Should Metaknight Be Banned? The Poll (LISTEN TO THE SBR PODCAST!)

[hotgarbage]

Isn't distinguishing between a game mode and a ban useless? Either way the result is the same: ______ isn't used in competitive play.

 

[Zankoku]

Isn't distinguishing between a game mode and a ban useless? Either way the result is the same: ______ isn't used in competitive play.

I agree, the semantics are irrelevant if they both end up doing the same thing.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Isn't distinguishing between a game mode and a ban useless? Either way the result is the same: ______ isn't used in competitive play.

Not really. If it's competative standard we're forced to make a choice in it, there are a million possible competative standards, metal, low gravity, anything between and including all items and none (and at each spawn level). And not making a choice is making a choice.


Since you have to make a decision on this, each is equally valid, so the standards for what not to choose is very low.


When it comes to characters (unless your game mode sets it one character only, or random only) out of an otherwise open choice, an option is explicitly removed. Because you're not forced to remove the option, the standard is higher.

 

[Kyuubi9t]

..................... they make the rules because nintendo doesn't care if the game is competetive, in order for it to be competetive we have to make a ruleset for everyone to follow, hence the reason stages and items are banned, and we don't play coin matches and that bs, MK is just another step in making the game more competetive, you don't belong here if thats what you think, to ban all advanced techs. smashboards is for competetive smash players.

you sir, are correct. i wont miss MK at all.

 

[salaboB]

Not really. If it's competative standard we're forced to make a choice in it, there are a million possible competative standards, metal, low gravity, anything between and including all items and none (and at each spawn level). And not making a choice is making a choice.


Since you have to make a decision on this, each is equally valid, so the standards for what not to choose is very low.


When it comes to characters (unless your game mode sets it one character only, or random only) out of an otherwise open choice, an option is explicitly removed. Because you're not forced to remove the option, the standard is higher.

Removing MK does not force players to choose any other specific character, so it's simply choosing a game mode where the pool of characters is everyone except MK.

It's not really different from choosing to play without items spawning, limited stages legal, non-metal/low gravity/whatever, or anything else.

 

[JesiahTEG]

I think a bunch of places have tried banning Meta Knight, and they've all realized it's better to leave him in the game. It's happened at a lot of places. I don't get the point of arguing it anymore.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Removing MK does not force players to choose any other specific character, so it's simply choosing a game mode where the pool of characters is everyone except MK.

It's not really different from choosing to play without items spawning, limited stages legal, non-metal/low gravity/whatever, or anything else.

Limited stages ARE a ban (though what stages are neutral is a gameplay mode).


Again, the difference is, limitations of choices once you get into the game itself (which under the current gameplay mode, counter-picking is a part of).



Inability for a player to perform an action in-game is what constitutes a ban, choosing one set of options in a forced choice outside of the game is a competative standard.

 

[salaboB]

I think a bunch of places have tried banning Meta Knight, and they've all realized it's better to leave him in the game. It's happened at a lot of places. I don't get the point of arguing it anymore.

Where has somewhere that banned him decided it was worse?

Maybe they just got tired of the johns from the MK mains.

 

[JesiahTEG]

?? No, actually the people that didn't main MK said the tournaments were better with him there. The same people that won with MK won with other characters too. Not to mention, turnout was lower at another MK banned tournament.

You should stop thinking you know everything, and stop acting like what you say is law. Where do you live btw? And what tournaments have you attended? Can I see the results please? I'm just curious.

 

[XienZo]

I think a bunch of places have tried banning Meta Knight, and they've all realized it's better to leave him in the game. It's happened at a lot of places. I don't get the point of arguing it anymore.

Wut, where?

Seriously, the game does not get worse if you do not have MK. The main reason we don't want to ban him is because he's beatable and we don't have to ban him at all, but we have nothing that says that the game will become WORSE if we ban him besides us being uncompetitive and MK players having to switch, neither of which would be apparent until the whole metagame converts.

 

[salaboB]

?? No, actually the people that didn't main MK said the tournaments were better with him there. The same people that won with MK won with other characters too. Not to mention, turnout was lower at another MK banned tournament.

