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

[Turbo Ether]

Better question would be, why not? How does a 50% win-rate not indicate to you that the character must be overpowered? This is why the character wins that often.

Not gonna answer the question, huh? 50% win-rate or more is common for the best characters across multiple fighting games over multiple years. This is how fighting games work. It's not overpowered.

A balanced win-rate, imho, would be one in which there is no gigantic gap between the win-rate of one top-tier character to the next. Simple as that.

I agree, however the metagame is still developing.

 

[M15t3R E]

Because Marth dominated the tournament scene similarly to MK perhaps?

Marth was considered the easiest to do well with in high levels of play, and so the sheer number of Marths caused the dominating statistic. This is comparable to MK, however MK is considered almost untouchable and unpunishable when used correctly. Marth was not.

Why do you think Marth and Fox are considered #1 on the tier list and not Marth alone?

Not gonna answer the question, huh? 50% win-rate or more is common for the best characters across multiple fighting games over multiple years. This is how fighting games work. It's not overpowered.

I don't know where you get your statistics from. I'd like to take a look at them.

I agree, however the metagame is still developing.

The problem is, many smashers believe Brawl has reached its peak in metagame, and that if there are still advancements to the metagame to come, they will be rather inconsequential.

 

[Turbo Ether]

Marth was considered the easiest to do well with in high levels of play, and so the sheer number of Marths caused the dominating statistic. This is comparable to MK, however MK is considered almost untouchable and unpunishable when used correctly. Marth was not.

Why do you think Marth and Fox are considered #1 on the tier list and not Marth alone?

MK is only considered untouchable and unpunishable to the people that want him banned.

Fox is #1 because he's theoretically the best character, due to the inhuman skill cap. At human levels, Marth performed the best over several years and several large tournaments.

@ your metagame development argument: That's entirely opinionated. You're entitled to it, however people disagree. As a matter of fact, your entire idea of what's considered balanced is entirely opinion in the first place.

Also, you still didn't answer the question. Check Alphazealots thread for Melee statistics.

I hope you realize this is a complete waste of time, people have different opinions, news @11. I don't care that you think 50% wins is broken, and I don't care that you don't care that I don't care.

 

[M15t3R E]

MK is only considered untouchable and unpunishable to the people that want him banned.

Fox is #1 because he's theoretically the best character, due to the inhuman skill cap. At human levels, Marth performed the best over several years and several large tournaments.

@ your metagame development argument: That's entirely opinionated. You're entitled to it, however people disagree. As a matter of fact, your entire idea of what's considered balanced is entirely opinion in the first place.

Also, you still didn't answer the question. Check Alphazealots thread for Melee statistics.

I hope you realize this is a complete waste of time, people have different opinions, news @11. I don't care that you think 50% wins is broken, and I don't care that you don't care that I don't care.

Marth definitely faired the best but he was far more defeatable than MK is in Brawl. That's the point.

I've been trying to make you understand that what YOU have been saying is ALSO opinion. You speak as if it's fact that the metagame is still developing, when many disagree. I'm trying to open your mind so maybe you'll understand why people disagree with you.

As for my views that you just don't care about- that's cool. I don't care about yours either.

 

[Turbo Ether]

I'm aware that my opinions are opinions. My opinion is that the best character having 50% wins is fine, because this is how fighting games have worked forever.

 

[M15t3R E]

I'm aware that my opinions are opinions. My opinion is that the best character having 50% wins is fine, because this is how fighting games have worked forever.

Okay. Again, I am doubting that very claim of yours. Not your opinion, but that claim.

 

[Zankoku]

Street Figher 3 Third Strike
EVO2K4:
1 Yun
2 Ken
3 Chun Li
4 Chun Li

EVO2K5:
1 Chun Li
2 Chun Li
3 Yun
4 Yun

EVO2K6:
1 Yun
2 Yun
3 Chun Li
4 Yun

EVO2K7:
1 Chun Li
2 Chun Li/Urien
3 Ken/Ryu
4 Makoto

Super Smash Bros. Melee
MELEE-FC:
1 Marth
2 Marth
3 Captain Falcon
4 Samus

FC3:
1 Marth
2 Peach
3 Ice Climbers
4 Captain Falcon

OC2:
1 Marth
2 Ice Climbers
3 Fox
4 Sheik

FC6:
1 Falco
2 Fox
3 Peach
4 Ice Climbers

*pound* 2:
1 Ice Climbers
2 Marth
3 Captain Falcon
4 Fox

FC-Diamond:
1 Marth
2 Falco/Fox
3 Ice Climbers
4 Sheik

OC3:
1 Fox
2 Marth
3 Ice Climbers
4 Marth

EVO 2K7:
1 Marth
2 Samus
3 Jigglypuff
4 Falco/Fox

*pound* 3:
1 Jigglypuff
2 Marth
3 Fox
4 Peach/Fox

 

