The "Metaknight should/will be banned" thread.

[GofG]

I dunno, I guess I just haven't been playing high-level players, but all of the guys I know that use MK suck with him.

Except that one guy who just seems to kick *** with everyone. I think we all know "that guy".

Azen?

Ten azens?

 

[Chaco]

"Metaknight is a plague."

QFT

Brining this back up...

 

[darkNES386]

This Sonic Main says... don't ban MK... ever. Those who feel this way right now are simply too lazy to improve their game.

 

[cutter]

Sky: I have nothing against people who joined later on rather than earlier on. it is SPECIFICALLY the crowd that showed up in february, i.e., the brawlers who have no melee tourney experience. If you can find me someone who joined in February who had Melee tourney experience, please do. I think I already found all of them, they're on my exceptions list.

I've lurked here since late 2006 but I never bothered creating an account until just recently. It is quite ignorant of you to discriminate because of join date.

BTW, the MK quote was not made by me. I was merely quoting Overswarm who made the original quote.

 

[MarKO X]

well, I have minimal Melee tournament experience to my name... only 2 tourneys, I did horribly in one and semi-ok in the other... but maybe that's not enough to get on Gofg's list. Oh well.

And MK is only a plague if the community allows him to be a plague. If people decide to step it up and figure out ways to beat him, then that will make the community better, even stronger. If not...

 

[LSDX]

I've lurked here since late 2006 but I never bothered creating an account until just recently. It is quite ignorant of you to discriminate because of join date.

BTW, the MK quote was not made by me. I was merely quoting Overswarm who made the original quote.

Agreed. I too have had Melee tourney exp., but I can't get noticed because I partake in a smaller tourney scene. I but recently got a new account to update my alias.

 

[GofG]

Cutter, you are an exception to the rule.

The majority of 2008ers joined because of Brawl. It is THESE 2008ers who I dislike and prejudge. Being that the majority of 2008ers joined because of Brawl, I start off disliking you if you are a 2008er.

All it means is you have to earn my respect, instead of getting it freely.

 

[PrinceMarthX]

I think it would be interesting to occasionally have a tournament where Meta Knight or maybe Snake aren't allowed. That way there would be more character variety

 

[cutter]

Then I'll earn it.

Sheik was dominant in the early days of Melee alongside Fox. Sheik was unquestionably the best character in the game in the early Melee tier lists and she made a good amount of the cast unusable in tournament play. Was Sheik banned? No. While some were whining and complaining about Sheik, others were developing other characters to be good in the metagame. While Sheik is still a force to be reckoned with in the Melee scene, there are many other viable characters like the spacies, Marth, Peach, CF, Samus, JP, and occasionally Ganondorf.

Sheik, like MK is essentially Old Sagat.

 

[MarKO X]

Cutter, you are an exception to the rule.

The majority of 2008ers joined because of Brawl. It is THESE 2008ers who I dislike and prejudge. Being that the majority of 2008ers joined because of Brawl, I start off disliking you if you are a 2008er.

All it means is you have to earn my respect, instead of getting it freely.

Interesting. I joined because Sonic sucked, and I wanted to know why. If Sonic didn't suck, I probably wouldn't be here right now. Good thing Sonic sucks, or else I'd still be pretty **** ignorant. (not sarcasm, it's true.)

As far as earning respect... well, that's never something I ever try to do, I either do it or don't do it naturally. I just be myself. But you shouldn't dislike 08ers because they came for Brawl. You should dislike 08ers because they don't know what the hell they're talking about... which is kinda the case with some, not all, but some of us.

 

[RDK]

Then I'll earn it.

Sheik was dominant in the early days of Melee alongside Fox. Sheik was unquestionably the best character in the game in the early Melee tier lists and she made a good amount of the cast unusable in tournament play. Was Sheik banned? No. While some were whining and complaining about Sheik, others were developing other characters to be good in the metagame. While Sheik is still a force to be reckoned with in the Melee scene, there are many other viable characters like the spacies, Marth, Peach, CF, Samus, JP, and occasionally Ganondorf.

Sheik, like MK is essentially Old Sagat.

Sheik is not like Old Sagat, and I'll tell you why.

