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

[worldjem7]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XLDYOAjii-Q

Watch this match and TELL ME that Toon Link stood even the SLIGHTEST chance of winning. TELL ME. I DARE you.

The only reason this looked even is because Dojo didn't use tornado until the end of the game.

johns

No johns.


I think the real root of the whole problem is not MK or matchups but, Brawl, itself, as a competitive game.

I'd like to take this time to refer to my arguments that I made on OBC (Online Brawl Community).

Link: http://onlinebrawlcommunity.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=37&t=1716&p=51668#p51668

He's good, but he's not THAT good. If he was they wouldv'e given him his own tier in Smash World Forums, instead of just placing him at the top with the other tier characters. Even they admit a tier is nothing more then an indication of who has an advantage to start out, and a player who has more skill then his oppoent by a wide margin will win whoever they play.

Firstly: Yes, he is. Nado+shuttle loop are ********. One completely destroys characters and the other kills at ridiculously low %

So... you say that MK isn't that good because of SWF's Tier List but, then you completely invalidate that by saying that Tier Lists don't matter because they're only a guideline... Contradiction much?

Tier Lists, for the most part, ARE a guideline to how good a character is in relation to the rest of the cast. And in a normal fighting game, in which case things are properly balanced and have some depth to them, Tiers wouldn't really matter because of this simple concept:

effort = payoff

In a game like Brawl, tiers are pretty much everything because:

character = payoff

What are you going to do? All you can do is try to make move "A" happen at time "T". There are no mindgames, there's no tech skill, there's hardly any movement at all. There's just some spacing, rolls, and dodges, and that's it.

MK has a Tornado that takes up his entire body and it beats almost every move in the game. So unless the character you're using is one with a good D-air or a counter or something then what are you going to do other than shield and/or run away?

So basically it's, "who can space better with their viable moves." And since MK has nothing BUT viable moves he can do whatever he wants. He can space, spam, camp, be gay, anything.

If you ban him from doing moves then you might as well just ban the character as a whole. It's not like there's only a handful of characters in the game, Brawl can afford a few bans.

And also, this.

In a reasonably and decently balanced game most of what decides a match is the person holding the controller with match-ups adding or subtracting an advantage. The tactics devised are result of the game itself being diverse and allowing players to find new things and do new things to take the game to higher levels of play.

Brawl is not such a game. It's not so much "how much" a character can do but how well it does it, in Brawl. Meta Knight has the best of everything. Best recovery, best smashes, best kill move, etc.

How do you expect to expand on a game when Sakurai has taken everything out of Brawl that there would be to expand upon?

Meta Knight is broken and should be banned. Until people realize this, Meta Knight will always win the most tournaments out of any character... Always...

And lastly.

If MK isn't as good as he is then he wouldn't be winning tournaments regardless of how many people use him. Unless no one uses him then obviously MK won't be winning tournaments.

There's a reason why stats are weighed so heavily: because they're reliable.
"Event "A" happened at Place "B""
"Person "J" beat Person "F" using character "Y" vs character "X""

How can you dispute something that is proven to be fact?

what's UNreliable is personal opinion and eye-witness testimony.

Besides, what else, other than statistics, are we going to use to judge a game at a competitive level?

 

[Tbagz]

God dammit ur SOOOOOOOO stupid! Why don't you just quit playng this game right now, delete ur smashboards account, and kill yourself.

**** I hate stupid people....

Lol, you probably sit at home and play brawl all day with no life. (ralza at least gets girls all the time)

but thats not the point.


Why is he stupid? he has a good imput.

 

[da K.I.D.]

As for the issue of banning immiediatly or failing to ban, the issue isn't whether it's better to ban sooner rather then later if it's warranted. The issue is clearly WHETHER it's warranted, and having enough time to make that distinction.