[M15t3R E]

Ankoku, what do those statistics prove? Turbo Ether claimed that there have been or are numerous fighting games in which one particular character had a 50% win-rate overall, meaning averaging among all tournaments.

Btw, Ankoku. At times you appear to be pro-ban, and at other times anti-ban. I can't figure you out. Would you be so kind as to satisfy my curiosity?

 

[Zankoku]

If you want to take all tournaments into account including local attendance ones, Meta Knight has closer to a 25% win-rate. Ask me for another statistic. : )

 

[M15t3R E]

You certainly did not help Turbo Ether prove his claim. I think you wasted time fetching those statistics for me.
But while you're here, can you tell me which side you're on? Anti-ban or pro-ban?

 

[NeoCrono]

EVO2K7:
1 Chun Li
2 Chun Li/Urien
3 Ken/Ryu
4 Makoto

I <3 Makoto

 

[Zankoku]

Objectivity demands impartiality. But I guess I'm on the Melee side.

 

[M15t3R E]

Objectivity demands impartiality. But I guess I'm on the Melee side.

And because everybody is so grounded in their subjective conclusions, such as the metagame will change or it won't, we'll only agree to disagree until the end of time...

 

[Inui]

I should care?
We shouldn't have 80:20 matches.
We should not have 7:3 matches.

We should not have such a competitively poor game but we do.

Brawl isn't balanced.

100/0 shouldn't exist. You do know what that means, right?

By default, every tier list should have DK, Bowser, and every character that falls to the infinite at the bottom of the tier list. Doing something else would be clearly wrong. They have 100/0 matches and are not viable at all.

Those infinites don't affect the metagame.
in melee, wobbling was banned only by a minority (again AN).
Guess what happened?
Their tournament rankings still did not improve.

It wasn't about rankings. It was about removing something the Ice Climbers didn't even need to win. It removed a skill-less, cheap tactic that made tournaments suck.

Things should only be banned provided they do one of two things.
1.Hurt the competitiveness of a game.
2.Affect the metagame toa significant degree.

I'm assuming you think Meta Knight does both? I don't.

I think Wobbling was banned because it was stupid and unneccessary. It's far less extreme than banning an entire character, btw, so don't make any comparisons please.

Wobbling didn't in melee.
Big deal the DDD infinite takes less skill than Fox's infinite aveshine. The ends is the asme though. You die.

It's also significantly easier to start. Fox's stuff was unrealistic. Pressing Z over and over isn't. Don't compare the two. It's foolish and you know it.

Hell Mk takes little time to learn and he is the best character. Ban him cause he takes so much less skill than using other characters.

I think Game and Watch is the most rewarded and least punished for random nonsense, so I'd say he's the easiest to just use. I notice this at my school. Random scrubs do the best with Game and Watch by a massive amount.

That means there is an issue between what you are saying and what Shaya had posted in October.
*shrug*
I'll look into it tomorrow

NYC doesn't post results, or when they do, the results fail. They don't use TIO and have lazy hosts.

I <3 Makoto

Yeah, she's super hot.

 

[NeoCrono]

And she just kicks *** too!!!
And thanks for the help Inui

 

[XienZo]

Brawl isn't balanced.

100/0 shouldn't exist. You do know what that means, right?

By default, every tier list should have DK, Bowser, and every character that falls to the infinite at the bottom of the tier list. Doing something else would be clearly wrong. They have 100/0 matches and are not viable at all.

I'm afraid you're going to have to explain that with some definition or logic because that isn't explicit by itself.

They are only unviable because DDD has to use only his infinite CG to win, which is very easy to learn and very efficent in terms of rewards to practice time ratio.

