What does it take to be banned?

[Black Mantis]

I mean, when it comes down to it, I don't really give a **** but I just wish the Brawl kids would stop ****ing embarrassing us.

The only embarrassment here is the reaction from certain parts of the community. There's literally mountains of data showing how OP and overcentralizing the character was, and people act like they didn't see this coming. Plus you have the morons who don't have a clue about the game and just troll.

A good example of a character being banned in a game is Akuma in turbo. MK was on Akuma turbo status. He's even banned in HD remix (an updated version of turbo).

 

[Pi]

hows the scene in jersey

 

[Violence]

Whoa... what happened to my thread...

I intended to talk about hypothetical melee bans, but I suppose I should give my two cents on the Brawl issue.

I play Magic the Gathering semi competitively, and a few months ago, a very expensive and powerful pair of cards were banned from the most popular format, Standard. For those curious, I'm referring to Jace, the Mind Sculptor, and Stoneforge Mystic.

Magic is very different from Melee, first of all, because there is variance, and second of all, because people don't put in the same amount of time and dedication to their deck as people do to their characters.

Now, Wizards of the Coast don't lightly ban cards from the most popular format, they want people to be able to play their cards. When they banned these cards, a lead developer gave a long article explaining exactly why they were banning these ridiculously powerful cards.

The first reason was the oppressiveness of the deck that ran a full playset of Jace and a full playset of Stoneforge Mystic. That deck, known as Caw Blade, was strictly the best deck, and no other decks could come close to its power level or consistency. The top 8's of large tournaments were all Caw Blade decks.

The second reason was that because Caw Blade was that, as a control deck, the mirror matches became very long battles of attrition. Often times, players would time out and the result of the game would be a draw, or a win without finishing the game.

The third reason was that as the popularity of Caw Blade rose, the cards in the deck skyrocketed in price, providing an additional barrier to play the best deck in the format.

All three reasons basically coalesced into the biggest reason that he gave.

Caw Blade made the game not fun.

Oh, sure, there were many people who still enjoyed playing, they would show up and play Caw Blade dittos all day, but tournament attendance declined very steadily. At the beginning of summer, which is when Magic has most of its business, tournament attendance was at the lowest it had been in quite a while. R&D had to do something immediately, and as a result, we had our ban.

This final point is the thing that I am most interested in.

Has tournament attendance significantly decreased because of Meta Knight? I don't think you can prove that MK is the cause of a decrease in attendance, but a correlation graph would be nice.

I mean, let's consider that Falcon is the best character in the game, and all characters better than he is no longer exist. Falcon is the top character and the only way to beat Falcons is to main Falcon yourself.

Would we ban Capt. Falcon at that point? I don't think so. No matter how much DD camping and OP aerials we see, Falcon embodies the ideals of melee for a lot of people. He punishes with exciting combos. He is fun to play, and he is fun to watch.

But if say, the best character was Jigglypuff, and the best Jigglypuffs were people who zoned with bair and didn't approach, and Melee became a game where the best strategy was to plank and camp with Puff, and it wasn't even close, I think we would ban Puff. It's just not fun to play against.




Say what you will about scrub johns, skill, brokenness, and character prevalence; to me, a community will not survive if its game is simply not fun to play. If the dominant strategy becomes not fun, there are simply only two alternatives. Either another, more fun strategy becomes dominant, or the dominant strategy has to be excluded.

I think we were lucky in Melee, we have one character who a decent percentage(myself not included) of people do not enjoy watching, and people consider that character unfun to play against and unfun to watch, but we are lucky in that the character is not dominant. No matter if who else becomes the best player, they are still considered entertaining, fun to watch, fun to play against, and that is what makes Melee's metagame so healthy after all these years.

It's the Wombo Combo, I Killed Mufasa, **** x2, Tipping an Illusion, Axe Effect, Genesis 2 Grand Finals simple, pure enjoyment of watching a game that looks fun.




Now, it's always up to the population to decide what's necessary. I would say that if you had a poll on the melee boards about banning Puff, I don't think you would get even close to a majority vote. Granted, Puff hasn't dominated our metagame like MK has in Brawl, but I'd like to think that our community is mature enough to think of alternative solutions to outright banning the problem.

