The "Metaknight should/will be banned" thread.

[Yuna]

No, move to NC. We're cooler. We have a mix of extremely ghetto gansta black smashers and overall-wearing hillbilly smashers. Tournies are amazing.

Are we gonna have a holy war about where I should move?

 

[Falconv1.0]

Are we gonna have a holy war about where I should move?

Yes.


There will be blood. ^_^

 

[adumbrodeus]

And run for mayor.

I'd vote for you!

Yes.


There will be blood. ^_^

Sweet, can I be involved?

*gets various martial-arts related weaponry out of closet*

PLEASE?

 

[Levitas]

Are we gonna have a holy war about where I should move?

Only if you decide you want to come to MI. Steer clear of MI.

 

[∫unk]

It's hard to ban metaknight, but god **** would the game be more enjoyable without him there.

 

[Smashless]

to kind of steer the conversation in a new direction (other than Yuna's city of residence)

what would a metaknight-less metagame look like? Would snake, who is still a beast, dominate the scene, or would it be a truly more balanced and healthy game?

I think metaknight keeps characters like ROB in check. getting rid of him might cause some unforseen problems.

 

[PassWurD]

If people were smart, they would go and play Melee.

Fix'd

 

[adumbrodeus]

to kind of steer the conversation in a new direction (other than Yuna's city of residence)

what would a metaknight-less metagame look like? Would snake, who is still a beast, dominate the scene, or would it be a truly more balanced and healthy game?

I think metaknight keeps characters like ROB in check. getting rid of him might cause some unforseen problems.

Yes, it would. ROB is good, but he has nowhere near the level of dominance that MK does. None of the other chars do.

No, Snake would not be king again, he owed that position to MK, who had a habit of eliminating his disadvantages.


No, top character would be Marth, because he soft-counters a mess of people, and without MK has no disadvantages (MK hurts him more then most characters, with a top tier like him, it's actually better to have a few good hard-counters then more soft-counters).

Realistically, I don't think people will have a problem with him either, because his list of characters that he hard-counters that half the cast doesn't is comprised of... *hears birds chirping*

The fact that he would have no disadvantages and soft-counters everyone and their mother would put him over the top, but he has very few **** match-ups, so his presence wouldn't make any character not viable. That honor would probably fall to the high tiers.

 

[RDK]

Banning MK will only cause people to ***** and moan about Snake, Marth, G&W, and the rest of the top-to-high tiers. Once you start eliminating characters that are "too good" for the sake of balance, you can't stop until you get rid of everyone above middle tier, since those characters tend to do well against each other but nobody else.

Point being, why throw diversity out the window for the sake of balance--because in reality, that's what you're doing--lowering diversity. Yes, a larger percentage of characters may place in tournaments, but you have less characters to play with.

Here's an idea: if MK is that much of a problem for you in tournaments, just main him. Or at least know your matchups. Don't be whiners. Just because you think he's unbeatable doesn't mean that everybody else should be banned from using him.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Banning MK will only cause people to ***** and moan about Snake, Marth, G&W, and the rest of the top-to-high tiers. Once you start eliminating characters that are "too good" for the sake of balance, you can't stop until you get rid of everyone above middle tier, since those characters tend to do well against each other but nobody else.

Point being, why throw diversity out the window for the sake of balance--because in reality, that's what you're doing--lowering diversity. Yes, a larger percentage of characters may place in tournaments, but you have less characters to play with.

Here's an idea: if MK is that much of a problem for you in tournaments, just main him. Or at least know your matchups. Don't be whiners. Just because you think he's unbeatable doesn't mean that everybody else should be banned from using him.

Ummm, doubtful, those chars don't have the glut of insanely good match-ups that MK has. Again, look at their match-up chart.

As I said before, Marth is the best contender for new top tier, and he basically hard-counters nobody, he just has a ton of soft counters, and (without MK) no disadvantages. His presence makes no character unviable in tournaments, and therefore it's doubtful anyone will complain.


On the other hand, MK has a significant effect on the diversity of viable characters, he is TECHNICALLY borderline for a ban, similar to Old Sagat.

But of course, at this point in the metagame, it would be utterly stupid and scrubbish to ban anyone since there hasn't been enough time to figure out if MK REALLY hard counters that many characters. This is worth discussing... 5 years from now.

