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

[JesiahTEG]

Brawl has issues other fighters don't, most notably stage advantages and disadvantages.

You may look at these other fighters all you want, but when a 50:50 matchup on a neutral stage can shift even though both players stay using the same characters, your opinion's basis suddenly looks a whole lot less relevent.

Yours is based on other games to provide your definitions. Mine is based on Brawl and its unique aspects. Which is better for this situation?

What? No, Brawl has nothing unique that has anything to do with my argument.

My point is, other games criteria is if a character is not unbeatable, don't ban him. Doesn't matter if Brawl has ledges and other games don't. Doesn't matter if the stages are different or whatever. Fact is, the point stays the same...If a character is unbeatable IN THEIR GAME, they should be banned..If they are not, they shouldn't be banned.

Again I respect your opinion but your point that time was really bad...Just letting you know.

 

[Zankoku]

Keep in mind that the more things that end up having to get banned, the less chances of that game being worth playing competitively in the first place.

 

[The Real Inferno]

Copy Pasta from another topic I posted in.

A problem with counterpicks against Meta Knights right now seems to be that many of them are stage specific. Examples would include Diddy on FD, Yoshi on no platform Stages, walk-offs and Pipes, and Snake on Norfair & Corneria (according to M2K). I can't vouch for the validity in ZSS as it's the only character I do not play (I would have to transform Samus out of Random select I suppose). The problem with a counter though is that they should be a counter -on any stage-, or they aren't a -true- counter. They just have a good matchup on particular playing fields. Another problem is some of these stages aren't always legal in tournaments (walk-offs, Pipes, Corneria, Norfair), or the opponent will innevitably ban that one stage that hurts them from the set.

The only two characters I honestly buy as being true Meta Knight counter possibilities at this time are Snake and Diddy. Yoshi and ZSS probably aren't anything better than neutral (which is a different argument). Diddy has quite the record against M2K, where Snake does not, with losses to Hylian, NinjaLink and Royal Nynja (am I missing some?). I can't really recall any Snake's taking some matches from M2K's Meta off the top of my head. I would really enjoy some conclusive proof that Diddy doesn't need FD to have an advantageous matchup with Meta as some have been claiming. I would also like to see more -consistent- results from top Diddy's beating top Meta's to prove the point. Were these matches flukes? Are Meta's currently just bad at the Matchup due to a low number of diddy players? Is the inexperience the -only- thing holding Meta back or is he at a true disadvantage? These are questions we need answers to in order to make a solid decision concerning the matchup. At this time the answers aren't yet available since they require time for observation.

 

[St. Viers]

@DAN GRyeah, you can pick fox, and then if you're playing someone better at gimping fox on FD than you, you switch to marth.

Come on, NO ITEMS, FOX ONLY was a completely ridiculed scrub statement about people who didn't like melee's competative scene. Although that was popular perception, it wasn't actually melee's tournie scene. Yet the NO ITEMS, MK ONLY argument, originating from people who admitted they started it because they lost to mk players that were MORE SKILLED players (overswarm, and the 100s of brawl players that wouldn't be winning regardless) seems to be valid?

re the race analogy. It's more like taking people used to running shorter races and making them a marathon, while one runner can do both. Until the other runners get used to running marathons, you can't tell whether the original runner has an unfair advantage. In other words, brawl is not melee, and so until we can play all chars in brawl like it's brawl, and can stop playing them like it's melee, we can't really be making this decision, even if the crowd is Positive that the winning runner has extra legs, and that's making his competing unfair.

 

[salaboB]

What? No, Brawl has nothing unique that has anything to do with my argument.

My point is, other games criteria is if a character is not unbeatable, don't ban him. Doesn't matter if Brawl has ledges and other games don't. Doesn't matter if the stages are different or whatever. Fact is, the point stays the same...If a character is unbeatable IN THEIR GAME, they should be banned..If they are not, they shouldn't be banned.

Again I respect your opinion but your point that time was really bad...Just letting you know.

The point is, other games if someone has a neutral it means someone has a neutral for that full set. You can also punish for errors a lot more strongly, so a 55:45 in another game can mean little -- one mistake on the 55 side, and they'll lose anyway. In Brawl, if the 55 makes a mistake they suffer a hit but that added edge continues to apply pressure for the rest of the match and can help them win. Brawl matchups are done on the assumption no mistakes will be made, and mistakes in Brawl do not result in fatalities as frequently as they do in other games -- so the matchup advantages end up meaning a much harder fight if you're on the low end of them.

