The SBR official stance on Metaknight.

[Peach_rules]

In a way, I'm kinda glad. The game was made for everyone to be played. I don't think it would have had the same "magic" if we started restricting the rules to that degree.

 

[ANTi_]

yay now i can name search myself without "anti-ban" coming up.

 

[Master Raven]

yay now i can name search myself without "anti-ban" coming up.

loooooooool

 

[Crow!]

I guess the SBR's position is "MK should not be banned, but we're not goint to take any effort whatsoever to stop you from doing so."

This reminds me of Pontius Pilate's approach to handling things...

The smash back room said to them, "Then what shall I do with Metaknight, called Broken?"
They all said, "Let him be banned!"
But the SBR said, "Why? What evil has he done?"
They only shouted the louder, "Let him be banned!"
When the SBR saw that they were not succeeding at all, but that a great divide in the community was breaking out instead, they took water and washed their hands in front of the community in a stickied thread, saying "We are innocent of this character's banning. Look to it yourselves."

 

[CRASHiC]

Now let's all play with items.

 

[Dark 3nergy]

People need to stop hoping that Meta Knight EVER gets banned but try to become actually good at this game instead.

instead of getting good at reg. brawl they decide to play modded version of brawl instead and believe they're good

LOGIC

 

['V']

Now let's all play with items.

I've been saying this forever.

*Goes to run ISP tourneys*

 

[Craeter]

If SBR has been discussing this for so long and still came to an anti-ban majority then it's for the best. They are very knowledgeable on the subject and even if they can't share their discussions with us we should still trust them.

 

[Red Arremer]

I guess the SBR's position is "MK should not be banned, but we're not goint to take any effort whatsoever to stop you from doing so."

What do you expect us to do, send an underling to every Smash event and force the TO to obey our recommended ruleset?

 

[Kewkky]

If SBR has been discussing this for so long and still came to an anti-ban majority then it's for the best. They are very knowledgeable on the subject and even if they can't share their discussions with us we should still trust them.

If they are the ones who have been putting together the current Brawl rule-set, said that it's just a suggestion over and over and no one has complained about it yet, then them not banning MK means it's just another case of the "It's for the best of the community" scenario.

And seriously, I haven't heard anyone complain about the stages, or the stock-match time limit, friendly fire, items, 3 stocks, and counterpick system in Brawl until banning MK was an issue thrown at the table for everyone to see. If they haven't complained about those being "biased by the SBR" and instead enjoy the game more than they would otherwise, why not feel the same way towards the MK decision?

Of course, humans are capable of error, so who's to say we won't see a change in the future?

 

[swordgard]

i just want all of you to see what the SBR has done.

The people spoke 4 times in fovor of a ban, yet the SBR STILL says no. Remember this day.



As one of the ONLY real men standing up and doing whats right, i recommend TO's to start hosting meta banned events.

I dont know what to say except that


A) This requires supermajority like any huge ban, which even the community didnt get
B) The poll consisted of so many alt accounts and ignorant people who admitted they voted even though they dont go to tourneys
C) I would rather let it be in the hands of COMPETENT people than in the ones of ignorant masses who obviously would jump in any bandwagon they can
D) You happen to say that the only real man standing up and doing whats right are people just like you, once again you just say that your right without bringing any actual evidence.

Lets rethink this. You main samus.

You ban stuff like D3s infinite chaingrab, which are far from overcentralizing or broken, yet do it. MK is debatable, but D3s chaingrab isnt, especially since D3 requires 1 mash between each grab, which makes it easy to break out until 50% if not more. D3s infinite works on samus.

Ban it.

MK beats samus.

Ban it.



See a small pattern here? Seriously, your as biased as it can get.

 

[swordgard]

What do you expect us to do, send an underling to every Smash event and force the TO to obey our recommended ruleset?

****, i knew this weird guy dressed in black with a tazer gun wasnt a tourney player. I shoulda noticed when he also went to make sure we had the right stage set before strangling the guy in charge.



Shoulda made the obvious link >.>


EDIT: Sorry for double post, expected someone to post in between.

 

[altairian]

Bottom line if you want MK banned, then run your own Mk banned tourney. Don't kick and scream and throw tantrums and whine about the SBR's decision. All the SBR does is create a list of RECOMMENDED rules. You are not in any way forced to use them. And if you don't have the balls to run your own tournament with the ruleset you prefer, then what right do you have to complain about it?

 

[de feuve]

I think the decision to ban MK could not have been taken so early. We should all wait and see what will happen in the next 12 months and then decide again.

