Minwu
Smash Journeyman
That's because Peach and Fox are underplayed by people that can compete with M2K. MK is Fox's 3rd or 4th worst matchup. Let's see Azen get that close with in the same matchups vs. M2K again. For an entire set.
-
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!
Should Metaknight be Banned? ***Take 3***
- Thread starter SamuraiPanda
- Start date
- Status
ShadowLink84
Smash Hero
I demand we have a pissing contest as well as a drinking contest.
Sounds better than brawl.
Of course
I was implying that Texas has no say in whether or not to ban things since they (or maybe it was another state) banned all of D3's chaingrabs, including the running chaingrabs, which is a ludicrous thing to do.
Rawr I type in all caps and contradict myself. Rawr.You guys are all stupid. You advocate the ban of a character you can't beat with your pathetic main? NOBODY CARES! IF YOU PLAY SOMEBODY LIKE SAMUS OR DK YOU DON'T NEED TO WONDER WHY YOU CAN'T WIN. If you're competitive (and we are a competitive community) you either play a character, who can actually win or otherwise you just stfu. The only other option is to become so good that the character doesn't matter (like Azen) but it'll never happen to you b/c you're just whining and *****ing all the time.
WE ARE A COMPETITIVE COMMUNITY. Unless you play a character, that's acually good at the game you should just shut your mouth. If you use a garbage character like PT you won't win anyways. So what if MK makes 90% of the cast unviable (which isn't even remotely true) when only 4 or 5 characters are viable in the first place (which is already a good rate...Tekken games usually have like 3 at best)? Nobody gives a fart about whether MK makes R.O.B unviable or not because R.O.B sucks.
If you want to win you play Meta, Snake, Wario or Diddy Kong. If you're really good you can do it with D3, Kirby, Lucario, G&W, Marth and Falco too. The only reason why these characters don't do as well as MK is because you stick to your stupid mains who suck and get ***** by the top tiers. In Melee everybody played Spacies, Marth and Sheik because those were the best characters. In Brawl you have people who use chars like Fox and Ness in tourney and expect to win. FORGET THAT. Before you whine about a good character use a good character yourself. Goddamit.
ALL YOU GUYS WHO PLAY ZAMUS, LINK OR WHATEVER: NOBODY CARES ABOUT YOUR MAIN CHARACTER. PLAY A GOOD CHARACTER OR ELSE GTFO.
If you were actually competitive and focused on playing the game TO WIN rather than cry like little babies we'd never have this issue. Why does Atomsk never complain about MK? BECAUSE HE DOESN'T HAVE YOUR SCRUB MINDSET. He goes to tourneys, plays the game AND ***** MKS WITH KING DEDEDE because he learns how to deal with it. HE COULDN'T DO THAT CONSISTENTLY IF MK WAS BROKEN. Anther beats MKs with ****ing Pikachu. LeePuff with G&W, Meep with the ICs, ADHD with Diddy, Ally with Snake, AZEN WITH ***ING LUCARIO and BOSS WITH ***ING LUIGI.
So basically you pansies dicuss BS like MK having no bad/even match-up WHEN YOU ALL CLEARLY SUCK AT THE GAME AND SHOLDN'T EVEN TALK ABOUT MATCH-UPS YOU HAVE NO ****ING CLUE ABOUT. Meanwhile Boss ***** MKs WITH LUIGI. Now don't ever say MK should be banned again.
FrostytheSnowThug
Smash Cadet
I'll **** you in pissing, and spitting.
I don't drink though. Never. Sorry. And doing that would only be half as bad for me as playing me in Brawl would be for you
Their majors were run correctly. That's all that matters. I couldn't give a **** how they wanna run local crap.
ShadowLink84
Smash Hero
Hell no, I'll murder you in the pissing contest and he johnson contest
I don't drink either, I was worried if you would have taken me up on that part.
As for playing you in brawl.
Hell I'll take your MK on i a Ganondorf vs MK matchup.
I can guarantee I will land at least five hits on you.
FrostytheSnowThug
Smash Cadet
I could guarantee that too. I don't shield, like ever.
ShadowLink84
Smash Hero
not using shield in brawl is like not using Fox's shine in melee.
SHIELD MOAR.
In anycase i'll get back on topic.
Concerning MK's ban, I am unsure, primarily because I can udnerstand the reasons for the communities concern. on the other hand, there is also the fac tthat Mk doesnt **** everyone either.
FrostytheSnowThug
Smash Cadet
M2K ***** people. MK alone is just a good character.
Ballistics
Smash Champion
lol tallahassee is the capital of Florida, where I live
I don't think the decision should be so polar: ban or not ban, I think a compromise would work perfectly.
