Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
It appears that you are using ad block :'(
Hey, we get it. However this website is run by and for the community... and it needs ads in order to keep running.
Please disable your adblock on Smashboards, or go premium to hide all advertisements and this notice. Alternatively, this ad may have just failed to load. Woops!
This whole argument of, "The top level players should decide the MK Ban" is a terrible argument if you are anti-ban.
I suggest we stick to actual debate of substance in fighting a ban because if you keep pushing that idea, I'm going to advise the rest of BBR-RC to take that statement for face value. Given my access to stats that you don't have, you can trust me when I say you might want to reevaluate that approach.
This whole argument of, "The top level players should decide the MK Ban" is a terrible argument if you are anti-ban.
I suggest we stick to actual debate of substance in fighting a ban because if you keep pushing that idea, I'm going to advise the rest of BBR-RC to take that statement for face value. Given my access to stats that you don't have, you can trust me when I say you might want to reevaluate that approach.
I guess it depends on the region but I'm seeing this grand death that is happening people are talking about. Attendance in most games usually goes on a stedy decline over time, in some cases boosts that come from nowhere.
If forum policy prevents transparency, change the policy..
Doing things behind closed doors is never a good idea, and saying "Well I can see **** you don't so you're wrong" isn't a debate with any substance. It's the same kind of argument a three-year old makes.
I don't make the policy so it isn't for me to change
That isn't to say I haven't tried because I've made the whole transparency suggestion to a higher up or two than myself. It's just the rules context I have to work within for the present time.
And I agree with that whole substance bit. Which is why I suggested redirecting the debate towards something of substance.
I wish I had something else productive to say that wasn't just an agreement. Overall, I'm kind of neutral now I guess. the potential MK ban doesn't reeeeally affect me all that much, since we'll lose an MK (Kassy), which sucks but I want to just kinda see how it all pans out.
It's not when it doesnt really effect anything OR when it's not in the communities face.
Like. If you're going to make a decision like this drastic AND not give anyone any information then the least you can do is...
A. Not leak out what you're doing // the fact that the discussion is going on UNTIL you have something to show
B. When the cat's out of the bag just say wait we will give you information when we are done
C. Troll the god damn community with a poll
Because at this point. The BBRC asked the community for their input (*poll*), and haven't given **** back so I can understand why people are frustrated. I'm not mad at anyone generally speaking and I realize some people in the BBRC do their job. But some don't, some clearly could care less, and to me it's seems apparent that the organization isn't quite that together.
The group is split on decisions internally, and it shows before you get things together for the public. There are leaks all the god damn time from like the most random people. It's just not that professional. So if you're not going to keep up with things a certain way, at least don't keep everyone else in the dark. It is NOT that hard to have a writeup ready, and if it was, then it could have waited along with the poll and this discussion.
Players who make last may know what's going on. By your logic, M2K could get a tumor damaging the spatial/visual part of his brain, and all of his arguments about why MK should remain legal would immediately become invalid now that he places last at every tournament.
No, I'm actually talking about real noobs; people like Sphere (no offense, I just figured you'd be a good example to use for the states). The people who go to tournaments regularly, but still aren't bad.
What do people think of, having two stage bans which reset each game, no DSR, with an updated rule saying you can't CP the same stage twice. (excluding gentleman's clause).
It's not when it doesnt really effect anything OR when it's not in the communities face.
Like. If you're going to make a decision like this drastic AND not give anyone any information then the least you can do is...
A. Not leak out what you're doing // the fact that the discussion is going on UNTIL you have something to show
B. When the cat's out of the bag just say wait we will give you information when we are done
C. Troll the god damn community with a poll
Because at this point. The BBRC asked the community for their input (*poll*), and haven't given **** back so I can understand why people are frustrated. I'm not mad at anyone generally speaking and I realize some people in the BBRC do their job. But some don't, some clearly could care less, and to me it's seems apparent that the organization isn't quite that together.
