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

[Justblaze647]

that's called getting outplayed

indeed.

10nods

 

[Yuna]

MK is SS tier.

I didnt even know there was a tier above S.

So he's bannable because of your prior ignorance to the existence of Tiers above A?

 

[Justblaze647]

So he's bannable because of your prior ignorance to the existence of Tiers above A?

Okay... so before I respond, let me read my previous post 17 times to make sure that you are the one who is incorrect...

*reads 17 times*

Who said anything about banning him? Because it most certainly wasn't me, so...

 

[Yuna]

Okay... so before I respond, let me read my previous post 17 times to make sure that you are the one who is incorrect...

*reads 17 times*

Who said anything about banning him? Because it most certainly wasn't me, so...

The topic of the thread is:
The Official "Should/Will Metaknight be banned?" Thread (LISTEN TO THE SBR PODCAST!)
You said:

MK is SS tier.

I didnt even know there was a tier above S.

nuff said.

So what the hell were you trying to say with that post? Were you saying he shouldn't be banned and using "He's in a Tier of his own, one above S!" as an argument? Or were you just rambling on randomly about some mysterious subject entirely disconnected from this thread?

 

[Justblaze647]

So what the hell were you trying to say with that post? Were you saying he shouldn't be banned and using "He's in a Tier of his own, one above S!" as an argument? Or were you just rambling on randomly about some mysterious subject entirely disconnected from this thread?

Well, considering the fact that this thread revolves around a decision that has already been made, I don't understand why it hasn't been locked yet. 2nd, when you infer something from a statement that I made, and I tell you that your assumption is incorrect, you CANNOT turn that around to make me look like an idiot.

On that note, drop it.

I'm not gonna argue with you.

Period.

 

[metaXzero]

Uugh. It's back.

MK's not getting banned. But I have a fear they might try and ban any new AT s that might get discovered for him.

 

[Melomaniacal]

Uugh. It's back.

MK's not getting banned. But I have a fear they might try and ban any new AT s that might get discovered for him.

Please, you're just mad that IDC will never be legal.

 

[metaXzero]

Please, you're just mad that IDC will never be legal.

It's banned in a VERY scrubby way. If MK ever gets another AT, who's to say they won't ban over reasons like "MK doesn't need to be better".

 

[Smooth Criminal]

that's called getting outplayed

LMAO.

Please, you're just mad that IDC will never be legal.

Annnnnnnnd you're probably pissed off about the fact that you can't get good enough with Lucario and beat an MK. (c wut I did thar?)

Meta, do yourself a favor and stop lobbying for IDC. -_- It's a ridiculous tactic that needs banning.

Smooth Criminal

 

[metaXzero]

LMAO.



Annnnnnnnd you're probably pissed off about the fact that you can't get good enough with Lucario and beat an MK. (c wut I did thar?)

Meta, do yourself a favor and not lobby for IDC. -_- It's a ridiculous tactic that needs banning.

Smooth Criminal

"Ban for being an unbeatable stall". taken care of.

"Banned for being a match reset tool and a "perfect defense"" Like planking which isn't banned? But unlike Planking, you can't stall out the match with this anymore? (BTW, I don't believe Planking should be banned).

"Banned for being a perfect approach". Unproven in practice.

If the SBR could just prove their judgement on IDC was sound, I'd stop. But they'd rather say "We're right, we just are". And that's dumb. It's the attempts at banning Wobbling shortly after it's discovery.

 

[Melomaniacal]

It's banned in a VERY scrubby way. If MK ever gets another AT, who's to say they won't ban over reasons like "MK doesn't need to be better".

If another AT comes along that doesn't have broken potential, it won't be banned. I don't feel like recapping your entire thread for you.

LMAO.



Annnnnnnnd you're probably pissed off about the fact that you can't get good enough with Lucario and beat an MK. (c wut I did thar?)

Meta, do yourself a favor and not lobby for IDC. -_- It's a ridiculous tactic that needs banning.

Smooth Criminal

What are you talking about? I have no problem with MK (I'm a member of the MK should not be banned group), and I live in MK country (Jersey). Don't start pulling insults out of your *** that aren't based on anything.

 

[metaXzero]

But as some SBR members would say, "it makes MK better, and he doesn't need to be better (even if it were slightly). So ban is good".