 

[Fletch]

Banning MK will only cause people to ***** and moan about Snake, Marth, G&W, and the rest of the top-to-high tiers. Once you start eliminating characters that are "too good" for the sake of balance, you can't stop until you get rid of everyone above middle tier, since those characters tend to do well against each other but nobody else.

Point being, why throw diversity out the window for the sake of balance--because in reality, that's what you're doing--lowering diversity. Yes, a larger percentage of characters may place in tournaments, but you have less characters to play with.

Here's an idea: if MK is that much of a problem for you in tournaments, just main him. Or at least know your matchups. Don't be whiners. Just because you think he's unbeatable doesn't mean that everybody else should be banned from using him.

RDK makes a great point. If you're that adamant about getting MK banned, everyone should just main him and makes sure he takes the top 8 spots at every tourney. Since this isn't happening right now though, he won't be banned any time soon.

 

[adumbrodeus]

RDK makes a great point. If you're that adamant about getting MK banned, everyone should just main him and makes sure he takes the top 8 spots at every tourney. Since this isn't happening right now though, he won't be banned any time soon.

You forget... the people who want him banned right now probably aren't gonna be thinking that far ahead.

 

[betterthanbonds9]

Ummm, doubtful, those chars don't have the glut of insanely good match-ups that MK has. Again, look at their match-up chart.

Who does meta destroy that most above mid tier dont already destroy?

And who cares about the hypothetical top tier anyway? It seems obvious throughout this thread that he isn't going to be banned at this time and predicting the future for events that aren't obvious (like "the day after Labor Day is tuesday") is impossible.

----

This thread deserves a lock and a sticky.

A lock because all intelligent conversation ended at about page 15 and a sticky to show all those that attempt to create "ban [character]" threads just wont end in the desired outcome for the original poster.

You forget... the people who want him banned right now probably aren't gonna be thinking that far ahead.

and that's why their opinions are argued against and then they run home to their mommies
I'm just glad that Nintendo banned pichu from brawl, he was WAY too strong

 

[RDK]

You forget... the people who want him banned right now probably aren't gonna be thinking that far ahead.

That's why nobody should give any great amount of consideration to people who are whining about MK. Look at every other competitive fighter out there. They all have their MK-esque characters.

Ummm, doubtful, those chars don't have the glut of insanely good match-ups that MK has. Again, look at their match-up chart.

As I said before, Marth is the best contender for new top tier, and he basically hard-counters nobody, he just has a ton of soft counters, and (without MK) no disadvantages. His presence makes no character unviable in tournaments, and therefore it's doubtful anyone will complain.

You're forgetting Snake, ROB, Game & Watch, etc. If MK gets banned, it's just a matter of time before someone complains about Snake, and then it starts all over again. The gaps between the top and high tier characters aren't as great as the gap between the high and mid tiers. If you get rid of MK, you have to get rid of the entire top and high.

 

[Fletch]

You forget... the people who want him banned right now probably aren't gonna be thinking that far ahead.

I'm just offering them a suggestion to get him banned; it's the only way it's going to happen. Since that won't actually happen though, I don't think there is anything to worry about.

 

[adumbrodeus]

Who does meta destroy that most above mid tier dont already destroy?

And who cares about the hypothetical top tier anyway? It seems obvious throughout this thread that he isn't going to be banned at this time and predicting the future for events that aren't obvious (like "the day after Labor Day is tuesday") is impossible.

Again, look at their match-up thread. Quite a few characters actually. And MK is unique in that you can't counter-pick him, so those characters become totally unviable.

As for the hypothetical top tier, since you guys were arguing that if he was banned the new top tier would be just as complained about, pointing out that the new top tier would not be just as complained about is relevant to the discussion. From an objective stance, Marth is the best candidate for this position.

----

This thread deserves a lock and a sticky.

A lock because all intelligent conversation ended at about page 15 and a sticky to show all those that attempt to create "ban [character]" threads just wont end in the desired outcome for the original poster.

Lol, probably does, cept OP was samuraipanda.

But it keeps these useless threads out of other areas, so it's good. Better to have one mass of stupidity then 14,000,000,000 no?

and that's why their opinions are argued against and then they run home to their mommies
I'm just glad that Nintendo banned pichu from brawl, he was WAY too strong

true, and lol

That's why nobody should give any great amount of consideration to people who are whining about MK. Look at every other competitive fighter out there. They all have their MK-esque characters.

Well, it's a matter of degrees. With the actual ban criteria, MK is boarderline, but obviously, it's way too soon to tell.