The group is split on decisions internally, and it shows before you get things together for the public. There are leaks all the god damn time from like the most random people. It's just not that professional. So if you're not going to keep up with things a certain way, at least don't keep everyone else in the dark. It is NOT that hard to have a writeup ready, and if it was, then it could have waited along with the poll and this discussion.
Still for what they have said I'm content with them keeping it hush hush for now. I don't see why waiting for their ruling or whatever is a problem if it's just patience for now. This is a deep routed problem but even then a solution by them isn't going to be super fast or anything, they could have left the poll with thoughts, but my guess is they are working on the full results of the poll with a decision on what they will do.
So for now, I get why some people are upset, but waiting and patience should be done for now until they are ready.
How does it make sense? Even BBRRC members have said the reason they cant give more info is because they have to follow forum protocols regardless. No ones blaming the individual members but that doesnt make the lack of info less silly.
I personally dont need to discredit voluntary polls, voluntary polls are already known to be very unreliable. If you want to argue this then you have to debate with the mathematicians and staticians who've determined this, not me. Also the first statement isnt true (granted its worded weird. Its voluntary polls not a poll you take voluntarily). There's certain conditions that need to be met for a poll to be good including having a simple random sample (by its definition). Its interesting but I wont write a lecture here .
Honestly, youre asking me for a lecture in statistics. Not only is this the wrong place to do that, but youre best off learning through reading or a teacher. I answered about as much as is necessary for this topic with responding to Ran.
Regarding how many people will leave the community:
How does it make sense? Even BBRRC members have said the reason they cant give more info is because they have to follow forum protocols regardless. No ones blaming the individual members but that doesnt make the lack of info less silly.
I'm mostly speaking in regards to the SS and the BBR. I'm not in the BRC, but the reasons why I understand the BBR and the SS should be private are the same reasons why I think the BRC should be private.
They're gonna make an official statement in the near future anyways, so all there is to it is to remain patient, and all will show later.
Still for what they have said I'm content with them keeping it hush hush for now. I don't see why waiting for their ruling or whatever is a problem if it's just patience for now. This is a deep routed problem but even then a solution by them isn't going to be super fast or anything, they could have left the poll with thoughts, but my guess is they are working on the full results of the poll with a decision on what they will do.
So for now, I get why some people are upset, but waiting and patience should be done for now until they are ready.
I agree with you... but most people aren't patient. And the community out of impatience will probably just ***** at everything because it's brawl.
But if they want to act like an organization or whatever and actually make big decisions // keep them hush hush then put in 5 minutes of time and make a writeup for the average person.
----
For some reason I'm convinced smashboards is consisted of
50% players who *****, and either A don't go to tournaments, or B say nothing about this at tournaments.
10% People who just want random information / character boards / finding tourny locations / whatever
10% People who just come for social activity
20% Trolls
5% Actual contributors
5% Mods/Admins/Staff/Whatever
I'm mostly speaking in regards to the SS and the BBR. I'm not in the BRC, but the reasons why I understand the BBR and the SS should be private are the same reasons why I think the BRC should be private.
They're gonna make an official statement in the near future anyways, so all there is to it is to remain patient, and all will show later.
It's not like we directly make outcomes/rulesets for tournaments, or drastically change anything. We specialize in content like the tier list, or MU charts, ect and putting out information. We make suggestions. But we aren't controlling anyone... All it being public would do is make it have like, more posts to actually read through, and waste everyones time.
I don't even think the BBRC should be public either, but I do think they could give more information and be more informative/professional about it. Especially considering what they're doing will possibly change the tournaments scene by a lotttt
You dont just state oh a ton of changes are happening and we know why it should happen but its confidential. You dont have to give the whole write up right then and there, but you should be prepared to give some actual information of you are spout about something major. If not, then just dont speak about it untill its ready.
@ Delux: Im not stating "pros should dictate everything." that isnt my argument at all. I stating they should have an effect of the outcome. You cant state that them participating in a huge public poll counts as enough weight; thats ridiculous. Their opinions should have weight; thats all im saying. Im not spouting out 'OVERTHROW BBR RC THEYZ SHOULDSNT ESxIST'
There needs to be some form of transparency. Right now there is absolutely none. I feeling really American right now; just straight up getting mindgamed under the veil of Democracy.
