Brawl and Tekken4: A Small Read

[etecoon]

you could make that case for some lower high tier characters or upper mid, like a lot of people have abandoned marth or ROB for MK. low tier characters are held back by the fact that they are ****ing awful and won't be at all competitive with MK gone either.

 

[CRASHiC]

But on an honest note, Metaknight isn't going to kill Brawl. It's the "Play to Win" logic that obviously plagued all of the players to the point where I bet the players could give two ****s about the Brawl community.

Bullllllllllllllllll shiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiit.

That's in EVERYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY Thiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiing competative. Brawl is no exception. Watch a Hungrybox match. Watch Diago. Everyone plays to win ITS HOW YOU PLAY

 

[hotgarbage]

If MK was banned, we'd still have that competitive mindset that doesn't warrant to fix other problems. Stage bans, planking, time-outs, whathaveyou. Yes, Metaknight is the crutch of the "Play to Win" example, but he isn't everything that's wrong with the Brawl community.

Never said that. I'm saying the players are the ones that will kill the metagame because they are just fine with winning regardless of their actions. It takes a puppet master to control a puppet.

So you're saying that planking, scrooging, timing out etc are the player's fault and that banning MK would not solve this core problem with these people's mindsets.

I'd argue that there is no core problem at all.

The only core mindset these top players have is "play to win", which arises from the simple truth that winning is their goal in a tournament. All this "gay" playing isn't the result of some kind of inane "TEEHEE I'M GOING TO TIME HIM OUT THIS MATCH <3" mindset, but the result of said strategy's effectiveness. It simply helps them achieve their goal of winning. If the metagame is changed with the removal of MK and that strategy is no longer the most effective it will no longer be used. Done deal.


EDIT: Oh wtf how did I miss this

But on an honest note, Metaknight isn't going to kill Brawl. It's the "Play to Win" logic that obviously plagued all of the players to the point where I bet the players could give two ****s about the Brawl community.

Brawl community? Look, the community is centered around tournament play of this game. It wouldn't exist without that core. You enter a tournament to win. As a result you play to win. ....that's really all there is to it. I kinda feel like you're getting things confused here. Using the optimal strategy in a tournament match and wanting to ban every other stage for inane reasons are two entirely different things.

 

[Turbo Ether]

ADHD may have won Pound 4, but it's pretty obvious that the Brawl metagame is becoming overcentralized around MK.

 

[HeroMystic]

So you're saying that planking, scrooging, timing out etc are the player's fault and that banning MK would not solve this core problem with these people's mindsets.

I'd argue that there is no core problem at all.

The only core mindset these top players have is "play to win", which arises from the simple truth that winning is their goal in a tournament. All this "gay" playing isn't the result of some kind of inane "TEEHEE I'M GOING TO TIME HIM OUT THIS MATCH <3" mindset, but the result of said strategy's effectiveness. It simply helps them achieve their goal of winning. If the metagame is changed with the removal of MK and that strategy is no longer the most effective it will no longer be used. Done deal.

I pretty much already said banning Metaknight would restore about 80% of game balance. Obviously though, a vast majority don't want him banned, either by P2W Logic, Conservative logic, or whatever. It's the same logic that allows optimal strategies like these. If MK is banned and these strategies turn out to become balanced as a result, then hey, two birds with one stone.

But as said before, no one wants MK banned.

Brawl community? Look, the community is centered around tournament play of this game. It wouldn't exist without that core. You enter a tournament to win. As a result you play to win. ....that's really all there is to it. I kinda feel like you're getting things confused here. Using the optimal strategy in a tournament match and wanting to ban every other stage for inane reasons are two entirely different things.

With the counterpick and stage strike system in play, stages have just as much impact towards the game as strategies does. In fact, match-ups can drastically change if the correct stage is chosen.

The fact that game balance is not taken into serious consideration these days is what harms and segregates the community.

 

[Matador]

brawl won't die in favor of melee. melee requires too much skill, 70% of competitive brawl players wouldn't be able to get into it.

Lmao, Melee isn't THAT hard to play, especially since most of the commands are muscle memory. It just depends on whether Brawl players are willing to invest the time to practice.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I pretty much already said banning Metaknight would restore about 80% of game balance. Obviously though, a vast majority don't want him banned, either by P2W Logic, Conservative logic, or whatever. It's the same logic that allows optimal strategies like these. If MK is banned and these strategies turn out to become balanced as a result, then hey, two birds with one stone.

But as said before, no one wants MK banned.



