The "Metaknight should/will be banned" thread.

[Doggalina]

How about we make anyone who plays MK use a tag with "Broken" and remove the b moves from that tag? That should help.

Or maybe the A moves and we use "fixed" for that tag. They can choose which one they want.

Broken doesn't fit. How about "GHEY"?

 

[3transfat]

While Metaknight doesn't currently warrant a ban, I believe he will at some point.
However, banning him now would be better for the community and tournament scene than banning him later would be. Much more diversity, much more fun.

 

[Yojimbo]

Not sure how I feel about this topic, since in my local tournament scene I have yet to see a viable Metaknight main. There were a few scrubs using him, but nothing unbeatable or even close. Hm... although these posts are convincing me that he might need a ban in the near future. But it seems too close to Sheik in Melee at the moment. 'course, that doesn't mean they can be directly compared as others have said.

But ****, MK is placing a lot in the results. That's got me thinking, to say the least.

 

[Bakithi]

I agree with you, 3transfat. =D

 

[Plairnkk]

you guys are such newbies, lol

 

[Niko_K]

^^ Plank speaks the truth. Though I just want to see the outcome of an MK free tourney.

1. Snake
2. DDD
3. Snake
4. Snake
5. Falco

^Prediction Skills

 

[everlasting yayuhzz]

MK is amazing, just not quite broken enough to get banned. Even though I personally think he should be banned, because he is a stupid character.

 

[bluebolt]

lolol people are noobs for saying he should be banned. he dosent have that much priority so ike and link have a chance.
no projectiles.
many have a chance.
I havent a problem beating other mk's unless they are better so, yeah. lol.

 

[bluebolt]

Not sure how I feel about this topic, since in my local tournament scene I have yet to see a viable Metaknight main. There were a few scrubs using him, but nothing unbeatable or even close. Hm... although these posts are convincing me that he might need a ban in the near future. But it seems too close to Sheik in Melee at the moment. 'course, that doesn't mean they can be directly compared as others have said.

But ****, MK is placing a lot in the results. That's got me thinking, to say the least.

thats cuz the mk players are good. its not metaknight being broken.


IF YOU BAN METAKNIGHT YOU PROVE YOUR ALL COWARDS. <- what that said.

 

[Doggalina]

bluebolt, you've just joined the likes of zombie7775 and basement_dweller and have been added to my ignore list. Thank you for playing.

 

[Falconv1.0]

Bluebolt, you are not using any facts...at all. Mk's priority is insane, and he ***** Ike and Link. The only character that can really ghey him is Snake.

Whenever I use MK, in order to justify myself, I use the tag MK***

I dont think he deserves a ban, but I do think he's a bit too easy to pick up and own with. If he does end up being banned, I really won't give a ****, the amount of 'viable' characters wont be much higher since the characters who get mega ***** by MK generally suck.

 

[Yuna]

IMO, MK should not be banned, unless we find out some new stuff that makes him much, much better (like his Infinite Cape, only not banned).

It doesn't matter if it goes so far as Meta-Knight being the only character winning tournaments because everyone good uses him.

A single character winning all tournaments does not warrant a ban. A single character dominating the scene to such a degree you have to play the same character to even stand the slightest chance of winning does.

In other words, yes, Meta-Knight is great. Yes, he beats everyone else. Yes, he's a few steps above everyone... but that's not enough. That just makes him the best character in the game.

 

[highandmightyjoe]

Isn't it sad that we even have to have this argument.

On a side not I don't play Street Fighter so I don't know how good Akuma is, but my idea of a broken character is Kabal from UMK3, and yes MK is as good as he was. He never got banned, in case anyone was wondering.

 

[Brinzy]

lolol people are noobs for saying he should be banned. he dosent have that much priority so ike and link have a chance.
no projectiles.
many have a chance.
I havent a problem beating other mk's unless they are better so, yeah. lol.

If you haven't had any problems beating MK, that's because you play the (currently) most viable characters for MK, or you play MK yourself, and even after all of that, you probably played some character whoring players who just saw that he was doing good and picked him up even though they didn't have a clue as to what's going on. To say that Ike and Link have a chance is to say that their chances are bleak, because god knows that it takes what, 1-2 bairs off the stage (that are gonna cut through Ike and Link anyway) to kill them? "He doesn't have that much priority" is a stupid statement. Having no projectiles doesn't hinder Marth, so why would it hinder Metaknight, again?

You don't even sound like you have any experience against a good MK.

 

[ShortFuse]

You guys talk about waiting 3 years. At this rate, people are getting extremely fed up with MetaSpam. I can beat MetaKnight, it's not that big of an issue, but I would have to use Fox. I feel cheated in skill because I know the people I play have much inferior skill than me and are just spamming the newb friendly character. It's really not right.
He won't get banned and this'll stain the competitive Brawl scene. I don't think Brawl will last as long as 3 years, and it won't last as long as Melee did.