@BPC: yeah we get it, everyone should matter. As far as voting is concerned that makes perfect sense. But when making decision people tend to raise inquiry with experts in the field. Thats the whole point.
Again, stating that people will come back and this and that is a ridiculous reason to ban any character. ESPECIALLY when that character isnt absurdly broken. ESPECIALLY WHEN WE HAVE CORE CP ISSUES THAT NEED ADJUSTMENT. Especially when we have other scenes that have made proper changes, have far more hype, and a healthier metagame then ours. If people could see discussion made on say potential changes on the CP system ( as there have been some brilliant ideas that have been brought up) from BBRC or anything of the matter, people could actively see if their opinions are being addressed. Or even have an actual PR who does answer questions, that actively engages the community regarding your endevours, people would could have some sense of being part of this whole.
Instead of feeling like peons.
And for the last time I DO NOT believe someone who complains about the game because he got beat by his sisters MK should hold the same value as strong tournament players. Ideally i feel BBRC should stand as representatives of the people, and top players should represent themselves. Obviously being a representative of the people SHOULD have more power overall than that of the top players, but they should have a definite say in the matter.
TL; DR: Besides the banning issue; BBRC needs to be far more professional on how they go about things. Noone is discounting you dont mean well. However on the PR side of things, things are done very poorly.
Oh btw Ran, why the hell would u state that 'as you progress higher in the bracket you are more inclined to fight MK'. Why would that even be needed? Of course i would be more inclined to face top tier the higher i go. Of course if I went to a national, where the top MKs went to, i would be more inclined to to play a MK the higher i go up. Theres nothing wrong with that. Thats like someone getting upset because as I start getting higher in Third Strike I see more Chuns, or more Yuns. In brawl i will see more MKs, Diddys, etc. Thats seriously the worst argument Ive seen on these boards. This overcentralization argument needs to stop. Talk about the character being broken, talk about his myriad of tactics or his absurd frame data maybe, but that? Thats just dumb. We are an MK nation; our best player at the time owned people all day with him. A ton of people just picked him up simply on that. Just like theres tons of people that picked up Marth when they saw Mr. R and Leon playing back in the day. Or the influx of Snakes in Japan. Theres going to be overcentralization. We were all influenced by M2K, the myriad of people who told us hes impossible to beat, and hes ridiculously easy. Hes also the best character in the game. Does it really seem crazy that there'd be a ton of Mks? Just like there were tons of D3s when M2K played him. Just like Snakes grew when Ally played him. Thats people jumping on the bandwagon. It happens with all fighting games and doesnt warrant a ban at all.
I know you gotta respect the game is supposed to be a spectator sport as well. Well look at the scenes around us. Theres ways to achieve that properly. I dont see how people easily dismiss Euro/Japan scenes data. We should actively be checking on these scenes and see what we are doing wrong and what we are doing right. Case in point, remember when Oli's thought MK was complete bs for them and then Brood comes by and every Oli all of a sudden upgrades? Japan came here and had their MKs upgrade after seeing what we do. And yet their Snakes still stand strong in MU. Does noone want to admit theyre maybe seeing something we dont ( I am not discounting Razer as being less than these snakes mind you, im just saying there are things i believe that we could learn from our bretheren) Can we for once come to the conclusion over here that maybe there somethings we are doing wrong?
@BPC: yeah we get it, everyone should matter. As far as voting is concerned that makes perfect sense. But when making decision people tend to raise inquiry with experts in the field. Thats the whole point.
Yes, but as we've established, this is far more about what people subjectively think about the direction of the metagame and the influence metaknight has on brawl than anything else. At that point, all the experts can do is state their cases and hope that people listen. I agree completely that it's stupid that scrubs decide the future of this game, but as far as choices go... We haz none.