Because if you ban MK in the short-term and it's unwarranted, the consequences of the ban will be greater by several magnitudes then waiting long enough to make that distinction.

thats subjective i see the bad possibilities of doing it now as, people might come up with something that beats MK and than all of us will have egg on our face for banning him

whereas, the longer we wait, the more people will play MK and the more people will quit brawl from the annoyance of the oversaturation of MKs. i would rather deal with the consequences of banning now, because we honestly dont know what will happen if we ban him now, but WE DO know what will happen if we dont

Best = best result with least amount of effort.

Read Sirlin please.

truth

If there is enough of a skill gap between me and a super turbo akuma player, I'll still win.

Does that mean Akuma isn't worthy of a ban?

The going assumption is the top levels of play, where skill gaps are really quite minute.



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).

Criteria 2: Again disagree, it's an order of magnitude. 1 Bad stage that's a counter-pick (or 2) won't really destroy a character's placements, especially if it isn't a major effect, aka, doesn't result in a soft counter).

Criteria 3, 4, and 5: Cherry-picking, it needs an actual standard. I could probably meet this with Ganondorf, except 5, but with more tournaments it would be a possibility.

Criteria 6 is good, use it for the entire thing.

Criteria 7, the number is arguable, but the principal is good. It prevents over-centralization.

Criteria 8 are pretty useless, with a character with this level of metagame dominance, the tier list will be dominated by characters that have reletively good match-ups against the character in question.

Criteria 9 is vital, but the range should be larger, sometime 2 characters need to be banned. It should be a portion of the cast, not an absolute.

I know they are meant to be used together, but if they're bad criteria it doesn't matter, they have to be useful individually and as a group.



Still, everything become more viable, because none of those counters will be as comon as MK is.

1.but the idea was that the character has to have NO COUNTERS, not "just a few"
MK has no true counters which is why he fits this criteria

2. haveing no bad stages means no stages that you can pick and expect him to do worse on. so i dont understand what you are saying...

3. by yourself, your saying that you can you can use ganon, and dominate, wins, top 3s and top 8s, on a regional, local, and national level?

8. that is the point, if the tier list degrades to who can fight Mk best (which in some cases it kinda is) and still none of them can go 50-50 with MK, thats a good criteria for a ban.

9. True enough, amend it to say that less than two characters meet all the above standards. is that fair?

Actually, myself and many other people see it as :

D3 - 45:55
ROB - 50:50
Lucario - 40:60ish
Falco - 40:60 (though I personally see it as even xD)
Marth - 35:65.

And the thing is, MK is the worst match-up of all the top tiers, 35:65 tied with Marth though more probably 30:70.
If MK was gone..he'd be a lot more viable I feel.
Sonic's main problems are randomly dotted around, some being very prominent tourney characters (G&W, Wario, sort of MK) down to people who hardly show up at all like Luigi.

i will exercise my right to disagree on those matchups as i did in the respective threads, ive said that all those matches are close to even and gave reasons for all of them. but like i and tenki said, i cant prove it on paper, so its pointless

 

[Yuna]

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*

Fine.

Welcome back Yuna.

Since it's been a while since we heard from you, could you just make a list of points for why you feel it's not right to ban Meta Knight yet? That would be great since it's a little unclear where you're getting all your reasoning from and it's been slowly wandering around in the thread. I'm honestly not sure what all you're arguing based on, but since you disagree with pretty much every pro-ban point for reasons he qualifies for a ban now (Given time to be sure they don't get fixed somehow) you surely have a number of reasons why he's not ready.

Why should I have to repeat myself for the 1 millionth time because you don't feel like reading? I've said a whole bunch of things on these past 3 pages alone.

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.

If people flock to characters because they're good, whether or not the 2nd best is different will not matter. They will flock to them to win! So, no, Sonic would still take it in the shorts.

The other do not counter Sonic as badly as Meta Knight does, but many of them counter him nonetheless. He'll become more viable but he won't magically become Competitively viable. He'll still run into plenty of match-ups where he's at a distinct disadvantage. Which translates into him being a longshot for doing well in tournaments, thus unviable.

More viable =/= Viable

And I've heard that most Sonic's get taken out by MK's at tourneys, whilst they can handle Snakes and ROB's and such.