Where are you getting this from?

You should stop thinking you know everything, and stop acting like what you say is law.

I don't believe that at all. You should quit thinking you saying something makes it fact when everyone else needs evidence to demonstrate anything. Links to the threads or discussions you are finding this feedback from, please. At the least, namedrop some people who we can ask.

 

[ColinJF]

My main question for salaboB is how he has over 500 posts (seriously) whining about Meta Knight. It's obvious he doesn't even do anything on smashboards other than whine about Meta Knight.

 

[aeghrur]

Seriously, who has said it's better with MK in tournies? Those people who believe everything should be in tournies and brawl should be pure? >_>
No, people have been saying they prefer MK-less tournies as it's more satisfying to play against a variety of character, and people on smashboards have preferred seeing the diverse range of characters in the top 8 without MK.

 

[salaboB]

Tournament record aside, my main question for salaboB is how he has over 500 posts (seriously) whining about Meta Knight. It's obvious he doesn't even do anything on smashboards other than whine about Meta Knight.

Simply because you fail at search does not mean all my posts are about MK. Nor are all of them "whining" about him.

Btw, if you can't answer a question and resort to discrediting the one asking it, that's a perfect example of ad hominem. It doesn't have to be an insult to qualify.

In this case, it's either an attempted ad hominem because you don't like me trying to get Jesiah to cough up the sources he got the data from, or an attempt at derailing the thread in what should then be a private message.

 

[ColinJF]

It's not an ad hominem because it isn't an argument; it's a question. I'm literally curious why there are users who have trillions of posts in these threads but don't use the rest of smashboards.

 

[salaboB]

It's not an ad hominem because it isn't an argument; it's a question. I'm literally curious why there are users who have trillions of posts in these threads but don't use the rest of smashboards.

Because I look through the rest of smashboards and there's almost nothing interesting going on to discuss. Usually new tactics attract my attention, but there's been precious few ATs located for anyone lately that have gained much interest.

However, here I can almost always find logical fallacies to discredit.

Edit: I did provide for you actually just asking a question: Thread derailment.

 

[JesiahTEG]

Where are you getting this from?


I don't believe that at all. You should quit thinking you saying something makes it fact when everyone else needs evidence to demonstrate anything. Links to the threads or discussions you are finding this feedback from, please. At the least, namedrop some people who we can ask.

Will you PLEASE please just read my posts. Everything I say I provide evidence. And unlike you, my evidence is backed up by tournament experience, lots and lots of research, discussions with good players, some of the best in the world. I respect the fact that you want Meta Knight banned and you have the right to argue/debate that, but it's important to realize other peoples opinions, and furthermore acknowledge them, especially if they know what they are talking about.

In the back room for example, just yesterday, I was debating with someone about something I felt very strongly about, and I was arguing it to death. After one of my long posts, they said something that made a lot of sense, and instead of being stubborn and continuing my argument, I admitted that his post made sense, and maybe I should re-evaluate my thinking.

Instead of looking at people's posts as arguments to your own, you should treat them as valuable information, and weigh them based upon the qualifications of the poster. Although I look at both Chillindude and a random noob's posts equally and give both of their opinions thought, 99% of the time I will come to the conclusion that Chillin's post is more qualified and therefore makes his information more valuable.

Every time someone that knows a lot about the game posts, you just write them off as people that think their opinion is better than others. The fact is, there are a lot of people on these boards that know what they are talking about. It's silly that because they have a high post count or a colored name you just automatically assume they don't matter. Learn to be humble sir, and acknowledge other people.

This is a tournament in New Orleans with Meta Knight banned.

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=202162

This is Ankoku's conclusion from that tournament.

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=5686012&postcount=6

As you can see, Lee placed 1st without Meta Knight, because he is a good player. And whether you agree with Ankoku or not on this it doesn't matter, he brought up a good point: Meta Knight allows worse people to win, but doesn't have that much of an effect on top level players.

This is HOBO 12, where Meta Knight was also banned. The tournament had a lower turnout than recent HOBO's from my understanding.