 

[Yuna]

Well, considering the fact that this thread revolves around a decision that has already been made, I don't understand why it hasn't been locked yet.

Neither do I.

2nd, when you infer something from a statement that I made, and I tell you that your assumption is incorrect, you CANNOT turn that around to make me look like an idiot.

I was not attempting to make you look like an idiot. I believed that you were making the argument that Meta Knight should be banned based on something you posted.

You acted as if I was stupid/over-analyzing/whatever for thinking so based on what you had posted. I merely explained how I was perfectly logical in my interpretation of what you wanted to say with your post.

While I might have been wrong in my assumption, there was nothing wrong in my train of thought, nor did I ever call you an idiot or imply you were an idiot due to my wrongful assumption. I merely called "formerly ignorant on Tier Lists" for not knowing there was even an S-tier before v. 2.0 of the Brawl Tier list was released.

On that note, drop it.

I'm not gonna argue with you.

Period.

I'm not arguing you. I was merely explaining why I interpreted your post the way I interpreted it and how I wasn't really wrong in doing so. If you didn't mean for it to be a post arguing MK should be banned, then I have nothing to debate you about.

It's banned in a VERY scrubby way. If MK ever gets another AT, who's to say they won't ban over reasons like "MK doesn't need to be better".

That's not why it's banned. It's banned because it's too time consuming and man-power requiring to monitor and is a stalling tactic.

Your solution, while it holds merits, still have several kinks to work out. However, one does not need to be a genius to see that a tactic such as the IDC needs banning. It's not like Itachi's b.A in GNT4 where there's a limit to how long he can stay gone and two set points where he'll reappear (right in front of his opponent or right behind them), plus the fact that he lags so much the opponent has a guaranteed throw-attempt.

The fact that is it broken is not the reason why it's banned though. It'll merely be the reason why it will be banned if a viable solution against the IDC being used as a stalling tactic is ever found.

BTW, why have you yet to make the argument that all stalling tactics should be legalized on the ground that if the timer runs out, the one who stalled loses (except in cases where both characters can do it, in which case all stalling tactics would be banned)? Some of them are legit "mindgamey" camping tactics. Also, it'd seem less of a biased argument than just arguing against the IDC-ban.

 

[Melomaniacal]

But as some SBR members would say, "it makes MK better, and he doesn't need to be better (even if it were slightly). So ban is good".

That's just sort of icing on the cake, so to speak. And the cake is massive.

 

[Kage Me]

that's called getting outplayed

It's called a broken character, actually.

 

[Yuna]

It's called a broken character, actually.

You can be broken and still perfectly legit to be used in tournaments. Especially in games such as Naruto: Gekitou Ninja Taisen 4, Marvel vs. Capcom 2 and Super Smash Bros. Brawl and Meta Knight isn't even close to being as broken as the S-tiers of NGNT4 and MvC2 in comparison to the other characters in the respective games (and both those games have only one banned character; Akamaru for being unthrowable, un-cinematic X:able, auto-tech crouching every single move that isn't low, having a virtually unbreakable block because of this, etc., etc., etc.).

Excuse me while I *does Death Fist-movent* "Shaa!" my opponents, j.B x 11 -> j.X -> AAA -> j.B -> tick throw -> j.B -> mixup between another j.B and d.A my opponents or chooses between one of a gazillion infinites and 0-almost death combos in MvC2.

 

[WastingPenguins]

Well, considering the fact that this thread revolves around a decision that has already been made, I don't understand why it hasn't been locked yet. 2nd, when you infer something from a statement that I made, and I tell you that your assumption is incorrect, you CANNOT turn that around to make me look like an idiot.

On that note, drop it.

I'm not gonna argue with you.

Period.

Thread: Should MK be banned?

You: Well he's in SS tier... I didn't even know tiers that high existed. Enough said!

...and you want to say that you weren't suggesting this as another strike in favor of banning MK? Don't worry, Yuna doesn't have to turn anything around to make you look like an idiot. You're doing that just fine on your own.

 

[metaXzero]

@Yuna. Some SBR members argued that as a reason. Just saying.

Don't say "will". It can either be a.)broken and overcentralizing, b.)a novelty AT, or c.)just somewhat useful. But we'll never know for sure because the community will assume a.). Even with what little evidence we do have questions it.