As well, with Brawl and its counterpicks the 50:50 starting matchup persisting is not true over the course of a tournament match. So if another game would ban someone for having 60:40's at worse (And I have yet to hear an unbanned character mentioned from another game that meets that) Brawl may very well have to do it for a character that has a 50:50 neutral at worst.

The reason it's less competitive is very easy to describe though. With MK being the best initial option and then the best option to prevent being counterpicked (Because no other character can't be counterpicked like MK) he harms competition by limiting player's choices in who they'll use -- they're not being effective if they don't master MK and use him as their opener. Then their second choice should be to get up counterpicks to the most commonly used characters -- but if they don't have MK to withstand possible CPs, they're shooting themselves in the foot.

Then you get MK vs. MK among the players who are simply being their most competitive. Anyone who is picking a character that can be cp'ed harder than MK is not truly playing to win, and is not truly being competitive. After that you might see MK vs. Snake, but then if the Snake wins they'll have to switch back to MK or get counterpicked harder themselves than Snake can do to MK. So MK is being used for 2 of 3 matches total if you're playing your smartest -- that's just by his matchups.

 

[Mortimer]

Keep in mind that the more things that end up having to get banned, the less chances of that game being worth playing competitively in the first place.

MK Ban: +1 Banned.
IDC Unban: -1 Banned.

Since the IDC ban is no longer necessary, it comes out even!

 

[Zankoku]

I'm not sure how banning a technique that ends the game is comparable to banning a character that does not yet have a 100% win rate.

 

[Pink Reaper]

MK Ban: +1 Banned.
IDC Unban: -1 Banned.

Since the IDC ban is no longer necessary, it comes out even!

Melee tournaments banned Mewtwo's Soul Stunner glitch that COULD NOT be done in singles no matter what. What makes you think they'll unban the infinite dimensional cake cape?

 

[Mortimer]

I'm not sure how banning a technique that ends the game is comparable to banning a character that does not yet have a 100% win rate.

It's comparable when you look at them in the context of "...the more things that end up having to get banned, the less chances of that game being worth playing competitively in the first place."

Talk in absolutes, get an answer in absolutes!

Melee tournaments banned Mewtwo's Soul Stunner glitch that COULD NOT be done in singles no matter what. What makes you think they'll unban the infinite dimensional cake cape?

If Meta Knight, the only char that can use the IDC, is banned, then banning the IDC is redundant.

 

[JesiahTEG]

Ah, I see your point now...Nice post, but I still disagree.

For one, the punishing in Brawl not being big...Are you serious? An Ftilt from Snake is 21%, that's devastating to MK. His grab game can lead to 48% with just 2 grabs if you predict wrong just ONCE. DDD's grab does 16% with every throw, and his other throws can be tech chased for more damage. MK gets punished just fine.

Also, your last statement is very interesting, and almost makes me want to contradict myself, but again I disagree. First off, it's a fact that player skill>character selection. That means, if you win with Snake on your first match and you are a better player, chances are you will win on the counterpick...And even if the counterpick is TERRIBLE and you ARE terrible on that stage and you just are forced to switch to MK or else you have no chance...Well, then you switch to MK.

This only seems bad because, underneath the surface, makes it look like MK is necessary to win no matter what. But a deeper look just shows that it's nothing more than CP'ing the best character in the game. Look at Ken, who secondaried Fox for his troubles with Sheik. (Not to mention, Marth vs Sheik is hard for Marth and he loses pretty badly, but since Ken is good he managed to beat Sheik with Marth, just like good people can beat MK with matchups as bad as 60-40) ANYWAYS...Azen plays so many characters in both games, to CP with. Every Marth main secondaries Fox. It's just how it is...Why don't they main Fox though? I mean, surely they want to win their hardest and by playing Marth they are obviously lowering their chances of winning and being less competitive right? Wrong.

It's called player preference. People realize that MK is NOT unbeatable, and therefore it doesn't matter if he is the best character or not...He can be beaten by other characters, and they prove it. That's what's GOOD about Brawl, is the fact that there are indeed several characters that do well vs Metaknight, and even if people don't realize it, the game is diverse in the fact that Snake, Lucario, Olimar, and to a lesser extent Diddy, Marth, Kirby, DK, ZSS can all deal with MK just fine. Azen, Bum, Snakeee, Chillin/DSF/Ally/Afro, Chu, Neo and Roy R all show that MK is beatable by other characters.