Florida is already starting to ban him in our tournaments but if he gets totally banned we will have no practice for OOS tournaments where he is allowed.
FrostytheSnowThug
Smash Cadet
Florida are whiny babies.
ShadowLink84
Smash Hero
Except m2k cannot take up more than 5 placings with Mk either.
Regardless of how many secondaries you are whipping out, the fact that you are using Mk, along with 6 other people i the top 8 does say alot.
DSF used how many characters? Around 4 or so, yet he still brought out MK.
Same for everyone else using other characters, they all brought out MK when they really needed to win.
So it is understandable as to why people are concerned.
We do see m2k losing to people, but considering how much lesser this occurs i comparison to Mk winning out, it does bring up ideas on MK being ban worthy or not.
Personally i think it may be similar to Sheik. He just seems ban worthy but its also because other metagames haven't really matured.
So he seems overpowering currently which is to be expected.
he is the best so his metagame has developed more greatly, so he will seem much worse than what appears.
I'm pretty sure that that is false.
As far as I know, Houston (only a part of Texas) only limited jab locks, wall infinites, and D3's standing infinite after 5 jabs/grabs/etc.
Unless someone from Houston (coughXyrocough) can correct this instead; I highly doubt any of Texas would ban D3's standard chaingrab.
FrostytheSnowThug
Smash Cadet
Exactly. MK feels like melee sometimes, which is why all the old melee pros use him. DSF, M2K, spam, etc.
But only M2K/Dojo used full MK in the top ten at Whobo. Secondaries help. People like Ninjalink always counterpick the worst possible match up for you. Notice, he never plays MK. His MK is still better than 75% of the top players. lmao
Bringing this up because no one addressed it.
We've had to ban items, stages, moves (infinite dimensional cape), and strategies (stalling, planking) to make this game competitive. Some of the items we banned because we simply didn't like them (Food, as noted by Edrees, is an excellent example).
So to answer your question; banning a character to make the game better competitively does not seem outside of the community's standards. Unless you can provide a good reason for banning Food that doesn't also apply to MK.
As Edrees noted; we did it to Food. We did it to little items that have little effect on the metagame.
We've had to ban items, stages, moves (infinite dimensional cape), and strategies (stalling, planking) to make this game competitive. Some of the items we banned because we simply didn't like them (Food, as noted by Edrees, is an excellent example).
So to answer your question; banning a character to make the game better competitively does not seem outside of the community's standards. Unless you can provide a good reason for banning Food that doesn't also apply to MK.
FrostytheSnowThug
Smash Cadet
All items were removed form play because they limit the movesets of people link link and peach further, and add a string on random crap into the game. Which is also why most stages are banned. Don't be an idiot
Explain how Food limits the moveset of Link and Peach.
ShadowLink84
Smash Hero
Alot of Ninjalinks characters are better than others because he is just that good.
If you have the skill, you can make up for it.
hell I have seen Balrog's perfect really bad Akuma's. but thats besides the point.
While secondaries certainly help, they really do not make much of a difference in the end. Since at worst, mk is suffering a neutral matchup, certainly they would help in making things easier, but not so much easier that you need to whip out a secondary.
meanwhile you see people whip out MK when they NEED to win which shows more importance on MK's usage.
Then again i pay a character who can outrun the tornado. sooo it makes little difference to me when I run into an MK.
FrostytheSnowThug
Smash Cadet
Please read the whole post instead of just the parts you like.
Ah, "add a string of random crap in the game"?
So, you're not good enough to overcome 1% healing?
We banned Food because we didn't like it. Primarily because it's random, yes, but "random" =/= ban. We just don't like random.
I think Game & Watch's over-B is significantly more effective on the outcome of the match than food is- we don't ban THAT, do we?
Coney
Smash Master
BMunich16
Smash Apprentice
There will always be somebody at the top of the tier, If MK didn't exist, this poll would be about Snake, it never ends, there will always be a top tier so get over it. Solid NO.
Kage Me
Smash Ace
I can provide a reason. It's because items had already been banned, and characters never were. Since items were banned before, it seemed like the right thing to do. However, banning a character would be seen by the community as "johning", which most board members have a crippling fear to.
...Ohwait, you wanted a good reason. Sorry, there are none of those.
FrostytheSnowThug
Smash Cadet
Don't use the didn't like it argument. We don't like you, Praxis, but you're still around, non?
and 1% healing to 5% healing. Times maybe 40?
D3 chaingrabs a character off the stage AS 15 food fall out of a party ball. yay -45% for d3 for getting a chaingrab. Man, you're stupid.
Items were WC standard in tourney play in 2002-2004. East coast ran rules without items and it was adopted by everyone. Don't being up 5 year old matters in hopes of your ****ty character moving up one space in the tier our of default.