The problem is quite clear, MK is making Brawl not fun. Not fun to play, not fun to watch, but he keeps being dominant. It doesn't look like a new strategy is going to emerge superior over him, so the problem has to be removed somehow. I'm sorry to hear about how this decision was made, M2K, I really think the decision could be made is a much better way, and alternatives to outright banning seem to be much more reasonable. I can understand why you're angry and frustrated.



Anyways, that's how I see it. I hope the issue gets resolved in a more fair way.

tl;dr: Barlw is not fun, but still, the way people went about banning Meta Knight is stupid.

 

[ShroudedOne]

Why should it always be up to the population to decide what's necessary? Is it that the population is never wrong/knows what is best? I don't think that's the case at all.

 

[Pi]

@violence good poossttt

it probably didn't help that people had other people constantly saying MK is broken/op/should be banned which spread the idea around and made it an acceptable view point instead of siding w/ the people who were saying 'yea he's good, but you can beat him if you try hard enough'

just easier that way i guess

i mean look what happen to jiggs and hbox, because 1 prominent person started hating on him, and the playstyle wasn't fun to play against, all the sudden it was okay, in fact it was fun and cool to hate on jiggs & hbox. spread like wildfire and now hbox is still fighting to earn the respect of much much much lesser players

it's pathetic how people find it acceptable to belittle the accomplishment of players due to their character choice/playstyles instead of learning to overcome them, of course the majority will be in favor of what ever it takes to do that whether it's to ban it or to disrespect it, than to beat it. noobs man.

but there is also something that has not been considered due to effort having to be put towards it to be effective, ANTI-BAN MK PLAYERS NEED TO HOST THEIR OWN TOURNAMENTS, THEIR OWN BIG TOURNAMENTS.

i know m2k mentioned a few, but i feel this 'not being stickied' thing has been blown way out of proportion.

if what you say is true, and the best players out there don't see a reason for MK to be banned, then who cares if a thread get's stickied. the best players need to take a stand for their game and say hey, we don't agree w/ your ruleset, we don't feel mk is banned, and we are not goin to support your tournament by attending.

if that happens, then i assure you the impressionable masses will take notice that their best players, their idols, the people they look up to are not even going to be at these big tournaments where mk is banned, then they won't either.

who's going to listen to zealot and the scrubs in the unity commity over the top placing players in the nation.

 

[Zekeishere]

Won't somebody think of the fun of this game? Noobs with be noobs with or without mk. But there will be more of them with mk gone. I am pro ban because I would rather play in a full 32 man bracket than win two rounds of MKs and be in winners finals at a local.

think of the noobs[\b]

The world of smash doesn't revolve around and cater to only you and other top mk players, Jason.

 

[TheCrimsonBlur]

The problem is quite clear, MK is making Brawl not fun. Not fun to play, not fun to watch, but he keeps being dominant. It doesn't look like a new strategy is going to emerge superior over him, so the problem has to be removed somehow.

I don't think MK is the reason Brawl isn't fun to play or watch...

Your argument would make a lot more sense if you were defending a Wobbling ban; your argument could go like this: wobbling on or off does not seem to make a difference in high-level ICs' tournament results (since a synced grab is death either way) but it does make a real difference in entertainment value. Wobbling off ICs combos are super creative and fun to watch. Having wobbling on robs spectators of that entertainment, and thus is undesirable and worthy of a ban.

But for Metaknight I don't think your Magic analogy applies. The strategies Metaknight uses which aren't fun to watch or play are intrinsic to Brawl. Campy, defensive play are how you play that game, with any character. Metaknight is just better at it than everyone else. I don't see how a Metaknight making a wall of dairs is so much less entertaining than a (Brawl) Marth making a wall of fairs or a Diddy chucking bananas from the other side of the stage.

 

[Kal]

Won't somebody think of the fun of this game? Noobs with be noobs with or without mk. But there will be more of them with mk gone. I am pro ban because I would rather play in a full 32 man bracket than win two rounds of MKs and be in winners finals at a local.

You can't just ban things because the scrubby players won't show up anymore if you don't. Where does this sort of catering stop? "Oh, you guys don't like Falco because he has a laser with some knockback? You won't show up if we don't ban him? Well I guess I'll ban him."

You either have a set of standards or you don't with fundamental issues like this. I don't think a sensible middle ground exists with regards to avoiding scrubbiness. The "slippery slope" has been shown to be very, very real when it comes to banning things without warrant.