I'm sure if these players really really thought MK was unbeatable, at least a few would be playing him since they want to win so bad...But since they realize he's not unbeatable, they can just win with characters they like. It just takes a ton of work, and a lot of people don't want to put in that work, so they don't realize it.

 

[salaboB]

Also, your last statement is very interesting, and almost makes me want to contradict myself, but again I disagree. First off, it's a fact that player skill>character selection. That means, if you win with Snake on your first match and you are a better player, chances are you will win on the counterpick...And even if the counterpick is TERRIBLE and you ARE terrible on that stage and you just are forced to switch to MK or else you have no chance...Well, then you switch to MK.

The issue is, if you're known to play Snake as your opener your opponent can CP you on the first round more strongly than you'll be able to respond with if they then switch to MK to avoid a return CP. Then you get to fight their MK at about 50:50, and then they get to CP you again -- so if you don't then play MK, you're again getting counterpicked.

Maybe it's because people are so fixated on having one main, but if people start to adjust to how much CPs matter in Brawl and using many characters the way Azen does, MK is going to be the only smart leadoff and followup character for you. There's just no way around it.

And player skill is only > character selection if the player skill is significantly greater. If you're about even on all the characters you'll play as, you're going to have a noticable advantage if you CP your opponent effectively.

This whole discussion is entirely irrelevent if the non-MK is enough better to just stomp on the MK regardless of who they use. Equal and close to equal skill levels are where what's competitive matters.

I do recognize MK is being effectively soft banned, and it's restricting his dominance and letting other people win tournaments. But I don't think it's necessarily going to last, and in a game of counterpicks it's giving the best players (Why do the best of the best seem to be sticking to MK if Snake is as strong as people keep saying?) an advantage since they'll just ignore others' opinions about which character they've chosen.

I also am most definitely not trying to say you must pick MK to win. But what I'm saying is that just by utilizing MK heavily, you're gaining an edge that nobody can gain against you -- the best they can do is break even by picking MK themselves. So it's an unfair advantage solely because he has no matchups worse than neutral, in a game where the matchups change every round based on the stage selected and thus counterpicking is more encouraged than other games where the stages have almost no impact on the outcome.

Edit: Oh, and there's a reason Snake goes just about even with MK -- he can apply a lot of hurt for a single mistakes. The problem with MK is that almost nobody else can do that so effectively, while he can still do it to them: Knock them off the edge, then a good shot at a gimp. So MK can punish mistakes better than most people, which will tend to tip matchups more in his favor than the no-mistake based matchup charts will ever show.

 

[fkacyan]

The issue is, if you're known to play Snake as your opener your opponent can CP you on the first round more strongly than you'll be able to respond with if they then switch to MK to avoid a return CP. Then you get to fight their MK at about 50:50, and then they get to CP you again -- so if you don't then play MK, you're again getting counterpicked.

Maybe it's because people are so fixated on having one main, but if people start to adjust to how much CPs matter in Brawl and using many characters the way Azen does, MK is going to be the only smart leadoff and followup character for you. There's just no way around it.

And player skill is only > character selection if the player skill is significantly greater. If you're about even on all the characters you'll play as, you're going to have a noticable advantage if you CP your opponent effectively.

This whole discussion is entirely irrelevent if the non-MK is enough better to just stomp on the MK regardless of who they use. Equal and close to equal skill levels are where what's competitive matters.

I do recognize MK is being effectively soft banned, and it's restricting his dominance and letting other people win tournaments. But I don't think it's necessarily going to last, and in a game of counterpicks it's giving the best players (Why do the best of the best seem to be sticking to MK if Snake is as strong as people keep saying?) an advantage since they'll just ignore others' opinions about which character they've chosen.

I also am most definitely not trying to say you must pick MK to win. But what I'm saying is that just by utilizing MK heavily, you're gaining an edge that nobody can gain against you -- the best they can do is break even by picking MK themselves. So it's an unfair advantage solely because he has no matchups worse than neutral, in a game where the matchups change every round based on the stage selected and thus counterpicking is more encouraged than other games where the stages have almost no impact on the outcome.

Why does Atomsk not use MK or Snake and play D3, Lucario, and Olimar instead?

The world may never know.