ShadowLink84
Smash Hero
It is primarily because it is an uncontrollable random.
You cannot control when the random element occurs or where it will appear.
While such moves such s G&W's judgement hammer can be controlled in occurrence and placement.
Also you can simply remove the overpowering items.
You cannot control when the random element occurs or where it will appear.
While such moves such s G&W's judgement hammer can be controlled in occurrence and placement.
Also you can simply remove the overpowering items.
Edrees is wrong.
Food is not an excellent example of a gratuitous ban at all. Some matches come down to the last smash/hit/move. Some matches almost end with a finisher, but the victim survives and comes back and wins.
If we throw healing items such as food into the mix, a single food item worth but 1-2% could be the one that decides the outcome. You vs. Me. I have 125%, you have 110%. You Smash me, but I survive by just a smidgeon due to having drunk a coffee (a food item) earlier.
I manage to return to the stage and Zelda-Fairs you. You flat out die from the hit. Fair? Not random? Items didn't change the outcome of the match?
Now, let's go to less extremes. You should've lost your first stock of the match from my fair, but since you healed up a total of 6% that stock, you do not. For the remainder of that stock, you manage to rack up 50% on me, 50% you wouldn't have been able to rack up on that stock had you died. Meanwhile, I rack up 45% of my own on you, but you don't die, it just stacks atop of your 110% to 160%.
You finally die. But I am 50% behind due to you not dying when you should've due to food. With food allowed, this will be happening... a lot. Every single percentage might count. Healing items (which are still items that spawn randomly) can unfairly change the results.
This is why I believe items as a whole need to be banned. Because most items have the ability to unfairly change the outcome of a match through nothing but sheer dumb luck. In a match where both sides are even, one side given an advantage is enough to win the match with the other side having done nothing wrong, really, especially in Brawl where you can pick up items mid-aerial.
You get aerialed by me. During this, since you are in hitstun, it is impossible for you to grab items. While I'm doing my aerial, food spawns inside/above of me and I eat it while hitting you. There was no way for you to know food would spawn then and there, yet you get screwed over by this, anyway.
The 2% I was healed will come to be the 2% I need to not die from your Smash later and I return and KO you. Fair?
The above?
If you can provide a good reason for why Food shouldn't be banned, be my guest and argue for the reinstatement of food. I will not accept it as a reason to ban MK, however. MK is a character. Character bans are last resorts.
No, random = anti-competitive
If we have the ability to remove randomness without limiting the metagame too much, we should take it, thus we ban minor things such as items (if we first remove the overpowered ones which have to go and then the ones which can easily change the outcome of matches, we left with around 5 or so items, be my guest, argue for their reinstatement) and stages (in the big picture, stages are minor).
You cannot ban a move (only a technique, since you cannot accidentally perform them as easily as a move). If you want to ban G&W's Over B, ban his entire character.
And that move applies only to G&W. Food applies to all characters. No matter who you face, Food could spawn at an inopportune moment and screw you over. The only way to remove G&W's Over B from play except for a "Never use Over B as G&W"-rule would be to ban G&W completely.
Also, some randomness is allowed. As long as it's limited, for example, to a single character's moveset and the randomness does not affect the metagame to a ginormous extent-
Coney
Smash Master
I hate threads like these. There are about three pages of relatively strong arguments with meaningful dialogue, and then for the following 200 pages you get posts like these, ones that contribute nothing to the argument and just regurgitate facts they've heard before. This point has been addressed over and over and the slippery slope argument has been FURIOUSLY disproved time and again. Come up with your own argument before you post, or bring up a solid argument that hasn't yet been discussed.
Vomiting the same facts over and over won't help anyone.
Exaggurate much? I didn't suggest legalizing stages with walk off ledges or party balls. Dedede kills a player, and grabs two pieces of food while the other player respawns. Oh no, Dedede is now unstoppable! Oh wait...
Wow, you quite like attributing false motivations to people, don't you?
Might I suggest reading a book on logical fallacies? I'm not arguing legalizing items. I'm asking specifically about FOOD. We banned food because we didn't like it in competitive play.
Essentially, your entire "response" was twisting my statements to include party balls and walk off ledges so you could "refute" it, then attributing false motivations about me wanting to make my main better in a tier list.
Learn2debate.
Sephiroths Masamune
Shocodoro Blagshidect
no the difference about snake and MK is that snake has counters
FrostytheSnowThug
Smash Cadet
I was giving you worst case scenarios. You've never obtained items out of a party ball, Praxis?
Like for instance, people banning the IC chaingrabs. What's the worst case scenario? ICs win a tournament? plz.