And as for the Japan point... YES! YES YES YES YES YES!!! SO ****ING SICK OF PEOPLE POINTING TO THE STATES! I see how people around here point to the states and say, "Soon we're gonna look like that". I just want to smack them so hard they point the other way and say, "LOOK AT JAPAN YOU MORONS!"
B.A.M., I hope you'll be pleased to know that I've isolated multiple stats that the RC will be taking into consideration that are essentially examinations into whether the pros feel MK merits a ban or not. I feel like with the proper context, these pieces of data will go a long way in helping the RC make the best decision possible.
I appreciate your concern and passion and hopefully knowing this will help put those concerns at ease.
That defeats the purpose entirely. The BBRC is not infallible no matter how big Xyro thinks his **** is. There are almost certainly more forms or pieces of data that could be contributed to a better deicision, or more ways of analyzing the data. More eyes is almost never a bad thing. What makes me most concerned is the way the BBR is treating this looks very much like the way Blizzard used to work, which was very little transparency and almost no communication. It's likely not a coincidence that the game is already bleeding subs.
The Unity Ruleset in and of itself is a pretty great idea as far as unifying the community, but the way it's being handled is... Well, frankly, terrible.
This whole argument of, "The top level players should decide the MK Ban" is a terrible argument if you are anti-ban.
I suggest we stick to actual debate of substance in fighting a ban because if you keep pushing that idea, I'm going to advise the rest of BBR-RC to take that statement for face value. Given my access to stats that you don't have, you can trust me when I say you might want to reevaluate that approach.
Delux I think very few from anti-ban approve of that approach or have used it. If I may, I'd like to make a summary using some observations I've made. Id really appreciate if you read through this.
Pro-ban uses 3 general arguments of different popularity. Specific arguments fit into these categories.
1. MK is broken
2. MK is bad for/Banning him is good for the community
3. MK forces us to cater our ruleset to him
Technically 3 is an element of 1, but its worth isolating and removing for the moment. For now Im going to address points 1 and 2, which even intelligent members of pro-ban like popsofctown have called out on BS.
Metaknight is broken:
An ancient/dead argument. Without dwelling long on this, this was the focus of the ban movement in '09 that didn't take hold because it was determined that he was not broken, and nothings really changed. Even a large chunk of pro-banners admit this isnt true. High level play success is attributed to skill. Nonetheless when posts like those of Doc King and ADHD are made about how people are winning because of MK it takes away focus and attention from legitimate arguments.
Metaknight is bad for the community/banning Metaknight is good for the community:
And here we have the overwhelming majority of current pro-ban arguments. I've said in the past this argument itself isnt bad if it can be proven. As Strong Bad says if the community decides we want to play casually for the sake of the community itself, or just because its more 'fun' its not like anyone can stop us.
Let's look at a few of the points attempting to prove this argument:
EVO 2006
1. Nitto (Yun)
2. Issei (Yun)
3. Nuki (Chun)
4. Mester (Yun)
5. PyroLee (Yun)
5. Tokido (Chun/Urien)
7. Amir (Chun)
7. Alex Valle (Ken)
Overall:
4 Yun
3 Chun
1 Ken
1 Urien
EVO 2007
1. Nuki (Chun)
2. Tokido (Chun)
3. Alex Valle (Ken/Ryu)
4. Mike Wakefield (Makoto)
5. Fubarduck (Chun)
5. David Hem (Necro)
7. Ricky Ortiz (Chun)
7. Ed Ma (Ken)
Overall:
4 Chun
2 Ken
1 Ryu
1 Makoto
1 Necro
EVO 2008
1. Nuki (Chun)
2. JWong (Chun)
3. Amir (Chun)
4. Tokido (Chun/Urien)
5. Fubarduck (Chun)
5. JR (Akuma)
7. Prodigal Son (Ken/Yun)
7. Watts (Yun/Ken)
Overall:
5 Chun
2 Yun
2 Ken
1 Urien
1 Akuma
Unfortunately people still attempt to push this point as well in spite of its weakness
D. The game isnt fun enough
The last set of arguments all fall under this. Which include but are not limited to:
i. MK is overcentralising (subjective/community specific)
ii. Theres not enough character diversity.
iii. Metaknight dittos are boring
iv. Hardly anyone will quit and everyone else will be happy (because the game will be more fun)
v. People will stop quitting brawl (because the game will be more fun)
vi. People who quit will come back to the community (because the game will be more fun)
etc etc etc.
