WHOBO Results, and the Conflict at hand.

[Supermodel From Paris]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfjdYRPXyvM A video documentary about brawl's metagame

 

[Shaya]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XfjdYRPXyvM A video documentary about brawl's metagame

Problem with this hero, is that Snake fits all the criteria, but he still loses.

Otherwise, this hero would have to be more broken than Meta Knight, and we'd be raging about it probably more.

 

[Eddie G]

Why just MK?

Why isn't it going to get boring if any character is this dominant?

If 68% of the players at Hobo 16 played ZSS and the top 8 ended up ( lol no offense):

1: M2K=DDD,Marth
2: Claw=ZSS
3: Snakee=ZSS
4: Neo=Marth
5: Pyro=ZSS
5: Lain=IC,ZSS
7: D1=ZSS
7: Shadow=ZSS


Would it be really boring? Do you think many people start to lose interest in Brawl?

Just to clarify I don't think so myself in a MK dominant situation or a ZSS situation since I felt melee Marth was much worse than MK , and these are not 'points' I'm just curious as to what you think since you're a player who I respect greatly.

Please, let's leave hypothetical examples out of this. It is FACT that MK is the dominant character, not ZSS, not Falco, not anyone else, at least not to a large degree. Besides, your example is silly because the rest of the top characters are negatively affected in some way either by a character counterpick or a stage counterpick. MK is not negatively affected. (I'm not referring to players here, just the characters)

Yes there are instances when players such as FICTION, Claw, and DEHF step up their game with another character and defeat top MK players. These are just instances though, and are not as frequent as victories that occur with MK.

 

[Master Raven]

Has there been an actual discussion somewhere regarding the Snake/MK matchup? I'm not disputing this, but I'm wondering where everyone gets their conclusions from and I certainly hope they're simply not parroting other people and have actually discussed/had lots of high-level experience in the matchup.

 

[DMG]

Pro Ban side is lose lose from the start sadly:

If you get a tournament with a lot of MK players, regardless of skill, someone could argue that MK was over represented at that tourney.

If you get a tournament with a scarce amount of MK players, regardless of skill, someone could argue that MK was not adequately represented at that tourney.

If you get a tournament with the top MK players attending, someone could argue that they are already the best players in the nation, justifying their placings.

If you get a tournament with average or bad MK players attending, someone could argue that it's the other player's faults for not having enough skill to beat them.

If the MK players win, obviously it's because they are better than everyone else, not because of their character.

If the MK player loses, obviously it's because they suck.


So yeah honestly ANY results out there are gonna be biased in some form or fashion depending on your views. Some people think 3 MK's in the top 10 is too much, while others think All Top 8 being MK is still not enough.

I gave up on both sides of the MK discussion since it's just opinions, and America clearly doesn't mind broken or near broken characters in most games around, as evidenced by our rarity or complete lack of bans regarding most characters. Even if MK was the next Akuma, I highly doubt we would collectively ban him lol.

 

[Master Raven]

I think I'm gonna sit out on my opinion regarding a ban until Genesis results, which will hopefully wind up being the biggest Smash event yet.

 

[DMG]

I think I'm gonna sit out on my opinion regarding a ban until Genesis results, which will hopefully wind up being the biggest Smash event yet.

Yeah but cmon we all know that 1 of 2 scenarios will happen:

Either a MK player will win it, in which case everyone will just say he's obviously the best player or extremely good (top 5 in the world) why ban MK? Hell it doesn't even have to be M2K it could be like DSF or TKD or someone and the thought process would remain the same in that case.

Or a non MK player will win it, in which case people will point to that FOREVER and say obviously MK is not broken if he didn't win the largest tournament to date.

