The Official "Should/Will Metaknight be banned?" Thread (LISTEN TO THE SBR PODCAST!)

[VulgarHandGestures]

Oh, and @ the MK/Snake discussion: The majority of people who are-frame perfect enough to dtilt trap you every time they do it will probably be beating you regardless of whether or not they're using MK.

it's not hard. i don't know why you're so adamant about this.

 

[AlphaZealot]

wobbling was banned,

Thats when I should have stopped reading your post. If you can't catch the hint here: wobbling was largely unbanned, there were just a few (most EC) tournament that banned it, because the EC is ban happy. FC, OC, EVO, and SCC did not ban wobbling. I think the only notable tournament that did was Pound 2/3, of which ChuDat won Pound 2 (the irony).

at least for the most part, and melee's ice climbers were never even half as dominant as mk is, nor as easy to play. no character in melee was.

And this is called a strawman argument. My argument was not that the Ice Climbers could have become the MK of Melee, it was that you cannot predict what characters will become good, what characters will counter others, or how things will progress in a game as complex as Smash. The Ice Climbers were on almost no ones radar as being able to place in the top 3 at tournaments prior to ChuDat's placement at TG6.

 

[XienZo]

I have a question for you.

Do you really think that tournament results will change if we ban Meta Knight?

Really?

I'm not talking about your 16-person local tourneys, I'm talking about those that are so big they have to use pools and all the shenanigans.

I can answer it for you - It won't. Shockingly, the results page for big tournies hasn't changed much from Melee to Brawl, and those are two entirely different games. Banning MK is only a placebo, as people will almost certainly be placing the same regardless of whether or not an MK is present in the tournament.

Oh, and @ the MK/Snake discussion: The majority of people who are-frame perfect enough to dtilt trap you every time they do it will probably be beating you regardless of whether or not they're using MK.

Doesn't that just mean that if we DO ban him, it won't disrupt the pros AND it'll make a lot of people happy?

 

[salaboB]

I have a question for you.

Do you really think that tournament results will change if we ban Meta Knight?

Really?

I have one for you.

Do you really think that tournament attendance will remain at current levels if we don't ban Meta Knight?

Really?

And this is called a strawman argument. My argument was not that the Ice Climbers could have become the MK of Melee, it was that you cannot predict what characters will become good, what characters will counter others, or how things will progress in a game as complex as Smash. The Ice Climbers were on almost no ones radar as being able to place in the top 3 at tournaments prior to ChuDat's placement at TG6.

But the IC's capability for CGs has been known since before this game was released. In fact, every possible AT for Melee has been attempted in Brawl, and most just don't work. As well, people have been hammering at it every way they can think of to try to find similarily broken moves...and they're just not locating any. On what basis are you expecting to find a broken AT that will somehow shoot someone up to greatness to compete with MK? Particularily with so many people playing MK and not seriously experimenting with anyone else?

MK can always be unbanned if this magically happens, but there's little to no evidence that it will and a fair bit of evidence that it's unlikely.

 

[Dark Sonic]

IOh, and @ the MK/Snake discussion: The majority of people who are-frame perfect enough to dtilt trap you every time they do it will probably be beating you regardless of whether or not they're using MK.

It does not require any frame perfection of the sort. It requires buffering, which is simple. The problem is setting up the d-tilt trap, not it's workings, and MK is still able to set it up since Snake really can't stop him (unless the Snake player is just miles better and predicts the MK player's movements). At high levels of play, MK just has more tools than Snake can deal with (holding a grenade is not going to be enough to stop MK).

 

[Praxis]

No one is currently a Meta Knight counter, and probably there will never be one. That is because the best advantage any character could muster against Meta Knight is a 6:4, and that is not defined as a counter. 7:3 is. I was mostly insinuating that you believe Meta Knight has no disadvantages from any other character, which I believe to be false. Using "counter" was a little too generalized.

Anyway. We're all entitled to our opinion. It's when we voice our opinions in ways that do not make sense that we get a slap on our wrist for it. That's really all I was doing.

What?
Who has a 6:4 advantage against MK?
Heck, who has a 5:5 matchup?