You're forgetting Snake, ROB, Game & Watch, etc. If MK gets banned, it's just a matter of time before someone complains about Snake, and then it starts all over again. The gaps between the top and high tier characters aren't as great as the gap between the high and mid tiers. If you get rid of MK, you have to get rid of the entire top and high.

Actually, the gap between MK and the rest of the cast is the most significant.

Regardless, without MK to clear out his disadvantages, Snake is not going to be top tier. No other character has that much of a gap.

As I pointed out, Marth has the most suitable match-ups, and he doesn't make a single character unviable, so it's not likely he'll be complained about anyway.


But it doesn't really matter now does it? Because even if MK does get banned, it's not because the SBR cowed to the scrubish "he's too good" excuse. It'll be in at least 5 years, with enormous amounts of evidence that he decreases the diversity of viable characters enough ON HIS OWN to warrant a ban. No other character can hits that point, nobody else will be banned, period.

You'll also notice that people rarely complain about anything other then the top tier, after all when Snake was top, who were people complaining about? Even though MK was shaping the tournament scene, NOBODY NOTICED, because he wasn't top tier. You can expect the same would happen with Marth, only the population of "ban-whiners" would be 5 people, because he would have a nill effect on character diversity.

I'm just offering them a suggestion to get him banned; it's the only way it's going to happen. Since that won't actually happen though, I don't think there is anything to worry about.

It's cool man, just wanted to point out that it's a wasted effort.

 

[Browny]

the best thing that could happen to brawl right now, is every just mains MK. If all this 'play to win at any costs' stuff is to believed, its obvious anyone who doesnt main MK is simply doing it wrong, and are only holding themselves back. none of these 'fits my playstyle excuses', anyone can be an MK pro in a day. then when everyone mains him he can be banned, and brawl becomes a decent game competitively again.

imo

 

[betterthanbonds9]

Again, look at their match-up thread. Quite a few characters actually. And MK is unique in that you can't counter-pick him, so those characters become totally unviable.

As for the hypothetical top tier, since you guys were arguing that if he was banned the new top tier would be just as complained about, pointing out that the new top tier would not be just as complained about is relevant to the discussion. From an objective stance, Marth is the best candidate for this position.

But it keeps these useless threads out of other areas, so it's good. Better to have one mass of stupidity then 14,000,000,000 no?

The new top tier logically isn't marth, it's the people who are right behind MK. And yeah, it might be relevant, doesn't make it necesarily helpful. (I'm pretty sure this is proof that predicting the future is both stupid and should be avoided)

Something about that chart is wrong. I never thought i'd link to this thread EVER, but here goes http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=157979. That actually seems more accurate IMO because it's actually been discussed. That thread you keep linking to doesn't even go in depth on the characters in thread (i could hardly care less if the OP isn't full of it, as long as the thread is). Not to mention half the comments on the thread are about how the thread lacks any logic....

I prefer just to sticky this and retitle it "Don't make 'ban [character]' topics" that way anybody that does post one just gets it locked/deleted.

Point is there is no new information being brought to the table and the same argument are thus repeated (even this one is a repeat of a repeat). Basically reading this thread is like watching Fox in primetime over the summer.

 

[Gindler]

So if MK was banned then Marth would become the new MK? Then what would be the point if someone will just step in and take MKs place?

 

[adumbrodeus]

The new top tier logically isn't marth, it's the people who are right behind MK. And yeah, it might be relevant, doesn't make it necesarily helpful. (I'm pretty sure this is proof that predicting the future is both stupid and should be avoided).

Not at all. There's a great deal of evidence that Snake owes his slot as second-best character to MK, as he did his top tier position.

It would seem so that the character that wins the second most would be most likely top tier, but you gotta remember that the current top tier affects the metagame A LOT. This is especially true of MK. So in this discussion, match-ups dictate, not tournament results.

But it's not the future, it's a hypothetical, and an interesting thought experiment, not to mention it debunks certain core arguments.

So if MK was banned then Marth would become the new MK? Then what would be the point if someone will just step in and take MKs place?

Being top tier is not the same as being MK. MK renders many characters as not being tournament viable, but Marth has maybe 2 match-ups that he outright destroys the character, the rest are 60-40 or close.

The result is a much more diverse tournament environment.


However, it's WAY too early to be sure.

 

[AlexX]

Being top tier is not the same as being MK. MK renders many characters as not being tournament viable, but Marth has maybe 2 match-ups that he outright destroys the character, the rest are 60-40 or close.