??? I thought I did say "I don't see why not" when you asked me about other "unbeatable stall" ATs a while back? So sure?

 

[Smooth Criminal]

What are you talking about? I have no problem with MK (I'm a member of the MK should not be banned group), and I live in MK country (Jersey). Don't start pulling insults out of your *** that aren't based on anything.

>_>

Well, considering that I did have no grounds to say something like that it was why I added the caption "c wut I did thar?". Just lotsa people are butthurt because their favorite character can't trounce the Betta Knight. I caught on to the fact that you were joking at like, the last second. I got no beef.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Smooth Criminal

 

[Justblaze647]

Thread: Should MK be banned?

You: Well he's in SS tier... I didn't even know tiers that high existed. Enough said!

...and you want to say that you weren't suggesting this as another strike in favor of banning MK? Don't worry, Yuna doesn't have to turn anything around to make you look like an idiot. You're doing that just fine on your own.

yes, I'm pro-ban.

no, I wasnt suggesting anything. I was stating a FACT

congrats on intercepting a comment that isn't aimed at you, stirring up conflict that has already been resolved, and nut hugging.

Have a nice day.

 

[Yuna]

@Yuna. Some SBR members argued that as a reason. Just saying.

Being an SBR member =/= Being a person of infinite wisdom and devoid of the ability to ever say stupid ****

"Some SBR members" =/= Matters

Don't say "will". It can either be a.)broken and overcentralizing, b.)a novelty AT, or c.)just somewhat useful. But we'll never know for sure because the community will assume a.). Even with what little evidence we do have questions it.

No, I say it "will" be because based on what I know of Competitive gaming, Compettive Smash, Brawl's engine and the IDC, it is my opinion that if the IDC is allowed in tournaments, it will make MK "too good", leading to the necessity of either banning the IDC or just banning MK altogether.

However, it is not a reason I support using as a reason to keep the IDC banned as it has yet to be proven broken. I'm just saying that if the IDC is allowed to reign supreme, based from what we know, I predict that it will dominate the metagame in such a way it will need to be banned (that is unless we find some tangible flaws for it that negate its many, many strengths, however, I am speaking based on what we know, not from what we hope/think will be discovered).

??? I thought I did say "I don't see why not" when you asked me about other "unbeatable stall" ATs a while back? So sure?

I missed that post. Sorry for that.

yes, I'm pro-ban.

no, I wasnt suggesting anything. I was stating a FACT

congrats on intercepting a comment that isn't aimed at you, stirring up conflict that has already been resolved, and nut hugging.

Have a nice day.

So let me try to get this straight:
* You are pro-ban
* You posted a post in which you stated a fact which is often cited as a reason to ban MK + an addendum written in such a way it is a totally legit interpretation that you were, in fact, making a pro-ban post (especially with the "'nough said"-part)
* I reply to you in an "anti-ban" manner, mostly in reply to your addendum where you stated that you didn't enough know there was a tier above S as if it mattered at all (I didn't)
* You get incensed that I had the gall to assume you were arguing for us to ban MK based on what you just said

O... K...

I forgot to make the argument that being in a tier of your own, SS or S or below, is in no way a bannable offense since I'd already made it a jillion times and that was a mistake.

 

[Yuna]

*accidental post*

 

[AlphaZealot]

Yuna: I wouldn't get sucked in to arguing with Metaxzero's sole crusade to get the IDC unbanned.

 

[metaXzero]

@Yuna
Hmm. So at least we're in agreement that the SBR shouldn't use unproven reasoning as an argument to keep IDC banned, right? Too bad the SBR are doing just that...

You said their were some kinks in my proposal though. Could you point those out again?

EDIT: AZ. Your argument was that "IDC is the first AT of it's kind and whether or not it's broken, because of how unique it is, it should remain banned". IIRC or course.

-_-

 

[Yuna]

@Yuna
Hmm. So at least we're in agreement that the SBR shouldn't use unproven reasoning as an argument to keep IDC banned, right? Too bad the SBR are doing just that...

Yes.

You said their were some kinks in my proposal though. Could you point those out again?

The "solution" to MK dittos.