The beginning of the Melee scene was nothing like the Smash scene that is established today. This is the basis for why arguments about time concerning how Brawl will develop are fallacious. The Melee scene was small when it first started; they had nowhere near the knowledge base that we have today about how the games work. This, coupled with the relative childishness and simplicity of Brawl's physics and inner workings, is why using the analogy you used is foolish.

The example of Sheik is merely that: an example of how metagames develop over a period of time. Melee's depth allowed for this. Brawl's does not. It's more than reasonable to say that Brawl will not achieve much greater heights of technicality or depth in the near future; and if it is achieved in the far future, it's only because of our misunderstanding of it in the first place.

Point being, please stop using false analogies that have nothing to do with the argument at hand. The 64 and Melee metagames have had literally years to develop and change, but that's only because it was so deep. Depth is an anathema to Brawl.

 

[cutter]

You do have to admit however, one of the reasons that a lot of the characters that are in Low/Bottom tier are they get wrecked by Sheik. Look at the characters Sheik can chaingrab in Melee and see how many of those characters are in the low tiers.

 

[RDK]

You do have to admit however, one of the reasons that a lot of the characters that are in Low/Bottom tier are they get wrecked by Sheik. Look at the characters Sheik can chaingrab in Melee and see how many of those characters are in the low tiers.

Those characters aren't solely in the low tiers because they get wrecked by Sheik--they're in the low tiers because they also have bad matchups against a majority of the cast. That's how tier lists work.

 

[KoJ]

Point being, please stop using false analogies that have nothing to do with the argument at hand. The 64 and Melee metagames have had literally years to develop and change, but that's only because it was so deep. Depth is an anathema to Brawl.

Excuse me?

Melee is definitely deep. But 64? 64 was a grabfest with very little actual AT's. Brawl is at least as deep as 64.

 

[cutter]

Those characters aren't solely in the low tiers because they get wrecked by Sheik--they're in the low tiers because they also have bad matchups against a majority of the cast. That's how tier lists work.

I didn't say that was the sole reason why they're low/bottom tier. Having bad matchups definately accounts for tier placement, but when you have a hopeless matchup against a highly played character, it really cements your place as a cellar dweller.

 

[RDK]

I didn't say that was the sole reason why they're low/bottom tier. Having bad matchups definately accounts for tier placement, but when you have a hopeless matchup against a highly played character, it really cements your place as a cellar dweller.

But that's what you're not getting--yes, a bottom dweller among tournaments because of a character that ishighly played. But that doesn't necessarily mean that character is a bottom dweller on the tier list. He can have a really bad matchup against another highly played character who is high on the tier list, but by the same token he can still have good matchups against a majority of the cast.

Character popularity =/= tier list status.

 

[IShotLazer]

True. Bad matchups with characters ARE what make a tier list. At least for one, even though its definitely not my decision nor can I push what I believe on others I think Metaknight should be banned. Brawl has multiple characters for a reason. This diversity is what makes the game fun, but lately it has gotten so bad that the only viable character to pick at this point seems to be Metaknight. Even Snake who was considered his counter for a while is now dominated by him. At this point we shouldn't ban him... but it should definitely be kept as a reminder and possibly in the future if things get worse we just might have to ban him... Then again just because we are a large community it doesn't mean that we can convince outside companies to follow the rules that we use... so Oh well. I will say without a doubt or remorse that the game would be much funner to play with Metaknight banned at this point for a lot of people.

 

[Arturito_Burrito]

I didn't say that was the sole reason why they're low/bottom tier. Having bad matchups definately accounts for tier placement, but when you have a hopeless matchup against a highly played character, it really cements your place as a cellar dweller.

This is true as tier list are primarily based off tournament results then match ups. If a character has 5 good match ups against high and top tiers he can end up being a highly tiered character as well. Even if he has 34 bad match ups.

 

[IShotLazer]

It's one of the reasons DK is good. He doesn't have very many "good" matchups however the characters that he does decent against make all the difference. DK is actually good at fighting Snake AND Metaknight to an extent... to an extent...

 

[Doggalina]

It's one of the reasons DK is good. He doesn't have very many "good" matchups however the characters that he does decent against make all the difference. DK is actually good at fighting Snake AND Metaknight to an extent... to an extent...