Because there's so many Metas. Wait 'til they flock to others. Also, theory says Sonic loses. The fact that some Sonics can win against some Snakes and Robots mean jack squat.

i will exercise my right to disagree on those matchups as i did in the respective threads, ive said that all those matches are close to even and gave reasons for all of them. but like i and tenki said, i cant prove it on paper, so its pointless

Yes you can. Argue it using valid arguments. Show them in practice how Sonic works against those characters. Teach other Sonics to do what you do.

But of course, everyone else is wrong and you are right. Obviously, Sonic breaks even against all of them because you say so. Do you even play on the "highest possible level"? Could you beat someone on the highest possible level playing Sonic or breaking even with them? Then why should we care how well you do at lower levels of play?

Stuff.

I won't even look at that link since you're so wrong on so many accounts

 

[Fatmanonice]

... But at this point, isn't that just wishfull thinking?

I mean we all talk about finding something we could use to counter MK...

Yeah, it's kind of like trying to deflect a nuke with a tennis racket but it'd still be nice if something was found within the next couple of months. Like I said, it could be something as small as discovering a strong counterpick stage against him or reliable "combos" against him with more characters like Yoshi's grab release into fair.

 

[Justblaze647]

Lol, you probably sit at home and play brawl all day with no life. (ralza at least gets girls all the time)

but thats not the point.


Why is he stupid? he has a good imput.

...ok
1st:
If you wanna talk about getting girls... go on myspace/facebook or whatever you kids do these days. But right now I'm on Smashboards to discuss Smash... and that's exactly what I'm gonna do.

2nd:
This thread doesnt have anything to do with how well your idiot friend's Lucario does against your MK. Therefore... everything in his post was rendered null and void.

3rd:
**** off

 

[Julz]

I can't really account for what overswarm meant but I think what he means by viable may be top tier viability.

Snake, D3, ROB, G&W, Falco, Marth, Wario... they can all hang at the top level. But not with MK around. With MK around, there's no reason to play any of those characters.

If you remove MK, those characters all become viable. Even more importantly, they all have a variety of counters! That means most people will be playing two characters! That's great for the community!

 

[darkNES386]

I don't think Meta Knight should be banned until enough individuals start to take action. If everyone is going to be looking for a collaborative decisions to made here before taking matters into their own hands then any sort of ban should be held off for as long as possible. I'd much rather start hearing local tournaments hosts state specific rules about using MK in their events before I see an official post on smashboards about it.

 

[da K.I.D.]

Fine.


Why should I have to repeat myself for the 1 millionth time because you don't feel like reading? I've said a whole bunch of things on these past 3 pages alone.

were stupid, i know you think so so make it easy for us and post, in one post, clearly and concisely, why MK shouldnt be banned.

If people flock to characters because they're good, whether or not the 2nd best is different will not matter. They will flock to them to win! So, no, Sonic would still take it in the shorts.

The other do not counter Sonic as badly as Meta Knight does, but many of them counter him nonetheless. He'll become more viable but he won't magically become Competitively viable. He'll still run into plenty of match-ups where he's at a distinct disadvantage. Which translates into him being a longshot for doing well in tournaments, thus unviable.

More viable =/= Viable

but the thing is is that ive gotten the impression that this more viable effect, will happen to like, a bunch of characters, something between 5 and 10 even though this will get posted as stuff or, stop being stupid

Because there's so many Metas. Wait 'til they flock to others. Also, theory says Sonic loses. The fact that some Sonics can win against some Snakes and Robots mean jack squat.


Yes you can. Argue it using valid arguments. Show them in practice how Sonic works against those characters. Teach other Sonics to do what you do.