 

[salaboB]

Why does Atomsk not use MK or Snake and play D3, Lucario, and Olimar instead?

The world may never know.

He is willing to have to work harder than the MKs he faces in order to win.

 

[Sky`]

Olimar ***** at Norfair...

This one guy tricked me, into getting into that Hut, like to protect yourself from the Fire, right?

Then he Jumped under and Uaired, and ***** me. :[

 

[XienZo]

Why does Atomsk not use MK or Snake and play D3, Lucario, and Olimar instead?

The world may never know.

The latter three come in either wonderfully colored outfits, aura, or minions, while the former two are drab grays.

 

[salaboB]

Olimar ***** at Norfair...

This one guy tricked me, into getting into that Hut, like to protect yourself from the Fire, right?

Then he Jumped under and Uaired, and ***** me. :[

Don't get in the hut, just shield or airdodge the wave right before it hits.

 

[XienZo]

Oh, well NOW you tell him...

 

[JesiahTEG]

He is willing to have to work harder than the MKs he faces in order to win.

But the end results are the same. MK's max potential is not that much higher than any other REALLY good character's max potential, if higher at all. I think Snake when played to max potential is much better than MK, but that's just opinion.

Also, what you said about having to use MK the first round to always have an advantage.

A.) There are double blind picks to avoid this.
B.) Snake has almost no bad matchups, and would be perfect for starting off a match since he wins on every neutral.
C.) DDD is Snakes only true disadvantaged matchup, and it's 55-45...Easily winnable for Snake if the Snake knows what he's doing. Same with MK...Loses 55-45 to Snake, but easily winnable for MK if the player is better. MK is just as disadvantaged in the first match of a set as Snake is.

And there are a lot of reasons why people use MK over Snake...For one, he's FUN. I know at least 10 people that play MK just because he is amazing at approaching, and they like approaching and it's fun for them. Furthermore, Snake takes patience and generally what people consider a boring campy playstyle, which is frowned upon and is not fun for them. MK's playstyle is more fun and less campy, but it doesn't make it automatically better.

I'll admit, Snake's potential is untapped so far because of how many people play MK. This doesn't change the fact that his matchups aren't that much worse than MK's, and he can win just as consistently. Just because MK is more popular doesn't mean other characters suck.

 

[Arturito_Burrito]

A lot of things you say are just opinion jesiah. How can you even say that DDD is the only mad match up for snake when the snake boards don't even have a match up thread.

edit: if the end results for working hard where the same then I think that would mean every match is 50:50.

 

[JesiahTEG]

How can you even say that DDD is the only mad match up for snake when the snake boards don't even have a match up thread.

Because I don't use the opinions of a bunch of people that post on a forum for my conclusions, unless they are very very credible, and that's rare. I prefer matchup experience, opinions from top level players, knowledge I gain on my own (which usually I then tell to other good players and they agree with me)

It's kinda rare to see really good players posting on the character specific boards. Why? Because they don't need to, since they get actual experience from good players, using an analytical eye. Character boards are nice, but the furthest thing from anything I'd use to determine Brawl.

HOWEVER, there are exceptions. Emblem Lord's theories and strategies are brilliant, and he's so good at thinking of them that they are actual fact. Overswarm when he was in the R.O.B. forums was really really good and a lot of what he said was credible.

The Snake boards don't have many people like that.

 

[salaboB]

Also, what you said about having to use MK the first round to always have an advantage.

A.) There are double blind picks to avoid this.
B.) Snake has almost no bad matchups, and would be perfect for starting off a match since he wins on every neutral.
C.) DDD is Snakes only true disadvantaged matchup, and it's 55-45...Easily winnable for Snake if the Snake knows what he's doing. Same with MK...Loses 55-45 to Snake, but easily winnable for MK if the player is better. MK is just as disadvantaged in the first match of a set as Snake is.

I specifically said if you're known to start with a character -- like, you always pick Snake. Your opponent could grab Dedede and gain that advantage against you, if they practiced enough with the common counterpicks. Then you'd have a disadvantaged start round, counterpick middle (Probably against MK, because he'd be the best can't-be-CP'ed), and then get disadvantaged third unless you chose MK yourself.