However, that does not mean EVERY 100:0 is unbalanced. Pika owns Fox at a 90:10, which is basically going to give Fox more wins due to tripping than that 10. However, this is NOT unbannable, because:
To CP against fox, you must learn the technique of that character that makes it a skewed matchup. Pika's entire playstyle each contributes to it, so if you want that skewed advantage, you need to learn the whole playstyle or you'll end up short. This requires much practice and is not very effecient; most people would do better if they spent that time on their main. That is the main difference between most skewed match-ups and DDD's, he only has a skewed matchup because of one technique, so people only have to learn that one technique to win.

BTW, I'm agreeing with banning the infinite, just pointing out that skewed matchups aren't always wrong.

 

[ShadowLink84]

Brawl isn't balanced.

100/0 shouldn't exist. You do know what that means, right?

By default, every tier list should have DK, Bowser, and every character that falls to the infinite at the bottom of the tier list. Doing something else would be clearly wrong. They have 100/0 matches and are not viable at all.

The tierlist represents the overall behavior. Having one 100-0 matchup does not affect them so much that they are bottom tier.

In SF2 honda used to go 9-1 with non projectile users.
You know what? We dealt with it then,we 'll deal with it now.
That's just how it is.

It wasn't about rankings. It was about removing something the Ice Climbers didn't even need to win. It removed a skill-less, cheap tactic that made tournaments suck.

Cause the IC users were totally winning tournaments where it wasn't banned m i rite?
it did not affect the metagame. And there infinite works against the entire cast.

I'm assuming you think Meta Knight does both? I don't.

I am in the its too early to say anything side. Don't assume my position for me.

I think Wobbling was banned because it was stupid and unneccessary. It's far less extreme than banning an entire character, btw, so don't make any comparisons please.

I think DD's infinite should be banned because its stupid and unnecessary. I thinj MK should be banned because its stupid and unnecessary.

Stupid and unnecessary are not valid arguments.

It's also significantly easier to start. Fox's stuff was unrealistic. Pressing Z over and over isn't. Don't compare the two. It's foolish and you know it.

Ia gree that I shouldn't compare but thats because one is a characters metagame, one is a tactic.


So we shall use wobbling.
Wobbling is more difficult than the infinite Cg DDD has, does it matter? No.
level of difficulty does not matter.

I think Game and Watch is the most rewarded and least punished for random nonsense, so I'd say he's the easiest to just use. I notice this at my school. Random scrubs do the best with Game and Watch by a massive amount.

This has nothing of relation to what I said Inui.

NYC doesn't post results, or when they do, the results fail. They don't use TIO and have lazy hosts.

okay.

 

[Inui]

The tierlist represents the overall behavior. Having one 100-0 matchup does not affect them so much that they are bottom tier.

Having a 100/0 means that character has an unwinnable match. Picking that 100/0 character negates them entirely. How can they be valid characters at all? They're not.

 

[ShadowLink84]

Having a 100/0 means that character has an unwinnable match. Picking that 100/0 character negates them entirely. How can they be valid characters at all? They're not.

Does it go through one ear and out the other?
Tierlists represent a characters behavior overall.
It is a comparison to other characters.
So even if they have a 100-0 matchup, that does not destroy their viability.
Tierlists do not focus on individual matchups.
Every character has a counter, that does not automatically mean they are completely unviable.

If MK went 100-0 against everyone then had a 100-0 disadvantage against Snake, would he be considered completely unviable?
in that particular matchup? yes
overall? no.

 

[Inui]

Does it go through one ear and out the other?
Tierlists represent a characters behavior overall.
It is a comparison to other characters.
So even if they have a 100-0 matchup, that does not destroy their viability.
Tierlists do not focus on individual matchups.
Every character has a counter, that does not automatically mean they are completely unviable.

Yes, it does mean they are not viable.

DK and Bowser have a 100/0 match with Dedede's infinite allowed. Simply choosing Dedede negates them entirely. No thought or experience is needed based on how insanely easy the infinites are to start and pull off.

Because merely choosing Dedede causes them to not be able to win, they are not viable at all and can't win. Such a simple thing negates their chances of winning to 0%. They are the worst characters if the infinite is allowed. Overall performance doesn't matter when merely picking Dedede negates them to nothingness.

They are never allowed to beat Dedede. Pick Dedede. They don't matter.