DK doesn't really have any horrendous matchups aside from DDD and ICs. His range and power give him good to decent matchups against everybody else.

 

[popsofctown]

True. But he was really good against DDD and ICs, and bad against MK, Snake, and G&W, his tier position would be lower, and that's the point.

 

[IShotLazer]

Exactly.
10metas.

 

[cj.Shark]

Metaknight describes the Pit and Toonlinks place on the character ranking list. such a shame really.

 

[GofG]

The argument has been exhausted and, yet again, we've reached the point where no further discussion will yield any new information. All topics have been addressed and it has come down to a matter of opinion.

Lock please.

 

[Foxtrotter]

The argument has been exhausted and, yet again, we've reached the point where no further discussion will yield any new information. All topics have been addressed and it has come down to a matter of opinion.

Lock please.

We've debated this barely three days...

I highly doubt that we've exhausted everything already. =/

 

[Yinlong]

The argument has been exhausted and, yet again, we've reached the point where no further discussion will yield any new information. All topics have been addressed and it has come down to a matter of opinion.

Lock please.

if they lock this, new people will come and make threads like "ZOMG METANIGHT SHULD BE BANZ0RZ" or "ZOMG METANIGHT ISN"T BROK3N"
this thread is actually to prevent that.

 

[GofG]

Then why did Scar's Melee vs Brawl thread get locked? That thread kept mvb threads from being created and also spawned a huge sensible discussion of the topic. Eventually, the discussion stagnated as all of the facts were examined and all that was left were opinions. This is when that topic was locked.

Just as this one needs to be locked right now. The discussion is over, at least as far as i can tell. Anyone new who comes into this thread will simply repeat arguments that were addressed earlier in the thread (this has already started happening.)

3 days? 790 posts? This thread shouldn't have existed in the first place; banning a character like Metaknight is ludicrous.

 

[Dark Sonic]

I didn't say that was the sole reason why they're low/bottom tier. Having bad matchups definately accounts for tier placement, but when you have a hopeless matchup against a highly played character, it really cements your place as a cellar dweller.

Doctor Mario, Ganondorf, Mario, and Captain Falcon could be chaingrabbed by Shiek, and they were all mid tier (with Captain Falcon borderline high).

Heck, Captain Falcon had bad matchups against Fox, Falco, Shiek, and Peach (and an even one with Marth according to most people), and yet he was still considered a tournament viable character, even regarded as high tier sometimes. Apperently being chaingrabbed by Shiek is not enough huh. The low tiers are low because they have very hard matchups against the majority of the high tiers. Or in a few of their cases, they may have decent matchups against the high tiers, but get wrecked by the low and mid tiers.

But then again, I honestly think that matchups mattered a little less in melee's physics engine, because most of the characters had ways of dealing with each other. Hell, Ganondorf had a massive chaingrab on Shiek (not often that you got it, but **** that's something I'd expect Shiek to do). But oh well.

 

[Fatmanonice]

Regarding my "whining" about Metaknight's dsmash earlier, I'm fully allowed to say which attacks I hate. I wasn't saying it was broken, I was just stating that I hate it. For the record, my other most hated attacks are Peach's dair (especially when I'm the Ice Climbers; ARGH!), Marth's dancing blade (especially when I'm Wario or Ness), and when I'm not the one doing the chaingrabbing with King Dedede and the Ice Climbers.

Since this thread will probably be locked anyways, I do think that the Metaknight Free Tournament experiment should be done just to see what happens. Honestly, what's the worse that could happen? More middle tier characters might actually rank? OH DEAR GOD! *jumps out a window and bursts into flames upon landing in a dumpster* If the experiment proves to show no significant results, he can go back to butt ****** most of the cast in tournaments the next day.