But of course, everyone else is wrong and you are right. Obviously, Sonic breaks even against all of them because you say so. Do you even play on the "highest possible level"? Could you beat someone on the highest possible level playing Sonic or breaking even with them? Then why should we care how well you do at lower levels of play?

lol, yuna dont bag on my skill till youve played me, cus last time I heard, you were straight garbage at the game, and based on that, you shouldnt even be talking because you have no idea of what goes on in the mind, at high level play, but im not going to say that because I dont know for myself how good you are at the game

 

[worldjem7]

oh noes dNES is master post searcher lol Hi NES!

lol you're probably the only one who even noticed my post.

 

[da K.I.D.]

i saw it and i thought it was highly insightful... but yuna refused to listen to valid arguements

 

[~ Gheb ~]

I noticed you post, worldjem...I jist didn't response.

 

[salaboB]

Why should I have to repeat myself for the 1 millionth time because you don't feel like reading? I've said a whole bunch of things on these past 3 pages alone.

Because what you've been doing is saying "No this won't work because you're wrong" (And providing a tiny bit of your reasoning, specific only to what you're disagreeing with) and nowhere have you provided a concrete list that anyone can respond to for why you believe he shouldn't be banned. I can't tell which is the same argument just reworded and which is an actual distinct point you have against it.

Frankly, I'm a bit suspicious your list consists of "He can still be beaten." and that's where every post you make comes from. I'd like to be proven wrong, but for some reason I'm feeling a bit skeptical.

 

[Fatmanonice]

@ da KID:

Let's try to keep this from becoming a "my *insert character here* can beat your *insert character here*" bicker-fest... I'd like a reason to actually come back to this thread later in the week.

 

[adumbrodeus]

thats subjective i see the bad possibilities of doing it now as, people might come up with something that beats MK and than all of us will have egg on our face for banning him

whereas, the longer we wait, the more people will play MK and the more people will quit brawl from the annoyance of the oversaturation of MKs. i would rather deal with the consequences of banning now, because we honestly dont know what will happen if we ban him now, but WE DO know what will happen if we dont

Wrong, I'm sorry, the issue is bigger.

We'll probably never be able to recognize if MK has counters if it's done too soon (he'll be absent from most friendlies as well as tournaments, because friendlies are "playing to learn").

It will cause a lot of MK mains to drop Brawl.

Two major issues that we have if an unwarranted ban occurs.

1.but the idea was that the character has to have NO COUNTERS, not "just a few"
MK has no true counters which is why he fits this criteria

I'm arguing the opposite, the character in the example deserves a ban.

2. haveing no bad stages means no stages that you can pick and expect him to do worse on. so i dont understand what you are saying...

"Bad" is a reletive term, you do "bad" if generally you do amazingly excellent, and in this case you just do excellent.

The wording needs more refinement.

It's also a matter of degrees, whether the stage is a neutral, how much of a disadvantage, etc.

3. by yourself, your saying that you can you can use ganon, and dominate, wins, top 3s and top 8s, on a regional, local, and national level?

It's an issue with the wording again.

If enough locals, regionals, and nationals are run, then yes, there WILL be a multitude of them that Ganondorf will win. It's just everyone else on the tier list will win several times that number.

It needs to be reletive to the total number of locals/regionals/nationals.

8. that is the point, if the tier list degrades to who can fight Mk best (which in some cases it kinda is) and still none of them can go 50-50 with MK, thats a good criteria for a ban.

Again, I bring the point of a character that destroys 90% of the field but gets dominated by a select few characters, that character does deserve a ban.

Also, we need to clearly define the tier levels in order to make referencing to them work.

9. True enough, amend it to say that less than two characters meet all the above standards. is that fair?

Just the opposite, amend it to say that "no more then [insert percentage of the cast arrived at after much debate here] characters meet the criteria".

That only one character/faction/ect. at max will be warranted for a ban in every single game ever created is simply not a logical conclusion since we don't know what games will come out in the future.

 

[da K.I.D.]

@ da KID:

Let's try to keep this from becoming a "my *insert character here* can beat your *insert character here*" bicker-fest... I'd like a reason to actually come back to this thread later in the week.

i caught myself a few min. ago, and im tryign to do exactly that

 

[darkNES386]

oh noes dNES is master post searcher lol Hi NES!