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=204685

Fliphop won, which could have been for a variety of reasons. I don't really know to be honest. That's the only change in results pretty much. Everyone else placed the same.

Since because I have a red name you just decide to discredit what I say, there's the evidence that you needed so badly...You could have just gone into tournament results and got it yourself by the way.

 

[Mortimer]

?? No, actually the people that didn't main MK said the tournaments were better with him there. The same people that won with MK won with other characters too. Not to mention, turnout was lower at another MK banned tournament.

Links to these discussions, please?

And Hobo 12 had less turnout, but it could have been due to a variety of factors. They'd have to hold more MK banned tournies to see if it was MK affecting the turnout. Nobody in the results thread complained about MK being banned, and a few thought it was great.

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=204685

This is a tournament in New Orleans with Meta Knight banned.

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=202162

This is Ankoku's conclusion from that tournament.

http://www.smashboards.com/showpost....12&postcount=6

As you can see, Lee placed 1st without Meta Knight, because he is a good player. And whether you agree with Ankoku or not on this it doesn't matter, he brought up a good point: Meta Knight allows worse people to win, but doesn't have that much of an effect on top level players.

Ankoku just says that there isn't enough data from which to draw a conclusion. Even if somebody else won there wouldn't be enough data to say that MK does make good players better. You're reading too much into it.

 

[salaboB]

Will you PLEASE please just read my posts. Everything I say I provide evidence.

...snip...

Since because I have a red name you just decide to discredit what I say, there's the evidence that you needed so badly...You could have just gone into tournament results and got it yourself by the way.

It's not because you have a red name, I do the same thing to brinboy.

Let's look at your claims based on the post I was objecting to:

I think a bunch of places have tried banning Meta Knight, and they've all realized it's better to leave him in the game. It's happened at a lot of places. I don't get the point of arguing it anymore.

So this post has zero evidence. It is in fact purely you saying things, with no citations to back any of your facts up. You use descriptions like "a bunch", "all", and "a lot" <- none of these are evidence or facts, they are simply implications that it has happened frequently with no references to track down where it has happened. You even say "I think" which basically is recognizing that it's all your beliefs. But if you want it to matter you need to provide proof beyond your opinion.

And then your response to when I asked about it the first time:

?? No, actually the people that didn't main MK said the tournaments were better with him there. The same people that won with MK won with other characters too. Not to mention, turnout was lower at another MK banned tournament.

I never have said the same people won't win, so you're discrediting some random person. Turnout being lower at one tournament? Fine, I never said anything about that either (Though you didn't say which one which means you provided no evidence, and are extrapolating a lasting impact from one result). Where is your example of "the people that didn't main MK said the tournaments were better with him there"? You still haven't given anything for it, even in your "There I provided you an example" post.

So you answered two questions I didn't ask, and the one I did ("Where have they decided it is worse?") you provided no evidence for in the first post, second post, or third post where you provided details for the other claims.

I am not asking for evidence because of who you are, I am asking for evidence because of what you are claiming. I can't really put it any more clearly than that.

 

[JesiahTEG]

You have to at least take the results into consideration though, you can't completely ignore them, even if you don't think there's enough data.

@ Salabo- I usually only say I think so I don't come off as thinking I know everything. It sort of sets the tone of, "Yeah I'm pretty sure, but I could be wrong."

Also I'm not exactly sure where the people said they wanted MK back, but I do indeed remember a results thread where the TO said "Meta Knight was banned, and we're going to unban him next time for sake of a larger turnout. People don't care if he's banned or not and would rather have him." It went something like that iirc, but I know you're just going to not believe me though. You can check the results thread and tell me if you find it though.

I have other things to do now though, so I'm done arguing for a bit. You never answered what tournaments you've attended and where you live though, and furthermore how you've placed in those tournaments. I'm still curious, but you can save it for later if you want.

 

[salaboB]

You have to at least take the results into consideration though, you can't completely ignore them, even if you don't think there's enough data.

And yet, you haven't provided the evidence I've asked for to back up your own statement. I did not make you say what you did.