 

[Nic64]

Has there been an actual discussion somewhere regarding the Snake/MK matchup? I'm not disputing this, but I'm wondering where everyone gets their conclusions from and I certainly hope they're simply not parroting other people and have actually discussed/had lots of high-level experience in the matchup.

this was discussed a lot during the two "should MK be banned" poll topics opinions on the matchup range anywhere from 45:55 MK to 55:45 Snake and some people who think it's even, most people think slightly in MK's favor.

my opinion on it changes a lot, I play both characters and it's kind of hard to tell sometimes, I think at this point I'd prefer to ditto than use snake against an MK but I'm a little better at MK to begin with so idk. I think so much of it is circumstancial like whether or not MK is able to gimp snake much or at all which you can't say for sure, as hylian said, matchups can be largely arbitrary...

 

[Espy Rose]

Even if MK was the next Akuma, I highly doubt we would collectively ban him lol.

The sad part is that this is most likely true...

 

[DMG]

Also, Sky MK is banned for HOBO 16 not because of these results, but because each month or two Xyro/TGM/Allan chooses to host a MK banned tournament for variety. He did it starting with 12, we were gonna do it on 14 but it was a PR tournament so we opted to have MK allowed. And now with 16 here he was gonna do it irregardless of the WHOBO results. Just wanted to point that out.

 

[MBlaze]

MK is just a freakin problem... everywhere you go you just see him. >.> I dropped Mario mostly because of him.

 

[Twin_Scimitar]

It seems to me that banning Metaknight gives us a better game. Regardless of whether or not characters metagames are not evolving as fast as his, or whether or not there is sufficient evidence that he is too far and above the best character in the game, we end up with a better game without him.

And no, i'm not saying because it makes the game more fun, which I contend is true, but is admittedly irrelevant. It makes the game more competitive because we gain the counter pick system that makes the game so darn fascinating. Again, regardless of whether or not Snake has a better matchup against Metaknight (let's say that in truth it is 55:45 for the sake of my argument), it is a fact that when people counterpick against a Metaknight, most people go to Metaknight, not to Snake, this trend is not changing. Having one supreme character that battles to the death against itself isn't the point of a competitive fighting game, or at least I don't see why it should be the point of fighting games with multiple characters to choose from.

After we ban him, if a character's metagame evolves so that they become much better, which is bound to happen, we can try to reintroduce him to see how that works out. There is always the "if we ban him we lose the chance of learning how to beat him" argument, one is welcome to use that argument, but it's lost it's effect on me and I don't care for it. He's been supreme for a loooonnnggg time, too long, let's stop it with the wait and see rubbish.

Food for thought and stuff.

 

[Master Raven]

I hate counterpicking systems.

 

[Ravin]

I hate counterpicking systems.

There is something very wrong with the mindset of this statement.

Ive been seeing it a lot, mostly with the new brawl stereotypes.

 

[Suspect]

CP should be like street fighter

winner stays character

inb4flame

 

[Mew2King]

the counterpicking system in brawl is so ******** you might as well just have best of 1 sets cuz whoever wins the first might as well have just won the set. Like, Marth vs Sheik was very winnable in Melee cuz of combos and stuff even though it was a counter, but Falco playing properly destroys DDD. Also at least MK's evolution of the game is fighting you and not THIS - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5v8Myoltijo&feature=channel_page

nice future for brawl x_x

 

[Master Raven]

I don't see what's wrong with disliking it. I know it's there and I'll have to CP at some point if I'm not MK, I'm just tired of overemphasis on counterpicking. That's why terrifically balanced games like Guilty Gear fascinate me. My ideal fighting game would be one where every matchup is even.

 

[Ravin]

Technically... <_<

Winner is supposed to change character first, then Loser can CP a character, then choose a stage.

MK makes this rule rather obsolete.

