Fourth and final community vote about Meta Knight.

Supermodel From Paris · Aug 1, 2009

Strong_Bad said:
That shouldn't be surprising at all. Brawl has terrible character balance (It's not a very good game), so what's the ****ing problem?

That isn't actually true, anyone below S tier and above **** tier is pretty balanced.

I mean, that's not to say it's perfect (or anywhere close) but for a game with 36 characters things could be worse.

And you can always use the AllyxM2K example, where the "better" character beats the "worse", twice now.

wow twice guess that means i'm anti-ban now

Negi-Kun · Aug 1, 2009

N4N3RZ said:
Pro-Ban is the way to go!

This .

Toronto Joe · Aug 1, 2009

looks like MK is officially banned in Ontario

****ing way too many babies in this community, smash community are never going to be taken seriously >.>

Divinokage · Aug 1, 2009

Toronto Joe said:
looks like MK if officially banned in Ontario

****ing scrubs

What? Why's that?

Supermodel From Paris · Aug 1, 2009

Divinokage said:
What? Why's that?

Because every game had apparently devolved into MK dittos or something so people lost interest and stopped attending tournaments.

Strong Badam · Aug 1, 2009

JUDGE said:
hahaha^^ wow thx dude^^
this is coool^^

aren't you that midwest person? if so, then you deserved that post. <3 mw

Clai · Aug 1, 2009

Supermodel From Paris said:
Just the fact that we have to constantly bicker about rules that keep MK in check says a lot!

By the way, just because something is banned doesn't make it less broken, LOL. You can ban stalling and IDC and EDC and planking and whatever else you want, they're still broken and you're still jumping through hoops to make a broken character work.

Stalling for the sake of stalling was banned in Melee, and as always been an integral rule in competitive Smash.
IDC is banned because it explicitly disobeys the rule about stalling.
Planking isn't anything new. It's STALLING for the sake of STALLING! It's just called planking because it was popularized by Plank (and if you bothered to do any research, you'd know that Plank does essentially the EXACT SAME THING in Melee in regards to being a ***** on the edge).

There is nothing broken about them. They are banned because they break the rules that were already in place by the ruling commitee. We have never had to shift the rules just because of Metaknight. We are adding these traits about Metaknight to the rules because they are in direct disagreement to the rules just as going under Final Destination and continously using the homing attack with Sonic is.

We aren't doing anything new just to keep Metaknight in line. We aren't giving Metaknight any special treatment just to say he isn't broken (because he isn't).

The people who main Metaknight have the follow the rules like every other player using every other character in the game.

Strong Badam · Aug 1, 2009

lol you're still jumping through hoops to try to save Brawl even though it's clear that as a competitive game it isn't very good (like 5 or 6 tourney viable chars? MK winning 22% of tournaments? many rules put in place just so MetaKnight stays as the best char and not too good? rofl)

AvaricePanda · Aug 1, 2009

Supermodel From Paris said:
The "no one ever truly knows anything!" argument is getting a little old and wasn't very good to begin with, sorry.

That wasn't the argument.

You being a ZSS main, I don't doubt that you know the ZSS vs. MK match-up well. But do you know the Snake vs. MK match-up, IC vs. MK match-up, Wario vs. MK match-up, etc.? If not, you can't talk as if you know them and say they aren't even.

kr3wman said:
Don't have to.

Just look at his hitboxes/frame data. It completely stomps the **** out of most characters in brawl and even those that people say are 'close to even'.

The only character I can see gain up on Meta Knight is Snake and that's because his projectile game/Huge hitboxes/Weight make up for his other flaws.

Yes, because hitboxes and frame data are the way to go for match-up discussion. Taking a linear path by seeing the pure attack data rather than taking the metagames of two players and weighing the advantages that each character has definitely shows what a match-up is!!

...if you couldn't tell, that was sarcasm.

That's a horrible way to look at match-ups.

Clai · Aug 1, 2009

Strong_Bad said:
lol you're still jumping through hoops to try to save Brawl even though it's clear that as a competitive game it isn't very good

These 'hoops' you're talking about are the exact same that have existed for Melee and Smash64. Brawl is not getting special treatment. If you really think that a good competitive game has to equal balanced, then you're going to be in for a real disappointment when you pick up a few other fighting games.

(like 5 or 6 tourney viable chars?