Please name these characters that would become tournament viable if MK were out of the picture.

 

[betterthanbonds9]

Not at all. There's a great deal of evidence that Snake owes his slot as second-best character to MK, as he did his top tier position.

It would seem so that the character that wins the second most would be most likely top tier, but you gotta remember that the current top tier affects the metagame A LOT. This is especially true of MK. So in this discussion, match-ups dictate, not tournament results.

But it's not the future, it's a hypothetical, and an interesting thought experiment, not to mention it debunks certain core arguments.

If snake owes his slot to MK, and in your thread you keep linking to snake is at a 60:40 disadvantage, something about your logic is really messing with my head.

I'm pretty sure that snake would stay there because he still has a good advantage over the rest of the cast. Okay, lets argue matchups. The marth boards argue that Marth has the disadvantage against snake:
http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=160991
http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=186736
http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?p=5267996#post5267996

note: the last one is your topic and it has him at even, the other two are 6:4...

If Marth is gonna take 1st place he needs to beat Snake...who is already higher, has a nice record against the cast, and is pretty popular.

this core argument being..."Snake takes new top tier"?
the argument that should be argued is "if we ban MK, then we need to ban the next MK"
^it doesn't matter who the next MK is...(and if you're a marth main, you might as well root for snake so he gets banned second )
---and that argument has been brought up, argued for, failed to be argued against, and brought up again at least twice a page >_<, seriously, just use this thread as a notice that banning a character is not gonna happen at this moment. Something drastic would need to occur beforehand.

 

[adumbrodeus]

If snake owes his slot to MK, and in your thread you keep linking to snake is at a 60:40 disadvantage, something about your logic is really messing with my head.

Because of their similar attributes, Marth's advantages tend to be cleared by MK a great deal more easily then Snake's advantages.

I'm pretty sure that snake would stay there because he still has a good advantage over the rest of the cast. Okay, lets argue matchups. The marth boards argue that Marth has the disadvantage against snake:
http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=160991
http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=186736
http://smashboards.com/showthread.php?p=5267996#post5267996

note: the last one is your topic and it has him at even, the other two are 6:4...

If Marth is gonna take 1st place he needs to beat Snake...who is already higher, has a nice record against the cast, and is pretty popular.

55-45 is generally considered a neutral, it's given to match-ups that are close enough that the result isn't remotely reliable even with equivalent skill, but there is a noticeable (albiet tiny) advantage for one char.

Again, it's effectively a neutral.

this core argument being..."Snake takes new top tier"?
the argument that should be argued is "if we ban MK, then we need to ban the next MK"
^it doesn't matter who the next MK is...(and if you're a marth main, you might as well root for snake so he gets banned second )
---and that argument has been brought up, argued for, failed to be argued against, and brought up again at least twice a page >_<, seriously, just use this thread as a notice that banning a character is not gonna happen at this moment. Something drastic would need to occur beforehand.

Pretty much.

That argument just annoys me, because it assumes that all top tier characters are functionally the same, and the truth is, they're all unique, and must be treated as such.

And really, I don't care who the top tier is, I'm just pointing to the facts as I see them. Snake's got concrete disadvantages, and if the worst match-up Marth has is effectively a neutral, he's the best candidate for top char. Think Falco vs. fox, Falco had an advantage that actually was an advantage, yet who was top tier? Overall match-ups were better for fox, so, he was.

Please name these characters that would become tournament viable if MK were out of the picture.

I posted the link to the MK match-up thread, and explained it multiple times.

Basically, MK's hard-counters, generally in smash it takes a high number of hard-counters to completely destroy a characters viability due to counter-picking. But that doesn't work for MK, so he's all that's necessary.

 

[AlexX]

I posted the link to the MK match-up thread, and explained it multiple times.

First of all, it's not very accurate. For example, I know for a fact Oli is roughly a 6-4 MK in his matchup, not a 7-3. Same with Ike. Secondly, even if it were accurate, it does nothing to tell me who would be viable if it weren't for MK.

Basically, MK's hard-counters, generally in smash it takes a high number of hard-counters to completely destroy a characters viability due to counter-picking. But that doesn't work for MK, so he's all that's necessary.

The characters MK hard counters are, for the most part, not very good in general. Captain Falcon and Ganondorf aren't going to magically become viable once he vanishes since they're just as badly beaten by the rest of the top tiers. Likewise, the other ones MK does really well against are mostly mid and low-tier characters, which also experience a huge amount of problems against other upper-tier opponents like G&W and Falco.