These argument almost seems like a joke, except that people like Player-1 and John#s are using them and attempting to make them sound objective (theyve talked to their friends so of course its true! oh yeah and lots of people come in here and say theyre quitting till MK's banned = instant validity). However with the previous three points A,B, and C weak, disproven, or constantly under attack this is essentially what most of pro-ban relies on. An emotional appeal with little substance or proof.
i.e. If we ban MK, then MAYBE the game will be more fun, and maybe maybe people will stop quitting, and maybe maybe maybe people will come back and play again.
quite honestly its risky and could just as easily prove to be detrimental with such little and difficulty obtainable information. I think DMG summed it up best:
You can't reasonably predict how many people would quit Brawl if MK were gone, how many people would come back, how many people would quit cause the game would still be dying, how many people would quit because their best MU is against MK and now they can't deal with other stuff, how many people would still play Brawl but would switch to a more dominating character with MK gone, etc.
You don't know. I don't know. God and jesus almighty don't know. Give it a rest EVERYONE!
Just focus on whetehr banning him is the right choice. Not this
Conclusion; arguments that appeal to the community are pretty trashy. Yet they take up the majority of debate since weak/disproven points are repeated as if they are strengthened by doing so. Cant even count how many times ive had to repeat information about voluntary polls as people recite the same disproven point.
MK Forces us to Cater our Ruleset to him
Quite honestly the best argument I've heard for MKs ban. To quote myself in regards to why its hardly addressed by anti-ban:
I'd say its almost entirely attributed to the fact that if MK is banned, it wont be for the reason youre giving, and as a practical matter it serves best for anti-ban to argue against the issue that will get him banned.
Right now the big argument against MK is to appeal to the communities well being
Popsofctown made a beautiful argument that unfortunately went unaddressed by both sides, as pro-ban has apparently wished to rely on unproven emotional appeals while anti-ban is forced to focus time on them. Im certain anti-ban would love nothing more than to focus on substantive arguments like these if we could get past the BS arguments currently being used now. Shoutouts to all the other pro-banners in this group who havent succumbed to the easy emotional appeals, I see yall posting on occasion.
As a footnote:
Going off pro-sentiment alone is unreliable. Several have admitted to outright bias (i.e. with reasons such as wanting the game to be more fun for them, helping/hurting them in tournament, etc.). With others it just oozes. My gripe is that while pro-banners are quick to jump on bias from people like m2k or anti, no one says anything to adhd or others. Just as an example, when adhd was beating m2k and losing to ally he would make out snake to be broken and easy to use and MK to be 'even'. iirc it got to the point where ally got upset at him for insulting his skill. The characters have changed, but the bias hasnt.
Honestly pros should have a good reason for not banning/banning MK just like everyone else. The reason pros should theoretically have more say is because theyre (theoretically) more informed through experience. But that shouldnt be taken as a given, nor should it be ignored that they could be just as bias as everyone else. Hence giving more weight to pro's opinions should require a superior understanding/explanation of the game. Otherwise whats the point?
If competitive depth can be defined as (and commonly is) "the amount of unique situations in the game," then surely removing a character decreases the number of unique situations
I'd like to argue that depth in this case is referring to the number of valid unique situations in the game; banning Akuma from ST2 certainly did remove the possibility of selecting him as a character, yet it improved depth because the number of competitively valid character choices made available after the ban far outnumbered the loss of the single character Akuma.
I can't accurately predict whether the same holds true for Meta Knight, but as far as things like banning stages due to overcentralizing tactics and strategies go, the same logic applies. Having all stages on provides more options, but when evaluating their competitive validity, you'll find that several of them are actually quite limiting to the rest of the game simply by being allowed.
.
