Why MK should NOT be banned (the opinion from someone who actually fights them)

[zeldspazz]

Luigis explosion is 1/8 iirc
Peach's stuff is like 1/550 or something iirc.

 

[salaboB]

Rumble Falls is about as simple a case as it gets. Scrolling stages inhibit competitive play the same way open-sided stages do. Not only that, but the stage speeds up and slows down at random.

Why do they inhibit competitive play?

"Because I said so" is not a valid reason. Does one person not win and one person not lose based on individual ability even if the stage is scrolling? Find a justification that can't also be applied to Meta Knight please.

And let me make distinction here - Luigi and Peach having random properties to their moves is entirely different from items being distributed at random. One is under control of the player, the other is not.

You're being arbitrary. Players can also control their position, which controls availability of items. The only question is where the random happens (One happens at the beginning of the event, then the player acts. The other the player acts, then the random happens.)

This fits my criteria perfectly, actually - it becomes heavily overcentralized on characters that can CG. I.E., D3.

Then MK breaks the game because it becomes heavily overcentralized on characters that can stand up well against him.

Sorry, but overcentralizing to a "few" characters isn't nearly enough overcentralization to merit a ban.

The only reason i dont like items because the spawning and position gets way to sloppy


Snake _________________ Kirby


on FD


Snake ___item___________Kirby

Right there snake has now an advantage over kirby as he can reach the item way faster especially also on different levels where items go on different platforms and such

And that's Kirby's fault. To take advantage of the items he should have been standing like this:

Snake __________Kirby_____

Then there's a larger chance of items dropping for him, and even your example is much closer to right between them -- while still being out of Snake's reach.

Do you see how much more tactical it is when stage position matters not just because of where your opponent is, but based on controlling the most ground? The game would suddenly be deeper, which means even more competitive!

 

[Boxob.]

Jack, honestly I think you just need to learn how to play.

 

[ShadowLink84]

Sorry, but you're making a huge oversimplification here. Picking a character is not the only factor that causes you to be you statistically more or less likely to win a match.

Saying he should have won because he picked MK assumes that all other factors are null. They're not, and they weren't in that particular scenario.

Actually no, I am not saying that, what I am saying is that when you compound factors such as skill and state of mind, when you assume the the playing field is equal, Metaknight had the BEST chances of winning.

All it did was prove, hey Diddy is capable of winning, which is something always known.
What I am pointing out, is you agreeing with Gheb earlier when he made his statement, which in itself was a fallacy, since it is picking out the one result when really, its more a bump than anything.

I'm not even going to point out why the above example is hilariously ludicrous. I suggest you look up the definitions of the terms mean, median, mode, statistically significant, and standard deviation.

We can always calculate the number of large tournaments.
Hen calculate the average placing of Metaknight.
We can then also calculate the SDV and determine its significance in the current metagame.

And that's the same exact argument people use as to why MK should be banned. Single events of MK or Diddy winning tournaments don't prove anything in and of themselves. What was the context?

Hardly, I for one dont think he should be banned.
I am showing that the argument goes BOTH ways.
You can't use either without showing significant proof.

The only difference is MK is not broken, and 99% of pro-ban are scrubs that need to get better. Pro-ban's entire argument is one big whine.

It is elitist to simply say "get better scrubs"
It is not elitist to say "Get better scrubs because you are doing blah blah blah wrong"

How is this at all relevant? IIRC this is the Brawl Boards, not SRK.

Plus, let me point out the hypocrisy of pro-ban. They whine about us trying to be like SRK in the vein of not being ban-happy. But then when we refuse to ban MK, people cry about us not banning Akuma......like the SRK community.

Doublethink.

After you my dear RDK.
You completely missed the point of my example.
Akuma in SF2HDR is not anywhere near as broken and he is beatable, but he was indeed banned even though he wasnt going 9-1 against the entire cast.

So it stands to quest, do we ban on the extreme point, or do we ban on something less extreme?

Correct me if I am wrong in regards to him though.

Also you never responded to my portion about why MK doesn't deserve a ban.

I dont believe that MK should be banned.

 

[Big-Cat]

Right, because a player knowing that he will pull out something is exactly the same as the game rewarding a player for being in a random place at a random time.

