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

['V']

Tourneys in Louisiana have declined as well.

 

[HeroMystic]

But like some people have said.... It might even be too late to make a criteria now. -_-

It's not too late to make a criteria. However, it's too late to make a criteria for banning Metaknight.

 

[stingers]

The only way to properly use a criteria for banning anything at this point in the game (ie. when we're all biased) is to 1. Find an outsider who knows absolutely nothing about Brawl in particular but is experienced in the fighting game genre to create criteria or 2. Find criteria created before the release of Brawl.

 

[Espy Rose]

I've noticed a lot of people quitting, which is why I ask.

Though my city's Smash scene has always been small and somewhat broken, I can say that about 5-8 of the players I knew in the scene have quit since the beginning of Brawl. Maybe even more.

And I know that some of them did so purely because of Meta Knight. Then again, that holds no weight whatsoever. Just something I wanted to throw out there.

Even though I don't have much to say, I also was pretty upset when I read that the SBR never came up with a criteria for banning a character when deciding to ban MK or not.

I kind of fell like the anti-ban side is afraid to agree upon a criteria for banning MK. Mostly because, once those criteria have been reached Metaknight will HAVE to be banned, and they wouldn't have any way to argue about it since they've already agreed to the criteria. Meanwhile, the pro-ban side(or at least a large portion of it) already feels like there's either a slim or no chance at all that Metaknight will be banned anyway. At least with a set criteria, we can have something to actually look for... Instead of having the pro-ban side will come back after every major tournament, where Metaknight has once again become even more dominant, and ask "Is this enough to ban him yet?" only for the anti-ban side to respond with a resounding "NO."

Plus, at least then all this stupid arguing would stop... Well, besides the arguing that would take place to agree upon a set criteria... But at least then it'd be more productive.

And just so everyone knows... I'm not trying to start an argument with anything I've said in this post. I really just am tired of all this stupid bickering back and forth. If we had a criteria, I'd at feel like at least then we could have something we could all (or at least most) agree upon.

But like some people have said.... It might even be too late to make a criteria now. -_-

I'm upset about the criteria, but I'm also upset in that there was never a criteria for banning anything in Brawl, apparently. I'm talking in regards to items and stages as well as characters.

Unless I read too far into something in this topic?

 

[HeroMystic]

No, that'd be correct. Items were banned at the very beginning. Stages used Melee's standardization completely ignoring the fact that Brawl is a different game. Even then, the majority of stages banned were because "they were gay".

 

[adumbrodeus]

"Content" is what is on the disc. "Content" would be stages, characters, textures, music, anything that is distributed to us by Nintendo (or, I guess, things we hack in ourselves, thanks to the Workshop). What you're trying to argue is NOT content. Our ruleset is not "content". It didn't come with each copy of Brawl and was not distributed by Nintendo. As one debater to another, read a dictionary; you're trying to argue a point using the wrong words, and it's not making you look very smart.

1. Usually, contents.
a. something that is contained: the contents of a box.
b. the subjects or topics covered in a book or document.
c. the chapters or other formal divisions of a book or document: a table of contents.
2. something that is to be expressed through some medium, as speech, writing, or any of various arts: a poetic form adequate to a poetic content.
3. significance or profundity; meaning: a clever play that lacks content.
4. substantive information or creative material viewed in contrast to its actual or potential manner of presentation: publishers, record companies, and other content providers; a flashy Web site, but without much content.
5. that which may be perceived in something: the latent versus the manifest content of a dream.
6. Philosophy, Logic. the sum of the attributes or notions comprised in a given conception; the substance or matter of cognition.
7. power of containing; holding capacity: The bowl's content is three quarts.
8. volume, area, or extent; size.
9. the amount contained.
10. Linguistics. the system of meanings or semantic values specific to a language (opposed to expression ).
11.
a. Mathematics. the greatest common divisor of all the coefficients of a given polynomial. Compare primitive polynomial.
b. any abstraction of the concept of length, area, or volume.

Definition 6 really, though others apply. I'm referring to content from a conceptual level.

I think I see what you're trying to say here, but I really don't see how that has anything to do with the debate at hand. Remember, we're trying to figure out if MK is banworthy in this thread; the only reason we're talking about rulesets are because of RDK's "criteria" argument. The fact that we have to "standardize" isn't really even a given, not 100%; are you willing to say that any of Xyro's tournaments aren't "real Brawl tournaments" because they don't follow the SBR's rules 100%?