 

[Violence]

I don't think the population is always right, nor do I think it knows what's best.

But it satisfies the most people, first of all. I do realize this can be construed as a tyranny of the majority in the worst cases, but for the most part, I think it's the system that gets things done the easiest.

For issues that we disagree on that most people are divided on, I would leave it to TOs individual discretion. However, things like 4 stock 8 minute stock time limit, friendly fire on, items off, a majority of a population is good at deciding on these things.

Crimsonblur: You make a good point, I am ignorant when it comes to Brawl. I was under the impression that M2K was the only character that planked and could run away for 8 minutes.

 

[Kal]

Your argument would make a lot more sense if you were defending a Wobbling ban; your argument could go like this: wobbling on or off does not seem to make a difference in high-level ICs' tournament results (since a synced grab is death either way) but it does make a real difference in entertainment value. Wobbling off ICs combos are super creative and fun to watch. Having wobbling on robs spectators of that entertainment, and thus is undesirable and worthy of a ban.

What is "fun" and "entertaining" is rather subjective. Thus, you'll never really reach an agreement about what should be banned. I personally find Falco (in Melee) to be a very boring character. But if I were to make an argument to ban him on this premise alone, I would get laughed at (and rightfully so!): why should anyone be forced to adhere to your arbitrary, subjective standards of "entertainment" and "fun?"

Moreover, "fun" and "entertainment" are entirely not within the realm of Playing to Win. Tournaments are fundamentally about competition. If you have fun, great, but you should not remove things just because they don't adhere to arbitrary entertainment standards.

This is one upsetting thing about the Smash community. You see Peach counterpick Brinstar and make use of the lava, people start booing. There's no drive to beat your opponent at any means necessary. Instead, there seems to be a drive to adhere to arbitrary standards of "honor" and "skill" that aren't defined within the game. "I deserve more credit for winning because I did it in such and such a way."

 

[TheCrimsonBlur]

What is "fun" and "entertaining" is rather subjective. Thus, you'll never really reach an agreement about what should be banned. I personally find Falco (in Melee) to be a very boring character. But if I were to make an argument to ban him on this premise alone, I would get laughed at (and rightfully so!): why should anyone be forced to adhere to your arbitrary, subjective standards of "entertainment" and "fun?"

Moreover, "fun" and "entertainment" are entirely not within the realm of Playing to Win. Tournaments are fundamentally about competition. If you have fun, great, but you should not remove things just because they don't adhere to arbitrary entertainment standards.

This is one upsetting thing about the Smash community. You see Peach counterpick Brinstar and make use of the lava, people start booing. There's no drive to beat your opponent at any means necessary. Instead, there seems to be a drive to adhere to arbitrary standards of "honor" and "skill" that aren't defined within the game. "I deserve more credit for winning because I did it in such and such a way."

There are more reasons to ban something than it being broken/overpowered.

The thing that you have to remember is that we are a self-regulating body. Nintendo is not going to come and patch the game for us, so we have to do everything in our power to make the product we deliver (tournament videos) as appealing and fun to watch as possible. This isn't a competitive decision, its a business decision. Of course having wobbling banned hurts certain players slightly, but is the entertainment gained enough to compensate? Thats for every tournament organizer to decide for themselves, but personally, I don't fault anyone for deciding one way or the other; its tough to say.

Look, as a spectator, when I see 5 handoffs->blizzard->nana throw->platform techchase->regrab->smash attack, even I want to switch my main to ICs, and I am one of the most character loyal people you'll ever meet. Wobbling removes that entertainment entirely. Thats not something you can ignore.

[sure, you could argue that my evaluation of the entertainment value of wobbling is "arbitrary" but I think thats overly nitpicky. Any rational person can tell you that watching someone wobble from 30 to 150 isn't entertaining. If there was something subjective about this I'd understand your Falco example, but in this case, its pretty clear the difference in entertainment]

 

[Kal]

There are more reasons to ban something than it being broken/overpowered.

Playing to Win

Really though, there aren't. At least, not any that can be agreed upon by everyone, nor any that are "fair" in any real sense.