With the counterpick and stage strike system in play, stages have just as much impact towards the game as strategies does. In fact, match-ups can drastically change if the correct stage is chosen.

The fact that game balance is not taken into serious consideration these days is what harms and segregates the community.

Call me crazy, but 55% of the smashboards community is not no one.

 

[phi1ny3]

I can see a lot of points but one that stands out to me is this:
Play to win

or rather, an extension to this argument. What simply prevents the characters that camp really well from stopping once MK is gone?

 

[Turbo Ether]

Lmao, Melee isn't THAT hard to play, especially since most of the commands are muscle memory.

I came to this conclusion last night. I NEVER play Melee anymore, but I decided to pop it in last night for fun, due to the Pound 4 hype. I can still perform advanced movements and combo's with little difficulty. In fact, I think Brawl helped me improve at Melee. Brawl is like weighted clothing, restricting my speed. Popped in Melee and i'm lightning quick.

 

[HeroMystic]

Call me crazy, but 55% of the smashboards community is not no one.

About 90% of that 55% are forum dwellers that don't go to tournaments.

I can see a lot of points but one that stands out to me is this:
Play to win

or rather, an extension to this argument. What simply prevents the characters that camp really well from stopping once MK is gone?

The current argument against that is the strategies are legit except when MK uses it because he's already too good.

 

[Eddie G]

About 90% of that 55% are forum dwellers that don't go to tournaments.

Do you have proof of this?

 

[HeroMystic]

No, though if you wanna dissect every vote on here, be my guest.

Same can be said about the anti-ban however. But on that note, why use a 2-year old poll? Opinions have obviously changed.

 

[Matador]

Do you have proof of this?

Go to one of the 3 polls we had about it and look at the posters who voted.

 

[WindMajor]

What ever happened to the TO's experimenting with MK banned tournaments? Since the SBR's decision, I've heard zero news about this. How did those go?

 

[CRASHiC]

I can see a lot of points but one that stands out to me is this:
Play to win

or rather, an extension to this argument. What simply prevents the characters that camp really well from stopping once MK is gone?

Metaknight still beats these charecters though.

Without Metaknight, there isn't a charecter that doesn't have some sort of trouble. Falco has 6 bad matchups, one of which is 30/70. Without his even matchup with Metaknight, he wouldn't be as favorable a charecter to pick or use as your secondary.

Wario loses to Marth.
Olimar loses to Marth.

The argument use to be "you get rid of Metaknight and now Marth has no bad matchups." That's not true anymore. Marth versus DDD is 60-40 and Snake versus Marth is now 60-40. Some might say the same about Snake, but Snake loses 40-60 to Olimar and 45-55 DDD. No one charecter is given a HUGE advantage by banning Metaknight. Marth, Toon Link, and Olimar are given the most, with others that also would receive a big bump such as Peach and R.O.B. The best charecter would suddenly become a toss up between Wario (having 1 bad matchup but to the next charecter), Marth (having 2 bad matchups but beating Wario), and Snake, basing this on the current listed matchups.

So Metaknight doesn't keep anything terribly bad from happening and doesn't keep any sort of character from claiming dominance.

What ever happened to the TO's experimenting with MK banned tournaments? Since the SBR's decision, I've heard zero news about this. How did those go?

I ran one in Florida, but Florida isn't a Metaknight heavy state anyway, its top Metaknight just picking up Metaknight about a month before the tournament, so there was no drastic change other than the third place going to a Ness player. Florida was NOT the place to get an accurate look at this though. You'd want a place where there is a Metaknight dominance, like NJ, or Cali.

 

[etecoon]

Lmao, Melee isn't THAT hard to play, especially since most of the commands are muscle memory. It just depends on whether Brawl players are willing to invest the time to practice.

it's a faster paced game than brawl, it's not just comboing, you have to make decisions faster too. but even if it were just muscle memory/memorizing combos, most brawl players are too lazy and technically ungifted for it.

 

[TLMSheikant]

^ Ive seen two cases of brawl players going to melee and being incredibly technical and fast learning. But I guess its not always like that.

 

[MysteriousSilver]

No, though if you wanna dissect every vote on here, be my guest.

Same can be said about the anti-ban however. But on that note, why use a 2-year old poll? Opinions have obviously changed.

I see quite a few colorful names on both sides (If that's how we're deciding who's opinion is worth listening to), not one sided at all.

And lol at melee being hard. Before playing brawl I had trouble L-canceling. I played it a bit the other night and (once I get used to the lack of buffering) I could do it consistently without much practice. I prefer brawl because of the greater diversity in characters and I like the feel of the game a lot more.