Because I'm trying to point out how tournament standardization dictates what is or is not relevant in terms of requirements for a harsh criteria.


And Xyro's tournaments, while Brawl tournaments, are a fundamentally different metagame, similar to how most AN tournaments are a different metagame.

No, they aren't! We made CP'ing up! Nowhere in the Brawl manual does it say anything about counterpicks. Since when can we make sh*t up and call it a "feature" of the game? They are a part of our made-up way to play the game. The self-importance here is staggering; I think we all need to remember that we're forcing a party game to be competitive and be a little humble.

*sigh* not the game as PROGRAMMED the game as PLAYED, anything where there's player choice and a decision which takes place in-game that effects it's outcome is part of the game.


I'm sorry, but all the things I mentioned have a very obvious and direct effect on the eventual victor, there's no two ways about it.

There are countless times in (and out) of matches that people are forced to ignore options that they would have otherwise had. Are you really going to DB-pick DK? Are you going to decide to use Fox's lasers when MK is in your face? Is Snake going to DACUS when Diddy puts a Banana in his path?

Of course not.

Situations will always change regardless of our ruleset, and players will have options taken away from them forcibly by sheer circumstance. That's life. I don't even know what you're trying to argue here...

You're not being forced by the ruleset in those cases, you're forced by your common sense... or not.

But this applies to the overarching ruleset, not the interplay become the actual players. The objective is to leave that interplay as free for them as possible, so they can make whatever decisions they want including the DACUS into that banana (unless you are actually proposing that we disallow him from doing it) and who knows, it might work out. The ability to make decisions that SEEM stupid is actually an important part of the interplay because they can be used to bait.

 

[stingers]

I think we should all just take ruleset discussion to my topic here: http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=262110

MK and the Ruleset go hand in hand but that doesn't mean this is the place to talk about it. :/

 

[Espy Rose]

No, that'd be correct. Items were banned at the very beginning. Stages used Melee's standardization completely ignoring the fact that Brawl is a different game. Even then, the majority of stages banned were because "they were gay".

I think I just excelled beyond being upset and into the realm of "pissed off".
So what exactly DID the B-SBR do during the baby stages of Brawl's competitive life? Throw darts at a board and ban whatever the dart landed on?

That's absolutely unacceptable. Now it may even be too late to do anything about it.
None of this would be happening if it weren't for Meta Knight (though I'm unfairly blaming him, I'm sure that there is more to it than just Meta Knight being Meta Knight). I'm having an extremely hard time even fathoming that a criteria for a different game wasn't even addressed.

Brawl was NEVER Melee. Why the HELL did they use Melee to shape up Brawl?
Ugh~

 

[stingers]

Espy, there was no SBR-B at the time. It was the SBR, and it was full of all the Melee Professionals. They really just didn't know any other way.

 

[Hylian]

I think I just excelled beyond being upset and into the realm of "pissed off".
So what exactly DID the B-SBR do during the baby stages of Brawl's competitive life? Throw darts at a board and ban whatever the dart landed on?

That's absolutely unacceptable. Now it may even be too late to do anything about it.
None of this would be happening if it weren't for Meta Knight (though I'm unfairly blaming him, I'm sure that there is more to it than just Meta Knight being Meta Knight). I'm having an extremely hard time even fathoming that a criteria for a different game wasn't even addressed.

Brawl was NEVER Melee. Why the HELL did they use Melee to shape Brawl?
Ugh~

Uh, we didn't? Why are you listening to random people who have no idea what goes on in the sbr?

 

[Espy Rose]

Espy, there was no SBR-B at the time. It was the SBR, and it was full of all the Melee Professionals. They really just didn't know any other way.

It does make sense. However, it's still an odd way of thinking. It's not going to be the same game, so why opt to change the rule set?

Uh, we didn't? Why are you listening to random people who have no idea what goes on in the sbr?

Then perhaps you could help shed some light on the issue. You are in the backroom, right?

 

[Turbo Ether]

Brawl was NEVER Melee. Why the HELL did they use Melee to shape up Brawl?
Ugh~

The community was young, dumb and prideful. SWF flamed SRK/Evo endlessly for running Brawl as an items tournament at Evo 2008.

 

[Hylian]

You are in the backroom, right?

....lol.


What do I need to shed light on? People were complaining that the sbr didn't ban enough when the game first came out because we tested the **** out of everything, including items, before banning them and saw them in tournaments.

People are just throwing around generalizations and assumptions when they really have no idea what they are talking about in regards to what went on in the sbr then.