 

[Slithe]

What the hell is this? Meta Knight should NOT be banned. He HAS bad matchups, such as Snake, DK, G&W, and recently, Diddy Kong. His best techniques (such as the infinite cape glitch) have been banned, so what is there to worry about for it to be cheating in tournaments when you have a character that fights in the same way under the same rules as another character; and so what if he has the most tournament wins (although last time I checked Snake had the most wins, although that might have changed, but that might not change the fact that Meta Knight is still probably the most popular character in tournaments). That shouldn't have any effect on character selection. If people want to pick Meta Knight, then so be it. I personally don't mind if we have a bunch of Meta Knight's fighting against one another. After all, it is THEIR choice. And no, I'm not saying all this just because I am a Meta Knight mainer, but I'm saying it because I wouldn't think it'd be fair to ban him because of all the following reasons I stated.

 

[GofG]

aaauuuuggghhh read the thread before posting, Slithe.

 

[Slithe]

oh, sorry, lol. didn't read your post a few posts before.

 

[Fatmanonice]

What the hell is this? Meta Knight should NOT be banned. He HAS bad matchups, such as Snake, DK, G&W, and recently, Diddy Kong. His best techniques (such as the infinite cape glitch) have been banned, so what is there to worry about for it to be cheating in tournaments when you have a character that fights in the same way under the same rules as another character; and so what if he has the most tournament wins (although last time I checked Snake had the most wins, although that might have changed, but that might not change the fact that Meta Knight is still probably the most popular character in tournaments). That shouldn't have any effect on character selection. If people want to pick Meta Knight, then so be it. I personally don't mind if we have a bunch of Meta Knight's fighting against one another. After all, it is THEIR choice. And no, I'm not saying all this just because I am a Meta Knight mainer, but I'm saying it because I wouldn't think it'd be fair to ban him because of all the following reasons I stated.

Of the characters you listed, Snake is the only one that's true and even now people are debating whether it's true or not due to Metaknight's further increasing lead over Snake. With that said, it's about 60/40 right now but it could become 50/50 or even 60/40 in Metaknight's favor in the near future. Also, when I checked like two days ago, Metaknight had like 36 wins and Snake had I believe 24 and was ahead of Snake by like 300-400 "points."

 

[Yinlong]

Then why did Scar's Melee vs Brawl thread get locked? That thread kept mvb threads from being created and also spawned a huge sensible discussion of the topic. Eventually, the discussion stagnated as all of the facts were examined and all that was left were opinions. This is when that topic was locked.

Just as this one needs to be locked right now. The discussion is over, at least as far as i can tell. Anyone new who comes into this thread will simply repeat arguments that were addressed earlier in the thread (this has already started happening.)

3 days? 790 posts? This thread shouldn't have existed in the first place; banning a character like Metaknight is ludicrous.

i don't know what to say to that, so i guess you win.

 

[Skyflyer]

I think as long as some characters have neutral match-ups against him, he shouldn't be banned. MK has one counter (snake) and about 7 characters that have a neutral matchup against him. DK, Yoshi, Wario, Diddy, Mr. Game and Watch, Marth and Lucario. This alone says why he shouldn't be banned.

 

[Winston]

Doctor Mario, Ganondorf, Mario, and Captain Falcon could be chaingrabbed by Shiek, and they were all mid tier (with Captain Falcon borderline high).

Heck, Captain Falcon had bad matchups against Fox, Falco, Shiek, and Peach (and an even one with Marth according to most people), and yet he was still considered a tournament viable character, even regarded as high tier sometimes. Apperently being chaingrabbed by Shiek is not enough huh. The low tiers are low because they have very hard matchups against the majority of the high tiers. Or in a few of their cases, they may have decent matchups against the high tiers, but get wrecked by the low and mid tiers.

But then again, I honestly think that matchups mattered a little less in melee's physics engine, because most of the characters had ways of dealing with each other. Hell, Ganondorf had a massive chaingrab on Shiek (not often that you got it, but **** that's something I'd expect Shiek to do). But oh well.

Falcon did fine against Peach and Marth, his bad matchups were basically Fox, Falco, and Sheik (to a lesser extent). That's why he was pretty high up on the tier list. He could handle or beat everyone else.

and to nitpick some more, Falcon didn't actually get chaingrabbed by sheik, just inescapable techchased.

 

[adumbrodeus]

I didn't read it. Because I skim threads like these with tons of spam, thus, I miss out on a lot of posts.

Np, it was just regarded as a good post on the topic and I wanted to bring it to your attention because it had a FAR more complete response.