The thing that you have to remember is that we are a self-regulating body. Nintendo is not going to come and patch the game for us, so we have to do everything in our power to make the product we deliver (tournament videos) as appealing and fun to watch as possible.

This is ubiquitously true of any game delivered before the PS3/360 era of gaming (save for PC games, obviously). You haven't actually justified why we should make the product as appealing and fun to watch as possible, but I see where you're coming from. When you read further, you'll understand why I think this notion is absurd.

This isn't a competitive decision, its a business decision. Of course having wobbling banned hurts certain players slightly, but is the entertainment gained enough to compensate? Thats for every tournament organizer to decide for themselves, but personally, I don't fault anyone for deciding one way or the other; its tough to say.

Look, as a spectator, when I see 5 handoffs->blizzard->nana throw->platform techchase->regrab->smash attack, even I want to switch my main to ICs, and I am one of the most character loyal people you'll ever meet. Wobbling removes that entertainment entirely. Thats not something you can ignore.

The question here is this: are you willing to sell out, i.e., make a business decision, which compromises the integrity of your game, just so that the players who don't appreciate it in the first place are more willing to come play it? I know that I would much rather play Smash with a small group of friends than concede to scrubby demands just to increase turnout.

This is only one problem. Another is fairness. If your only justification for banning something is "too many players don't like it," then you're essentially telling the minority to **** off. "Sorry, you want to use something that doesn't ruin the game in any well-defined sense? Take it up with the scrubs who influence our decision-making process so heavily."

One final problem is the ever-present slippery-slope argument (please read here for the difference between the argument and the fallacy). When we ban something because players dislike it, this opens up banning just about anything because players dislike it. The same arguments which would lead you to ban Wobbling could also lead you to ban Falco's laser, Marth's chain-grab, Sheik's Chain Grab, edge guarding, uthrow-rest, etc. So I'm disinclined to ban something just because players might become more entertained.

I also think this is hugely insulting to people in general. As though we're telling them "well, you can't really appreciate why this is fair, so we'll just get rid of it for you." Sorry, but if we want to fix this sort of issue, we can't just pander to idiotic demands; we need to educate people, explain to them why their disdain with whatever they wish to ban is baseless and unfounded, and teach them to Play to Win, and what Playing to Win really means.

 

[JackieRabbit5]

this shouldn't effect melee imo

melee players should try to understand how the Mk ban subject has torn the brawl community, all the pro and anti-ban points have been discussed over and over, numerous polls and arguing over the past 2-3 years... but in the end I think a big part of it was the antiban's unwillingness to take the facts and statistics of MK overcentralization/dominance seriously, by just calling proban views scrubby, that led to this...

let me say this about melee, watching like Armada use Young Link (a low tier character!?) to beat HBox made me think wow, there's actually counterpicking in this game, and it was really cool to see although many people called it a campy boring match heh. You wouldn't see that in brawl largely because of MK ruining counterpicking.

so don't think the MK ban decision was made lightly

 

[bossa nova ♪]

^ wisdom

 

[Kal]

The thing, Jackie, is that "overcentralization" and "dominance" are not regarded as reasons for banning. Instead, we only ban things which are actually game-breaking. This is why we regard the pro-ban players as scrubby. Because they're considering absolutely irrelevant things like the amount of money made by the character, the fact that 18% of people use him, and that polls suggest that most players want him banned, when they deliberate the question of whether he should be banned.

 

[TheCrimsonBlur]

Playing to Win

I've read Sirlin. In fact I've met him.

And I disagree with a lot of his philosophies. I also think that Smash's multitude of modes and customizable rulesets does not translate very well with his ideologies.

Really though, there aren't. At least, not any that can be agreed upon by everyone

Sure there are. Heres a counterexample: What if when Melee shipped, the developers had accidentally kept the character models as wire frames. You could go into the options and change this, but the default mode is wire frames. I think it'd be justifiable to ban the wire frame mode and force everyone to go into options and play with full character models, even though the wire frame mode isn't inherently broken or overpowered.

The question here is this: are you willing to sell out, i.e., make a business decision, which compromises the integrity of your game, just so that the players who don't appreciate it in the first place are more willing to come play it?

You seem to have a false notion of the "integrity of the game" when it comes to smash; smash has no default mode. What we play is the ruleset we find most fun and competitive. Nintendo and HAL do not tell us how to play our game. There is no "pure" form of Melee; you cannot taint something that doesn't have a set ruleset on its own. Items on or items off, 40 stocks or 4 stocks, timer or no timer, there is no pure Melee.