ShadowLink84
Smash Hero
Confused here.
Are you saying the IC CG when legal can win them a tournament?
I was talking about turning on food, not turning on party balls- they're separate items.
Banning IC chaingrabs is dumb. It's not even enforceable. You're banning grabbing someone out of a throw? You'd need a judge watching to prove it. And ICs aren't winning tournaments so it's irrelevant...
This elitist attitude is dangerous when applied to more serious topics. 'Oh, if we are just smart enough, we can fix every problem in existence from the outside in.' It doesn't work that way, and history is full of examples where this attitude did more harm than good.
For a video game fanbase, however, this kind of elitism is just silly.
I would go on about some of your other comments, but I don't have time to make 10,000 posts, I'm busy contributing to society. Thanks.
But limiting people's movesets isn't broken. It's just an alteration on the gameplay that we don't like. So what if peoples movesets are altered? It doesn't break the game.
I love you for hitting the nail on the head. I think the fact that nobody wants to do something *new* that we've never done in the history of smash, people are more cautious than they should be about banning a character. However, there is no logical justifcation for withholding on the ban of a character but banning a stage or gameplay element freely. Whether you ban a character, item, or stage, is irrelevant, the only thing that matters is the reason something needs to be banned. If the reason is the exact same, I don't see why the fact that it is a character should be even considered. If the character is causing an end that we determined bannable as a community, I don't see why the character should have extra protection by virtue of being a character.
Yuna your example of 1% saving a match shows that food was banned for reasons other than that is it broken. Something POSSIBLY effecting the outcome of 1 out of 500 matches is hardly broken. Effectively if we banned food for the reasons in your post we banned it despite it not being broken Your reason is that food can change the match with sheer dumb luck. I agree. BUT IT IS SO RARE FOR FOOD TO DO THIS. On very low, food will probably effect one out of 300 matches played. It is not broken. Banning things because they are affected by luck is an example that we can ban things because we don't like what they are- yuna doesn't like the fact that luck plays a role so he consideres it a bannable offense Food isn't broken even if it is a matter of luck, because the luck will rarely do anything serious to change the match on very low.
What I'm trying to say is that
WE HAVE BANNED THINGS THAT ARE NOT BROKEN
METAKNIGHT DOESN"T HAVE TO BE BROKEN TO BE BANNED
That's my message and I have yet to see why Metaknight should be broken to be banned despite everyone enjoying the fact that we banned a lot of stuff that isn't necessarily broken, but just a hamperment. Food is a hamperment, ait makes matches less competitive, it gets in the way of regular fighting. It is based on luck. IT IS NOT BROKEN ESPECIALLY not on very low.
Also I tend to ignore all posts that call others stupid. If you have to resort to name calling I will refuse to address you.
Also, there's a lot of factors based on luck we don't ban. DDD's Waddle Dees/Gordo, Peach's turnips. These are all based on luck. So are the platforms on Yoshi's Island. Most of the legal counterpicks have elements that influence a match based on luck to the same degree that food on very low would. Yet these things aren't banned, so I don't thing luck is the only reason food was banned, we just plain and simple didn't like playing with it on.
I wrote a very long post in response to your challenge about Food. You probably missed it. Please read it and reply to it.
It's not elitism, it's logic. The majority is often wrong on many things. This is why we don't have majority votes on many things. This is also why the rights of minorities are often not put to a majority vote. This is why black civil rights were legislated through the bench, not through a majority vote.
This is also why we don't put up polls in General when trying to decide on the ruleset for the majority. And I'm pretty it's like that in all fighting game communities. No community lets just any Tom, **** and Harry vote on the proposed ruleset.
They might not have an SBR of their own, but they still listen only or primarily to their most trusted and credible members.
If we allowed anyone to vote, we might end up with All Stages, All Items, Time.
Melomaniacal
Smash Champion
Well, I don't know if I'd call MK "anti-competitive," either.
Kage Me
Smash Ace
Food changing the outcome of matches due to healing players? That occurs in more than 1 out of 500 matches. If Food is the only thing on or one of the few items allowed (since so many items are just flat out broken), it'll affect at least 50% of all matches to some degree, IMO.
Items are random. Now prove how Meta Knight is random.
It is random. It is anti-competitive because of its randomness. With only 5-10 items on, Food would spawn pretty often, even on Very Low. And in Competitive fighting games, every percentage counts.
1-10% could the deciding factor in many a match! Due to sheer randomness.
If this was in response to me (which I doubt, but still), I resent that. I have not called anyone names in this thread.
4 tournaments?! Oh noes!
ShadowLink84
Smash Hero
Good job now name the tournaments they won. =)
Of the 4 they have won.
- Status