 

[Redemption]

Had you read my previous post instead of just blatantly attacking my opinion, you would have seen that I've been to large tournaments with pools (70 people) which, by the way, is ENTIRELY irrelevant to the discussion. So you get points for looking moronic. Good for you.

Characters are banned in fighting games for a reason. The ban hammer isn't just passed around like a hot potato. I've seen characters in other games banned for questionable reasons (algol was just banned in SC4 because he was a "boss character who had a projectile game) Yet here, when a character clearly dominates all others and puts the user at a clear advantage over the others, the community tries to stop it by defending the character, probably because they use him too.

So my opinion is ban, and that's all I'm going to add to this discussion

 

[AlphaZealot]

Diddy is mostly 5:5 or 6:4 on some stages.

But the IC's capability for CGs has been known since before this game was released. In fact, every possible AT for Melee has been attempted in Brawl, and most just don't work. As well, people have been hammering at it every way they can think of to try to find similarily broken moves...and they're just not locating any. On what basis are you expecting to find a broken AT that will somehow shoot someone up to greatness to compete with MK? Particularily with so many people playing MK and not seriously experimenting with anyone else?

You don't need the discover of advanced techniques to change a match up, the correct or even new application of older techniques can get the job done, Jiggypuff is a good example in Melee of this instance. Its also funny that you say nothing will be discovered....then that not many people are exploring other characters. Last I checked, if fewer people explore characters, then the chance of finding success and developing the character slows down-just because progress is slow does not mean progress isn't being made or that breakthroughs can't be made down the road.

Again, you are claiming that you can predict how Brawl will develop. I'm saying we can't. You want to make a decision out of fear. I want to NOT make a decision out of hope and respect for the players that I know are out there looking for ways to get around MK (G-reg is one of them, and guess what, he regularly beats some of the best MK's in the world with Snake).

 

[VulgarHandGestures]

Thats when I should have stopped reading your post. If you can't catch the hint here: wobbling was largely unbanned, there were just a few (most EC) tournament that banned it, because the EC is ban happy. FC, OC, EVO, and SCC did not ban wobbling. I think the only notable tournament that did was Pound 2/3, of which ChuDat won Pound 2 (the irony).

i know this is wrong. i'm not saying wobbling was completely banned across the country, but there was a pretty big uproar about it, and i know many tournaments in the southwest (at least) banned the technique.

And this is called a strawman argument. My argument was not that the Ice Climbers could have become the MK of Melee, it was that you cannot predict what characters will become good, what characters will counter others, or how things will progress in a game as complex as Smash. The Ice Climbers were on almost no ones radar as being able to place in the top 3 at tournaments prior to ChuDat's placement at TG6.

and my argument was that even with a technique that was an auto stock loss, that went widely unbanned according to you, the ic's were never as big a threat as mk is now, or any of melee's top handful of characters were. for the record, i believed since melee's release that the ice climbers had the most unrecognized potential.

additionally, mk has been opening the gap between him and the rest of the characters for months now. we can wait, as you suggest, but when do we stop waiting? when is it too late to bother doing anything?

i believe we SHOULD wait, as you do, but the way in which you have argued your position has been defeated for the entirety of this thread. as a matter of fact, i think MOST of the pro-ban side would agree we should wait, at least for a few months. letting the game move itself along in the hope that "something" will rise to counter mk is starting to look categorically unrealistic.

 

[Deleted member]

Edit: Nevermind.

 

[Hyper_Ridley]

Out of curiosity, how long did it take for Akuma to be banned from Street Fighter 2?

 

[VulgarHandGestures]

Out of curiosity, how long did it take for Akuma to be banned from Street Fighter 2?

almost immediately.

 

[salaboB]

Again, you are claiming that you can predict how Brawl will develop. I'm saying we can't. You want to make a decision out of fear. I want to NOT make a decision out of hope and respect for the players that I know are out there looking for ways to get around MK (G-reg is one of them, and guess what, he regularly beats some of the best MK's in the world with Snake).

It's not fear, it's because the benefits of banning MK whether correct or not by all evidence outweigh the benefits of leaving him unbanned.

The gains from banning him have been gone over many times (Including a very well written thread about it). The gains from leaving him alone are...not having a few MK-only mains quit? Whee.

 

[LeeHarris]

Diddy is mostly 5:5 or 6:4 on some stages.