Again: if there is a specific character I'm missing that you think would become viable if MK were out of the picture, then please name them. I can see that the match-up chart is what you use as the basis for your entire argument, but it doesn't work here since I don't see anyone he totally destroys that doesn't also get totally destroyed by the rest of the upper-tiers.

 

[Gindler]

Being top tier is not the same as being MK. MK renders many characters as not being tournament viable, but Marth has maybe 2 match-ups that he outright destroys the character, the rest are 60-40 or close.

The result is a much more diverse tournament environment.


However, it's WAY too early to be sure.

I can't think of a character that's powerless against MK. But seconding Ness I do know that against Marth, Ness is worthless. I'd much rather put up my bowser (that's decent at best) against an MK main...I believe bowser is one of the matchups where MK "destroys" them. But I've seen a few instances where Bowser beats MK, and this was in real life not youtube so I knew they were both good. Only time I've seen a Ness beat a Marth is when Marth agreed not to death grab. All in all, as far as I'm concerned I'd rather have MK be in "MK tier" than have Marth be in top tier. As for everyone else but Ness/Lucas/and MK users they may benefit from an MK ban. But the closest that'll ever come to happen would be a soft ban, but I know some people who would never agree to no use MK.

Thank You samuraipanda for this thread

 

[Yuna]

I posted the link to the MK match-up thread, and explained it multiple times.

Basically, MK's hard-counters, generally in smash it takes a high number of hard-counters to completely destroy a characters viability due to counter-picking. But that doesn't work for MK, so he's all that's necessary.

We've already been through this. The characters MK hard-counters are generally pretty bad characters anyway. They have other factors (like, say, matchups) rendering them unviable. Removing MK won't magically make them viable. It's remove one of their horrible matchups.

 

[ShadowLink84]

And run for mayor.

You'd probably win too XD

Hmm it would be nice to seer MK banned though, mainly since i am just that much of a ******* towards MK >_>

 

[corhor]

The gap between MK and everyone else in brawl isn't as great as the gap between Falco/Fox and everyone in melee.

 

[RDK]

The gap between MK and everyone else in brawl isn't as great as the gap between Falco/Fox and everyone in melee.

^ Nice first post. People will definetely take you seriously after that little gem.

 

[Demp]

edit - Nevermind.

 

[Fearmy]

MK will be pretty much crap next game, or unless nintendo is adjusting, and trying not to debuff him so much like Melee Fox -> Brawl Fox, or Melee Samus -> Samus. Even Though samus was mid tier ( i think) in melee, still.... samus D: but if MK was gone... that would be.... nice, we definitely can't ban him atm, but if he gets like 4 or so char spec techs that make him more broken, then maybe. I would Rather have more chars instead of everyone maining MK. or if we somehow made MK's get a slight handicap bonus, i don't really know anymore, but right now we non-mkers have something to value once we beat this demon...

 

[popsofctown]

Please name these characters that would become tournament viable if MK were out of the picture.

Luigi would be tournament viable if MK were out of the picture, he has an abnormaly bad matchup against MK, and his fight against Marth is quite doable.
Fox would certainly be tournament viable if MK were out of the picture. I've seen a Fox player be able to beat everything but MK (He beats Marth and Snake fine)
IMO, Kirby could break into the scene pretty well with MK removed... tons of other characters as well.

It'd be a hassle to do, but i could show you numerous mid or low tier characters that need TWO CP helpers to give them a neutral/positive matchup list. They can't find any one accessory that would beat everything they need and MK as well. (Except MK himself). To get a total neutral/positive matchup sheet, they need their favorite character, plus someone who covers that character's innate weaknesses, and then their Diddy/Lucario. That spreads them out way too far, that mathematical means they need three times the character specific knowledge as an MK user (ok, that's probably an exaggeration, but still).

With MK gone, there would be numerous two character combos that could sweep the sheet, that don't exist now.


As for the speculation about Marth suddenly sweeping the world in MK's absence, that's all just speculation. We don't know what Marth could do. The "how to beat Marth" meta game is so incredibly small that it can be expected to reveal Marth's weaknesses very well. He's one of the most unpopular high tier characters.

 

[Yuna]

Subjective and faulty opinion.

10 shotalinks.