 

[hotgarbage]

I think it's been started a few times in this thread that Brawl tournaments have been getting larger and larger.

Where is this data coming from, exactly?

I've been wondering this myself actually. Coupled with the surplus of extra time I have atm and I decided look into it with the resources available. All data used is straight from ankoku's thread.



*graph had an error. Correct one: http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=9396995&postcount=1074 *


I'm dead tired so I'm not going to say much about this; I'll leave that up to you guys. I will say that the after-Christmas bump (and decline ) is amusing though.

 

[HeroMystic]

@Espy: Not everything was the SBR's fault. The community is largely at fault as far as stages go. Some were warranted though most were not. EVO is probably the straw that broke the camel's back as far as items go.

 

[Espy Rose]

....lol.


What do I need to shed light on? People were complaining that the sbr didn't ban enough when the game first came out because we tested the **** out of everything, including items, before banning them and saw them in tournaments.

People are just throwing around generalizations and assumptions when they really have no idea what they are talking about in regards to what went on in the sbr then.

So you tested the items and stages out, but just never made a criteria for any of it, or am I wrong in assuming that?

Just wondering, is all.

@HeroMystic: Fair enough.

Still, I'm pretty upset about the absence of a criteria.

 

[Hylian]

@Espy: Not everything was the SBR's fault. The community is largely at fault as far as stages go. Some were warranted though most were not. EVO is probably the straw that broke the camel's back as far as items go.

Nobody even used the SBR stage list, everyone just banned things right away, the sbr hardly banned anything lmao.

Where are all these misconceptions coming from? :/. People just look for something or someone to blame so they are able to complain. It's childish.

So you tested the items and stages out, but just never made a criteria for any of it, or am I wrong in assuming that?

You are wrong in assuming anything, you just shouldn't assume. Of course we had a criteria. We had topics devoted entirely to finding the criteria we wanted to use.

 

[stingers]

yeah I remember shaking my head at things like pirate ship and distant planet way back when their first list was out

i still do <.<

items need to be on though >.>

 

[Sosuke]

Where are all these misconceptions coming from? :/. People just look for something or someone to blame so they are able to complain. It's childish.

Might blame someone else if there was a little more communication between the SBR and the rest of Smashboards.

 

[Jack Kieser]

So you tested the items and stages out, but just never made a criteria for any of it, or am I wrong in assuming that?

Just wondering, is all.

@HeroMystic: Fair enough.

Still, I'm pretty upset about the absence of a criteria.

I'd really like to know this as well, since RDK keeps bringing up stuff like this as an actually argument. He keeps saying that we gave everything a fair shake, items and stages, before the SBR's first ruleset, but I can't find any even decently-sized All Brawl (or even just items-on Brawl) tournaments recorded between release and the first ruleset. Nothing outside of theoretical and as-of-now unlisted Smashfests and such.

And, for the record, if Hylian says that the SBR tested it themselves, I don't think we should let that slide; Sak tested things himself, and we still got broken crap in Brawl. Even ISP had major tournament data on its side. A bunch of shadowy figures testing things and not releasing their data, or even their rigor, no matter how pro they may be, isn't really a real-world test.

 

[Hylian]

items need to be on though >.>

Opinion. One that is also in the vast minority. They are different games almost, and random spawn points make it unappealing for the majority of smashers. Though most of the sbr doesn't mind items at all, we've held item tournaments and looked at the results from ones other people hold.


People really need to stop assuming things.

 

[C.J.]

Hylian, would you mind sharing the criteria (or at least some of it) with us?

 

[HeroMystic]

Where are all these misconceptions coming from? :/.

I'm not going to act like I know the SBR nor am I going to argue about it. In fact when I was answering Espy I had the community in mind, not the SBR.

But on that note, I also remember the SBR more or less have the final say in just about everything concerning bans. Was this an exceptional case due to community consensus as far as stages/items go?

 

[Espy Rose]

Of course we had a criteria. We had topics devoted entirely to finding the criteria we wanted to use.

Then is it fair to ask for the specifics? What exactly IS that criteria?

Might blame someone else if there was a little more communication between the SBR and the rest of Smashboards.

lol. You crazy.

People really need to stop assuming things.

It's hard not to when there's nothing to look back on as hard data. This entire Meta Knight debacle wouldn't even be going on if there was some criteria that was easy to find, and absolute.

I would think asking for people to just sit back and do nothing about it is being unreasonable.

Hylian, would you mind sharing the criteria (or at least some of it) with us?