 

[betterthanbonds9]

I find tournaments without MK to be more fun, but i think he shouldn't be banned (i didn't even know this thread was still going on O_o)

oh, i always wondered...lets say i get a star kill with MK, i have some free time, i decide to IDC until my opponent comes back, it doesn't strike me as a "you're doing the IDC, you should fofeit the game" situation, but I just want to know...

 

[swordgard]

@Yuna
Hmm. So at least we're in agreement that the SBR shouldn't use unproven reasoning as an argument to keep IDC banned, right? Too bad the SBR are doing just that...

You said their were some kinks in my proposal though. Could you point those out again?

EDIT: AZ. Your argument was that "IDC is the first AT of it's kind and whether or not it's broken, because of how unique it is, it should remain banned". IIRC or course.

-_-

Did yuna not tell you already why its broken, i even made a list which you basically answered as: Not proven in reality. However, some players DID play with IDC and conclude extremly rapidly that it was bannable for being OP. Metaxzero, did you even try the technique. You get a variable amount of invincibilty frames where you can move anywhere. Yes you found a solution to the stall, but there are 2 problems remaining. 1 your solution to mk ditto is not viable, you cannot change the way a technique behaves for one single matchup, or your forcing anyone who does not want to deal with this to switch to mk, thus overcentralizing the game. 2: Really, it does NOT take empirical proof(IE in game testing) to see that this technique is broken for approach/retreat/attacking. We provided you with a vid of dojo, which you managed to simply avoid talking about. Stop trolling this thread, stop trolling this forum, or host your own tourney where idc is not banned. YOU have to prove to us its not broken, not the other way around. You say that you are willing to see if its really broken or not, but your not doing any effort to prove to us that it is broken.

 

[brinboy789]

who necroed thsi thread >_>_>_>_>_>_>_>_>_>_>_>

the debate is OVER

 

[bobson]

We provided you with a vid of dojo, which you managed to simply avoid talking about.

Can I get a link to that video?
I typically use the IDC for non-stalling purposes whenever I use Metaknight in friendlies, and I'd like to see how a pro uses it.

 

[Melomaniacal]

>_>

Well, considering that I did have no grounds to say something like that it was why I added the caption "c wut I did thar?". Just lotsa people are butthurt because their favorite character can't trounce the Betta Knight. I caught on to the fact that you were joking at like, the last second. I got no beef.

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Smooth Criminal

I don't care how good my character vs. MK or vs. anyone for that matter, I just took it personally because you made a personal attack, and sarcasm is hard to detect on teh interwebs. So yeah, it's all good, brah.

 

[metaXzero]

Yes.


The "solution" to MK dittos.

How it's banned in dittos you mean?

Originally, I had it as "if both used IDC, it's treated as if both DIDN'T use IDC." Unfortunantely, that creates one problem that defeats the reason of unbanning it. If one MK uses IDC, they HAVE to keep a percentage/stock lead over the MK. If the MK who used IDC first ever falls behind in percentage/stock, the other MK will be able to use IDC to stall to the timer. And because IDC is unbeatable as a stall, that's a guaranteed win.

I got an idea for MK dittos If both MKs use IDC, both will lose if the timer hits 0. How's that?

@swordgard: That Dojo video nearly eliminates the possibility of IDC being useless. But don't argue that's enough to prove IDC should remained banned. If Dojo had used IDC nearly the entire time though...

 

[BarakuDragon]

can't beleive this thread is open again.. what happened to the sticky about mk not being baned? lol. What's IDC anyway *been away from forums for like 2 months* lol. I havn't bothered to read past 2 pages of this thread to see if this is still a bout mk being banned or just skills only. But if it's about him being baned I think people need to leave it out =p.

 

[swordgard]

How it's banned in dittos you mean?

Originally, I had it as "if both used IDC, it's treated as if both DIDN'T use IDC." Unfortunantely, that creates one problem that defeats the reason of unbanning it. If one MK uses IDC, they HAVE to keep a percentage/stock lead over the MK. If the MK who used IDC first ever falls behind in percentage/stock, the other MK will be able to use IDC to stall to the timer. And because IDC is unbeatable as a stall, that's a guaranteed win.

I got an idea for MK dittos If both MKs use IDC, both will lose if the timer hits 0. How's that?