One final problem is the ever-present slippery-slope argument (please read here for the difference between the argument and the fallacy). When we ban something because players dislike it, this opens up banning just about anything because players dislike it. The same arguments which would lead you to ban Wobbling could also lead you to ban Falco's laser, Marth's chain-grab, Sheik's Chain Grab, edge guarding, uthrow-rest, etc. So I'm disinclined to ban something just because players might become more entertained.

I've already covered this. Falco's laser, Marth's chain-grab, etc are subjectively boring and unfun. Playing with wireframes or wobbling on/off are objectively boring and unfun. There is a difference. If it is inarguable that a certain mechanic makes the game less entertaining to watch, then you can consider banning it. If that mechanic has no perceived affects on competitive play (wire frames), then the choice is obvious. Since removing wobbling does have an affect on competitive play, the decision becomes a lot tougher, and hence why the issue is still so divisive 10 years later.

 

[AllyKnight]

Oh this is just dumb. Of course M2K is a major reason why this ban happened. Hes been winning almost every tourney since Brawls release. The Metaknight "statistics" that they keep purporting, and the perceived dominance of MK would be very different if M2K didn't exist.

If Brawl had instead been dominated by you, Ally, when you mained Snake, then I doubt this ban would have happened.

Not really. Snake doesn't have the tools to plank. Sorry Besides, no snake ever got close on doing what I did for the 2.5 years I only played Snake till I switched.

honestly shadwphoenx is right

ally you and anti, AND tyrant, all admitted to me that you copied the **** out of my MK. Besides tyrant, you two wouldn't have even mained him without my influence. I honestly think if I wasn't around since the VERY beginning ****** EVERY tourney, encouraging tons of people to pick him up, + all the videos, it would not be like this right now, AT ALL, especially since it's heavily based off who is in the finals and a lot of newbs look at amount-of-money won and me, +tyrant, you, anti, won a LOT of money. I always kept talking to tyrant and dojo among others about MK strats, ALL i wanted was to fully master the character as far as he could possibly be pushed, and I even took off 2 years of college to do it. I focused on metaknight when I should have focused on college especially 2 years ago during MLG.

I'm going to have a big writeup on a lot of things over next week or so since a lot of it gets lost in hundreds of disorganized posts of mine

if people knew as much as i did on this subject and what is REALLY going on, they would all see how terribly ****ed up it all is.

Shut up LOL you're the dumbest guy ever sometimes <-- (the sometimes is very important, you can be smart too). not everyone went on Youtube and said AH I'm going to watch all of Mew2King's MK video and copy this god. NO.

I never watched any video of you, if I ever took something from you, it was more likely picking up stuff to use it against you (aka abusing MK's gayness)

No one is trying to play the character (or atleast me) as gay as yours so keep your **** away from me.

And what influenced me to use MK was you being a ******, timing me out cuz 'I can't approach Snake, so I'll time him out cuz I'm the only character that can do so.) You're making me just go Pro-Ban because someone like you with a dumb mindset doesn't deserve ****. Get a job and you'll be much happier than wasting your life on a fictional character. **** iMAD

 

[Zekeishere]

You can't just ban things because the scrubby players won't show up anymore if you don't. Where does this sort of catering stop? "Oh, you guys don't like Falco because he has a laser with some knockback? You won't show up if we don't ban him? Well I guess I'll ban him."

You either have a set of standards or you don't with fundamental issues like this. I don't think a sensible middle ground exists with regards to avoiding scrubbiness. The "slippery slope" has been shown to be very, very real when it comes to banning things without warrant.

Maaaaan, how has the "slippery slope been shown to be very real" In this situation? Nothing has even happened yet except I've seen MULTIPLE PEOPLE say they are returning to the scene because of MK's demise, and M2K whining.

I love this game, but it really is kinda bad in some instances. Its not going to last as long as Melee has. And I still want to play it at least until SSB4 comes out. If that means MK has to be banned and there is like no one truely affected in my SoCal community in a negative way because of it, then hell yeah I'll opt to ban him. Again, I'd rather NOT play MK and have locals in the 30s, 40s and 50s than play him and have consistent tournaments with 15 - 25 people and declining.