This~

@HeroMystic: In that case, I should probably apologize for being a bit rash in my judgment. Sorry about that.
Oh, and the second paragraph. What he said.

 

[Hylian]

Might blame someone else if there was a little more communication between the SBR and the rest of Smashboards.

Read that again to yourself and think hard about that reasoning and why it's a really bad response lol.

I'd really like to know this as well, since RDK keeps bringing up stuff like this as an actually argument. He keeps saying that we gave everything a fair shake, items and stages, before the SBR's first ruleset, but I can't find any even decently-sized All Brawl (or even just items-on Brawl) tournaments recorded between release and the first ruleset. Nothing outside of theoretical and as-of-now unlisted Smashfests and such.

And, for the record, if Hylian says that the SBR tested it themselves, I don't think we should let that slide; Sak tested things himself, and we still got broken crap in Brawl. Even ISP had major tournament data on its side. A bunch of shadowy figures testing things and not releasing their data, or even their rigor, no matter how pro they may be, isn't really a real-world test.

Yeah, because the sbr is out to get all the smashers and get rid of everything we hate and there is a huge conspiracy so that our members are always winning money.

Seriously? Chill out, we do the best we can it's all anyone can do. SBR members aren't a bunch of "shadowy" figures they are well known smashers that attend tournaments frequently.

Hylian, would you mind sharing the criteria (or at least some of it) with us?

Don't remember it and I don't feel like looking through thousands of topics for it. I'm pretty sure we posted it a couple of times on the forums if you want to do that searching yourself.

 

[stingers]

Of course it's an opinion. And there are no random spawn points, sounds like the SBR didn't do great research @.@

 

[Col. Stauffenberg]

As I remember it, the first SBR official stage list was notoriously liberal and most TOs slashed it to ribbons. Hardly indicative of a group that supposedly banned things without a second thought.

 

[M@v]

Since you guys aren't taking the hint, a large portion of the people on the boards are idiots.

Thats why there is so little communication between them and the rest of the boards.

 

[Hylian]

I'm not going to act like I know the SBR nor am I going to argue about it. In fact when I was answering Espy I had the community in mind, not the SBR.

But on that note, I also remember the SBR more or less have the final say in just about everything concerning bans. Was this an exceptional case due to community consensus as far as stages/items go?

Not at all, the community practically ignored the SBR stagelist and banned stages on their own. The sbr doesn't try to force any rules at all, any to is free to do whatever, we don't care lol. We give a recommended ruleset which WE think is the most fair, doesn't mean everyone will or has to use it. That's why it's just recommended. It's not like we blacklist TO's that don't use our ruleset.

It's hard not to when there's nothing to look back on as hard data. This entire MK debacle wouldn't even be going on if there was something easy to find, and absolute.

Asking for people to just sit back and do nothing about it is impossible.

Huh? Honestly your posts just seem bitter for some reason. We aren't asking anyone to sit back and do nothing, This entire MK debacle shouldn't even be going on imo I don't know how anyone thinks he's bannable. I don't understand what you mean when you say if there was something easy to find, and absolute.

 

[Espy Rose]

Don't remember it and I don't feel like looking through thousands of topics for it. I'm pretty sure we posted it a couple of times on the forums if you want to do that searching yourself.

D:

I'd think something as important as that would be stickied somewhere in tactical...
Perhaps I'll go looking for it.

Huh? Honestly your posts just seem bitter for some reason. We aren't asking anyone to sit back and do nothing, This entire MK debacle shouldn't even be going on imo I don't know how anyone thinks he's bannable. I don't understand what you mean when you say if there was something easy to find, and absolute.

It's just the faulty way that I post Hylian.
I feel like he's a bannable character, but that's purely because I find that Jack and Flan's arguments feel "right" in comparison to anything I've read from the anti-ban side.

It just does. It's a stupid reason to go about it I suppose, but it's just something that feels right to me.

Oh, and as for your last sentence. I meant something along the lines of: Perhaps the criteria should've been archived somewhere where it's easy to access, and nigh-impossible to change.

 

[Hylian]

Of course it's an opinion. And there are no random spawn points, sounds like the SBR didn't do great research @.@

Points as in time.

As I remember it, the first SBR official stage list was notoriously liberal and most TOs slashed it to ribbons. Hardly indicative of a group that supposedly banned things without a second thought.

Yep.

 

[Sosuke]

Read that again to yourself and think hard about that reasoning and why it's a really bad response lol.