So either you're just hoping for a mis-guess that they won't CP you if you're known to not play MK (And pick someone you have the advantage against) -- you're rolling the dice on your tournament match, or you play MK and remove the possibility of having worse than a 50:50. And nobody has demonstrated anyone has better than 50:50 versus MK on the neutrals (I'm not sure anyone's really shown any 50:50's with him there)

 

[JesiahTEG]

Snake vs Metaknight is in fact in Snake's favor. I'm pretty sure every good player agrees on this, and even more people.

 

[Dark.Pch]

Snake vs Metaknight is in fact in Snake's favor. I'm pretty sure every good player agrees on this, and even more people.

If I remember correctly, M2K once said that Snake does beat meta. If snake does not get gimped, then Snake wins.

 

[aeghrur]

Couple things:
Unbeatable=ban, anything else=not ban
Do notice how black and white this is. It's basically talking in absolutes and it does not even apply for characters deserving a ban like Akuma because, well, technically, he's not unbeatable. So, this point is kind of null. You have to have shades people.

Snake's domination isn't as great as you say it is Jesiah. If I remember correctly, ROB>Snake. Even Overswarm agrees, and he's the ROB expert right? Snake vs MK is not in "fact" that it's Snake's advantage. That's just your opinion based upon experience. The boards opinion based upon logic and debate says it is MK's advantage. Personally, I believe theirs to be more valid as they have both sides arguing to help limit the bias instead of your opinion riddled with bias, yet filled with experience. =/

Oh, and Ad hominem against the Snake boards? lol. :O

Edit: to person above:
Ifs ifs ifs ifs ifs.
If Metaknight doesn't get tilted, he wins. :O
You have to put gimping in as a part of this because it's an essential part of the game
On stage ground, on stage air, off stage. 3 major components of brawl. You can't simply decide to take away the possibility of 1/3 of the gameplay. It can happen, but you can't just make theories without that 1/3. Cuz I mean, without offstage, olimar owns and sonic sucks even more. Without onstage ground, Olimar kinda sucks and MK dominates even more. :O

 

[salaboB]

If I remember correctly, M2K once said that Snake does beat meta. If snake does not get gimped, then Snake wins.

Find the quote, most I remember him saying is that a campy Snake is very hard, and on Corneria beats Meta.

That's not a neutral stage, so at worst against a known Snake user you'll pick someone that can handle Corneria vs. Snake other than MK if they pick it. (You could use...Snake)

The first blind pick is still best off as MK though.

 

[Mew2King]

i think snake wins 55:45 or more if played right. I thought this when I used DDD too. On that note, 2 months ago in tourney at Critical Hit 4 chillin thought he was going to **** my Snake in tourney with MK and I beat him 2 stock mid % and 1 stock low % in a row. That was like my 2nd time ever using Snake in tourney. Snake has the advantage in the match, most people just don't play it right.

 

[JesiahTEG]

aeghur, if I recall correctly, Snake vs R.O.B. is even if you go by what most top level players say.

If you go by what DSF says, Snake beats ROB. If you're basing off of the word of top level players that's fine, but take into account what other players say too.

 

[salaboB]

i think snake wins 55:45 or more if played right. I thought this when I used DDD too. On that note, 2 months ago in tourney at Critical Hit 4 chillin thought he was going to **** my Snake in tourney with MK and I beat him 2 stock mid % and 1 stock low % in a row. That was like my 2nd time ever using Snake in tourney. Snake has the advantage in the match, most people just don't play it right.

Maybe you should teach people how to play Snake right so more can beat MK, then we won't have this problem.

Or just leave tourney results saying that Snake doesn't beat MK, because you don't want to help people against your character. That's fine, too -- but it kinda means you're saying something that can't be proven.

 

[Natch]

MK is broken.

1. He has "no" weaknesses.
Before you harp on me for this, MK has no de facto weaknesses against the majority of the cast. As an example, a character could be made that dies in one hit, but has an instant kill move that is garunteed to hit. Sure, he dies in one hit, but that doesn't matter because he'll kill you first. His weakness does not exist, for all intents and purposes.

MK is like this, though to a lesser extent. He does have weaknesses on paper, but for whatever reason, they don't seem to make that much of a difference. It should be noted that the characters that can put up a fight are the ones who can exploit his weaknesses consistantly and effectively.


