Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
Exactly.
Not really. Azen beat other MKs as Lucario.
Random, you are wrong, already refuted, no logic. Who the hell told you that BS? Sonic 50:50 all of those people? In what alternate universe? You are wrong. "You lack hat... logic."da K.I.D. said:
thank you for truth
I think he meant he had a matchup problem vs a person, not the character, at least thats how it seemed to me
at least respect me enough to quote the post you ****
Do styles of play count in matchup discussions? Yes, you compare the best styles (for instance, an aggressive Marth is better against DK, while a defensive Marth does better against MK)
Don't you think they're already doing that? You want us to stop using Azen as proof for why MK is broken, but then you yourself use him for proof of why he's not, when it's very possible that MK players have just been using the wrong strategy to fight Lucario (obviously Lee found something or else he wouldn't have given Azen any more trouble than the rest of the MKs).
Concerning this part, I've noticed that a lot of the character boards have been complaining that their character's metagame have become stagnant recently. The Wolf, Toon Link, Falco, Wario, Pikachu, etc boards claim that they have found most of the techniques/strategies needed to win or at least excel and now it's, more or less, a time to simply refine them. To me, this sounds a little odd but, then again, I use the whole cast and try not to focus on one character for long periods of time (as in no longer than a couple of days) so, obviously, I haven't gotten down all the techniques/strategies (for example, I'm still working on applying Pikachu's QAC and the Ice Climber's infinites) for everyone.
spread it. like butter on steak. however nasty that is.
Im Tbagz, I am talking about high level, dont assume im instantly a scrub because your from canada and have never heard of me.
I never said Azen's proof of why MK's not broken. I said that if you're gonna use Azen at Hobo11 as "proof", there are any number of things I can use Azen at Hobo11 as "proof" of a whole bunch of other things.
But Sonic wouldn't randomly become viable. He's just have one less bad match-up to contend with, He'd be more viable, but he wouldn't magically become actually viable.
It can go either way, depending on what happens. It could be that there's nothing new to discover. Or that people just aren't trying hard enough. Stagnation isn't always bad.
Yet M2K did better than him?
Azen does better with lucario than MK vs all MKs excluding lee. Lee is not the best MK. M2K > Lee. Therefore, like Yuna said, its a personal issue and not becuase Lee is the best MK.
(check the original post to see your response to me. This is why replying to something in the quotation just really sucks, and people should stop doing it. Come on.)
God dammit ur SOOOOOOOO stupid! Why don't you just quit playng this game right now, delete ur smashboards account, and kill yourself.
Obviously the principal is quantified by the analogy, I just wasn't taking issue with THAT PARTICULAR CASE. In that situation the long-term and short-term decision is clear.
1. As long as the criteria that is ultimately decided upon to judge MK makes that distinction, then I am fine. Unlike Yuna, I am merely urging caution, I am not trying to make sure he's never banned.
Best = best result with least amount of effort.
If there is enough of a skill gap between me and a super turbo akuma player, I'll still win.
I take issue with criteria 1. Sometimes a single character can utterly dominate the metagame and have one counter (which generally results in the countering character being top). That counter fares reletively poorly against others (early metagame Snake/MK was a good example of this dynamic, but not to a banable level).
Still, everything become more viable, because none of those counters will be as comon as MK is.
Actually, myself and many other people see it as :
) and most people hate it. I think that's what bugs me the most about him. Overswarm's comment about how he doesn't play Smash anymore, he just goes to tournaments and collects money has me concerned. Obviously, he's joking around by referring to how Metaknight is basically Smash on training wheels and what if more professionals pick up this mentality? I don't care if Metaknight wins tournaments but I don't want him to end up being the death of variety in this game.
The problem is that people don't actually bother reading back even one page. If they see someone uttering something that to me and other people with insight sounds ludicrous but to the uninitiated sounds like teh truth, they're going take it for teh truth, especially if it supports their "side" of the banhammer.
No, he'd be slightly more viable. The only reason why he would, in practice, be "a lot more" viable would be because the hordes of MKs would no longer be around. Before, he had hordes of 70:30s/80:20s. Not anymore.
Because Marth suffers no disadvantageous matchups that Meta Knight destroys that Marth doesn't already beat? And we answered this already. Many pages back. You not seeing it does not mean we didn't.
But not by an equal amount and that's my point: Top tiers will benefit more
You just argued that Meta Knight is a really good character and technically easy to play as and has an easy time winning. None of this amounts to "too good" and "needs to be banned".@ Yuna:
True, Metaknight is beatable but it definately takes much more effort from the opposing party in a majority of his match ups (poor Mario...) and counterpicking stages against him is hard since most people insist on the neutral stages and only one counterpick actually slows him down (if only Metaknight had a strong counterpick as laughably bad as Ganondorf on Hanebow.
Not at all, top tiers are top tiers because they have reasonable match-ups against MK and are not signifigantly countered by anything that MK doesn't destroy.
Oh God, not again... I always end up having to repeat this over and over again in threads like this. *turns on cruise control for cool* I DON'T WANT METAKNIGHT BANNED but I'd like something to be found that knocks him down a peg. *right clicks and copies sentence*
This is extremely worth thinking about. Consider that all the other tournament games with bans have extreme characters banned. The games themselves also are designed with more technical aspects in mind, giving more options for fighting strong matchup advantaged characters -- a borderline character in those games will look different than a borderline character in Brawl. So direct comparisons of just matchups isn't enough to say that MK is like Soandso who has no bad matchups and thus shouldn't be banned, because the games have entirely different ways how advantaged matchups impact things as well as entirely different communities that react differently to them.
But none of the other characters counter Sonic as hard as Metaknight, and his match-ups with the other top tiers people will bandwagon to are generally bearable with the exception of G&W, who will probably prove to be one of the least popular characters people will turn to when/if MK gets banned, because they're rather different.
... But at this point, isn't that just wishfull thinking?