LoL, the pleasure is all mine. I liked your little "ad" you threw in there for us.

 

[Tbagz]

...ok
1st:
If you wanna talk about getting girls... go on myspace/facebook or whatever you kids do these days. But right now I'm on Smashboards to discuss Smash... and that's exactly what I'm gonna do.

2nd:
This thread doesnt have anything to do with how well your idiot friend's Lucario does against your MK. Therefore... everything in his post was rendered null and void.

3rd:
**** off

why dont you be mature about this debate? i asked around in my school of kids who play brawl that HATE mk with a passion, and they think its unjust to ban metaknight and makes no sense.

maybe in the far future i could see it having a 20% cance happening but i dont want it to happen at all.

 

[salaboB]

Wrong, I'm sorry, the issue is bigger.

We'll probably never be able to recognize if MK has counters if it's done too soon (he'll be absent from most friendlies as well as tournaments, because friendlies are "playing to learn").

It will cause a lot of MK mains to drop Brawl.

Two major issues that we have if an unwarranted ban occurs.

However, we'll have an immediate growth in multiple other characters' metagames, and possibly people returning who quit because their main had no chance whatsoever against MK (Or just got bored always fighting MK).

The damage is counteracted a bit by benefits for banning, there is nothing really mitigating it for leaving him alone.

As far as playing vs. MK, people will remember him -- and any new strategies that pop up I'm quite certain will be tested against him. If one is ever found that destroys him, I bet he'd begin being unbanned soon after it was verified.

 

[MorphedChaos]

Looks like its tilting in the favor of a ban. I'd just like to ask, Would it be so hard that, If a new AT was discovered a year after hes banned, to just say "Sorry" and unban him? Is that just too much to ask?

 

[ftl]

I don't think Meta Knight should be banned until enough individuals start to take action. If everyone is going to be looking for a collaborative decisions to made here before taking matters into their own hands then any sort of ban should be held off for as long as possible. I'd much rather start hearing local tournaments hosts state specific rules about using MK in their events before I see an official post on smashboards about it.

It's a cycle, though. TOs probably don't want to do something contentious like ban a character without feeling like they'd have the support of the community in doing so. Otherwise, they're like those guys that decide to ban wavedashing, looked down on. Unless the SBR condones it, I don't think that there will be all that many major tournaments that try it, if any.

 

[Yuna]

were stupid, i know you think so so make it easy for us and post, in one post, clearly and concisely, why MK shouldnt be banned.

Meta Knight does not yet (on paper and in practice) dominate the metagame to such an extent that no other character has a reasonable chance of beating him. Insofar, all of the reasons for why Meta Knight is dominating can be explained by "He's popular".

Neither in practice nor on paper does Meta Knight win over everyone else to such a degree there's no reasonable chance of defeating him. The mere fact that there are still characters who have arguable 45:55s and 5-4s against him makes him, at this moment, unbannable.

 

[Yuna]

Looks like its tilting in the favor of a ban. I'd just like to ask, Would it be so hard that, If a new AT was discovered a year after hes banned, to just say "Sorry" and unban him? Is that just too much to ask?

If I get you convicted of murder and then have you sent to death row, then after one year, we discover evidence that you didn't really do it and go "Sorry" and "unban" you, would that be just fine?

Doing something that's wrong and then undoing it won't make it any less wrong (of course, it's less wrong than putting you away for murder, but it was still Scrubby to jump to conclusions and do it in the first place).

 

[Fatmanonice]

why dont you be mature about this debate? i asked around in my school of kids who play brawl that HATE mk with a passion, and they think its unjust to ban metaknight and makes no sense.

maybe in the far future i could see it having a 20% cance happening but i dont want it to happen at all.

... No offense but why should we care what your friends think? What makes their opinions so note worthy that it would sway people who want Metaknight banned change their mind? It's kind of like saying "my Dad can beat up your Dad." Who cares unless both happen to be professional boxers?