 

[LuigiKing]

Luigi would be tournament viable if MK were out of the picture, he has an abnormaly bad matchup against MK, and his fight against Marth is quite doable.
Fox would certainly be tournament viable if MK were out of the picture. I've seen a Fox player be able to beat everything but MK (He beats Marth and Snake fine)
IMO, Kirby could break into the scene pretty well with MK removed... tons of other characters as well.

He makes a great point here. I know as a Luigi main MK is the only high/top tier matchup that isn't doable, but MK is easily a 9:1 matchup against Luigi, simply because of their disturbingly similar game. Point being, if MK were out of the picture, I would feel a lot safer in tournies than I do now. Marth is pretty even with Luigi as far as that individual matchup goes, and falco really isn't that bad. Neither is snake if you watch the uptilt. G&W is the only other top/high character Luigi has serious issues with, but he can at least be counterpicked to some extent. I know no one wants to listen to me ramble about Luigi, because no one believes he has any good matchups anyway, but from our perspective over at the Luigi boards, MK is the only impossible matchup, but its one that is TRULY IMPOSSIBLE if the MK player is as skilled as you are.

 

[cmpr94x]

I main Luigi and I do not think he is an impossible matchup at all. Luigi's game play is not THAT similar to MK's and he has some advantages over him. I really do not think that MK should be banned, I think people should stop whining and find ways around him. Also, tournaments are not based upon Luigi. They should be based on all of the characters. We should not take Metaknight out because he owns another character. Pika owns Snake oh no we have to take Pikachu out. Everyone owns Bowser oh we have to have only Bowser tourneys or else it will not be fair. Boo hoo people.

 

[betterthanbonds9]

Because of their similar attributes, Marth's advantages tend to be cleared by MK a great deal more easily then Snake's advantages.

55-45 is generally considered a neutral, it's given to match-ups that are close enough that the result isn't remotely reliable even with equivalent skill, but there is a noticeable (albiet tiny) advantage for one char.

Again, it's effectively a neutral.

I posted the link to the MK match-up thread, and explained it multiple times.

Basically, MK's hard-counters, generally in smash it takes a high number of hard-counters to completely destroy a characters viability due to counter-picking. But that doesn't work for MK, so he's all that's necessary.

Snake would still be higher because he has the advantage against marth, is it that hard to understand that your own boards more respected people are saying that it's 60:40, not 50:50 or 55:45. Any idiot that took match can tell what that ratio is and can apply it to a scenario and cna tell that 60:40 means an advantage for snake. So no, your own boards say it's not neutral.

THAT MK MATCH UP THREAD SUCKS HARDCORE. I mean really, over half the posts in it are about how crappy the thread is, did you even look at it? And no, you haven't discussed it, you've thrown it out like a safety blanket and for some reason you didn't put flame retardant on your blanket and it keeps burning up. At least tell me why it should be trusted because the people IN the thread sure dont think so.

Or an extremely popular one....see sheik/fox/falco

 

[Yuna]

He makes a great point here. I know as a Luigi main MK is the only high/top tier matchup that isn't doable, but MK is easily a 9:1 matchup against Luigi, simply because of their disturbingly similar game.

Who are you and why shouldn't we laugh at you?

 

[popsofctown]

My list of characters was "faulty and subjective" only because the question itself was really flawed. AlexX asked that someone give a list of characters that would become viable if MK was ought. Viable is subjective. Obviously, any character would become more viable if a more powerful character was banned.... the cast is smaller. To what degree is unprovable, but we can guess at what kind of good things might happen.

 

[Yuna]

My list of characters was "faulty and subjective" only because the question itself was really flawed. AlexX asked that someone give a list of characters that would become viable if MK was ought. Viable is subjective. Obviously, any character would become more viable if a more powerful character was banned.... the cast is smaller. To what degree is unprovable, but we can guess at what kind of good things might happen.

Claiming Luigi enjoys a 9-1 matchup against MK is BS. A lot of your other statements is BS as well.

The question is not at all flawed. Which characters does MK render unviable that would otherwise be viable? Unviable requires at least a 6-4 to 6-3 matchup.

 

[popsofctown]

i never said luigi's matchup against MK is 1-9.

And i would maintain that the question is flawed. You can't define unviable really. It's something that happens in degrees. Beating every character in the game with falco is hard, with toon link it's a little harder, with PT it's a little harder.... so on. It's a spectrum. It's difficult to say where you draw the line and call that a disadvantage that we can reasonably expect to be overcome by skill.