Spoiler

btw, I support MK ban not because he's unbeatable (while certainly a challenge, I've never lost to an MK who I thought wouldn't have beaten me otherwise), but because he overcentralizes the game (50% of the top 12 at pound were MK, regardless of who won) and takes other bannings to keep him in line (Stage bans, bans on IDC, ledgegrab limits, scrooging bans, so on, so forth). The longer time goes by, the more reasons there are to get rid of the little ****er.

 

[DanGR]

it's a faster paced game than brawl, it's not just comboing, you have to make decisions faster too. but even if it were just muscle memory/memorizing combos, most brawl players are too lazy and technically ungifted for it.

WTF are you talking about.

edit:

No one charecter is given a HUGE advantage by banning Metaknight. Marth, Toon Link, and Olimar are given the most, with others that also would receive a big bump such as Peach and R.O.B.

Olimar's bad matchups (luigi, marth, peach, and some debatable other ones.) suddenly lose their worst matchup... I wouldn't call this very great for Oli, even if Meta was our worst matchup. (Which I don't think is necessarily true)

 

[D. Disciple]

I have to come to the conclusion, that the problem in Brawl isn't MK, the real problem are the players' attitudes toward their own game.

 

[Z1GMA]

MK is just... Ough...

 

[B!squick]

So, yeah, I think we're eventually get tired of seeing MK everywhere and either use him for the best shot at making the monies or play more Melee until Super Smash Bros. Armageddon or whatever comes out on the Wii^2, or Wii Wii as I have dubbed Nintendo's next gen system.

 

[etecoon]

WTF are you talking about.

brawl players are typically lazy and don't want to put in a lot of work, obviously there are many exceptions but on the whole I think the brawl community is lazier than the melee community, it's why they play brawl.

 

[LooftWaffles]

brawl players are typically lazy and don't want to put in a lot of work, obviously there are many exceptions but on the whole I think the brawl community is lazier than the melee community, it's why they play brawl.

Get this **** out of here.

A lazy community would have quit the game already. Instead, were being proactive trying to extend the overall lifespan of the game by having serious discussion that gets hijacked by Melee tards.

 

[etecoon]

melee tard? I don't play melee, I've only touched it a few times since brawl came out. that's just my observation, brawl players are more likely to give up on something and say something is cheap and can't be beaten or that they can't do things with their current main(everyone switching to MK) etc. as I said, there are definitely exceptions, just on the whole that's what I've seen. it has nothing to do with the game itself, just the community.

 

[LooftWaffles]

melee tard? I don't play melee, I've only touched it a few times since brawl came out. that's just my observation, brawl players are more likely to give up on something and say something is cheap and can't be beaten or that they can't do things with their current main(everyone switching to MK) etc. as I said, there are definitely exceptions, just on the whole that's what I've seen. it has nothing to do with the game itself, just the community.

Fair enough, wasnt meant to single you out, came out that way.

What Im really sick of are Melee players hating on Brawl because of People using optimum stategy.

 

[etecoon]

I'm half trolling anyway, I don't really feel that badly about the brawl community, but that's an interesting point you make about optimum strategy. I think part of why that is is that in brawl there is a very obvious best choice(meta knight), melee doesn't have as clear a best character so you get a little more personal preference/finding what works for you. everyone wants to win but in brawl there's that one really obvious choice that understandably, is going to get a disproportionate amount of attention

 

[LooftWaffles]

Another thing: MK can plank and scrooge, but what cant he do that other characters can?

No CG
No momentum cancel
All specials leave in helpless
Subpar vertical recovery (not including jumps)
No spike
No projectile

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Another thing: MK can plank and scrooge, but what cant he do that other characters can?

No CG
No momentum cancel
All specials leave in helpless
Subpar vertical recovery (not including jumps)
No spike
No projectile

-Okay...
-Uair is incredibly fast and effective.
-All specials are ****ing ****.
-Nah... sideB is really, really good vertical recovery. On par with, oh, say, Toon Link or Samus? Plus, he has like 6 jumps...
-Dair is worse than a spike.
-Hugely disjointed on every move, transcendant priority. He's got a ****ing beam sword.

 

[Kewkky]

This is quite a long post, so scroll down and look for your name in the quotes if you think I'm quoting you... Or just read it all, the more info the better, amirite?