 

[Nic64]

There is something very wrong with the mindset of this statement

I can see where he's coming from, in a game where counterpicks are massively massively important as pro ban people are trying to emphasize what the game would be like without MK(I don't think it would be but let's just say), you're essentially bringing luck and whoever gets the better end of the double blind pick into the equation. Like if I pick DDD in game one and you pick either falco or donkey kong, someone basically just got an auto win based off of luck of the draw assuming that one of us isn't way better than the other. I think most good characters can deal with their worst matchups including MK so I don't think you'll suddenly see people maining 2-4 characters or whatever some people have said might happen, but I can see why some people might not like a game where the CP system is so overstated. Ideally you'd have a balanced game where you don't have to worry about that but unfortunately brawl's developers cared more about a single player mode that most of us wouldn't bother coming back to anyway than actually play testing in multiplayer so it is what it is

 

[Ravin]

@ Nic - I dont think the developers of SSB, Melee, or Brawl cared for a competitive game much as we are making it out to be. If your wanted my personal IMO

I can see where he is coming from as well. But there is something very wrong with that mindset.

 

[Master Raven]

What's wrong with my mindset? All I'm saying is I hate counterpicking systems. That doesn't mean I won't CP, I just dislike the concept.

 

[DMG]

I don't mind the counterpicking system at all, rather the character/matchups involved that make it a chore lol.

Also counter picking is a very nice way to get out of a terrible situation. If you play SFIV and you pick Chun Li and your opponent picks Zangief, wouldn't you like to be able to switch characters instead of only being able to use her? That would SUCK HARD lol.

 

[Nic64]

Obviously, Sakurai has said as much, Melee being as competitive as it was was a complete accident. And yeah, I'm not saying I agree with either of you, it's hard to have a strong opinion either way on such a flawed game for me, just saying I understand what he meant I think...

 

[Ravin]

I said its what I have been hearing alot. Its not a good mindset to have

You can think it all you want, its your mind, ect.

 

[Nic64]

Also at least MK's evolution of the game is fighting you

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p0nc8l0XKEY

 

[ShadowLink84]

CP should be like street fighter

winner stays character

inb4flame

*performs last rites on the Vega user* <_<

 

[Master Raven]

I don't understand what you're saying Ravin but okay.

 

[Twin_Scimitar]

the counterpicking system in brawl is so ******** you might as well just have best of 1 sets cuz whoever wins the first might as well have just won the set. Like, Marth vs Sheik was very winnable in Melee cuz of combos and stuff even though it was a counter, but Falco playing properly destroys DDD. Also at least MK's evolution of the game is fighting you and not THIS - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5v8Myoltijo&feature=channel_page

nice future for brawl x_x

Heh. So the DDD cps the falco with Snake, Marth, or GW. The DDD doesn't have to use falco to have a reasonable chance. Also best of one sets are ridiculous and you probably know that. The counter picking system gives DDD mains a chance against Falco mains, the DDD main has a chance of winning it with his secondar(y/ies) in game 2 and 3. Imagine the poor fox mains that randomly played against a Pikachu.

There are chaingrabs in brawl, omgz. Considering the massive amounts of Pikachu mains winning all the tournaments we better keep good ol' metaknight and his miracle cure metagame stimulation formula around!

General statement:

Let's just play a fighting game where we can all have chaingrabless Metaknight vs. Metaknight battles. It's just like that awesome fighting game they made where the is only one playable character... wait, what did you say? There aren't any games like that? Is that because it's ********? hmmm...

*Exaggerates*, but my point has been conveyed.

 

[Ravin]

Im saying this Raven.

You, from what I assume, Main or sub MK. Therefore, you don't need to have an in depth analaysis of CP or characters. You need your aerials, a few grabs, and very minor AT's. SDI and Wallteching at some points if the time calls for it. And if anyone picks a stage against you, It doesnt effect or bother your gameplay at all.

Im a Samus main, Zelda Sub. Therefore I have to heavily indulge myself in CP's, what little metagame I have, stage attacks, Jab setups, in depth characters that are my weakness,Such as D3 and MK, to even come up to the bar to understand what I can do to even beat a "Semi" Pro. I have to know certain approches, sometimes Zair works. If someone CP's JJ or a rather large ceiling stage I am limit to kill moves.