Outside of that, I'm pretty neutral on the topic. I'm still going to lose to the players better than me, and beat the players that I'm better than.

Except the MK players that switch to Snake after the ban(lol)

 

[UltimateRazer]

I don't think any other stages are really that great for MK. Not even Delphino, not only have I lost to brood there but at Pound5 Razer 2 stocked me at high % on that stage just by getting a lead in the beginning and me being unable to get it back no matter what I did. I truely think it's just brinstar and rainbow (Brinstar is worse though). ive been 2 stocked by adhd there too. Delphino is overrated for MK, but I still enjoy it.

You have a skewed vision of our match. It was obvious you were going for a time out and when I finally got the lead, I didn't let you get it back. Felt like playing Lee.

 

[JackieRabbit5]

The thing, Jackie, is that "overcentralization" and "dominance" are not regarded as reasons for banning. Instead, we only ban things which are actually game-breaking. This is why we regard the pro-ban players as scrubby. Because they're considering absolutely irrelevant things like the amount of money made by the character, the fact that 18% of people use him, and that polls suggest that most players want him banned, when they deliberate the question of whether he should be banned.

its true whether he's actually "broken" or not is highly debatable and controversial, cause for most of the MK ban issue's most heated discussion.. and it almost depends on how you define the meaning of the word itself. I won't get into it all but there are also facts on how he has so many clear advantages over the rest of the cast including extremely good and varied recovery, disjointed hitboxes, range/priority/speed, covers many options, planking/stalling ability etc.

Game-breaking status is borderline and somewhat difficult to justify a ban in and of itself, but that in conjunction with overcentralization and dominance can at least form a solid basis for banning i think. And putting up with it all for this long has made a difference.

and a majority of top level players are for the ban too (at least 6:4 see here) so don't think this is just a "scrub" decision.


EDIT:

Get a job and you'll be much happier than wasting your life on a fictional character. **** iMAD

ohh dam lol

 

[Kal]

Sure there are. Heres a counterexample: What if when Melee shipped, the developers had accidentally kept the character models as wire frames. You could go into the options and change this, but the default mode is wire frames. I think it'd be justifiable to ban the wire frame mode and force everyone to go into options and play with full character models, even though the wire frame mode isn't inherently broken or overpowered.

I think there's a difference between toggling starting options (e.g. time vs. stock) and explicitly banning strategies. Moreover, the analogy you've made is only aesthetic; no one would care.

You seem to have a false notion of the "integrity of the game" when it comes to smash; smash has no default mode. What we play is the ruleset we find most fun and competitive. Nintendo and HAL do not tell us how to play our game. There is no "pure" form of Melee; you cannot taint something that doesn't have a set ruleset on its own. Items on or items off, 40 stocks or 4 stocks, timer or no timer, there is no pure Melee.

Please, calling this notion false is absurd. The game's integrity is, more or less, its "out-of-the-box" gameplay, with whatever starting ruleset we wish to use with regards to toggles (e.g. time vs. stock, items-on vs. items-off). Banning something like Wobbling is grossly different from choosing to play with stock instead of time, and it's completely ridiculous that you're comparing these ideas.

I've already covered this. Falco's laser, Marth's chain-grab, etc are subjectively boring and unfun. Playing with wireframes or wobbling on/off are objectively boring and unfun. There is a difference. If it is inarguable that a certain mechanic makes the game less entertaining to watch, then you can consider banning it. If that mechanic has no perceived affects on competitive play (wire frames), then the choice is obvious. Since removing wobbling does have an affect on competitive play, the decision becomes a lot tougher, and hence why the issue is still so divisive 10 years later.

I'm not going to waste my time addressing this notion of "objectively boring." It's a little insulting that you would even posit such an argument.

Maaaaan, how has the "slippery slope been shown to be very real" In this situation? Nothing has even happened yet except I've seen MULTIPLE PEOPLE say they are returning to the scene because of MK's demise, and M2K whining.

What I meant by it being "real" is that the argument itself is valid. The slippery slope argument I've posited is very general, so there not being an example in Brawl doesn't indicate that it's false. However, the fact that I've justified the intermediate steps at least shows the argument to be valid, if not sound.