It was just a joke, but I would seriously like to see more of that.


Unless there is a decent amount of communication and I don't notice it at all. =/
Which could totally be it. >__>

 

[Jack Kieser]

Yeah, because the sbr is out to get all the smashers and get rid of everything we hate and there is a huge conspiracy so that our members are always winning money.

Seriously? Chill out, we do the best we can it's all anyone can do. SBR members aren't a bunch of "shadowy" figures they are well known smashers that attend tournaments frequently.

With all due respect*, I think you're the one who needs to chill. If I went up to any rational person and said, "There's a teapot situated halfway between Jupiter and Saturn that holds the times of birth and death for every individual on earth", they asked for proof, and I said, "I did my best to find it, you'll just have to trust me on it", I'd expect them to not only not take me seriously, but slap me in the face for being dumb.

You guys all may be awesome pros who frequent tournaments, but I'm sorry... I'm not going to believe you until I see the proof. I don't think you're out to get anyone, but like I said, you all testing it in your own little bubble is not the same as 6 months of real-world testing done by the entire Smash community (and I'm just saying 6 months because that sounds like a reasonable amount of time; I know it's totally arbitrary).

All of this can end if you guys (not just you personally) provided us with some info on your process. And, for the record, it's not our job to search for your data. Even so, if it was there, I'm pretty sure someone would have found it by now. I mean, really, how many threads could you guys possibly have back there?

* For anyone who's played Mass Effect, refer to Chief Williams' thoughts on people who say "with all due respect".

 

[Hylian]

It was just a joke, but I would seriously like to see more of that.


Unless there is a decent amount of communication and I don't notice it at all. =/
Which could totally be it. >__>

You are free to talk to any sbr member about anything lol. I'm sorry we don't give you our life stories. It's pretty much just things you would expect to be talked about there. Tournaments, rules, characters, etc. Just without the random nonsense.

The ruleset can be found here:

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=230481

The voting on the stages was based off of discussion, with the options being Starter, Counterpick, Banned, or to not vote at all. To be solidified as a Starter, Counterpick, or Banned stage, a stage needed to have at least 2/3rds majority (66.67%). If a stage did not, it would be split into two categories and the TO using the rule list would have to choose which category he prefered it to be in. No stage had equal or even close to equal votes for all three categories at once.

All stages were voted on with the intent of every ruleset using the stage striking system.

The layout below is listed in this manner:

Stage: Starter - Counterpick - Banned


Voting Changes:
Castle Siege: 14-16-1 >>> 5-9-0
Corneria: 1-27-9 >>> 0-3-15
Delfino 10-12-0 >>> 6-20-0
Distant Planet 0-20-10 >>> 0-15-11
Green Greens 0-10-11 >>> 0-6-9
Green Hill Zone 0-17-3 >>> 0-3-19
Halberd: 18-16-0 >>> 18-16-0
Luigi's Mansion: 0-30-8 >>> 0-11-8
Mario Circuit: 0-14-11 >>> 0-5-19
Onett 0-10-12 >>> 0-3-14
Pirate Ship: 2-18-4 >>> 0-15-3
Pokémon Stadium 2 2-21-2 >>> 0-24-11
Port Town Aero Dive 0-13-15* >>> 0-12-23
Shadow Moses: 0-6-29 >>> 1-1-20
Skyworld 0-12-8 >>> 0-0-16
Yoshi's Island (Pipes) 0-15-6 >>> 0-10-19
Norfair: 1-27-0 >>> 0-16-10

Old vote tallies (stages that were not revoted on)
Battlefield: 47-0-1
Big Blue 0-3-17
Bridge of Eldin 0-2-25
Brinstar 1-20-0
Final Destination: 26-2-1
Flat Zone 2: 1-1-22
Frigate Orpheon: 1-29-0
Hanenbow 0-5-16
Hyrule Temple: 0-0-16
Jungle Japes 0-14-1
Lylat Cruise 16-9-0
Mario Bros: 2-0-22
Mushroomy Kingdom II 0-0-21
Mushroomy Kingdom I 0-0-19
New Pork City: 2-1-20
Pokémon Stadium 1: 16-14-2
Pictochat 0-25-9
Rumble Falls 0-3-21
Rainbow Cruise: 0-30-1
Spear Pillar: 1-0-31
Smashville: 24-0-1
The Summit 0-2-20
Wario Ware: 0-2-33
Yoshi's Island (Wii): 37-0-0
75m 2-2-24


------------------------------

Stages become Starter stages when it is agreed by a 2/3 majority in the SBR that each stage is overall a fair stage with only minimal advantages and disadvantages given that has an overall low number of hazards, ineffective hazards, or basic hazards that can be predicted and implemented into a strategy.