Please explain the analogy between MK and the Tekken character. Your points given were:
* MK "has an unfair playstyle that deter the enjoyable aspects of the game"
* MK "excels in the air, ground AND offstage fights"
* MK "is the overpowered best character in this game"

MK and the Tekken4 character Jin both have theoretically unpunishable tactics, and they're both also extremely hard to punish in the hands of a pro. You can't argue against this while keeping a straight face thanks to Ally and Gnes (as well as other people top MKs have timed out recently), both who main characters that can stop planking/scrooging/tornado-spamming, yet still getting timed out no matter how hard they tried to beat the tactic. Other characters who can plank and/or Scrooge are easier to take care of due to them not having a lightning-fast uair, a spammable semispike that punishes whoever tries to get them off and/or a fixed-knockback gimping move altogether. Pit for example: his uair is too slow to plank as well as MK can, so he can be punished accordingly from above. He has a very small room for error due to the viable characters' ability to bypass his weaker planking, as well as G&W's. You can jump down to try and punish them, and the most common outcome that could happen is you'll take some damage and make it back on-stag to try again... MK will gimp you no matter what happens unless the MK doesn't do it right, taking off a WHOLE STOCK IN A SINGLE MANEUVER, giving him an even bigger advantage. How exactly can you beat that, if Ally couldn't in this tourney as well as Gnes in his previous well-known match against M2K?

If you have some info that I could digest, please share with me, I'm open for any and all ideas.

Just a side note, kewkky is AMAZING against MK. Like, seriously, he knows what can be punished, and how, and actually does it. So don't try going for the "omg learn the match-up!!!" route, cause he knows the match-up better than you do

Thanks for backing me up, man. At least I know I left a good impression @ Pound4 despite not making it out of my pools.

That's gotta be the worst reasoning for wanting to ban a character ever. Let's ban jigglypuff because it's not fair that I travel OOS investing my own personal funds and time just to get my falco uthrow->rested. Let's ban marth because I flew all the way to California only to be grabbed once and my fox dies. Let's ban Sheik because one grab and I'm out of the tournament even though I've been practicing my Bowser for 72 hours straight and I spend $1,000 travelling to this tournament

The difference between MK and those situations is that MK's tactic is unavoidable... You can outplay a Marth/Jiggs/Falco/Sheik/Peach/Fox and win a match due to being smarter, but outplaying an MK once he's got a stock advantage and he's bent on planking and scrooging the entire match is near impossible AND infuriating... If you REALLY want to refute this argument, stop playing Mr. TheoryMaster 3000 and prove how the strategies can be beat with a character that can theoretically beat them. I'll be waiting around for your videos.

You're saying that Falco vs Jigglypuff (or Fox vs Marth) is not winnable? You're saying that Jigglypuff's uthrow->rest combo requires "reading" after getting the grab? You're saying that when someone times their opponent out without stalling, he didn't outplay his opponent? When you beat your opponent, no matter HOW you did it (as long as you didn't break any rules), you, by definition, outplayed them.

Except that planking/scrooging/dair camping/smart tornado spamming theoretically can be beat, but when put in practice against even the top players, there's really nothing you can do about it but make up even more and more rules limiting MK as a character to try and keep him in bay, only to have players find loopholes in them and continue said strategies. Believe it or not, those melee examples take some intense reading and mistakes on the opponents' part so literally they are getting outplayed. Against MK, getting planked after they gain a nice % advantage and having them time the clock out then losing stocks trying to get them out of their supremely advantageous positions is everything BUT outplaying them.

He's a popular character who's easy to win with, of course he's going to take a majority of the top spots. Even if ADHD didn't take first, and he placed 2nd or whatever - how is it possible he got that high?

I can answer this easily. He is a great player, thus he did great against all the other characters he faced. He also knows the MK:Diddy MU (a near-even MU according to a couple of people, yet arguably in MK's favor) better than the other MKs he had to get through. What I don't understand is how people can't see the M2K:Ally:ADHD triangle... M2K > Ally > ADHD > M2K > (...). What if ADHD would've faced Ally and lost, then M2K beaten Ally at Grand Finals, what would be everyone's counter-argument about MK's dominance in our current (and previous) metagame(s)? They'd have nothing to fall back on, and this tourney's ADHD victory is still not a good counter-argument. A single player doesn't create a competitive scene, a LOT of players do. If top 12 would better describe who's dominating the scene, then we'd be able to see that 2/3 of all the pros who placed used MK for some of their tougher MUs in order to avoid losing, yet still remain loyal to their mains.

In Tekken 4, Jin had the same advantage MK does: an overpowered moveset, along with a powerful unblockable combo that only the best of the best were able to avoid falling into. Expecting the whole Brawl community to get as good as ADHD is an unrealistic dream, and nothing less than a stupid argument.