Against MK? Didn't we already go over this? Diddy's only advantage over MK is his ability to stop MK's easy approaches. If the MK player knows the matchup, he can just out camp Diddy and punish him. You have never beaten a good MK in person (please don't try to tell me online counts for ANYTHING, bananas **** online), Ninjalink did good in ONE tournament against MK, and yet I can tell you tons of personal experiences where either my MK or someone else's has destroyed a good Diddy.

Again, you are claiming that you can predict how Brawl will develop. I'm saying we can't. You want to make a decision out of fear. I want to NOT make a decision out of hope and respect for the players that I know are out there looking for ways to get around MK (G-reg is one of them, and guess what, he regularly beats some of the best MK's in the world with Snake).

AZ, you don't even play in tournaments. You say it's out of fear or that we just don't have enough experience against MK, but the tournament players say otherwise. Until you have to deal with the same problems we do, I really don't feel like you will have accurate statements.

Also, G-reg gets dominated by the only MK on his level in the area: M2K. I'm almost certain he has never won a set against M2K.

 

[AlphaZealot]

and my argument was that even with a technique that was an auto stock loss, that went widely unbanned according to you, the ic's were never as big a threat as mk is now, or any of melee's top handful of characters were. for the record, i believed since melee's release that the ice climbers had the most unrecognized potential.

I still don't know why you are talking about the Ice Climbers as if I had alluded them to being on par with MK in Melee. I raised the Ice Climbers as an example of a character that got extremely better towards the end of Melee, far better then was assumed in the beginning of Melee. I'm saying there can and likely will be characters like this in Brawl. It has nothing to do with characters rivaling MK in terms of success, it has to do with not knowing how things will develop or how match ups will change over time.

We can't predict what will happen. We can't say "Oh, in 6 months 80% of people will use MK", because such statements put to much faith in our ability of prediction. As shown with the Ice Climbers and Jigglypuff, and even Fox/Falco to some extent in Melee, the nature of Smash and how characters will fair over time is largely unpredictable.

Also, G-reg gets dominated by the only MK on his level in the area: M2K. I'm almost certain he has never won a set against M2K.

You know, until you've played G-reg, or actually, until you've been to a tournament in MD/VA, you don't have any right to comment on G-reg being on par with M2K. I don't think G-reg will take offense when I say he is NOT on M2K's level. Actually, I'm pretty surprised you think he is. The MK's that are on G-reg's level in MD/VA are Forte/Omni/Plank, and G-reg can win against both of them. I would even argue that Forte is probably better than G-reg.

 

[salaboB]

I raised the Ice Climbers as an example of a character that got extremely better towards the end of Melee, far better then was assumed in the beginning of Melee. I'm saying there can and likely will be characters like this in Brawl.

You have nothing but your opinion for this, while there is support against it.

You claim we're arrogant for predicting things that can't be proven. At least our assumptions are based on what's already happened (Heavy testing of Brawl looking for ATs and ways to apply known tactics among all characters with nothing significantly unpredictable found), and not just "there can be a secret AT we haven't found yet".

Pot, meet kettle.

 

[AlphaZealot]

My statements are based on watching Melee develop over 5-6 years and seeing things in 2007 that NO ONE predicted in 2003/2004. You are saying the past won't repeat itself. I'm saying, give things a chance.

 

[salaboB]

My statements are based on watching Melee develop over 5-6 years and seeing things in 2007 that NO ONE predicted in 2003/2004. You are saying the past won't repeat itself. I'm saying, give things a chance.

Assuming you're right even, what good is it?

First, there's no way to predict someone rising to an effectiveness to rival MK. Even if they do, you can't say they'll still have anyone else who can counter them -- it seems most likely anything that lets them defeat MK will break any current counters they have. If they rise above everyone but MK the situation is no better than it currently is, if they rise above MK then we're likely in an even worse situation and they'll have to be discussed for banning.

Second, you haven't explained the harm caused by banning MK prematurely. We're already losing players who are tired of fighting him constantly, due to his lack of counters, lack of disadvantaged stages, and sheer number of people playing him. So we'll lose some people who only main MK, but stop losing people who are tired of fighting him and others will return when they hear about it. Other characters will suddenly get increased playtime, and the possibility of someone unexpectedly rising to dominance will raise dramatically. Nobody will be returning that has left and the chances will continue to lower of someone unexpectedly being found to be awesome, if things stay the same.