 

[Rajam]

Hylian. There should be more obvious posts encouraging TOs to host MK-banned tourneys. Remind people that they still have their own choice to do so.

I think that's the least violent/controversial path the SBR can take. Banning him -by standard- would be pretty crazy, but just leaving him in and neglecting that all these debates have been taken so seriously is also going to generate a lot of hate.

I know you already posted and said you encourage this. I'm just saying it should definitely be enouraged more and more. It's the closest thing I can think of to bringing a healthy balance to the two sides.

I support this 100%

 

[Dark 3nergy]

What do you expect us to do, send an underling to every Smash event and force the TO to obey our recommended ruleset?

yes

10101010101010

 

[MBlaze]

Finally this **** is over.

 

[Xyro77]

Btw how many mk mainers or 2nds are on SBR?

i dont think i am allowed to tell you. But yea, it dont look good for the proban side.

 

[M-WUZ-H3R3]

It's about time this was settled. Although I don't see MetaKnight not being portrayed as the character with 'unfair' matchups. Hes likely never to loose the negitive reputation.

On the other hand, we have Snake who is simply being called 'just plain good'. While which, he remains just slightly behind MetaKnight in matchups. But lets just keep him like that; the community has had enough seperation since the ban poll.

 

[The Cunning Weasel]

Ban Snake for the lulz.

Well, MK is gay but not ban worthy gay

 

[Xyro77]

I dont know what to say except that


A) This requires supermajority like any huge ban, which even the community didnt get
B) The poll consisted of so many alt accounts and ignorant people who admitted they voted even though they dont go to tourneys
C) I would rather let it be in the hands of COMPETENT people than in the ones of ignorant masses who obviously would jump in any bandwagon they can
D) You happen to say that the only real man standing up and doing whats right are people just like you, once again you just say that your right without bringing any actual evidence.

Lets rethink this. You main samus.

You ban stuff like D3s infinite chaingrab, which are far from overcentralizing or broken, yet do it. MK is debatable, but D3s chaingrab isnt, especially since D3 requires 1 mash between each grab, which makes it easy to break out until 50% if not more. D3s infinite works on samus.

Ban it.

MK beats samus.

Ban it.



See a small pattern here? Seriously, your as biased as it can get.

A. there will never be a super majority on this issue for either side.

B. alt accounts were on antiban side too. not just pro ban.

C. I agree that competent people should make rules but at the same time COMPETENT person should also be able to see the public had there say-so 4 times in a row and was ignored.

D. I have grown up with parents and educators always tell me how i should "stand up for what i believe in" and not fall to "what the popular belief" is at the time(because it always changes). I believe that metaknight is soooo much better than the rest of the cast it is impossible for ANY character to ever catch-up(quote this **** if yu need to). I also believe that the PEOPLE want him banned and there is NEXT TO NO ONE standing up for them. I am, NM has and others will follow. You want evidence? Look at the pro ban arguement. Want more? View hobo 15 to 16 to 17. Want more? Pick pit/zs/marth/samus/lucario and go play a GOOD metaknight. MAYBE you will understand what COUNTLESS others already have instead of relying on broken CGS wih your ICs(assuming you main them). Want more? Find the info on Rogue Pit vs Jash. Want more? look at world hobo/hobo 11/cot4 and more more.


And again, im glad you THINK you know so much about me because now its my turn to throw it in your face.


1. DDD vs samus WITHOUT ICG is 80-20 which means samus WILL NOT WIN unless the DDD is a complete moron. NOW THAT YOU KNOW THAT, lets thrown in the ICG to a match-up that is already nearly impossible. What does the ICG make the match-up? IMPOSSIBLE. I am banning a broken tech that make 5-6 characters 100% unviable. Why should mario/luigi/bowser/dk/samus/ ddd(if you count him) be unviable just cause the SBR allows broken techs? Dont answet the question, your an anitban so obviously you are messed up and cant handle the truth.

2. You get this idea that i BAN things just cause i dont like them. Im glad you made this false retort because now its time to throw it back in your face.

olimar vs samus is her 2nd hardest match-up. NOTHING samus has gets thru olimar. did i ban any techs to hold olimar back? did i ban stages that olimar likes? nope! in fact i allow LUIGIS MANSION(which is one of his BEST stages).

Falco vs samus is another one of those match-ups that cant be won IF THE FALCO spams laser and OVER+B. did i ban anything to hold him back? did i ban laser lock? nope.