 

[Yuna]

... No offense but why should we care what your friends think? What makes their opinions so note worthy that it would sway people who want Metaknight banned change their mind? It's kind of like saying "my Dad can beat up your Dad." Who cares unless both happen to be professional boxers?

Two of the best professional boxers there are.

 

[da K.I.D.]

Wrong, I'm sorry, the issue is bigger.

We'll probably never be able to recognize if MK has counters if it's done too soon (he'll be absent from most friendlies as well as tournaments, because friendlies are "playing to learn").

It will cause a lot of MK mains to drop Brawl.

WOAHHHHHHHHHHH, that is an entirely new arguement can you give specific examples, and if you can will it be more than the number of people that have already dropped brawl because of MKs inclusion? cause from what ive heard, Mk mains will jsut switch characters. M2K and dojo both said that. im just giving names because i asked the same of you

Two major issues that we have if an unwarranted ban occurs.

I'm arguing the opposite, the character in the example deserves a ban.

"Bad" is a reletive term, you do "bad" if generally you do amazingly excellent, and in this case you just do excellent.

The wording needs more refinement.

It's also a matter of degrees, whether the stage is a neutral, how much of a disadvantage, etc.

ok, im glad i figured out where you stand on his matches.
and yes, bad does need to be more objective, but i dont really know any stages that clearly disadvantage MK.

It's an issue with the wording again.

If enough locals, regionals, and nationals are run, then yes, there WILL be a multitude of them that Ganondorf will win. It's just everyone else on the tier list will win several times that number.

It needs to be reletive to the total number of locals/regionals/nationals.

if you noticed, my quote had the word"dominated" in it you cant dominate tourneys on any level if every one elses numbers are several times as high as ganon, so I will ask again.
Is there a way in this situation for you (you referenced yourself alone in that post put it doesnt have to be just you) to dominate wins, top 3s and top 8s on a local, regional, and national level

Again, I bring the point of a character that destroys 90% of the field but gets dominated by a select few characters, that character does deserve a ban.

Also, we need to clearly define the tier levels in order to make referencing to them work.



Just the opposite, amend it to say that "no more then [insert percentage of the cast arrived at after much debate here] characters meet the criteria".

That only one character/faction/ect. at max will be warranted for a ban in every single game ever created is simply not a logical conclusion since we don't know what games will come out in the future.

the thing is is that that if its more than 2 characters that do that, than they are just top tier, (sorry for the incoming reference) in melee, 4-7 characters could do everything on the list, but nobody was banned because they were all near even at the top if you only have 2 characters that dominate than they both should be banned, if its 3, it makes for a paper, rock scissors game, in which i really dont know what to do, but if its 4 characters that do these things, than you cant ban all four, that just makes them top tier

 

[darkNES386]

Looks like its tilting in the favor of a ban. I'd just like to ask, Would it be so hard that, If a new AT was discovered a year after hes banned, to just say "Sorry" and unban him? Is that just too much to ask?

Where's the incentive to find tactics against MK or at least improving your game against MK if the entire community suddenly rejects/limits his participation?

It's a cycle, though. TOs probably don't want to do something contentious like ban a character without feeling like they'd have the support of the community in doing so. Otherwise, they're like those guys that decide to ban wavedashing, looked down on. Unless the SBR condones it, I don't think that there will be all that many major tournaments that try it, if any.

Which is exactly why I feel that SBR shouldn't do anything about MK until it becomes obvious to everyone that the competitive community is being crippled everywhere.

 

[salaboB]

If I get you convicted of murder and then have you sent to death row, then after one year, we discover evidence that you didn't really do it and go "Sorry" and "unban" you, would that be just fine?

Doing something that's wrong and then undoing it won't make it any less wrong (of course, it's less wrong than putting you away for murder, but it was still Scrubby to jump to conclusions and do it in the first place).

No, but as has been addressed (Unlike in your example) there are some immediate positive gains to banning him now, so if it is wrong we'll still have gained some.