The only thing different between the two is that being in a random place for a given point in time is not present when pulling a turnip out or doing Green Missle. The randomness factor is still in. Why not go ahead and ban Peach and Luigi as result?

 

[Allied]

Jack, honestly I think you just need to learn how to play.

wow haha boxob from left field

 

[Lifeisweird]

Rumble Falls is about as simple a case as it gets. Scrolling stages inhibit competitive play the same way open-sided stages do. Not only that, but the stage speeds up and slows down at random.


This fits my criteria perfectly, actually - it becomes heavily overcentralized on characters that can CG. I.E., D3.

Actually Rumble fall's vertical scrolling is not random, and is actually a static part of the stage, just like Rainbow Cruise. And last time I checked, Rainbow Cruise wasn't banned.

This stage doesn't overcentralize BECAUSE of the scrolling, it makes it so that most characters with CG's would die with the person that he or she is chaingrabbing, therefore neutralizing the chaingrab. If your going to say that the scrolling is only a section of the stage, look at PS2. It has a wall, which creates an infinite for D3. But it's not banned because it's only a section of the stage.

 

[zeldspazz]

This is going to be a never ending discussion for the lifetime of brawl if it continues like this >_>

IMO we ban MK when the time comes. We shouldnt ban him now, because at this moment there is no reason to, the best example the one being brought up 50million times (Pound).

Now, if MKs learn to get around all the top tier's weaknesses and truley starts to overcentralize the metagame with planking and running the time out, where literally 9/10 or all important tournies are won by MK, then I think it should be considered. But for now, I think there is no current need for a ban.

Or, we could try banning for Metaknight for ___ amount of time. We can see how the competitive scene then grows or diminishes and make a final decision from there.

The point is I dont believe either side will come to an agreement so we have to try to be flexible and crompromise in order to find the correct solution. Going around in circles with these pointless discussions will get us no where if both sides are as closeminded as they appear to be.




....just my opinion >_>

 

[Allied]

Why do they inhibit competitive play?

"Because I said so" is not a valid reason. Does one person not win and one person not lose based on individual ability even if the stage is scrolling? Find a justification that can't also be applied to Meta Knight please.


You're being arbitrary. Players can also control their position, which controls availability of items. The only question is where the random happens (One happens at the beginning of the event, then the player acts. The other the player acts, then the random happens.)


Then MK breaks the game because it becomes heavily overcentralized on characters that can stand up well against him.

Sorry, but overcentralizing to a "few" characters isn't nearly enough overcentralization to merit a ban.

And that's Kirby's fault. To take advantage of the items he should have been standing like this:

Snake __________Kirby_____

Then there's a larger chance of items dropping for him, and even your example is much closer to right between them -- while still being out of Snake's reach.

Do you see how much more tactical it is when stage position matters not just because of where your opponent is, but based on controlling the most ground? The game would suddenly be deeper, which means even more competitive!

hahah
salabo it wouldn't work because ok lets say i'm playing against snake

snake ____________________ Kirby

Match Start


I usually wait for snake to make the first move I CANT approach on snake he can grenade, utilt my aierals except bair but i dont want that stale or if i do use it i have to space it correctly

So since i have to wait for my opportunity to MAYBE approach this is usually what happens
Kirby
_______Snake___________


So i'm chilling in the air trying to look for an opening thru the greandes and his super powered utilt but THEN

Kirby
_______itemSnake___________


Item lands right next to snake because item spawning is random now he gets 1 more advantage to SHUT ME down even more and if i get knocked off my little chunk of land i'm trying to space right there

I lose stage control now i'm on the edge and now i'm not in a good position to fight, losing the fight to items

thats why its not really competitively safe to play with items lol doesnt work, anything can happen its 10000000x worse than tripping because now an item of randomness too, spawns randomly on the stage and that right there can make a match and honestly that fact alone scares me because would i really want 500 dollars or 600 dollars on the line knowing i could easily lose that if this f@ggot MK player gets a star


edit- my picture got messed up =(

 

[Boxob.]

MK is entirely not warranted for a ban. If anyone here has learned the matchup, and still thinks he needs to be banned, you need to re learn the matchup.

ADHD's not an *******, I forget who said that, but he isn't, you're just mad cause you can't do the youtube diddy nearly as well as he can.