Will you just admit you haven't got posts by people who attended MK-banned tournaments saying they thought it was better with him present? That or present it, because your constant evasion is just making it look like you were exaggerating to try to sway opinion to your side without facts to back it up.

(And yes, I do expect and have seen the same be applied to pro-ban people who spout opinions as facts. This is not anything against you -- I just have enough to do pointing it out for the anti-ban side so leave doing that against the pro-ban debaters to other people who are inclined to do it.)

 

[aeghrur]

You have to at least take the results into consideration though, you can't completely ignore them, even if you don't think there's enough data.

You can't ignore them, yet you also can't give unfair extrapolations to them either.
You can't say because one tourny had lower turnout, all tournies will have lower turnout without MK. =/

Also, we're not arguing MK will change the results so much. We're arguing that MK kills diversity, overcentralize the Metagame, and has no bad match up thus causing 1 and 2. I think...?

 

[Zankoku]

Scientific Method:
Make hypothesis (MK is so overpowered that people are winning just because they use MK)
Test hypothesis (Take top-placing MK player and make him play in an MK-banned tournament)
Record data
If data does not support hypothesis, revise hypothesis and continue testing
If data supports hypothesis, continue testing
Conclusion may be reached upon sufficient data supporting hypothesis (7 for statistical significance)

None of you are allowed to jump to conclusions until then.

 

[Atomsk_92]

this sounds like the best idea so far^

 

[MuBa]

While the scientific method sounds nice but it seems like the top players will still win because they know how to mindgame and execute attacks nearly all the time.

I'd say we should hypothesize that "If MK is banned, then there will be more character diversity in tournaments and placings."

If that is true. Then having MK banned would be for the better.

 

[salaboB]

Also I'm not exactly sure where the people said they wanted MK back, but I do indeed remember a results thread where the TO said "Meta Knight was banned, and we're going to unban him next time for sake of a larger turnout. People don't care if he's banned or not and would rather have him." It went something like that iirc, but I know you're just going to not believe me though. You can check the results thread and tell me if you find it though.

I did check the results thread! And guess what...you're putting words in his mouth. Wall of quotes of references to MK, tournament enjoyment, and tournament attendance, gogogo!

This tournament was very fun. I'm glad I went, and I played fairly well.

(Enjoyed it -- no johns about better with MK in the entire post)

inui. meta will never be banned again unless sbr wants more results. the anime thing u want to attend is safe.

(Hey look, he didn't provide reasoning why. He just said he wasn't going to ban MK again)

The MK ban wasn't as bad as I thought. My bracket consisted of JS(Ness), HeyTallMan(Lucas), Hylian (GW), Sethlon (Falco), Roy (Marth), Lee-M (Lucario). Only person that would've used MK was most likely Lee if he wasn't banned.

(Nope, that's not "It was better with him". I think this was the most negative comment about MK being banned I found.)

How was the overall attitude of the tournament with MK being banned?

(Question)

Not a single tear.

(Answer)

Amazingly fun tournament.

(Still not seeing any tears)

wait

were those people playing brawl?

and having a good time?

O_O

(Disbelief -- No mention of better with MK)

Hylian had ordered Dr. Pepper (of course) and we were at the beginning of our meal when our waiter came by and asked what we had been drinking (for refill purposes). When Hylian said "Dr. Pepper," the waiter replied "I'm sorry we're all out of Dr. Pepper." Hylian, at this moment, looked more betrayed than any person I have ever seen; real or fictional; dead or alive. It looked as if someone had slaughtered his entire bloodline and left him for dead. It was true disappointment and sadness in the form of a person.

(Hey if I'm going to all this effort I'll include the things I find really amusing)

Was lotsa fun...props to stiltz for a great tourney. The venue was a nice one, we should get more use out of it Can't say i missed MK.

(Whoops, that sounds like he liked MK being gone)

I had a lot of fun at this tourney. Cannot wait for the next.

(Still no johns in sight about MK being gone)

Dang... so this is what a non-MK tourney looks like...

(An observation! Sorry, it's neutral.)