If it's not wrong, and again unlike your example (Unless continued feeding of the prisoner counts as damage), there will be continued loss of players that won't just magically be undone later.

If you ban now you get: Loss of some MK players, a possibly divided tournament scene, a return of a few players wanting to check out the metagame without MK, other characters' metagames developing and an increased chance of new ATs being found for them, more character diversity at tournaments. If it is premature and he gets unbanned, the damage is further reduced by the return of a few MK players since they can play as him again.

If you ban later you get: Loss of players tired of always fighting against MK/Feeling they must play as him to win, loss of some MK players, a possibly divided tournament scene, a return of a few players wanting to check out the metagame without MK, other characters' metagames developing and an increased chance of new ATs being found for them, more character diversity at tournaments.

If you don't ban you get: Loss of players tired of always fighting against MK/Feeling they must play as him to win that will continue until the tournament scene dies, unless an AT that's found (With decreasing chances for it being located as more people choose to use MK or quit instead) can significantly tip the balance against him.

The minor gains from the last don't look worthwhile to me for the potential risks, especially as it looks most likely like it will be the second -- and the first has a number of immediate benefits that offset the penalty of being wrong.

Where's the incentive to find tactics against MK or at least improving your game against MK if the entire community suddenly rejects/limits his participation?

What kind of horrible metagame do you want where it's all about finding a tactic versus a single opponent? If a more flexible AT for another character can't do it but it is something specific against him, frankly I'm not sure why we want it found that badly. What a waste of player time to locate such a specialized thing.

 

[Sucumbio]

I'm now leaning towards agreeing that he should be banned from competitive play. To be competitive means there's a percent chance the fight could go either way. MK (and I'll admit I've never fought one of these world-class MKs) is tough! No doubt. I find many flaws in his design as if to say the developers forgot to add disadvantages to his moves like they did with all other characters. This creates an unbalanced character. If say, tethering characters could grab him out of his tornado, yeah, that'd work. Something, anything! But instead, you have a slice and dice machine on crack with no -real- penalties (being light isn't a penalty in his case, it's one of his many strengths).

Watching tons of MK videos I've seen that if you could somehow combine the moves of a few characters THEN MK would be consistently beatable. But that won't happen. So sadly I have to agree that because MK was obviously created without enough forethought, he should not be used in tourney play.

Then again, I am of the humble opinion that tourney's should also require ONLY use of DEFAULT Wii-mote and nunchuck setup. No C-sucking. heh. ah well.

 

[Mocha19]

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=198174

Maybe this will help some people? Sorry if this sucks. Not trying to stir up trouble.. =[

 

[darkNES386]

What kind of horrible metagame do you want where it's all about finding a tactic versus a single opponent? If a more flexible AT for another character can't do it but it is something specific against him, frankly I'm not sure why we want it found that badly. What a waste of player time to locate such a specialized thing.

You can't tell me that you invest more time learning how to play against Captain Falcon or Jigglypuff then say Marth or DDD.

EDIT: to clarify, I'm not expecting some magical technique to save the day for us against MK.

 

[da K.I.D.]

Looks like its tilting in the favor of a ban. I'd just like to ask, Would it be so hard that, If a new AT was discovered a year after hes banned, to just say "Sorry" and unban him? Is that just too much to ask?

this is what makes me think that people who dont want mk banned, just have too much pride...

Meta Knight does not yet (on paper and in practice) dominate the metagame to such an extent that no other character has a reasonable chance of beating him. Insofar, all of the reasons for why Meta Knight is dominating can be explained by "He's popular".

Neither in practice nor on paper does Meta Knight win over everyone else to such a degree there's no reasonable chance of defeating him. The mere fact that there are still characters who have arguable 45:55s and 5-4s against him makes him, at this moment, unbannable.

OK, now we are gettign somewhere here!!!
dispite the fact that i kinda disagree, i will speak on this... but first...
1. would MK have to fulfill both or just one of these conditions to get banned?
2. what is unreasonable, does he have beat the whole cast the same way he beats sonic? (80-20) 90-10? 70-30? what exactly?