 

[WindMajor]

Back in October 2008, the Anti-bans told me that the metagame is still growing, and that we should not ban Metaknight because our metagame will find a way around Metaknight over time.

I swear, if our metagame turns into Metaknight, I'm just gonna laugh.

 

[RDK]

The only thing different between the two is that being in a random place for a given point in time is not present when pulling a turnip out or doing Green Missle. The randomness factor is still in. Why not go ahead and ban Peach and Luigi as result?

Because they're two completely alien concepts. You couldn't pick any two more different instances of randomness.

Items reward players based on random distribution. Luigi and Peach do not.

MK is entirely not warranted for a ban. If anyone here has learned the matchup, and still thinks he needs to be banned, you need to re learn the matchup.

ADHD's not an *******, I forget who said that, but he isn't, you're just mad cause you can't do the youtube diddy nearly as well as he can.

What ho? A Poe!

 

[Allied]

they said the same thing about shiek

and yeah grand finals at nationals now you have jiggs dittos melee woo :] (just teasing melee inb4 allied melee is da best EVAR!)

 

[salaboB]

thats why its not really competitively safe to play with items lol doesnt work, anything can happen its 10000000x worse than tripping because now an item of randomness too, spawns randomly on the stage and that right there can make a match and honestly that fact alone scares me because would i really want 500 dollars or 600 dollars on the line knowing i could easily lose that if this f@ggot MK player gets a star

You don't enable all items.

And what it does is it forces you to care about stage control besides just how it relates to zoning your opponent, and suddenly a ton of irritating strategies (Like planking) are noticably less viable.

Because they're two completely alien concepts. You couldn't pick any two more different instances of randomness.

Items reward players based on random distribution. Luigi and Peach do not.

There are certain sections of the map that have more chances for items, keeping yourself in a position to claim those items is in fact something that requires skill.

Those better at leveraging items will win more often than those who suck at it.

Also, Luigi's misfire can very much save a player (Or kill them) based on random distribution - if he uses it as a recovery and it goes off when it wasn't (or was) needed...Being saved or killed is definitely a reward or a penalty.

 

[Jack Kieser]

Back in October 2008, the Anti-bans told me that the metagame is still growing, and that we should not ban Metaknight because our metagame will find a way around Metaknight over time.

I swear, if our metagame turns into Metaknight, I'm just gonna laugh.

I sure as hell won't laugh.

EDIT: Wow, someone who gets the concept of playing with items on. Go salaboB.

 

[RDK]

You don't enable all items.

And what it does is it forces you to care about stage control besides just how it relates to zoning your opponent, and suddenly a ton of irritating strategies (Like planking) are noticably less viable.

There are certain sections of the map that have more chances for items, keeping yourself in a position to claim those items is in fact something that requires skill.

Those better at leveraging items will win more often than those who suck at it.

Also, Luigi's misfire can very much save a player (Or kill them) based on random distribution - if he uses it as a recovery and it goes off when it wasn't (or was) needed...

I sure as hell won't laugh.

EDIT: Wow, someone who gets the concept of playing with items on. Go salaboB.

No, he's not getting the concept of playing with items on. This is the same garbage SRK wanted to pull at EVO.

Items randomly effect gameplay in a manner that overcentralizes the game around items. Not only that, but it gives an unfair advantage to players for simply being in the same spot that a certain item decided to spawn at. To say that Luigi and Peach's respective "random" moves sway gameplay in a way that takes control from the player is asinine.

 

[Allied]

You don't enable all items.

And what it does is it forces you to care about stage control besides just how it relates to zoning your opponent, and suddenly a ton of irritating strategies (Like planking) are noticably less viable.

Star KO last time i checked because they have a competitive item ruleset if you want that is allowed and planking wouldn't change at all theres no item that can hit an MK planking the edge but thats why you have ledgehog rules tho so that never was a problem

If anything items actually make lower tier characters less viable (at least imo i can't say) because now i have to do something that i normally wouldn't do just because this item could end up being the loss of my last stock and thats not cool nor competitive thats just 2 characters scrambling for an item on a ground like 2 hobos fighting over a mcchicken

I already care about stage control and my zoning already because you NEED that with my characters like snake and kirby and i'm sure plenty of other characters hardcore but it doesn't mean items will fix competitively play it can actually serverely hurt some characters and boost some others like MK

 

[Boxob.]