If MetaKnight gets banned, it won't be because of how undeniably superior he is, it'll be to save the Brawl competitive scene before everyone abandons it and moves onto another fighting game. That's the point of the softban in Japan, to keep the competitive scene alive. After a while people will stop going to tournaments because of MetaKnight. Counterpicking doesn't work really because how loser can change character. In the end, you'll probably still lose. I feel like abandoning my Marth even though it's vastly superior to my Fox just because I can face MetaKnight better with Fox.

The only mains people will play in tournaments will be MK and those characters that can counter MK. Every character who can't counter MK or match evenly will not be their mains.

The alternative is, that if you want to play MetaKnight, your opponent has the right to second character pick: Always

 

[Grunt]

On a side not I don't play Street Fighter so I don't know how good Akuma is

Akuma throws a fireball in the air downwards at an angle making most approaches useless.
MK is really not Akuma level though.

 

[psykoplympton]

ive been quoting the playing to win thing all day and heres the simple truth.


"Surely, it must be a group of scrubs who simply don’t know how to beat him, and reflexively cry out for a ban."

 

[Brinzy]

Akuma throws a fireball in the air downwards at an angle making most approaches useless.

Not to mention he was strong as hell. Just string together a few kicks + Shoryuken, and there goes half of your life.

 

[ShortFuse]

repeating this, since I edited my post late:


Maybe a good rule is that if you want to play MetaKnight, your opponent has the right to second character pick: Always
You also cannot pick MetaKnight as your character if you choose second (unless it's dittos)

 

[bluebolt]

you guys are such newbies, lol

I know they are, right?

 

[Morrigan]

It's imposible to keep up with this thread. It moves so fast...

 

[Yuna]

repeating this, since I edited my post late:


Maybe a good rule is that if you want to play MetaKnight, your opponent has the right to second character pick: Always
You also cannot pick MetaKnight as your character if you choose second (unless it's dittos)

How about you don't be stupid and always go with a character as whom you're good against Meta-Knight if you think the opponent will play Meta-Knight?

It's called Counter-picking and is a staple in Competitive fighting games.

 

[Doggalina]

It wouldn't hurt to do some research before tourneys to find out who the entrants mains are. Also, you could just play it safe and always lead off with either a) somebody you know you can beat Meta with or b) Meta.

 

[highandmightyjoe]

I find the "for the good of the game" argument interesting. How exactly are we supposed to convince new players to come over to Brawl if we ourselves are so unhappy with it that we take to banning entire characters. If anything it seems to me like a drastic action like that would look bad for the community and prevent new players from coming in.

That said he is ridiculously overpowered and just another example of Nintendo's mistakes with Brawl. I main DeDeDe and Marth, and play Zamus and Captain Falcon casually. I practice alot with my mains and consider myself a pretty good DeDeDe and at least an average Marth. But against a MK who knows what he is doing I have to switch to Diddy to win. I know I am much better with DeDeDe than I am with Diddy but the match-ups are so uneven that I have to switch to like my 7th best character to win. I know I'm not the only one who has had to take special precautions just to beat him. Being forced to completely changed the way you play the game, and even the character you play as just so you have a chance of beating an overpowered opponent is no fun at all, but no reason for a banning.

It's annoying, it's stupid, it's cheap, but it's no reason for a ban.

 

[DanGR]

stuff

I agree totally.

Yuna, how broken and unbeatable he is wasn't his point. That doesn't even matter as far as I'm concerned. If MK was the worst in the game, but everyone used him cuz he was by far the "coolest" or something,(which is far fetched, but humor me) the competitive scene would diminish simply b/c the game would get too boring and repetitive. It's the same effect.

 

[FBM]

Strangely, MK's tournament wins have only been going upwards, now exceeding Snake's. The game has been out for 6 months, and unless something drastically changes, I don't see this changing anywhere soon.

Learning how to beat certain characters means learning about their weaknesses and how to abuse them. It won't work because MK has no weaknesses. You can learn all the frame data and knockback and chaingrab percentages you like, but there's no way around MK besides simply being a better player than your opponent.

6 months is a short time. Snake was easily more popular than MK for awhile, so why the change? If it happened to Snake, it could happen to MK too (though I do agree that MK seems stronger).

Anyway, we all know MK's qualities and you're right that analyzing them won't give us more insight. It's OTHER characters we need to examine and see what we can find in them that might work against MK. I believe when this happens, his popularity will cool a bit, because decent MKs will lose to characters experienced in the matchup that they have little to no experience against.

 

[Yuna]

Yuna, how broken and unbeatable he is wasn't his point. That doesn't even matter as far as I'm concerned.