 

[ShroudedOne]

@violence good poossttt

it probably didn't help that people had other people constantly saying MK is broken/op/should be banned which spread the idea around and made it an acceptable view point instead of siding w/ the people who were saying 'yea he's good, but you can beat him if you try hard enough'

just easier that way i guess

i mean look what happen to jiggs and hbox, because 1 prominent person started hating on him, and the playstyle wasn't fun to play against, all the sudden it was okay, in fact it was fun and cool to hate on jiggs & hbox. spread like wildfire and now hbox is still fighting to earn the respect of much much much lesser players

it's pathetic how people find it acceptable to belittle the accomplishment of players due to their character choice/playstyles instead of learning to overcome them, of course the majority will be in favor of what ever it takes to do that whether it's to ban it or to disrespect it, than to beat it. noobs man.

but there is also something that has not been considered due to effort having to be put towards it to be effective, ANTI-BAN MK PLAYERS NEED TO HOST THEIR OWN TOURNAMENTS, THEIR OWN BIG TOURNAMENTS.

i know m2k mentioned a few, but i feel this 'not being stickied' thing has been blown way out of proportion.

if what you say is true, and the best players out there don't see a reason for MK to be banned, then who cares if a thread get's stickied. the best players need to take a stand for their game and say hey, we don't agree w/ your ruleset, we don't feel mk is banned, and we are not goin to support your tournament by attending.

if that happens, then i assure you the impressionable masses will take notice that their best players, their idols, the people they look up to are not even going to be at these big tournaments where mk is banned, then they won't either.

who's going to listen to zealot and the scrubs in the unity commity over the top placing players in the nation.

Yes. I completely agree with this. This mindset is VERY evident with Dr. Peepee, a top player that I think people should look at a little more. Not once has he whined/complained about a play style. He simply sits down, and figures out how to beat it. I think this is the healthiest attitude towards this kind of thing.

I've already covered this. Falco's laser, Marth's chain-grab, etc are subjectively boring and unfun. Playing with wireframes or wobbling on/off are objectively boring and unfun. There is a difference. If it is inarguable that a certain mechanic makes the game less entertaining to watch, then you can consider banning it. If that mechanic has no perceived affects on competitive play (wire frames), then the choice is obvious. Since removing wobbling does have an affect on competitive play, the decision becomes a lot tougher, and hence why the issue is still so divisive 10 years later.

...

So maybe I'm missing something here. But the last time I checked, you couldn't define words like "fun" or "boring" in an objective manner. It simply isn't possible. If someone happens to enjoy watching someone wobble, that makes them an irrational person? Why? Because they have different likes than everyone else? I'm 100% certain that there are people who enjoy wobbling, because you cannot pigeonhole the likes/dislikes of a large group of people. There will always be outliers.

Again, "fun" and "boring" are subjective. I find Peach dittos in Melee fun to watch. Almost no one else does. I highly doubt that this alone makes me irrational.

 

[Kal]

and a majority of top level players are for the ban too (at least 6:4 see here) so don't think this is just a "scrub" decision.

Only the players who don't know what I mean when I say "scrub" think it has anything to do with player skill.

 

[Max?]

So many ridiculous and unnecessary walls of text in this thread.

 

[ShroudedOne]

^

Including this one...?

=)

 

[-ShadowPhoenix-]

Lol idk why we're even arguing about this...

over the years we've always been like "**** BRAWL" and now we're part of the discussion

 

[TheCrimsonBlur]

Moreover, the analogy you've made is only aesthetic; no one would care.

What a refutation.

Alright I'm done. **** brawl.

 

[Kal]

Quote mining is such a strong argument form, Crimson. Especially when followed after the claim that "objectively boring" exists. Combine that with comically missing the point, and I think you're well on your way to becoming a master debater.

 

[ShroudedOne]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKgTv_SzlQg

I think that what Gimpyfish is saying here should be listened to very carefully. This is also pretty much in line with what you've been saying, Kal.

 

[Kal]

He has a good point about not being bullied. Basically, if the tournament is yours (i.e., if everything about the tournament's rules are up to you), run it how you want. However, I do not like the way he suggests that URC's impact can be ignored. Frankly, when you have a body like the URC, it impacts tournaments in general. It's not unimaginable to think that the URC could prevent non-Unity tournaments from becoming popular enough to reach "national" status. That is one reason I have a major issue with groups like the URC and MBR.