Naturally. The mindset of "I hate the CP system" is bad because this doesnt help the metagame at all. Noone is useing anyone else. Why play anyone else when you can play MK? Thats why I see the mindset as bad. You dont need to do anything but hover your P1 icon over MK and hit random.

Its like I had fought a MK on Rainbow Cruse. Id rather cut my balls off then ever do that again.

Edit - To further my statement "I hear it a lot" Its most common around MK's because they dont need a CP system. But because most people play MK, there is no reason to push or understand the CP system. And this is why brawl is tanking hard.

This is why melee thrived at the point when a character was thought to be overpowered. Several points were made that the top 6-8 characters in melee at least had a CP if not several so it was not completely Over played and the metagame thrived.

 

[Master Raven]

I would hate the CP system even if I didn't main MK. It's got nothing to do with that I use him. All I'm simply saying is I don't like the overemphasis of counterpicking in general. I KNOW if I didn't main MK that at some point I'd have to CP, but even I'd only do it if I knew a matchup like the back of my hand and lost countless times.

 

[Ravin]

I know. I didnt say you directly. I just said the statement itself.

 

[ShadowLink84]

stuff

There is one game and its called street fighter.
Yeah there wa sa second character butit was a mere sprite change. @_@

 

[Twin_Scimitar]

There is one game and its called street fighter.
Yeah there wa sa second character butit was a mere sprite change. @_@

Good job, i'm wrong. Have a prize. It's still doesn't make for a good game. If you somehow think one character fighters are good games, fighters with multiple playable characters are still fundamentally better.

 

[ShadowLink84]

Good job, i'm wrong. Have a prize. It's still doesn't make for a good game. If you somehow think one character fighters are good games, fighters with multiple playable characters are still fundamentally better.

Wooow, someone is anal.
Are you seriously trying to create a debate where there is none?
Especially towards a resons ethat obiously was not intended to be taken in a serious fashion.

Of course if you wish to get in a debate, I would argue that one character fighting games are better.
Why?
in terms of competitive capability, a one character fighting game ensures balance and ensures that both players re in a contest of skill, rather than a contest of who is using the better character.

There NOW you have reason to use your witty responses and have good reason to start a debate.

 

[ssbbFICTION]

The thing that people seem to miss is that at THE ABSOLUTE HIGHEST LEVEL OF PLAY in brawl, matchups are mostly even or very close to it.

MK
Snake
Falco
Wario

IMO the top four characters in the game. At the highest level, these characters essentially all have fairly even matchups, and trade games depending on skill. After this point in the tier list you begin to find counterpicks, as are found with

Diddy
GW
DDD

...The top four characters up there all have the ability to move up or down on that four character list. After that, massive counters come into play with

Snake > GW
GW > DDD
Falco > DDD

 

[Blistering Speed]

Anyone notice how Pikachu could fit in that description of the top 4 Fiction gave? I agree with Ampharos, that rat's on the rise.

 

[Mew2King]

I think we just need multiple anthers to "prove" it, since we only have one

it's just like how no one realized how gay and good jigglypuff was since mango didn't come out until really late, i don't think pikachu will be realized for a while unless anther just goes beast mode at some tourneys

Besides Pikachu, I think Diddy is definitely up there with the top chars, and olimar too. Squirtle could be amazing alone also.

 

[Anther]

We need to find the Mangother!

 

[meepxzero]

i think the gay stuff in brawl besides mk balance mk being in the game. If ic didnt have infinites they would lose so badly vs mk or yah pikachu with the new cg. I dunno where ur going with ur arguement m2k, but if its to defend mk being in the game then by all means i agree with you.

The metagame of brawl in the future will come down to mk and cging people to death. People dont think ic are one of the top chars (many ic mains do believe they are the 3rd best in the game) but al prove them wrong and in the process get their infinite banned at the same time lol.

 

[Anther]

I'm beginning to think that we should ban Nana. The metagame of brawl is fine until she starts doing stuff.
I think squirtle's in the same boat as fox, where he's pretty amazing but dies when the wind blows him.