If MK went 100-0 against everyone then had a 100-0 disadvantage against Snake, would he be considered completely unviable?
in that particular matchup? yes
overall? no.

That's an insane and unrealistic thing to say and it makes me think you're one of those people that disagrees with people for the sake of arguing like a jerk.

 

[salaboB]

They are never allowed to beat Dedede. Pick Dedede. They don't matter.

They can still be used to counterpick someone else.

 

[Inui]

They can still be used to counterpick someone else.

lol

You can occassionally select them on a counterpick if your opponent switches to non-Dedede, so they are suddenly viable and good characters!

lmao what a joke

 

[ShadowLink84]

Yes, it does mean they are not viable.

DK and Bowser have a 100/0 match with Dedede's infinite allowed. Simply choosing Dedede negates them entirely. No thought or experience is needed based on how insanely easy the infinites are to start and pull off.

Because merely choosing Dedede causes them to not be able to win, they are not viable at all and can't win. Such a simple thing negates their chances of winning to 0%. They are the worst characters if the infinite is allowed. Overall performance doesn't matter when merely picking Dedede negates them to nothingness.

They are never allowed to beat Dedede. Pick Dedede. They don't matter.

here are some glasses Inui. you apparently need them.
Again tierlists represent the OVERALL behavior of characters to another.

In MvC2 Magneto, Storm, Cable and Sentinel are the 4 best characters.
They completely destroy all the characters below them with ease.
Does this mean that Wolverine is no longer mid tier and should be bottom tier?
No.

Does this change the fact that Cyclops and Strider are high tier? No.
All you are doing is arguing for the sake of arguing when the FACTS re right there.

yes the are completely screwed in that ONE matchup but they are not completely unviable other than that ONE matchup. That ONE matchup does not dictate their overall potential and capabilities against the other characters.

That's an insane and unrealistic thing to say and it makes me think you're one of those people that disagrees with people for the sake of arguing of like a jerk.

This is coming from someone who insists that not only refuses to even realize its an exaggerated example so that the point would be clear, but absolutely insists that ONE 100-0 match automatically means a character is completely unviable in high level play and utterly refuses to listen to the points.

Overall=/=one terrible matchup out of 39.

If 50 people get a 100 and one person gets a 0.
Dos this mean the average of that class is 0?
No.

lol

You can occassionally select them on a counterpick if your opponent switches to non-Dedede, so they are suddenly viable and good characters!

lmao what a joke

I can't believe you just said this Inui.

 

[Inui]

There's something you're not getting.

If your opponent picks Bowser or DK, you can pick Dedede and they have a 0% chance of winning.

It's that simple.

Negating Bowser and DK to worthless pieces of garbage is that easy. It takes nothing. Simply choose Dedede and you already won.

Any character with a flaw that extreme isn't viable in competitive play.

We're not talking about destroying here. We're talking about literally not being able to win.

Their capabilities against other characters don't matter. There is absolutely no reason to ever use not-Dedede against DK and Bowser. No reason at all. Only a total fool wouldn't just pick Dedede and take the guaranteed win.

 

[Zankoku]

There's something you're not getting.

If your opponent picks Bowser or DK, you can pick Dedede and they have a 0% chance of winning.

It's that simple.

Negating Bowser and DK to worthless pieces of garbage is that easy. It takes nothing. Simply choose Dedede and you already won.

Any character with a flaw that extreme isn't viable in competitive play.

We're not talking about destroying here. We're talking about literally not being able to win.

Their capabilities against other characters don't matter. There is absolutely no reason to ever use not-Dedede against DK and Bowser. No reason at all. Only a total fool wouldn't just pick Dedede and take the guaranteed win.

Dedede being auto-win against Bowser/DK does not hurt Bowser/DK's viability in counterpicking characters they happen to counter.

 

[XienZo]

Inui, I think you need to mention that DDD's skewed matchups are SPECIAL. I think they should be banned, but there are SPECIFIC details that make DDD's matchups DIFFERENT from other no-way-to-win-matches.

They are only unviable because DDD has to use only his infinite CG to win, which is very easy to learn and very efficent in terms of rewards to practice time ratio.