MARTH vs samus is ANOTHER hard *** fight if the marth spaces right. Did i ban his TILT LOCKS? did i hold marth back? nope.

IC(your character, right) didnt i just retract the ICG rule for them? OH WAIT!!!!! YEA I DID! Now hylian(and IC main) can ICG the **** out of anybody he please.

Do i ban jab locks? Do i ban GW/pit/marth/ect ledge stalling? All of which hurt samus. the answer is no, i do not ban it.



So as proven above in MULTIPLE examples. i BAN things i feel are broken and not thing i "dislike" or that make me lose. You and your kind HAVE NO CLUE about me and my thinking. I am a very successful TO that does what he BELIEVES is right. If my rules and thinking and events were so rigged and/or bad......NO ONE would attend my events


but instead....


My most recent METAKNIGHT banned event hit 100 entrants(world record for a non meta event). In fact i ASK that all TO's just man up and TRY to hold a meta banned event. it dont have to be a perm thing, just try it and get feed back from your players.

 

[MJG]

This was a surprise that he didnt get banned *sarcasm*

 

[Dark 3nergy]

D. I have grown up with parents and educators always tell me how i should "stand up for what i believe in" and not fall to "what the popular belief" is at the time(because it always changes).

Theres nothing wrong with this thought process. Yet one should realize if they do heavily favor one side of an argument--that they need to be able to logically dedicate their opinion. In which case, in this type of environment is very difficult to do without being smacked at for it. That and also due to how grey the argument over MK can be.

 

[Serris]

1. DDD vs samus WITHOUT ICG is 80-20 which means samus WILL NOT WIN unless the DDD is a complete moron. NOW THAT YOU KNOW THAT, lets thrown in the ICG to a match-up that is already nearly impossible. What does the ICG make the match-up? IMPOSSIBLE. I am banning a broken tech that make 5-6 characters 100% unviable. Why should mario/luigi/bowser/dk/samus/ ddd(if you count him) be unviable just cause the SBR allows broken techs? Dont answet the question, your an anitban so obviously you are messed up and cant handle the question.

Just thought I'd add my two cents:

Dedede's infinite chaingrab requires very little skill to pull off. Just picking Dedede randomly one day, I was able to infinite within half a minute of using him. Brawl's buffering system makes it far too easy to chain down-throws while standing in place. Considering it renders five characters completely nonviable (two of which are your supposed sacred "Meta Knight counters"), I'd say it's ban-worthy.

As for trying to argue with the Ice Climbers infinite, that at least requires an understanding of the character and technical skill to do it. Even then, it's not completely reliable because of the precision needed. Different characters also have methods of separating the Ice Climbers and rendering their infinite harmless. This doesn't apply to Dedede.

 

[DanGR]

Btw how many mk mainers or 2nds are on SBR?

i dont think i am allowed to tell you.

That's messed up.

 

[Inui]

The side of truth and justice has prevailed.

Snake beats MK.

Diddy wins on neutrals.

MK vs ICs is overall even.

Oooooh yeeeaaah.

 

[Dark 3nergy]

The side of truth and justice has prevailed.

Snake beats MK.

Diddy wins on neutrals.

MK vs ICs is overall even.

Oooooh yeeeaaah.

you for got your animated gifs

 

[Master Raven]

lol why can't people just use the gentleman's rule for dealing with infinites so both parties are satisfied

 

[Dark 3nergy]

lol why can't people just use the gentleman's rule for dealing with infinites so both parties are satisfied

a vast majority of the smashers here are under the age of 21

Maturity in brawl?

HAH poppy ****

 

[Tarmogoyf]

lol why can't people just use the gentleman's rule for dealing with infinites so both parties are satisfied

Because we aren't like Japan, we can't really follow honor systems/soft bans, which is basically what the gentelman's rule is.

 

[~ Gheb ~]

To those, who say that anti-ban only won because MK is over-represented in the SBR:
There are many anti-ban top players, who are NOT in the SBR. Why should the votes of MikeHaze, ADHD, Meep, NEO and Candy count less than those of VASTLY inferior players just because somebody decided to let them in the SBR at some point?
Likewise it's absurd that those people's votes only have as much influence as the votes of random newbies, alt-accounts or Melee players trying to troll.

If people complain about too many MKs being in the SBR (some of them are pro-ban btw like LeeMartin or lolOverswarm) then anti-ban side is right to complain about many top players of the anti-ban side being excluded. In the end it evens out so saying that the result was decided by an abudance of MK players is incorrect.

The side of truth and justice has prevailed.

Snake beats MK.

Diddy wins on neutrals.