Also...I think that it wasn't because of the meta ban that made less people show up. San angelo came anyways, sandtrap came, Infinity was going to come with the second dallas car until their **** got messed up, Lee still came...the only meta who simply didn't show was DMK.

If anything, the reason why this tourney had less of a turnout was because of the new venue and small amount of time.

(Look! Sethlon has reasoning for why there are less people that actually have more support than "MK wasn't there." He even namedrops the people involved and everything.)

What a beautiful list of winning characters. Seeing "MK" about 7 or 8 times in the top 10 has gotten old a long time ago.
GJ to all players. I know the competition must have been fierce!

(He didn't attend the tournament it sounds like, but since you said to read the thread ...)

This. I kinda thought it strange for LESS people to show up to a MK tournament at first, but then kinda just blew it off. The results still look super sexy without him showing up in the top 8.

(Puffball agrees with Sethlon on why attendance was low. Click the arrow and read the post yourself if you don't trust me.)

Results from a no-Metaknight tournament are obviously going to being in people from everywhere. lots of us are interested. And I'm especially interested in teams results :[

(Final quote about it, again from someone not there, but I was trying to be thorough.)



So there you go, Jesiah. By your request I read through the thread, and I pulled out all references to MK, tournament enjoyment, future bans on him, and why tournament attendance was low. None of it supports your claims except that tournament attendance was low, and for unspecified reasons MK will not be banned in the future. ie, two of your basic facts were true but based on your evidence the reasoning behind them was made up and the third fact (People like tournaments with MK more) is entirely unsupported. I will admit I left out shoutouts saying "Awesome job with the tournament" or the like, because it was ambiguous if they enjoyed it or just felt it was well organized.

This isn't even a discussion, it's just you stating your opinion and me showing why the relevant parts are is just opinion. Feel free to read through the entire thread yourself and pull out any quotes I missed, but I don't believe you'll find any that are related to what you're claiming (And I included the current last post in the thread, so any added after I had no way of getting).

 

[XienZo]

Scientific Method:
Make hypothesis (MK is so overpowered that people are winning just because they use MK)
Test hypothesis (Take top-placing MK player and make him play in an MK-banned tournament)
Record data
If data does not support hypothesis, revise hypothesis and continue testing
If data supports hypothesis, continue testing
Conclusion may be reached upon sufficient data supporting hypothesis (7 for statistical significance)

None of you are allowed to jump to conclusions until then.

I feel stupid.

This entire board SWF should feel stupid for not realizing this.

Or too shy for not bringing it up.

 

[salaboB]

I feel stupid.

This entire board SWF should feel stupid for not realizing this.

Or too shy for not bringing it up.

Ankoku is showing how to find whether the people winning with MK will win without him. Unfortunately, I don't think there's been a heavy push to demonstrate that as one of the key factors for whether MK should be banned or not, so it's of only limited value.

Applying that to tournament attendance, on the other hand...

 

[XienZo]

Ankoku is showing how to find whether the people winning with MK will win without him. Unfortunately, I don't think there's been a heavy push to demonstrate that as one of the key factors for whether MK should be banned or not, so it's of only limited value.

Applying that to tournament attendance, on the other hand...

Still, the scientific method you learned in 4th grade NEVER fails. It either works, or we get too lazy since some effort is required.

But technically, the SBR should be the ones running such a thing. It'd be better than theorycrafting and flaming and intrepreting random matches all day....

 

[aeghrur]

Scientific Method:
Make hypothesis (MK is so overpowered that people are winning just because they use MK)
Test hypothesis (Take top-placing MK player and make him play in an MK-banned tournament)
Record data
If data does not support hypothesis, revise hypothesis and continue testing
If data supports hypothesis, continue testing
Conclusion may be reached upon sufficient data supporting hypothesis (7 for statistical significance)

None of you are allowed to jump to conclusions until then.

I disagree with your hypothesis.
I believe it should be "If MK was banned, then there would not be such an overcentralization of the metagame." Or "If MK was banned, then there would be a larger variety of characters in the top 10 of tournaments because people would start counterpicking against one another."