There are 13 characters in the S and A tier. They are all completely viable characters. Hell, we can make a case that the B-tier is viable too, meaning that almost half the cast in Brawl is tourney viable.

MK winning 22% of tournaments?

He's the best and most overused character in the game. Really, what are you expecting?

many rules put in place just so MetaKnight stays as the best char and not too good? rofl)

I'm just going to completely ignore this because you prove to be incapable of comprehending what I said on the post right above yours, the post that proves this statement to be utter nonsense. Look at it and then construct a proper argument.

tocador · Aug 1, 2009

Supermodel From Paris said:
That isn't actually true, anyone below S tier and above **** tier is pretty balanced.

I mean, that's not to say it's perfect (or anywhere close) but for a game with 36 characters things could be worse.

wow twice guess that means i'm anti-ban now

Good job avoiding my whole argument and trolling it saying that.

Dude, your like the most closed minded from this thread, and you are wrong, just give up, MK wont be banned, and im sure your not going to change it =/.

Darth Waffles · Aug 1, 2009

Clai said:
He's the best and most overused character in the game. Really, what are you expecting?

I had a whole long post with the math behind this which led to MK's 22%, Snake's 13%, D3's 7%, and the other 33 characters getting less than 2% on average. "Best and overused" character would make sense if MK had 10% and everyone else had 5%. It would be kind of pushing it for MK's 15% and everyone else's 3%. But to be over 11 times more successful than 33 of 36 characters (22+% to like 1.76%) is a little too much for me =\. I'll live and I'll keep playing Brawl even if MK doesn't get banned- I can just see how MK affects the other characters rather than just mine and the results are a little too much for me for ignore.

Also, to point out something about the tier + viable character thing, the list clearly says that MK is clearly better than the second character on the list, who is clearly better than the third character (etc.) for top tier. This hurts the A and B lists even more. Just someting to consider.

etecoon · Aug 1, 2009

Darth Waffles said:
I had a whole long post with the math behind this which led to MK's 22%, Snake's 13%, D3's 7%, and the other 33 characters getting less than 2% on average. "Best and overused" character would make sense if MK had 10% and everyone else had 5%. It would be kind of pushing it for MK's 15% and everyone else's 3%. But to be over 11 times more successful than 33 of 36 characters (22+% to like 1.76%) is a little too much for me =\. I'll live and I'll keep playing Brawl even if MK doesn't get banned- I can just see how MK affects the other characters rather than just mine and the results are a little too much for me for ignore.

36 characters is a meaningless figure because HALF OF THEM ARE TERRIBLE. Ganondorf, Link etc. are not winning/taking major spots regardless, they are IRRELEVANT, it's always going to be the top 10-15 characters that really matter.

Clai · Aug 1, 2009

BPC, I'm going to answer all your questions one by one, since I'm guilty of basing my arguments off of comparisons to other fighting games.

Budget Player Cadet_ said:
Name me one other fighting game with such a diverse metagame?

The diversity of the metagame has nothing to do with it. All fighting games work with the same principles: Spacing, use of attacks and defenses, mindgames, comboes, etc.

Where the way the game works induces that a character bad against a lot of the best characters can do stunningly well against other top chars?

I can't find the video at the moment, but a Sakura player beat a well-known Ryu player in Street Fighter IV at EVO. Sakura is terrible.

Where there are chaingrabs that are finite? Where your survival is based not only on how well you block but what you do after a potentially killing blow lands? Where you don't die if you go past a certain amount of damage (you could potentially go up to 999% with a few chars, like Falco, Fox, DDD, etc.)?

Lumping these three together because they all ask essentially the same thing. Yes, comboes that are dependant on percentages, edgeguarding and the existance of blast zones separate smash from traditional fighters, but the essential principles that I've already outlined are still there, making this game, in essence, a fighter.

Where there are, innately, so many factors that need to be banned from the base up such as items and broken stages?

We've already removed those, so... who cares?

It really is the case that you can pretty much compare SSBB to Mario Kart about as well as you can to Street Fighter. Both are equally stupid comparisons.

COME ON! BLUE FALCON! [The Blue Falcon just happens to make a cameo in Mario Kart Wii]

In essence, Mario Kart is a racing game, so you can compare the features of Mario Kart that are intrinsic to racing games to other racers. As an essential fighter, we can compare features of Brawl to that of other fighting games.