If I get you convicted of murder and then have you sent to death row, then after one year, we discover evidence that you didn't really do it and go "Sorry" and "unban" you, would that be just fine?

Doing something that's wrong and then undoing it won't make it any less wrong (of course, it's less wrong than putting you away for murder, but it was still Scrubby to jump to conclusions and do it in the first place).

if that happened to me, i would just be happy to have my life back, so I assume that i would just be happy to have my character back?
but at the time, there was good evidence for the decision, so it would be hard to argue against that chain of events, the only thing i would ask is for compensation of my lost time, seeing as I wont be able to get a job after that, but thats where the analogy dies, because thats only something i would ask for because its real life and not a VG

 

[Yuna]

Stuff.

Basically, if enough people dislike you and whine about it, even if you didn't do anything wrong or illegal, you can still be arrested, but in solitary/on death row/whatever for an indefinite amount of time 'til such time there's evidence to prove the whiners wrong.

 

[Yuna]

OK, now we are gettign somewhere here!!!

Only I've been saying it every three of so posts for the past 150 pages...

dispite the fact that i kinda disagree, i will speak on this... but first...
1. would MK have to fulfill both or just one of these conditions to get banned?

Of course.

2. what is unreasonable, does he have beat the whole cast the same way he beats sonic? (80-20) 90-10? 70-30? what exactly?

He still has a 55:45 and a few 50:40s. That's perfectly reasonable. 60:40s are also reasonable, but maybe not if they are all 60:40s. 70:30 is reaaaally pushing it and I would not classify this as "reasonable". First step would be to prove he has 60:40s.

 

[da K.I.D.]

I'm now leaning towards agreeing that he should be banned from competitive play. To be competitive means there's a percent chance the fight could go either way. MK (and I'll admit I've never fought one of these world-class MKs) is tough! No doubt. I find many flaws in his design as if to say the developers forgot to add disadvantages to his moves like they did with all other characters. This creates an unbalanced character. If say, tethering characters could grab him out of his tornado, yeah, that'd work. Something, anything! But instead, you have a slice and dice machine on crack with no -real- penalties (being light isn't a penalty in his case, it's one of his many strengths).

Watching tons of MK videos I've seen that if you could somehow combine the moves of a few characters THEN MK would be consistently beatable. But that won't happen. So sadly I have to agree that because MK was obviously created without enough forethought, he should not be used in tourney play.

Then again, I am of the humble opinion that tourney's should also require ONLY use of DEFAULT Wii-mote and nunchuck setup. No C-sucking. heh. ah well.

ahh... mannnn, you done effed it up with that last sentance, lol. you know nobody's gonna listen to that post now right?
im glad you can see where i am salab are coming from.
about the controller thing... all i will say, is that whose decision is it that wii-chuck is THE default controls, as opposed to just the wii mote or the classic controller. thats why i disagree with that but i want this to stay on topic now that i just broke big ground with yuna.

 

[da K.I.D.]

Of course.

you didnt answer the question... would he need to fulfill just one or both of your criteria to be banned

 

[salaboB]

You can't tell me that you invest more time learning how to play against Captain Falcon or Jigglypuff then say Marth or DDD.

EDIT: to clarify, I'm not expecting some magical technique to save the day for us against MK.

No, I'm saying that we already know the basics of how to fight MK, and none of them work well enough to provide an advantage. If there is something that will bring him down, it has to be an AT that either he can't benefit from as much as everyone else, or is character specific. So if he's around, the chances of finding such an AT (Because it's most likely going to be character specific, there's not many general AT concepts even that wouldn't benefit him as much as they benefit everyone else) are far reduced than if he's out of the picture, even temporarily.

 

[ADHD]

Akuma was beatable. Therefor he is so absolutely valid and akuma should not be banned.

 

[Grunt]

Akuma was beatable.

-_______________________________________-

 

[ADHD]

-_______________________________________-

Its a perfectly valid arguement , right?