And I was telling ShortFuse (and, apparently, you) that how broken and unbeatable he is is relevant. And that the majority of the top echelon of every single Competitive fighting game community in existence disagree with you.

Banning a character is always a last resort. And how broken and unbeatable they are should be the only reason to ban them.

If MK was the worst in the game, but everyone used him cuz he was by far the "coolest" or something,(which is far fetched, but humor me) the competitive scene would diminish simply b/c the game would get too boring and repetitive. It's the same effect.

Inconsequential. We don't ban characters for being "too popular" among the top echelon of players. It would be stupid.

 

[RDK]

How about you don't be stupid and always go with a character as whom you're good against Meta-Knight if you think the opponent will play Meta-Knight?

It's called Counter-picking and is a staple in Competitive fighting games.

The point is really that it becomes ridiculous to even assume you can enter a tournament nowadays and do well primarily with a character who has a more-than-normally unfavorable matchup with MK. The whole counterpick argument isn't even that relevant, as it boils down to a matter of choosing the lesser evil (I.E., no overly advantageous matchups, but who is the "best" of the inherently "bad" matchups).

I'm not saying all-out ban him, but I heavily favor the idea of hosting MK-free tournaments, just because I think the results would be beneficial and interesting.

Which brings us back the original question: if you're playing to win, why are you not playing MK?

 

[~ Gheb ~]

Banning MK? I'm not against it. Why?

Stupid comparision: Pokemon

In FRLG 386 Mewtwo was banned because he was ridicoulusly powerful. Of course, there where other Pokemon, who could counter him but that would've been plain stupid. You would have to use a pokemon just to counter Mewtwo, which would completely break the game and set the enitre metagame in stone.

MK is pretty much the same. Of course you could just use a counter (if there only was one...) but that again would force the player to master a character just for the sake of defeating somebody overpowered.

This obviously leads nowhere...

 

[Doggalina]

Which brings us back the original question: if you're playing to win, why are you not playing Melee?

Fixed.

/agenda

 

[acv]

The point is really that it becomes ridiculous to even assume you can enter a tournament nowadays and do well primarily with a character who has a more-than-normally unfavorable matchup with MK. The whole counterpick argument isn't even that relevant, as it boils down to a matter of choosing the lesser evil (I.E., no overly advantageous matchups, but who is the "best" of the inherently "bad" matchups).

I'm not saying all-out ban him, but I heavily favor the idea of hosting MK-free tournaments, just because I think the results would be beneficial and interesting.

Which brings us back the original question: if you're playing to win, why are you not playing MK?

smash is not about characters,its about skill.

20%haracter
75:skill
5%:luck

if you think MK is almost unbeatable then get off the boards,play against MK and you will learn that if your are playing to win you dont need to necesarily use MK.

 

[RDK]

Fixed.

/agenda

^ Give this man a cigar.

smash is not about characters,its about skill.

20%haracter
75:skill
5%:luck

Wrong. Skill plays a large part, but character choice when considering counterpick mechanics is still a factor. Otherwise we wouldn't be having this discussion; the roster would be 100% balanced, and only skill would matter.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

At a certain skill level, it's the character that decides the result

 

[Yuna]

The point is really that it becomes ridiculous to even assume you can enter a tournament nowadays and do well primarily with a character who has a more-than-normally unfavorable matchup with MK. The whole counterpick argument isn't even that relevant, as it boils down to a matter of choosing the lesser evil (I.E., no overly advantageous matchups, but who is the "best" of the inherently "bad" matchups).

I'm not saying all-out ban him, but I heavily favor the idea of hosting MK-free tournaments, just because I think the results would be beneficial and interesting.

Which brings us back the original question: if you're playing to win, why are you not playing MK?

So we should ban him simply for being the best character in the game? Well OK then. Then we'll just have to ban Snake. And then Game & Watch. And then all of High Tier.

Only then will the game be pretty even because the only characters left would be Low and the huge Mid, all of which (except the Lows) are pretty equal.

Yay, go "diversity" and "fun". Who cares about logic, fairness, Competitiveness and other BS like that?

If you cannot prove that Meta-Knight is "too good" on such a level it's all about playing Meta-Knight or losing very badly, then don't say anything at all. Seriously, all of this whining about too little diversity and him being the best character in the game (newsflash, there will always be a "best character"! Unless we ban everyone except just one character, at which point it really would be about picking just that character or no character) is stupid.

 

[Doggalina]

smash is not about characters,its about skill.

20%haracter
75:skill
5%:luck

Saying that character matchups aren't important is just shear ignorance. An amazing Falcon WILL get ***** by an above average Meta, no doubt. Tiers exist, and character choice is VERY important.

Also, if you are skilled, why not use Meta, who would maximize that 20% from character?