Stages become Counterpick stages when it is agreed by a 2/3 majority in the SBR that they are not an overall fair stage in that they give specific advantages and disadvantages to certain types of characters, so much so that it can influence the match directly. Or, that the stage has hazards that disrupt play to such an extent that it cannot be assumed the player can avoid them with minimal effort or the hazards have such incredible damage and knockback that they can directly influence the outcome of a match.

Stages become Banned stages when it is agreed by a 2/3 majority in the SBR that they are not a fair or competitive stage at all, in that certain characters can easily have a near 100% win rate against others at top level play or that a large majority of the cast cannot actively be played on this stage, or that the stage simply requires such a radical change in gameplay that players cannot be reasonably expected to adapt (such as the Cave of Immortality in Hyrule Temple). Hazards can also cause a stage to be banned if they are random in nature and thus directly disrupting gameplay on a consistent basis, or if they are so powerful and/or unavoidable that they directly determine the outcome of a match on a consistent basis.

 

[Espy Rose]

In case you missed it Hylian, reposting:

It's just the faulty way that I post Hylian.
I feel like he's a bannable character, but that's purely because I find that Jack and Flan's arguments feel "right" in comparison to anything I've read from the anti-ban side.

It just does. It's a stupid reason to go about it I suppose, but it's just something that feels right to me.

Oh, and as for your last sentence. I meant something along the lines of: Perhaps the criteria should've been archived somewhere where it's easy to access, and nigh-impossible to change.

@Last post:

That covers the stages...what about the items/characters? Or, am I in the wrong for asking for that information?

 

[DtJ Composer]

CONCRETE EVIDENCE that MK should not be banned:

He's only a six, see? (blurry cell phone camera is blurry. :|)

 

[adumbrodeus]

Of course it's an opinion. And there are no random spawn points, sounds like the SBR didn't do great research @.@

There is no such thing are true "random", but the spawn points are chosen in a "weighted random" manner, emphasizing center stage and losing player in that order.

And spawn items are "randomly" chosen.

 

[Hylian]

With all due respect*, I think you're the one who needs to chill. If I went up to any rational person and said, "There's a teapot situated halfway between Jupiter and Saturn that holds the times of birth and death for every individual on earth", they asked for proof, and I said, "I did my best to find it, you'll just have to trust me on it", I'd expect them to not only not take me seriously, but slap me in the face for being dumb.

...I don't even know what to say this comparison isn't even fathomable.

You guys all may be awesome pros who frequent tournaments, but I'm sorry... I'm not going to believe you until I see the proof. I don't think you're out to get anyone, but like I said, you all testing it in your own little bubble is not the same as 6 months of real-world testing done by the entire Smash community (and I'm just saying 6 months because that sounds like a reasonable amount of time; I know it's totally arbitrary).

Own little bubble? Which is like..every region in the US and europe? You could never get the entire smash community to just change the norm for "testing" for half a year, that isn't even reasonable. We do the best we can with what we have, you want things that are impossible. Hundreds of people have been testing practically everything in brawl since the day it came out.

All of this can end if you guys (not just you personally) provided us with some info on your process. And, for the record, it's not our job to search for your data. Even so, if it was there, I'm pretty sure someone would have found it by now. I mean, really, how many threads could you guys possibly have back there?

* For anyone who's played Mass Effect, refer to Chief Williams' thoughts on people who say "with all due respect".

No, it can't end because of people who don't pay attention and realize that we provide you with the info for pretty much everything we talk about. A good example would be the mk debate.

 

[stingers]

There is no such thing are true "random", but the spawn points are chosen in a "weighted random" manner, emphasizing center stage and losing player in that order.

And spawn items are "randomly" chosen.

The first part was proven wrong through hacking, there are definitely spawn points on the stage.

 

[Jack Kieser]

That covers the stages...what about the items/characters? Or, and I in the wrong for asking for that information?

I'm assuming that they used the same criteria for stage bans from day one; working off of that, I'm going to try to scrounge up the original ruleset, the first one they put out, to see how long it took them to make it and how liberal/conservative it really was (because I honestly can't remember the specifics); the list he posted has the criteria, but it's the 2009 set, and that doesn't really prove they approached the situation the right way back in 2008.