The because part isn't necessary, but it can be added into a hypothesis right? =/

 

[Zankoku]

A game based entirely on character matchups would be pretty bad IMO. Rock paper scissors first round, loser of previous round decides on his choice second?

 

[aeghrur]

It's not based entirely upon character match ups, but it is a big part of it. =/
I mean, counterpicking is a big part of smash. =O
Also, the big tournies, we all predict the well known, top notch players will be winning those tournaments even without metaknight I guess. =/ It's not like they need metaknight to win, it's just he gives them the best chance. He's not unbeatable so obviously he's not the reason people like M2K are winning. However, on the smaller, regional tournies, he could be the reason, yet that's not at the highest level of play. So, what do we do in this case? Hm, this might seem a little confusing. If this argument doesn't turn out to be the crap i think it will become, I might clarify later, lol.

 

[ShadowLink84]

A game based entirely on character matchups would be pretty bad IMO. Rock paper scissors first round, loser of previous round decides on his choice second?

indeed we should all go Mk and play on one stage.
No I am not mocking you Ankoku I am actually being serious.

Think about it, one of the main concerns with Brawl is that much of the game relies once character matchups. there isn't some tech which allows Link to face Sheik or MK better.
So if we reduce it to a handful of characters that soft counter each other then the game will be more competitive.

*shrug* Just a thought I've been thinking about. Much of what we do is in the name of competitiveness so why do we allow diversity? To be truly competitive means to go purely on skill not to be given an inherent advantage or disadvantage.

 

[Zankoku]

I'm fine with diversity, but not fine with the concept of a game based entirely on character-based matchups taking such a large part in it that "diversity" is an illusion maintained by everyone playing a set of two or three characters that they cycle through entirely based on what character the opponent happens to be playing.

Which isn't happening, either, so you people who talk about "diversity" along with "character matchups" need to notice that the top 8 of HOBO 12 didn't really switch around between characters; they just played whatever one character they played.

 

[ShadowLink84]

I agree completely.

 

[XienZo]

indeed we should all go Mk and play on one stage.
No I am not mocking you Ankoku I am actually being serious.

Think about it, one of the main concerns with Brawl is that much of the game relies once character matchups. there isn't some tech which allows Link to face Sheik or MK better.
So if we reduce it to a handful of characters that soft counter each other then the game will be more competitive.

*shrug* Just a thought I've been thinking about. Much of what we do is in the name of competitiveness so why do we allow diversity? To be truly competitive means to go purely on skill not to be given an inherent advantage or disadvantage.

Easy, I've explained this a few times.

A good metagame needs competitiveness, right?
However, a good metagame also needs PEOPLE. People who advance the metagame and find ATs and enter tournaments.
More charcters=more playstyles=Brawl suiting more people.
The less characters we have, the competitveness increases, but the # of people decreases at a faster rate, and the metagame deteorates as a whole.

 

[Sliq]

Scientific Method:
Make hypothesis (MK is so overpowered that people are winning just because they use MK)
Test hypothesis (Take top-placing MK player and make him play in an MK-banned tournament)
Record data
If data does not support hypothesis, revise hypothesis and continue testing
If data supports hypothesis, continue testing
Conclusion may be reached upon sufficient data supporting hypothesis (7 for statistical significance)

None of you are allowed to jump to conclusions until then.

This would definitely work best on the EC, but it would take a while to get enough results to make a comparison.

 

[Inui]

omg lol

Meta Knight disappearing doesn't make the game have much more variety at all because characters like Dedede, Snake, Falco, and Game and Watch negate most of the cast as well.

 

[1048576]

That's 4x the variety. Then there's Marf.

Did you look at Hobo 12? The MK banned results are promising thus far.

Melee had 4 good characters and it was a fine game.

 

[XienZo]

omg lol

Meta Knight disappearing doesn't make the game have much more variety at all because characters like Dedede, Snake, Falco, and Game and Watch negate most of the cast as well.

DDD, Snake, Falco, and G&W is exactly 4 times more characters than MK. I'd say its worth it.

Edit: Beaten =P