I sure as hell won't laugh.

EDIT: Wow, someone who gets the concept of playing with items on. Go salaboB.

Idk my dude. It seems to me that you're someone who wants to play with metaknight off and items on. It's hard to take your posts as anything credible.

Items. Are. Random.

 

[GunmasterLombardi]

Back in October 2008, the Anti-bans told me that the metagame is still growing, and that we should not ban Metaknight because our metagame will find a way around Metaknight over time.

I swear, if our metagame turns into Metaknight, I'm just gonna laugh.

Sweet, turns out that MK's attacks aren't as fast as we thought and we can perfect shield and punish anything.

...wait.

 

[Jupz]

How the hell is banning items being compared to banning MK. Items are random. metaknight is not random. One is a character. The other is a part of the game.

 

[Allied]

idk but welcome to the discussion jupz

 

[RDK]

How the hell is banning items being compared to banning MK. Items are random. metaknight is not random. One is a character. The other is a part of the game.

It's useless; the illogical horde marches on.

 

[GunmasterLombardi]

Someone doesn't get what would count as an "overcentralization" and they're trying to get an understanding. Items were banned 'cause of overcentralization and people think MK does the same.

 

[Jack Kieser]

No, he's not getting the concept of playing with items on. This is the same garbage SRK wanted to pull at EVO.

Items randomly effect gameplay in a manner that overcentralizes the game around items. Not only that, but it gives an unfair advantage to players for simply being in the same spot that a certain item decided to spawn at. To say that Luigi and Peach's respective "random" moves sway gameplay in a way that takes control from the player is asinine.

It's most certainly not the same EVO garbage. EVO totally screwed up trying to play with items. Medium? Smash Balls? Are you kidding? No, they just didn't do it right. Properly implemented, the random chance that comes with items is negligible, and doesn't interfere enough with the game to make a lesser player win a statistically larger amount of the time. That being said... let's keep the discussion to Metaknight, PLEASE. At least to ban criteria. And, RDK, if you want to talk about items, I'm still waiting for those tournament threads. Please and thank you.

Idk my dude. It seems to me that you're someone who wants to play with metaknight off and items on. It's hard to take your posts as anything credible.

Items. Are. Random.

Yes. Yes, that's very true; they are random. How astute. I'd like Metaknight gone, but I don't want items on in general; I think they should be an official side ruleset, but not the main one. Items tournaments should be officially sanctioned, but should stay as side events.

How the hell is banning items being compared to banning MK. Items are random. metaknight is not random. One is a character. The other is a part of the game.

Um... they are BOTH a part of the game.

 

[ShadowLink84]

Sweet, turns out that MK's attacks aren't as fast as we thought and we can perfect shield and punish anything.

...wait.

Yeah I went there

 

[Allied]

gunmasterlombardi i dont understand why you guys just dont keep trying harder and keep positive haha

inb4 CUZ MK IS SO GOOD

save it

dont wcare anymore bed

edit -@shadowlink ROFLMAO!!!!

 

[GunmasterLombardi]

Readin' ADHD's post impresses me but it still doesn't change my mind. I'd say he's the best Diddy, and he went 3-3 w/ m2k. m2k is the best MK, so theoretically if every Diddy player (Falcos and Snakes too) was as good as ADHD then MK wouldn't be so bad. You wouldn't need to ban him.

Buuuut...the same goes for MK players. There is room 4 improvement 4 every1 of them. If they all were as good as m2k at the same time then we'd be back 2 square one where MK is on the edge between banning him and banning him.

@Allied: I beat MKs all the time in friendlies (at least I used to 'cause I'm playing Uncharted 2 right now...) I know dis matchup.

@Boxob (below): It's not garbage 'cause there are items that would benefit a lot of sucky characters w/o completely swaying the match around and making some1 dependant on items.

 

[Boxob.]

Jack, I'll tell you what. If you can round up enough players for an items on tourney, you can host one.

But no one smart wants to play that garbage, because it's just that, garbage.

 

[Karcist]

Anyone else notice how horribly conceited the part in the thread title "the opinion from someone who actually fights them" is?

 

[Jack Kieser]

Jack, I'll tell you what. If you can round up enough players for an items on tourney, you can host one.