EDIT: Yuna, I can guarantee you that in the MK-free metagame that seems to be developing, Snake will NOT dominate as Metaknight does.

 

[RDK]

So we should ban him simply for being the best character in the game? Well OK then. Then we'll just have to ban Snake. And then Game & Watch. And then all of High Tier.

Only then will the game be pretty even because the only characters left would be Low and the huge Mid, all of which (except the Lows) are pretty equal.

Yay, go "diversity" and "fun". Who cares about logic, fairness, Competitiveness and other BS like that?

Like I said--not much can be done without changing the actual fabric of the game. I think in the end we simply have to realize that we're playing a game that was meant to be one giant mindfvck to the entire competitive community.

 

[Revven]

Banning MK? I'm not against it. Why?

Stupid comparision: Pokemon

In FRLG 386 Mewtwo was banned because he was ridicoulusly powerful. Of course, there where other Pokemon, who could counter him but that would've been plain stupid. You would have to use a pokemon just to counter Mewtwo, which would completely break the game and set the enitre metagame in stone.

MK is pretty much the same. Of course you could just use a counter (if there only was one...) but that again would force the player to master a character just for the sake of defeating somebody overpowered.

This obviously leads nowhere...

Yep, this is pretty much how I feel. If Snake is MK's only counter (if even that) and I have to master someone I don't play at all then why are we keeping MK? Is it just because we don't want to have to ban a character in Smash? Or is it because it's not as extreme as Akuma and the only reason WHY MK isn't banned is because the only character banning in a fighting game ever was Akuma? I don't want to get into Akuma because I don't know anything about him but, MK doesn't have more than one true counter, right? In a cast of 35 characters, the only character that does remotely well or does the best against him is Snake. Sure, there's Diddy Kong but, that's only one more character and he's not even in the top like DDD or R.O.B.

So, I have to ask, MK isn't super broken like Akuma but he doesn't have any bad match ups and the only real character that kind of counters him is Snake of a cast of 35 characters. Let me say that again, 35 characters and only one or two can actually stand a chance against MK? He's beatable, yeah, only by a certain character though out of 35 characters. Isn't that umm... a bit... weird and imbalanced?

It's early to ban MK, I agree, but later on if it gets much worse, just ban him. If only two characters of 35 can be used to just barely beat MK why shouldn't he be banned?

Only post I'm making, just want to be enlightened.

 

[RedrappeR]

Which brings us back the original question: if you're playing to win, why are you not playing MK?

Not everyone competitive immediately radiates to the Top Tier. Of all the game community's out there, I thought Smash would be the one who effectively knew that rule from the get go-- seeing as how some of the best players here don't always gravitate towards only Top Tier characters.

Look, while a majority will use MK, some people just don't fit his style. They don't like playing him, it's not fun, it's not beneficial, and really-- it's pointless. They just don't like the character all that much. If there are characters they can master, who they can play BETTER than MK, and produce results with-- it's best they go with that one.

It's fairly amateur just to pick a character due to his tier placement. It depends on how the character suits your style of play, your mindset, and the mechanics you play with best. Yun is considered by far the most powerful character in 3S, yet Nuki has dominated 2 years in a row with Chun-Li.

Sure, if you're playing to Win and you can pick up MK well enough, it's best to do so. But if theres a character you're better at using, and you can pick up a strategy against MK's(which you CAN.)-- then you're better off picking them.

That's pretty much all I have to say. Everything else I have about this whole banning thing has already been mentioned. Unless you have a character that clearly cannot be beaten from any standpoint whatsoever-- a character who's disadvantages don't exist(MK has disadvantages, don't kid yourself), and who the game engine caters too on a regular basis outside of the regular ruleset, then that Char is broken. In other words:

Unless you give me an MK with the SNK boss syndrome, or a MASTER HAND like playstyle... he isn't broken. Not by a long shot. He's just easier to pick up as a character, and he's adaptable. Big deal, welcome to fighting games.

That's it. I'm not really in the mood for arguing. Just thought I'd give a respectable $00.02 in.

 

[MorphedChaos]

Can we not just Softban him like they are doing in Japan and see what happens? Its a Softan, not a real ban, so it wont make too much of a difference.

 

[DanGR]

And I was telling ShortFuse (and, apparently, you) that how broken and unbeatable he is is relevant. And that the majority of the top echelon of every single Competitive fighting game community in existence disagree with you.

Banning a character is always a last resort. And how broken and unbeatable they are should be the only reason to ban them.

Inconsequential. We don't ban characters for being "too popular" among the top echelon of players. It would be stupid.

People are constantly quitting this game b/c it clearly doesn't match up to most fighting game's standards. You know why. And the existence of MK is among the primary reasons. MK is ruining an already bad Smash reputation. That warrants a ban imo.

I don't know about you, but I want a better Smash game to come out.