Third, he can be unbanned if someone does rise to dominance and can be demonstrated to break his chokehold. If they can't, that new character may have to be banned as well -- but that would require quite the amazing technique application to reach that level of power. I'm not ready to accept that even as an unlikely possibility without some actual evidence of anyone having it. Not even MK really does -- it's no one technique that makes him so effective, it's the sheer number of good options he has.

tl;dr: There's little to be gained from leaving him in, there are gains from removing him, and the removal can be undone if something is found in the future. That last one is why it's not required we be 100% sure nothing will be found, just reasonably likely is enough.

 

[AlphaZealot]

How about the players like M2K and Forte who have put countless hours into a character...

I wonder if Forte will even play in tournaments if the character he basically invented gets banned because he was to successful.

 

[ColinJF]

Your "balance of gains" analysis is completely the wrong way to look at a ban.

A character ban is an extreme measure. We don't make them just because there are gains to be had by doing so. There's also the question of what "gains" exactly means in this context. There are "gains" to be had by banning King Dedede's infinite on DK, and little benefit to the metagame to allow it. It should obviously be allowed though, because it isn't gamebreaking.

It doesn't matter if the game is made "better" in some fuzzy sense by banning Meta Knight. That isn't a reason to ban him.

 

[LeeHarris]

My statements are based on watching Melee develop over 5-6 years and seeing things in 2007 that NO ONE predicted in 2003/2004. You are saying the past won't repeat itself. I'm saying, give things a chance.

AZ, this isn't like Melee's development. Just like OS said, you cannot compare the two. We aren't getting ***** by Sheik CGs due to bad DI. We aren't discovering things that only a few people in the community can do.

In Melee, upsets would happen all the time with different characters and players. In Brawl, the only upsets we ever see are players beating better players using MK.

 

[Dark Sonic]

^^Alpha-And what about the players like Sethlon who have put countless hours into a character, only to be beaten by a relatively new MK main.

 

[salaboB]

It doesn't matter if the game is made "better" in some fuzzy sense by banning Meta Knight. That isn't a reason to ban him.

My balance of gains wasn't focused on making the game better, it was focused on keeping tournament attendance at a level where taking the time to attend and win is still worthwhile.

Nobody has explained why they feel people will continue coming to tournaments when we already have a growing number of reports of people not attending as frequently. When was the last time you heard "Boy I want to go to a tournament so I can fight 5 MKs in a row with my Dedede!" Do you think Brawl as it stands is really an appealing game for people to try to join the competitive scene of?

 

[LeeHarris]

How about the players like M2K and Forte who have put countless hours into a character...

I wonder if Forte will even play in tournaments if the character he basically invented gets banned because he was to successful.

What about the countless hours Sethlon has poured into Falco? What about the countless hours Overswarm has put into ROB? Those two "top tier" (they aren't anymore) characters are useless against MK now. We sure are jerks for not banning MK

I've already address this issue. You can't base ANYTHING off the amount of time someone spent on a character and the fairness relating to it. I guarantee you for every "unfair" thing about banning MK I can find two "unfair" things about not banning MK.

 

[Mortimer]

My statements are based on watching Melee develop over 5-6 years and seeing things in 2007 that NO ONE predicted in 2003/2004. You are saying the past won't repeat itself. I'm saying, give things a chance.

People predicted the IC back in 2003 at least. There's a decent "Ice Climbers are underrated" thread on these forums, dated back then.

 

[Kookie]

^^Alpha-And what about the players like Sethlon who have put countless hours into a character, only to be beaten by a relatively new MK main.

Odd, I just recently experienced something like that. Not to say that I'm quite at the level Sethlon is at, but I've been maining my character since release, and to be beaten by someone who's used Meta Knight for a week was just a kick to my nuts.

 

[Praxis]

Diddy is mostly 5:5 or 6:4 on some stages.

Proof?
Show me a high level Diddy player beating high level MKs consistently, or even 50% of the time.