 

[KishPrime]

I could've said that word for word...been making that same complaint for five years on and off. Well said to Gimpy. At some point TOs stopped making their own decisions, and it drove me nuts. I told the Melee Back Room when we made the first SBR ruleset that it would cause more problems than solutions and took the Back Room in a direction we shouldn't go...and I feel like I was correct. It puts artificial pressure on TOs to conform to an artificial and meaningless standard.

Let people run what they want, and if you don't like it, don't go.

 

[Yikarur]

M2Ks posts are so embarassing..
how delusional and blind needs someone to be to think like he does.
that's like paranoia.

"they created rules so that MK is broken ON PURPOSE"
LOL
seriously, how can someone take him seriously?

 

[Strife]

M2Ks posts are so embarassing..
how delusional and blind needs someone to be to think like he does.
that's like paranoia.

"they created rules so that MK is broken ON PURPOSE"
LOL
seriously, how can someone take him seriously?

He provides a pretty compelling argument actually, and logically it makes sense. You should read everything before writing him off.

 

[gm jack]

A lot of it depends on stuff that would have happened in the BBR, which we can't see.

If he did suggest rules to try and limit MKs ability to be gay, and they got turned down, it does suggest either:

1. The bbr would rather ban a character than experiment with rules which were mostly inherited off melee.
2. There are reasons they wouldn't work melee players don't know.

Either way, glad I gave up brawl a long time ago.

 

[the_CAM_factor]

wow good job sharing your mind gimpyfish

 

[Divinokage]

As for TOing, I know for a fact that people would love more tournaments around here with reasonable rules. All you need to do is talk to them to know what they would want more and then run a tournament. A true TO for their region is very close to most players and should run tournaments depending on what they want... unless you want to go large scale but I have no experience with that so I can't really have an opinion on that. You definitely don't need to listen to whatever standard someone else tries to force on you.. What I'm trying to say is stop being ****ies in this 2011 era lol.

 

[JackieRabbit5]

Kal, I see what you mean, "scrub" doesn't necessarily have to do with skill, but the playing to win mindset. Pretty sure proban players like #1 ranked Ally and #3 ranked ADHD, have that, granted those kind of top of the top ppl weren't on the URC directly responsible for the final decision. I will say that the fact the final vote was 14-0 (with 3 abstaining) does seem awful skewed... but again the ban issue has already been discussed countless times (and not always in a well-mannered way), so this result shouldn't come as a surprise. Especially since antiban was overall unable to effectively counterargue or do much about it.
And I don't see like a slippery slope effect happening personally.

Anyways just trying to inform

 

[Rockenos]

Well, sure, we all have characters we don't like (My friends hate Puff, I hate Peach) but none of us are quite infantile enough to think any of those characters actually don't belong in the game.

Also, unlike Brawl, our game is good and doesn't need to ban its characters

 

[Kal]

Kal, I see what you mean, "scrub" doesn't necessarily have to do with skill, but the playing to win mindset. Pretty sure proban players like #1 ranked Ally and #3 ranked ADHD, have that, granted those kind of top of the top ppl weren't on the URC directly responsible for the final decision.

Seriously, just read the link. Winning tournaments doesn't necessarily mean none of your views are scrubby.

Especially since antiban was overall unable to effectively counterargue or do much about it.

Burden of proof lies on pro-ban; anti-ban is the default stance. They should not have to prove to you that the character is not broken. Instead, you guys should prove that he's sufficiently broken and ban him.

Instead, it seems your side referenced a lot of bull **** like the fact 18% of people play Meta Knight.

 

[SpaceFalcon]

Brawl players are a bunch of durper *******. One of our best players shows them how it gets done in the smash series and they go cry about it.

When people didn't know what DI was and shiek kept comboing everything to 80%, nobody cried about it. People got better

Then fox came along and you had nerds emerging out their rooms with all these waveshines and technical crap, still it wasn't banned

In most recent years, jigglypuff. BUT mango and dr pp still get it done.

Point? Melee community > brawl community.

They are all a bunch of whiney babies who are a disgrace to competitive gaming LOL

every time I think about brawl players I just imagine a bunch of noobs who play runescape playing with their vibrating wii motes and giggling.