2. He has an answer to everything.
MK has too many options that are all above average. Whatever you do, he has an answer to it. The characters that do well against him are those that have better answers. But even that isn't enough. You need have to a fair amount of "better answers," or the right combination. The last option is to flatout have a strategy that can and will work against anyone, assuming the opponent makes a mistake. Take Diddy, for example. If you make a mistake, he will get you with a bannana, which usually leads to a free hit. Everyone has to deal with this. If you manage to beat Diddy, you still didn't beat his bannanas. You can never truly beat the bannanas, just the Diddy who uses them. This is called a brick wall.

This is why MK has 60:40's across the board, and the reason why previously questionable/bad matchups are now shifting. Snake, GaW, and Falco are examples. Once they found a tactic that worked, the matchup changed.


3. He is fundamentally different from every other character in the game.
How can a character have NO disadvantaged matchups? They either have to be perfectly designed and have absolutly no weaknesses, or they have to have something so incredibly powerful it essentially breaks the game. MK falls into the latter. His certain "something" is that his sword has wacky priority. MK's sword will never actually clank. The only way to actually hit MK is to attack before his hitbox comes out, or outrange him utterly and completely.

MK's sword is like a mobile projectile. Now, it's accepted that projectiles are brick walls. You must get past their projectile before you can actually fight your opponent. Whenever MK does a move, it's a brick wall. Brick walls mean that any weaknesses the character has do not matter, as you are not fighting the character. Once a brick wall is broken down-if possible-or gotten around, you can start actually fighting the character. The problem with MK is that his brick walls can be deployed in an instant.

In order to even stand a chance against MK, you either need a brick wall that the PLAYER cannot find a way around, or you have to continiously jump through a series of hoops. Shield the Tornado. Spotdodge the Down Smash. Avoid the Shuttle Loop. Stay away from the Dtilt. Airdodge through his Dair.

The list goes on and on.

The reason why his 60:40 matchups aren't worse than 60:40 is because there are enough pros who can jump through these hoops on instinct, and the average players who don't use MK have enough skill compared to those that do that it's possible for them to win. All the character has to have are good brick walls, and moves that actually outprioritize MK's moves-which are very rare. These in large part are one in the same, as the majority of brick walls are projectiles.


GENERAL NOTE: Exceptions are not the norm. If you find an exception, it doesn't disprove what I said. Assume I'm a reasonable and flexible person, that I apologize for my incorrect statement, and change it to include the exception.

 

[Mew2King]

Azens Marth 3-0d KDJs sheik in tourney

Sheik still ***** Marth, and my Sheik still beats him the majority. I've 4 then 3 stocked PC's Marth with Sheik before too, granted they were just friendlies. You get my point though.

sorry that the community sucks. I already proved my point using a character I've used for only a few hours beforehand since Brawl's release. I've also won tons of tourneys with DDD. I'm sorry I main a character you don't like.

things I say don't change matchups. I'm sorry I'm smarter than you all and you can't think for yourselves, but since you need help, I'll tell you all I did was throw grenades until he came to me, F Tilted him most of the time he ran at me, grabbed most of the other time. I didn't even pivot grab back then but that would probably be good too since Snake's pivot grab has mad range. Up tilt kills at high 84s (so 85) without DI or high 90s with good DI. Stay mid-stage all game. Grabs are 50/50 chance of a tilt.

 

[salaboB]

Azens Marth 3-0d KDJs sheik in tourney

Sheik still ***** Marth, and my Sheik still beats him the majority. I've 4 then 3 stocked PC's Marth with Sheik before too, granted they were just friendlies. You get my point though.

sorry that the community sucks. I already proved my point using a character I've used for only a few hours beforehand since Brawl's release. I've also won tons of tourneys with DDD. I'm sorry I main a character you don't like.

things I say don't change matchups. I'm sorry I'm smarter than you all and you can't think for yourselves, but since you need help, I'll tell you all I did was throw grenades until he came to me, F Tilted him most of the time he ran at me, grabbed most of the other time. I didn't even pivot grab back then but that would probably be good too since Snake's pivot grab has mad range. Up tilt kills at high 84s (so 85) without DI or high 90s with good DI. Stay mid-stage all game.

So in other words...he walked into your attacks instead of approaching the way you've found MKs need to approach Snake. Beyond that, your skill and timing > his skill and timing, so even if Snake wasn't advantaged but was neutral, you'd have likely won (And could have won hard if he weren't used to facing a Snake that played the way you did).

Your advice on how to win with Snake is nothing new, yet Snakes are not easily beating MKs -- people switching to MK off of Snake when Snake had been so popular initially is proof of this.