Diddy might destroy MKs that don't know the matchups, but at high levels of play where both players know the matchup, do you really think it is 50:50?

 

[Kel]

Exactly, AZ. The game can develop way too much to ban a character. Banning a character will only hinder how Brawl develops over all.

You don't have to like MK, you just have to learn how to beat him. I actually like fighting MKs with other characters because I like the challenge. Just like I chose to stick to Marth when I had to play sheiks in melee. I could have easily gone ICs or Fox to deal with Sheik, but I liked the challenge.

 

[salaboB]

Exactly, AZ. The game can develop way too much to ban a character. Banning a character will only hinder how Brawl develops over all.

Proof please. All this is is an opinion.

Why will MK being banned and thus more people actually playing the other characters hinder Brawl's development? It just means we might not know every single way MK can ruin a character's approaches for longer than it will take if he's left alone.

 

[XienZo]

My statements are based on watching Melee develop over 5-6 years and seeing things in 2007 that NO ONE predicted in 2003/2004. You are saying the past won't repeat itself. I'm saying, give things a chance.

Well, the thing is, what if we can't afford to wait?

People in Melee couldn't say, "This game sucks now, lets go back to 64"

When Melee was developing, as time went on, more people joined and helped the community.
As Brawl is developing, people are leaving, and the community starts to decline.

Banning MK is more of a damage control now.

 

[Kookie]

Exactly, AZ. The game can develop way too much to ban a character. Banning a character will only hinder how Brawl develops over all.

You don't have to like MK, you just have to learn how to beat him. I actually like fighting MKs with other characters because I like the challenge. Just like I chose to stick to Marth when I had to play sheiks in melee. I could have easily gone ICs or Fox to deal with Sheik, but I liked the challenge.

Having a challenge is certainly a good thing. But is it really just a challenge when you have to play near perfection just to stand a chance against a Meta Knight that knows what it's doing?

 

[LeeHarris]

You don't have to like MK, you just have to learn how to beat him. I actually like fighting MKs with other characters because I like the challenge. Just like I chose to stick to Marth when I had to play sheiks in melee. I could have easily gone ICs or Fox to deal with Sheik, but I liked the challenge.

You like the challenge? Let me reword that: "I like to lose to MKs because it's difficult."

I'm sorry, I don't like losing because someone has a character advantage regardless of who I use.

Want a real challenge? Play someone better than you.

 

[Praxis]

The gains from banning him have been gone over many times (Including a very well written thread about it). .

awww <3

 

[Kookie]

awww <3

All that thread needs is happy unicorns and rainbows and I'm sold. Until then . . .

Naw, I'm kidding. It was a good one. lol

 

[Lixivium]

My statements are based on watching Melee develop over 5-6 years and seeing things in 2007 that NO ONE predicted in 2003/2004. You are saying the past won't repeat itself. I'm saying, give things a chance.

I think you're giving Brawl more credit than it deserves. The players might largely be the same, but the game sure is different. It's one thing to err on the side of optimism, it's another to be idealistic and naive about it.

 

[Kookie]

I think you're giving Brawl more credit than it deserves. The players might largely be the same, but the game sure is different. It's one thing to err on the side of optimism, it's another to be idealistic and naive about it.

In other words, relying on a wet match in a dark cave is a bad idea.

 

[TheEliteSmasher]

You people are some whiny scrub azz motherf*ckers, we shouldn't make everyone lose the skill they've gained with him just because dumbazzes like you people can't beat him.

 

[Praxis]

All that thread needs is happy unicorns and rainbows and I'm sold. Until then . . .

Naw, I'm kidding. It was a good one. lol

 

[salaboB]

You people are some whiny scrub azz motherf*ckers, we shouldn't make everyone lose the skill they've gained with him just because dumbazzes like you people can't beat him.

So tell me...

Can you reliably beat MK players? Without using MK yourself? At tournaments?

 

[Lixivium]

In other words, relying on a wet match in a dark cave is a bad idea.

The point is, back when there were still Brawl vs. Melee flamewars in this forum, people kept saying "Brawl is not Melee, get over it". Well it's fine for you to say that, but then you have no basis for assuming Brawl will follow the same path as Melee, especially when we already know it's limited in a way to make it unlikely for most characters to evolve.