And guess what? The relationship between characters and the value of matchups, essentially the center of the Metaknight debate, is found in all fighters. So yes, we can compare Metaknight's so-called 'dominance' to the top-tier characters of other fighting games.

Toronto Joe said:
looks like MK is officially banned in Ontario

****ing way too many babies in this community, smash community are never going to be taken seriously >.>

Supermodel From Paris said:
Because every game had apparently devolved into MK dittos or something so people lost interest and stopped attending tournaments.

Good for the kids in Ontario. They couldn't handle putting in the effort to beat Metaknight in tournaments, so they got him banned. Congratulations. Now lets wait till they start crying when they start going to other regions that know that Metaknight is not broken and they start losing a lot because their scrubby* play is clearly outclassed by the play of every other region that has learned to beat Metaknight.

*I'm using scrubby in the actual definition of the word here, the one used by Sirlin. For once, it's the appropriate term to use in this statement.

tocador · Aug 1, 2009

Darth Waffles said:
I had a whole long post with the math behind this which led to MK's 22%, Snake's 13%, D3's 7%, and the other 33 characters getting less than 2% on average. "Best and overused" character would make sense if MK had 10% and everyone else had 5%. It would be kind of pushing it for MK's 15% and everyone else's 3%. But to be over 11 times more successful than 33 of 36 characters (22+% to like 1.76%) is a little too much for me =\. I'll live and I'll keep playing Brawl even if MK doesn't get banned- I can just see how MK affects the other characters rather than just mine and the results are a little too much for me for ignore.

Also, to point out something about the tier + viable character thing, the list clearly says that MK is clearly better than the second character on the list, who is clearly better than the third character (etc.) for top tier. This hurts the A and B lists even more. Just someting to consider.

Did you really just say you think its wrong for MK to win 11 times more tourneys that ganon? I thought that the difference would be even greater, but thanks to kosk, that isnt the case.

When someone isnt tournament viable, like C.falcon or Ganon, it means that they werent suposed to be winning any tournaments, and for them to have at least 1.76% win rate blatantly proves that brawl still gives some chance to low tiers when not in the "allyxm2k level of play".

Divinokage · Aug 1, 2009

Clai said:
Good for the kids in Ontario. They couldn't handle putting in the effort to beat Metaknight in tournaments, so they got him banned. Congratulations. Now lets wait till they start crying when they start going to other regions that know that Metaknight is not broken and they start losing a lot because their scrubby* play is clearly outclassed by the play of every other region that has learned to beat Metaknight.

*I'm using scrubby in the actual definition of the word here, the one used by Sirlin. For once, it's the appropriate term to use in this statement.

Exactly, they will never be able to perform out of region because of this. GG Ontario scrubs. =)

<3 Ontario melee though. =)

Dark 3nergy · Aug 1, 2009

Clai said:
Good for the kids in Ontario. They couldn't handle putting in the effort to beat Metaknight in tournaments, so they got him banned. Congratulations. Now lets wait till they start crying when they start going to other regions that know that Metaknight is not broken and they start losing a lot because their scrubby* play is clearly outclassed by the play of every other region that has learned to beat Metaknight.

*I'm using scrubby in the actual definition of the word here, the one used by Sirlin. For once, it's the appropriate term to use in this statement.

**** son the truth must hurt

CT Chia · Aug 1, 2009

Can someone please answer me this -

How is it appropriate that every single character in the game has at least one bad matchup except for MetaKnight? And no, Snake does not count as a bad matchup for MetaKnight. That has been debated to death so much that I refuse to believe it's anything worse than even.

Supermodel From Paris · Aug 1, 2009

tocador said:
Good job avoiding my whole argument and trolling it saying that.

Dude, your like the most closed minded from this thread, and you are wrong, just give up, MK wont be banned, and im sure your not going to change it =/.

He won't be banned because there are a lot of kids here who think that because they read sirlin they know everything. MK is bannable. Sorry.

Clai · Aug 1, 2009

Darth Waffles said:
I had a whole long post with the math behind this which led to MK's 22%, Snake's 13%, D3's 7%, and the other 33 characters getting less than 2% on average. "Best and overused" character would make sense if MK had 10% and everyone else had 5%. It would be kind of pushing it for MK's 15% and everyone else's 3%. But to be over 11 times more successful than 33 of 36 characters (22+% to like 1.76%) is a little too much for me =\. I'll live and I'll keep playing Brawl even if MK doesn't get banned- I can just see how MK affects the other characters rather than just mine and the results are a little too much for me for ignore.