However, that does not mean EVERY 100:0 is unbalanced. Pika owns Fox at a 90:10, which is basically going to give Fox more wins due to tripping than that 10. However, this is NOT unbannable, because:
To CP against fox, you must learn the technique of that character that makes it a skewed matchup. Pika's entire playstyle each contributes to it, so if you want that skewed advantage, you need to learn the whole playstyle or you'll end up short. This requires much practice and is not very effecient; most people would do better if they spent that time on their main. That is the main difference between most skewed match-ups and DDD's, he only has a skewed matchup because of one technique, so people only have to learn that one technique to win.

BTW, I'm agreeing with banning the infinite, just pointing out that skewed matchups aren't always wrong.

 

[ShadowLink84]

If your opponent picks Bowser or DK, you can pick Dedede and they have a 0% chance of winning.

It's that simple.

Negating Bowser and DK to worthless pieces of garbage is that easy. It takes nothing. Simple choose Dedede and you already won.

Any character with a flaw that extreme isn't viable in competitive play.

We're not talking about destroying here. We're talking about literally not being able to win.

Their capabilities against other characters don't matter. There is absolutely no reason to ever use not-Dedede against DK and Bowser. No reason at all. Only a total fool wouldn't just pick Dedede and take the guaranteed win.

You're being illogical inui.
let me just tl;dr your argument.


No matter how good the character is if they have one extremely bad match they are completely unviable overall and should be bottom tier.
Which isn't true.
Why?

Tier lists represent OVERALL performance.
One matchup does not reflect over all performanc

Top:
Balrog

Lower-Mid:
Honda

anyone corrIf I recall correctly, E honda destroys characters without projectiles. He has a great advantage against balrog who is top tier. 9-1 I think.

Under your logic balrog should be in bottom tier cause he would be at an extreme disadvantage.
That means he goes with Cammy.

Doesn't make sense so stop with the faulty logic and reasoning.

 

[Inui]

Under your logic balrog should be in bottom tier cause he would be at an extreme disadvantage.

Nope. It's not 100/0. It's 90/10.

Dedede being auto-win against Bowser/DK does not hurt Bowser/DK's viability in counterpicking characters they happen to counter.

Being viable only in counterpick situations when your opponent switches off of Dedede =/= good at all. Still bottom tier, imo. Worthless in the tournament scene.

This debate is really off topic and we're obviously not going to agree at all, so this conversation is over lol.

 

[XienZo]

I am headdesking so hard, its not even funny...

 

[ShadowLink84]

Moving on, how long do we wait?

 

[Inui]

Hey, I feel exactly the same way with regards to your posts, so lol. :]

Wait for what?

 

[aeghrur]

So I finished PoT today, like, the Manga(finished anime long time ago) and um, yeah, pretty cool epilogue thing. The ending though, lol, kinda weirdish. =( I wanted Kaido to go all demonish and win, lol. I also thought Echizen's pinnacle of perfection stuff were too good, just like the taking away the senses thing, but that manga has a lot of extremes lol. Why am I bringing this up? Because this thread is going no where just like the other threads and I figured we might be able to talk about PoT and get along for a little while.

 

[Inui]

Prince of Tennis is amazing.

I really liked Inui vs Renji. Epic match.

 

[rehab]

psh, HnIppo's the real deal.

 

[aeghrur]

Prince of Tennis is amazing.

I really liked Inui vs Renji. Epic match.

I hate how Renji seems to always be better than Inui at data collecting. )=<
And he also seems to like, mock him and stuff about it. That match was cool though to see Inui just totally throw away his data, lol.

 

[ShadowLink84]

Hey, I feel exactly the same way with regards to your posts, so lol. :]

When you post its like seeing a casual n00b demand for items in a tournament without justification.

Wait for what?

Before it can be dictated if the metagame has aged enough to reach a definitive conclusion.

 

[aeghrur]

Shadowlink, if another debate starts up again and everyone hates on each other again, I'm blaming you. )=< Party pooper. lol.

 

[ShadowLink84]

*shrug* I hear that often.

 

[Commander Pancakes]

yes. you know its gay when smash pros play meta knight and their reason is "i play to ban him" thats such a bull reason. we all know meta knight is the best character in brawl. we could all just not play him but no people are gay and play him anyway just to win. now some of my friends are like that too. its really stupid

 

[-Jumpman-]

Where is this discussion going? Want to compare everything to other situations which aren't even the same? Please, this is the "problem": Should MK be banned?