But no one smart wants to play that garbage, because it's just that, garbage.

Um... WHOBO, anyone? 2v2 ISP tournament? Guess who took the top spot?

...M2k and Inui.

150+ entrants. Yeah. Try again.

 

[Boxob.]

Um... WHOBO, anyone? 2v2 ISP tournament? Guess who took the top spot?

...M2k and Inui.

150+ entrants. Yeah. Try again.

As right as you are, and as wrong as I was. Items are still lame, and shouldn't ever be considered for true competitive play. I don't care that they won, really. It still undeniably skews what would have been the results without the items.

 

[Jack Kieser]

As right as you are, and as wrong as I was. Items are still lame, and shouldn't ever be considered for true competitive play. I don't care that they won, really. It still undeniably skews what would have been the results without the items.

*sigh* Like I said, this is a MK discussion thread, not an items play thread. I'll just leave it at this: no one is asking you to like it, but if there are people who do, do you have the right to tell them they they're wrong for playing that way? (As long as they aren't forcing you) If it was an officially sanctioned way to play, with an SBR ruleset and everything, but was officially relegated to side events, would it really put you off that much?

 

[judge!]

meh


theres a huge differance between a mk player...and a top player that plays MK. a decent//bad mk main player to me r complete utter jokes. like idk how anyone can loose to 99% of mks or even attempt to ***** about him lol. Also people crying over mk...do u even go to tourneys or make it out of pools? lol


its the player not the char.

 

[phi1ny3]

Anyone comparing planking in a MK/Lucario team to planking in singles has no idea what they're talking about.

In doubles with Lucario the point is to create a situation where Lucario's teammate still has 3 stocks when Lucario has 1. In singles the point is to make it nigh impossible for your opponent to be able to approach you so you can time them out.

It's not the same thing at all.

bwahahaha Anubis strat ftw!

 

[Browny]

As right as you are, and as wrong as I was. Items are still lame, and shouldn't ever be considered for true competitive play. I don't care that they won, really. It still undeniably skews what would have been the results without the items.

have you ever played in a proper ISP doubles tournament? with a partner who at least took the game seriously too?

 

[Jupz]

Also the argument that Metaknight is destroying the game is ********. Just stop and think about it. So what if a few random, complaining drama queens quit the game because of Metaknight? No (or very few) pros are quitting the game because of Metaknight. Haven't you considered that they might be aware of something we are not? If were going to ban Metaknight, it will be simply for the mid level players, since it's obvious he can be handled at high levels of play.

Consider how many people WILL quit the game if metaknight is banned, including a lot of pros. Probably more of a loss to the community then if he stays, especially because MOST top players agree he should not be banned.

You're arguing for MK to be banned to stop a bunch of whiny scrubs from quitting brawl (who probably don't even like the game anyway and are just using MK as an excuse to quit), when the loss to the community is worse if Metaknight gets banned. And what about the people that spent 2 years learning MK?

Have you considered the supposed "drop" in numbers (which still hasn't been proven at all) is maybe simply because people are getting bored of the game? Inevitably the number of people playing the game is going to drop, MK or no MK. You can't say the drop in numbers (if there even is one) is because of Metaknight any more then can you say humans caused global warming. The number of people playing the game isn't going to stay constant forever.

 

[Boxob.]

have you ever played in a proper ISP doubles tournament? with a partner who at least took the game seriously too?

Idk wtf an isp is. I play melee.

I'm in here trolling and you're asking me serious questions.

 

[Shaya]

You have no idea what you're talking about Jupz.

 

[-Mars-]

Why do people keep talking about items? Every time somebody good loses to a player below their skill level their gonna john about items and eventually everyone will hate them.

Seriously items aren't ever going to come back into the smash world so mods seriously do us a favor and make the sensors bleep out the word "item" please? So we don't have to read post after post about items.

 

[Jupz]

Why do people keep talking about items? Every time somebody good loses to a player below their skill level their gonna john about items and eventually everyone will hate them.

Seriously items aren't ever going to come back into the smash world so mods seriously do us a favor and make the sensors bleep out the word "item" please? So we don't have to read post after post about items.

Lol, too good.

Also what I was trying to say was that if you're going to argue MK should be banned then talk about the character's traits, not side effects.