Something for you to consider:
The best character is the character that is, statistically, the most likely to win tournaments because that character is better than all the other characters.

When you combine that with the fact that more people are using this character than any other character in the game, of course that's going to skew tournament placings, perhaps even heavily. However, the existance of characters like Snake and Dedede that are checking Metaknight from winning at a more rediculous rate proves that Metaknight is not overcentralizing the game. In fact, I'd be a lot more scared if Metaknight was winning 5 times more than every single character out there. That would likely be broken.

That 1.76% you pulled out from one of Pierce's posts was an average. The other 33 characters are not all winning 1.76% apiece. According to Ankoku's list, Meatknight has a least ten times as many placings as all but 7 other characters.

Also, to point out something about the tier + viable character thing, the list clearly says that MK is clearly better than the second character on the list, who is clearly better than the third character (etc.) for top tier. This hurts the A and B lists even more. Just someting to consider.

Who does Metaknight heavily beat in the S-B tiers? Marth and R.O.B? Then take out DK because he gets destroyed by DDD, and that's still a very solid list of viable characters. Just because they aren't used much (Lurario at 22nd on Ankoku's list...), doesn't mean they aren't viable.

etecoon · Aug 1, 2009

Supermodel From Paris said:
He won't be banned because there are a lot of kids here who think that because they read sirlin they know everything. MK is bannable. Sorry.

yeha i mean he can just go dsmashdsmashdsmashdsmash and you cant stop it thats sogay

Supermodel From Paris · Aug 1, 2009

Also, the "ANYONE WHO WANTS MK BANNED IS A SCRUB LOLOLOLOL" argument has been done to death and ISNT TRUE, good competitors and players want MK banned as much as me or anyone else. I know they do, because for some reason the SBR is allowed to vote twice so I can see how some of them voted LOLOLOLOLOLOl

AvaricePanda · Aug 1, 2009

ChiboSempai said:
Can someone please answer me this -

How is it appropriate that every single character in the game has at least one bad matchup except for MetaKnight? And no, Snake does not count as a bad matchup for MetaKnight. That has been debated to death so much that I refuse to believe it's anything worse than even.

SFIV says hi.

While he has no bad match-ups, he arguably has even ones and ones that are gradually shifting against his favor (Diddy, ICs).

Besides, the use of the character counterpick system in mid and high levels of play isn't much, so the importance of him having a bad match-up isn't large.

Is it necessarily appropriate? No. Is it ban-worthy? No.

ETWIST51294 · Aug 1, 2009

AvaricePanda said:
SFIV says hi.

While he has no bad match-ups, he arguably has even ones and ones that are gradually shifting against his favor (Diddy, ICs).

Besides, the use of the character counterpick system in mid and high levels of play isn't much, so the importance of him having a bad match-up isn't large.

Is it necessarily appropriate? No. Is it ban-worthy? No.

Your kinda right for saying SFIV, Sagat has no bad match ups except maybe Bison, I'm not sure.

Clai · Aug 1, 2009

ChiboSempai said:
Can someone please answer me this -

How is it appropriate that every single character in the game has at least one bad matchup except for MetaKnight? And no, Snake does not count as a bad matchup for MetaKnight. That has been debated to death so much that I refuse to believe it's anything worse than even.

I have answered this question, so many times. SO MANY TIMES. It's seriously starting to hurt. Okay Chibo, are you going to read my answer this time? Are you going to pay attention since you've asked this question before and I responded to it IN THIS VERY THREAD? So are you ready this time? You sure? Here we go:

We have already said that, through the combination of characters and match-ups, Metaknight has no bad matchups at all. We've already gotten through that. You want to know why this happens?

Because Metaknight is the best character in the game. He is better than everyone else.

Now this is why that this is the case, but Metaknight is still not worthy of being banned: because Metaknight does not invalidate enough of the cast, nor does he overcentralize the metagame enough that the only reasonable way to counter Metaknight is to use Metaknight. Even when Metaknight has no disadvantages, there are enough characters that provide a reasonable chance of winning that Metaknight does not overcentralize the metagame.