MK vs ICs is overall even.

Oooooh yeeeaaah.

inb4flames

I agree though...

 

[ShadowLink84]

A good decision by the SBR.

Some posters have said this decision shows that the SBR is out of touch with the community opinion, but that's bogus. All of the polls have been ~55% in favour of a ban. Such a small majority indicates widespread disagreement on whether Meta Knight should be banned, and in the face of such disagreement, the only rational choice is to be conservative and err on the side of caution: not removing a character from the game, a radical and unprecedented step.

So not only did the SBR make the right choice, it made a choice that reflects the community poll.

Banning a character s not a radical or unprecedented step.
banning a character is simply a much more influential ban than simply removing items or stage or tactics.

Who cares if its not been done before, what amtters is that the criteria must be met.
There is NO way that the decision reflects the community. It wouldn't reflect the community even if it favored pro ban, simply because the community is split down the middle. To make any such statement is illogical and refutable by the fact that the community itself, stands at opposite ends and that no decision would reflect their opinion entirely.

The side of truth and justice has prevailed.

Inui stop flaming the hate between both sides. There is no right and wrong.
There is only, what was supported, and what was not supported.

Snake beats MK.

Which is why only Ally has managed to perform so incredibly well.

Diddy wins on neutrals.

Diddy has an advantage on neutrals? Really?
****, makes me wonde rwhy there aren't tons of Diddy's in the top 4. >_>

MK vs ICs is overall even.

Don't get grabbed/hit. MK does it well IMO

Oooooh yeeeaaah.

 

[Zolios]

Even if 100% of people voted for metaknight, he still wouldn't be banned by SBR's standards. This means that regardless of the community's beliefs of tournament play, SBR has the final say.

SBR should have no effect on the community whatsoever. The lack of the use of the poll just shows how they're exemplifying their non-existant power.

EDIT: I am anti-ban by the way.

 

[M-WUZ-H3R3]

lol why can't people just use the gentleman's rule for dealing with infinites so both parties are satisfied

Because it's difficult for those rules to be followed while playing with a compettitive mindset.

 

[Uzima (Uzi)]

metaknight is broken to hell, snake is maybe even more broken, brawls ledges can be rather stupid as **** at times, so many stages are freaking ********, so many characters have broken locks and chains on other characters.

brawl is broken and stupid and infureating...

and yet i play it constantly : P

theres something wrong with us competative smasher, lol


Then again, you ban every broken thing in brawl and every stupid glitch and every inescapable lock and every other thing that takes away true competativness, brawl is left an empty shell of its formor self,
nothing major will ever get banned, it would just start a downward spiral of one thing getting banned after the next.

it just wont happen no matter how obvious is should...

 

[B!squick]

Ha, who didn't see this outcome coming? I ask you, who?

 

[Spelt]

Ha, who didn't see this outcome coming? I ask you, who?

Meta Knight.

 

[Red Arremer]

Even if 100% of people voted for metaknight, he still wouldn't be banned by SBR's standards. This means that regardless of the community's beliefs of tournament play, SBR has the final say.

SBR should have no effect on the community whatsoever. The lack of the use of the poll just shows how they're exemplifying their non-existant power.

The poll has been used, stop lying.

If 100% had voted Pro-Ban, then the outcome would've been far more in Pro-Ban's favour. It would've netted Pro-ban a whole 21 votes, which is about a third of the SBR-members who voted (a little less statistically). That means that inside of the SBR the Pro-Ban side would've needed (a bit more than) a third, and considering if so many people think that he should be banned, there would be more SBRoomers vouching for a ban, he would be banned.

And if the community wants to hold MK-banned tournaments, that's their thing. The SBR has no power over the community. It's the community that follows the SBR's ruleset. Which is, again, only RECOMMENDED.

 

[Zankoku]

Even if 100% of people voted for metaknight, he still wouldn't be banned by SBR's standards. This means that regardless of the community's beliefs of tournament play, SBR has the final say.

Well, seeing as how the SBR is made up of people as well, I'm not exactly sure what you're implying when you say "even if everyone voted for MK to be banned he wouldn't be banned." However, if 100% of the public poll was indeed in one direction we wouldn't even need to debate what decision to make, because it's unanimous - the SBR as it is makes recommendations for issues that are not overwhelmingly in one direction or the other; if literally everyone said "Meta Knight should be banned" then we wouldn't even discuss it. He'd just be banned.

 

[Spelt]

This is all theoretical though?
you have no idea how it would actually play out unless it really happened.
moot point.