Or not. He doesn't fit it yet. No, not even if things stay like this when the game matures.

Again, why? I gave a criteria and explained my reasons why decrease in character diversity is a good reason for bannings. I gave a respected source in competative gaming insight (namely Sirlin) to back up my argument that "broken beyond belief" is just a certain level of decreasing diversity, and lesser forms are bannable.

Why does MK not fit? Or are you arguing that anything less then "only char/tactic that is viable" isn't bannable? If so, why?

I'll reiterate: This game is so imbalanced, if we want to ban characters for hindering diversity, then we have to ban everyone down to Mid. Because in Mid (and below), everyone counters everyone and it's anyone's guess.

Ban MK, then we have to ban the rest of Top and High.

Actually, that's why the rest of high are safe. A lot of chars they hard counter are shared among the entire group and have at least one other char they hard counter. For example, Ganondorf is hard countered by a good amount of the cast.

MK is different, a 60-40 match-up is considered good against MK. And the fact that he basically can't be counter-picked against means that there is no mitigation against this issue. Other chars with a number of hard counters are hard-countered themselves (for instance DDD).

Snake's previous top-tier status was a testament to MK's field clearing ability, he alone removed almost all of Snake's counters from tournaments, allowing for Snake to be perceived as God tier when he was really nothing of the sort.


No, high tier (because only MK is top tier realistically) is not worth banning. MK independently makes enough characters unviable in tournaments that without his presence would be viable to be worthy of a ban.


It's similar to why Melee's Sheik was the closest to bannable but wasn't really. Sheik hard countered a lot of characters, but everything Sheik hard countered was hard countered by at least one other character in the higher tiers. Sheik didn't make enough chars unviable by herself to justify this, MK does.

How do I micharacterize people's arguments?

You didn't. The person I quoted initially did.

This whole discussion that we've been having came from my response to somebody else's quote which you responded to. He mischaracterized people's arguments, not you.







Edit:

yuna and i are similar in that we think that if we logically explain things to people they will understand and convert. However, ill have to say a good 75-80% of people lack the ability to understand logic anyway so it's pretty much a worthless argument, hence why i'll post once or twice then give up. People are stupid and impossible to convert even with logic, look at religion.

I'll agree with you in general, however keep in mind that some people might have intelligent highly nuanced opposing stances.

While most people here are posting garbage, I like to think that a few intelligent posters drop by that have opinions different enough to have a legitimate debate.

Two words...

Solid, Snake...

MK beats Snake, 60-40.

MK is top ranked as well.

Regardless, MK was always the most bannable character, others might not have recognized this, but MK was always clearing the field so Snakes could win. This is why it took so long to discover Snake's disadvantageous match-ups, MK players just eliminated them.

Guys...its relatively simple: if your main is bad against MK, pick up a secondary for dealing with MK that doesn't have such an upwards battle. Suddenly, you can pick off the MK players and use your actual character against everyone else, pretty soon those MK players will have to use secondaries for their bad match ups, and viola, lots of variety.

Unfortunately, to make it worth pulling a secondary against a character, it can't be an even match-up. Even a soft-counter is pretty difficult for a secondary.

MK doesn't even have any confirmed soft-counters only currently theorized, diddy. Otherwise no, they go even or have a slight disadvantage, and they just win because of the current MK playstyle, aka jumping into the **** (Emblem Lord's description).

If diddy is a soft-counter, then everyone secondaries Diddy... how does this increase diversity again? It'll still be an uphill battle because Diddy doesn't play like anyone else in the cast so he's very difficult to mesh with another main.

Been there, done that. I have three mains (Mario, Ness, and Wario) and three secondaries (Ice Climbers, Fox, and King Dedede). My secondaries were mainly chosen to deal with Metaknight, King Dedede, and Snake. Also, Metaknight doesn't really have any "bad matchups". He has just Snake which is probably 60/40 in Snake's favor. Sorry to be such a whiner but I don't really care for Snake's playstyle and I don't regularly play as characters I don't have fun playing as, call me crazy.

No, he has the possibility of Diddy. Snake is at a 60-40 disadvantage against MK.