Supermodel From Paris said:
Also, the "ANYONE WHO WANTS MK BANNED IS A SCRUB LOLOLOLOL" argument has been done to death and ISNT TRUE, good competitors and players want MK banned as much as me or anyone else. I know they do, because for some reason the SBR is allowed to vote twice so I can see how some of them voted LOLOLOLOLOLOl

Indeed, there are very good players representing both sides of the debate. However, both sides have shown a hugely scrubby mentality when discussing the ban, almost to the point where the good points of each side get drowned out. There are scrubs everywhere.

I think I've decided that I should use Meatknight more often to talk about this character when I'm responding to some people. I think it's a little more appropriate, considering some of the circumstances.

Dark 3nergy · Aug 1, 2009

Clai said:
I have answered this question, so many times. SO MANY TIMES. It's seriously starting to hurt. Okay Chibo, are you going to read my answer this time? Are you going to pay attention since you've asked this question before and I responded to it IN THIS VERY THREAD? So are you ready this time? You sure? Here we go:

it think its because we're all kinda well...sick of debating this thing rly [numb in the head over it if u will]

how do you keep YOUR sanity in the mist of all this confrontation Clai? seriously

Divinokage · Aug 1, 2009

Clai said:
Indeed, there are very good players representing both sides of the debate. However, both sides have shown a hugely scrubby mentality when discussing the ban, almost to the point where the good points of each side get drowned out. There are scrubs everywhere.

I think I've decided that I should use Meatknight more often to talk about this character when I'm responding to some people. I think it's a little more appropriate, considering some of the circumstances.

That's why there can only be one champion MK and that is M2k. And I mean not everyone is cut out to be a champion and that is why most people will have the scrubby mentality. They want the easy way out of course, however in tournaments you get only 2 chances when you fight, if you **** up because something in your head is wrong or whatever.. then GG good bye you lose, try again or quit smash.

Supermodel From Paris · Aug 1, 2009

Divinokage said:
That's why there can only be one champion MK and that is M2k. And I mean not everyone is cut out to be a champion and that is why most people will have the scrubby mentality. They want the easy way out of course.

Because picking MK as your main is totally taking the hard way!

Strong Badam · Aug 1, 2009

Clai said:
I'm just going to completely ignore this because you prove to be incapable of comprehending what I said on the post right above yours, the post that proves this statement to be utter nonsense. Look at it and then construct a proper argument.

IDC? Planking (a technique best performed by MK)? Stalling (a technique best performed by MK)?

Divinokage · Aug 1, 2009

Supermodel From Paris said:
Because picking MK as your main is totally taking the hard way!

It is, it's player skill over the character advantage completely.. do you see the general MK mains winning a major tournament, ahem ya right. lol.

Supermodel From Paris · Aug 1, 2009

Divinokage said:
It is, it's player skill over the character advantage completely.. do you see the general MK mains winning a major tournament, ahem ya right. lol.

Uh, it's because the best players play MK, not because MK chooses these players to represent him. Good players CHOOSE the best characters, that's how fighting games work.

Strong Badam · Aug 1, 2009

that's not even close to accurate, regardless of whether or not you want to argue that Brawl is a "fighting game".

Smooth Criminal · Aug 1, 2009

Supermodel From Paris said:
Because picking MK as your main is totally taking the hard way!

I am actually going to say something in this godforsaken thread.

SFP, if you think MK is easy mode pick him up. Start winning tourneys if it's soooooooooo easy.

Smooth Criminal

Supermodel From Paris · Aug 1, 2009

Strong_Bad said:
that's not even close to accurate, regardless of whether or not you want to argue that Brawl is a "fighting game".

Uh, it is accurate. The best players choose good characters because they want to win money. What is so hard to understand?

SnowballBob33 · Aug 1, 2009

Pro-Ban

What don't you people realize? Brawl has a very different system than other fighters. It's a whole other thing called recovery. Recovery is a basic element of the game. You can die at ANY PERCENT. Most games require some pre-set damage taken for you to die. Not in brawl. You can die at 200% you can die at 20% it doesn't matter. Most characters can be gimped, or somehow edge guarded to allow them to die early. MK breaks this simple element of the game. He has 5 jumps, 2 glides, and 3 other practical recovery moves. Not only that, his aerial moves that can be used at any point in the air have the priority and speed in which there is a significant more amount of risk than reward if you do attempt to edge guard him. It is basically impossible to edge guard him without a fault of the MK. Not only that, his momentum canceling with his uair is amazing, meaning he dies at similar percents as heavy characters. This breaks the most essential element of the game,death, which means he's broken. Now that we know he's broken, he can be banned.