Being really good at the game does not mean you see matchups the way they truly are better than everyone else. You can suffer from bias and playstyle advantages and disadvantages too. If other people can't replicate what you're doing, it's probably not the character providing the edge.

 

[Mew2King]

I have a thing called projectiles, I can just spam them forever. I have an advantage if he approaches. When he goes Snake vs my MK, all our matches are extremely close and it's very even, I barely have the advantage but my Melee advantage was larger than that by comparison. Sorry that you Snake players aren't smart enough to do it right. I'm pretty sure Afro Thunder went 1-1 with my MK at FAST1, and I'm good at MK vs Snake on both ends. Afro also says he thinks it's either even or small advantage to Snake. MK is much more popular. Being really good does help, so does going to tourneys and experiencing things and seeing everything that's not on youtube. You can't just discredit what I say because it's not something you agree with.

 

[Samuelson]

What other characters do you think go pretty even with MK and why M2K. I want to hear more of your opinion on this MK issue.

 

[aeghrur]

aeghur, if I recall correctly, Snake vs R.O.B. is even if you go by what most top level players say.

If you go by what DSF says, Snake beats ROB. If you're basing off of the word of top level players that's fine, but take into account what other players say too.

Oh, my mistake there. :O Thought it was a ROB advantage, well, new thing learned.
M2Ks right, we can't simply discredit his opinion. =/ Nor Jesiah's. But we can use counter-opinions.

 

[salaboB]

You can't just discredit what I say because it's not something you agree with.

It has nothing to do with agreeing or disagreeing with your opinion, it's just this little thing called lack of supporting evidence...

 

[The Real Inferno]

i think snake wins 55:45 or more if played right. I thought this when I used DDD too. On that note, 2 months ago in tourney at Critical Hit 4 chillin thought he was going to **** my Snake in tourney with MK and I beat him 2 stock mid % and 1 stock low % in a row. That was like my 2nd time ever using Snake in tourney. Snake has the advantage in the match, most people just don't play it right.

Well, I do agree I think Snake stands a good chance against Meta.

Azens Marth 3-0d KDJs sheik in tourney

Sheik still ***** Marth, and my Sheik still beats him the majority. I've 4 then 3 stocked PC's Marth with Sheik before too, granted they were just friendlies. You get my point though.

sorry that the community sucks. I already proved my point using a character I've used for only a few hours beforehand since Brawl's release. I've also won tons of tourneys with DDD. I'm sorry I main a character you don't like.

things I say don't change matchups.

Except this contradicts yourself. =/ Stop doing that.

 

[JesiahTEG]

Yeah, who better than to give you supporting evidence than the best player in the entire world.

Pfft, evidence...The guy's done nothing. Get a life M2K, come back when you're credible. Obviously the people on Smashboards know more than you. What a loser.

 

[mc4]

It's kinda hard to say. There are many people out there who aren't really good with meta-knight who don't play him the way the people who dominate play him. Like nonstop shuttle loop slash down smash to tornado down smash forward tilt shuttle loop tornado fsmash fsmash fsmash shuttle loop down smash fair fair bair bair bair shuttle loop tornado fair fair fair shuttle loop and so on...lol... so do the people who aren't win at all cost spammers deserve to suffer using a character that they enjoy using? But on the other hand if there are any other metaknights out there like dsf's for example maybe he should be banned lol that would make it easier for me

 

[salaboB]

Yeah, who better than to give you supporting evidence than the best player in the entire world.

Pfft, evidence...The guy's done nothing. Get a life M2K, come back when you're credible. Obviously the people on Smashboards know more than you. What a loser.

Considering your points are almost entirely opinion, I am utterly unsurprised you choose to mock when you can't disprove.

 

[The Real Inferno]

Yeah, who better than to give you supporting evidence than the best player in the entire world.

Pfft, evidence...The guy's done nothing. Get a life M2K, come back when you're credible. Obviously the people on Smashboards know more than you. What a loser.

Actually I would like to point out something here that bothers me. Alot of people assume that the best players results are indicative of matchups. The sheer fact is though that top players transcend matchup. Their experiences cannot be used as sole defining evidence. M2K could probably beat Chillin with Captain Falcon if he so chose. He's that good. Does that mean Captain Falcon is a meta counter? Erm, probably not. This doesn't make M2K wrong, but it also doesn't make him inherently correct either, nor exempt him from argumentative standards.