Basically, grenade spamming kills MK's b moves, but without them he's still got safe approaches against Snake. His safe attacks also outrange Snake's. His rushdown and pressure games are also far superior, plus he can harass Snake's recovery quite well.

60-40, MK.

Seriously, if Meta is so retardedly easy to play and win as, then why don't all the whiners just use him as a secondary for their bad matchups?

A lot of people actually do.

His Dsmash is pretty slow. Why are you whining about it?

huh?

What frame does the hitbox come out again? Oh yeah, 5. Marth's dtilt comes out on 7 btw.

For a lot of spotdodges, you can counter it being spotdodged by doing it again.

It's an awesome attack.

Then I'll earn it.

Sheik was dominant in the early days of Melee alongside Fox. Sheik was unquestionably the best character in the game in the early Melee tier lists and she made a good amount of the cast unusable in tournament play. Was Sheik banned? No. While some were whining and complaining about Sheik, others were developing other characters to be good in the metagame. While Sheik is still a force to be reckoned with in the Melee scene, there are many other viable characters like the spacies, Marth, Peach, CF, Samus, JP, and occasionally Ganondorf.

Sheik, like MK is essentially Old Sagat.

No, Sheik doesn't make a lot of characters unviable on her own, if you look at her match-ups, sure she has plenty of 8s, but you'll see that for every character she counters, at least one other character has at least as 7. Sheik is the closest to bannable.

MK on the other hand, like Old Sagat, has unique chars that he makes unviable.

Also, keep in mind, Old Sagat is banned in Japan, he's definately a ban-worthy character, but he's close enough to the line that different countries can have different rulesets with him.

 

[petrie911]

I think as long as some characters have neutral match-ups against him, he shouldn't be banned.

I'm going to have to disagree there. If Meta-Knight indeed has no disadvantageous matchups, he is broken. Why? Because there is no reason to use a different character. Why use Snake or DDD or ROB or Marth and run the risk of having a disadvantageous matchup when you can just use Meta-Knight and avoid that risk? In this situation, using Meta-Knight, and only Meta Knight, is the optimal strategy, and all others will lose to it.

If it is true that the best a character can do against MK is 50/50, then I expect MK will eventually completely dominate the tourney scene. And then he will be banned.

Please note that the above only applies if all of MK's matchups are 50/50 or more. If any are significantly less, it does not apply.

 

[Shining Blitz]

Golfg: Me. Actually, I don't remember when I joined, but I think it was past your threshold. But I have been playing melee at school tourneys every single friday for two years, and I've lurked for even longer.
Now, back to the topic:
I mained Samus, Ness, and Roy in Melee. I mained Samus and Ness in SSB64. I now main Sonic and Ness because Samus got nerfed so badly. In Melee, every friday afternoon I struggled against Sheiks being chaingrabbed to death many times; against Fox and Falco, I did slightly better, as I knew the techniques used better. Marth, I put more effort into beating, as I mained Roy and I wanted to prove that a good Roy can beat a Marth. Until Meta-Knight, though, I had never considered anything near a character ban.
But Meta-Knight is broken, plain and simple. Though I don't want to ban him, I see that Brawl cannot become a competitive, diverse game unless something is done. Perhaps a 30-60% handicap may help, but I just don't know if I can keep playing Brawl seriously, in tournaments, if something is not done.

 

[Fatmanonice]

I think as long as some characters have neutral match-ups against him, he shouldn't be banned. MK has one counter (snake) and about 7 characters that have a neutral matchup against him. DK, Yoshi, Wario, Diddy, Mr. Game and Watch, Marth and Lucario. This alone says why he shouldn't be banned.

DK, Wario, and Marth are not neutral and it's been explained several times why already, Diddy is questionable and most just say he is because Ninjalink(?) beat Mew2King in ONE tournament with him, Mew2King said himself that the Yoshi/Metaknight is 60/40 in Metaknight's favor, and Mr. Game and Watch is probably right. As for Lucario, I have no idea. Aside from Azen, I really don't know any high ranking Lucario players and I rarely fight Lucarios myself. He is probably one of the characters I use the least in my "match up experiments" so I don't really know how he stands against too many characters.