Supermodel From Paris · Aug 1, 2009

Smooth Criminal said:
I am actually going to say something in this godforsaken thread.

SFP, if you think MK is easy mode pick him up. Start winning tourneys if it's soooooooooo easy.

Smooth Criminal

1. It is generally accepted that MK is one of the easier characters in the game to play.
2. Player skill still matters if you main MK, just not as much
3. I just meant it insomuch as MK having no bad match-ups.

Clai · Aug 1, 2009

D.E. said:
it think its because we're all kinda well...sick of debating this thing rly [numb in the head over it if u will]

how do you keep YOUR sanity in the mist of all this confrontation Clai? seriously

If I have to explain my points multiple times to multiple people, I'm fine with that. Yes, they should have read the thread and found the responses there, but I'm not going to hold that against them. It is a very, very, long thread, and answers get lost.

If someone asks me a question and then asks that very same question again, though, especially when I go through the trouble of detailing it out to them, I get irked. I don't know how I keep my sanity. I don't have sanity when it comes to this game. I main Ganon.

Strong_Bad said:
IDC? Planking (a technique best performed by MK)? Stalling (a technique best performed by MK)?

Clai said:
Stalling for the sake of stalling was banned in Melee, and as always been an integral rule in competitive Smash.
IDC is banned because it explicitly disobeys the rule about stalling.
Planking isn't anything new. It's STALLING for the sake of STALLING! It's just called planking because it was popularized by Plank (and if you bothered to do any research, you'd know that Plank does essentially the EXACT SAME THING in Melee in regards to being a ***** on the edge).

There is nothing broken about them. They are banned because they break the rules that were already in place by the ruling commitee. We have never had to shift the rules just because of Metaknight. We are adding these traits about Metaknight to the rules because they are in direct disagreement to the rules just as going under Final Destination and continously using the homing attack with Sonic is.

We aren't doing anything new just to keep Metaknight in line. We aren't giving Metaknight any special treatment just to say he isn't broken (because he isn't).

The people who main Metaknight have the follow the rules like every other player using every other character in the game.

Okay, now you're just making me mad.

Meatknight is not ban-worthy.

ETWIST51294 · Aug 1, 2009

Clai said:
Meatknight is not ban-worthy.

Meatknight XD :laugh:

I will start calling him that from now on.

Smooth Criminal · Aug 1, 2009

Supermodel From Paris said:
1. It is generally accepted that MK is one of the easier characters in the game to play.
2. Player skill still matters if you main MK, just not as much
3. I just meant it insomuch as MK having no bad match-ups.

And this is different from every other fighting game and their top tiers...how?

/thread

But wait...I suppose Smash isn't a traditional fighting game. Even though we're trying to make it resemble one for the past X amount of years.

Smooth Criminal

Divinokage · Aug 1, 2009

Supermodel From Paris said:
Uh, it's because the best players play MK, not because MK chooses these players to represent him. Good players CHOOSE the best characters, that's how fighting games work.

That's bull**** some players choose their characters because they feel comfortable with him. Some players choose their character because they have something to prove.. Some players pick top tier because they seemingly want the easy way out, but competition is wayyy more than that... You have to overcome nervousness, disavantageous situations, get those clutch moments. Some players pick top tier because they have an advantage over the cast.. but you still have to put the time and effort to learn every single matchup. For example, you can't just pick MK and expect to do well.. that's not how it works, you gotta learn the spacing, what the character can do, ledge cancels.. whatever. If truly MK was easier to play then how come he's not winning even if there's a crazy amount of them?

Fourth and final community vote about Meta Knight.

Should Meta Knight be banned from competitive Brawl?

Yes

No

Smash Hero

Smash Lord

Smash Master

Smash Legend

Smash Hero

Super Elite

Smash Lord

Super Elite

Smash Lord

Smash Lord

Smash Lord

Smash Lord

Smash Hero

Smash Lord

Smash Lord

Smash Legend

Smash Hero

Smash Obsessed

Smash Hero

Smash Lord

Smash Hero

Smash Hero

Smash Lord

Smash Hero

Smash Lord

Smash Hero

Smash Legend

Smash Hero

Super Elite

Smash Legend

Smash Hero

Super Elite

Da Cheef

Smash Hero

Smash Ace

Smash Hero

Smash Lord

Smash Hero

Da Cheef

Smash Legend

Information

Network