@swordgard: That Dojo video nearly eliminates the possibility of IDC being useless. But don't argue that's enough to prove IDC should remained banned. If Dojo had used IDC nearly the entire time though...

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=_wxAsoU2kSc
3:36 to 3:39, how is that not broken if used over and over. Faster than you can react .\


Edit: And as alphazealot said, for all intents of the game(coding wise), mk doesnt exist during idc, and this can be done for an unlimited amount of time. This is broken. It is banned, but mk does not have to be banned. And as i said, proove us its not broken by hosting your own tourneys, dont let all the burden of proof lie on us. Your making accusations, not the other way around.

 

[metaXzero]

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=_wxAsoU2kSc
3:36 to 3:39, how is that not broken if used over and over. Faster than you can react .\


Edit: And as alphazealot said, for all intents of the game(coding wise), mk doesnt exist during idc, and this can be done for an unlimited amount of time. This is broken. It is banned, but mk does not have to be banned. And as i said, proove us its not broken by hosting your own tourneys, dont let all the burden of proof lie on us. Your making accusations, not the other way around.

I see Santi shooting an arrow for no reason and Dojo punishing the lag. If Dojo COULDN'T punish that with IDC, I'd question IDC's usefulness again. Basically 3:36-39 is NOT "proof" of how much IDC should be banned. Really, it just shows IDC use punishing open lag that has no reason being open. It's like Hylian's vid of him punishing a ZSS who was just sitting there spamming D-Smashing. You can't seriously use those examples and say "IDC should remain banned".

And AZ says it's brokeness/unbrokeness is irrelevent (his stance is it should be banned just because it's the first tech of its kind ever in a fighter). That kind of stance would get so many things banned...

 

[Falconv1.0]

Is it just me or with all these issues with stalling maybe instead of making arbitrary bans on things that we cant completely monitor we should ban Brawl from tourneys.

 

[Arturito_Burrito]

http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=_wxAsoU2kSc
3:36 to 3:39, how is that not broken if used over and over. Faster than you can react .\


Edit: And as alphazealot said, for all intents of the game(coding wise), mk doesnt exist during idc, and this can be done for an unlimited amount of time. This is broken. It is banned, but mk does not have to be banned. And as i said, proove us its not broken by hosting your own tourneys, dont let all the burden of proof lie on us. Your making accusations, not the other way around.

lol I remember yuna used to keep saying the burden of proof lied on the people who wanted things banned and so did a lot of the other anti ban group. Funny how things shifted now.

 

[St. Viers]

Burrito: that's because in both cases the side is arguing against what is already in place, and therefore need to prove why their point *should* be the case.

Let's say that MK was banned. It would then be the burden of the pro-MK side to come up with reasons not to ban. Likewise, as IDC is banned, it's up to people who want it to change to provide the evidence. Not to hard to understand really.

 

[metaXzero]

Burrito: that's because in both cases the side is arguing against what is already in place, and therefore need to prove why their point *should* be the case.

Let's say that MK was banned. It would then be the burden of the pro-MK side to come up with reasons not to ban. Likewise, as IDC is banned, it's up to people who want it to change to provide the evidence. Not to hard to understand really.

Normally, this is the case. However, IDCs original ban dealt with the stalling nature of it. Basically, it was thought that their was no way to make a clear, enforeceable, non-arbitrary, and non-subjective rule to allow IDC AND eliminate stalling with it.

Unfortunantely, despite that point being proven false, the now "keep-ban side" are falling back on points they not only didn't use pre-ban, but also didn't even prove. They've only used ONE video to justify those points despite how poorly the video proves anything.

 

[Justblaze647]

My question for you is... why give MK another broken tool to own the rest of the cast with?

As if he doesn't have enough going for him already...

 

[Genome Squirrel]

Normally, this is the case. However, IDCs original ban dealt with the stalling nature of it. Basically, it was thought that their was no way to make a clear, enforeceable, non-arbitrary, and non-subjective rule to allow IDC AND eliminate stalling with it.

Unfortunantely, despite that point being proven false, the now "keep-ban side" are falling back on points they not only didn't use pre-ban, but also didn't even prove. They've only used ONE video to justify those points despite how poorly the video proves anything.

don't you think that having a rule that forces people to win or lose despite how well they play is bad. that i could never even try to attack and still win.