If we ignore the criteria of banning MK because he proves to be broken, and focus on banning MK due to over centralization - it's still illogical to ban him when he's not even winning. We care when he over centralizes the money, and thus the scene. In a 100 man tourney, MK taking all the spots 4th to 100th is irrelevant.

I agree... But as we can see with many tourneys, MK either takes all the top spots, or two top spots. Hell, now with Ally using MK and other pros switching as well due to his 'option-rich' moveset and how it makes the game more 'fun' for them -which is subjective, by the way-, we're practically guaranteed seeing two MKs taking top 3 spots at every national tourney, be it 1st 2nd or 3rd. That's money going to MK and not to anyone else, just like Jin used to do in the Tekken4 scene.

And I'd rather compare MK to Jin, than compare MK to SF2 Akuma. SF2 Akuma was truly broken and accepted as such by the whole community, MK isn't in the same position. He's certainly quite gay, though.

If we start caring about those 97 lesser players incapable of beating MK, we can admit defeat to competing in a bad game and all go play something else.

In all seriousness, I would probably just play Melee for friendlies and lulz. I love the game and I could go all competitive in it, but I feel like everyone's miles ahead of me right now and catching up before the next installment of the Smash Series (or some other fighting game that piques my interest) is an extremely tough, time-consuming challenge... A challenge that's probably never gonna be met due to me going to college, finding a job, living my non-gamer life, and satisfying my personal needs.

I'm so glad the OP didn't intend to start another MK ban debate and merely wanted to discuss how Tekken 4 compares to Brawl. Oh wait...

I actually didn't mention "We should ban MK" throughout my whole post, I knew it would get me some negative comments. Although I am pro-ban, I know people have their respective opinions and I wanted to hear them when another lesser-known game (possibly Jin's fault as well) who underwent the same situation was put on the table for everyone to see.

"MK may not be broken, but he's the obvious problem."

The obvious solution then, is to ban him. His criteria is over centralization (with a comparison to Tekken), my counter is a that that criteria is usually an indication of a bad game - with a fix being futile.

Kinda like putting a leaking boat inside a bigger boat, then still "sailing" on the leaky boat.

Well, if you would ask anyone, you'd hear lots of people say that Brawl is unbalanced compared to other fighting games. Frustrating physics, ******** unexplained disjoints, TRIPPING... There's lots of reasons why this game is overall considered a bad game for the competitive scene. It's true that players have pondered if the removal of the most harmful element of the game -MetaKnight- would create a more attractive competitive scene as well as at least increase its popularity, but in the end the split between the community has been on an even level thus regarding that same element to not be as threatening as the community makes it seem.

Lots of people use "learn the MU and fight back" as an excuse to 'keep the metagame growing and come up with anti-MK tactics', but what are they expecting to find? Some universal AT that automatically grabs MK if he's invincible from anywhere on the stage (obvious hyperbole)? There's really nothing that will be found in whatever lifespan Brawl has that will alter the metagame THAT much, hell amazing players have appeared here and there and they STILL are having troubles with the near-impossibility that is beating MK with his extremely gay tactics. What else do people want to see before any action is heavily (and I emphasize heavily) considered? Are they waiting for the competitive scene to be just hardcore fans, then hope for the best and go through with a decision expecting the players to come back when they've already settled in a different, more balanced and enjoyable game overall? Literally, the hype Melee bring is beyond real, and apparently every large national tourney has a surprise for the pros to love the game even more, be it Armada (Peach), Amsah (Sheik), Lord HDL (LINK! A low tier!), or whoever else appears next! Even a supposedly unviable character according to the wiser players came and shook up the scene a bit, that NEVER happens in Brawl (and I know it's not the players' fault, but the games' design that's at fault), and proves just how unexpected things can go besides MK taking 2/3 of the top spots, as well as top 3 with the aid of gay tacticsa that require time-outs...

My first post was meant to be an informative read to propel further discussion regarding MK, and to 'persuade' players the next time a large discussion concerning MK and the SBR-B making any kind of decision at all came up. It's meant to keep people informed, get them to know of similar situations and not commit the same mistake if the scene appears to be suffering from an eerily identical problem. I said I didn't want to spark any 'Ban MK' debates, yet I'm being accused of sparking a debate when the sole purpose was to 'inform' players. I have no idea how that happened, but meh, as long as it becomes serious discussion like how I've been reading so far, anything is fine.

MK isn't the only character that can time people out, otherwise we wouldn't even have second doubts.

I know about those other characters, don't worry about me and my lack of knowledge. Regardless of other characters, who's the one that has the most devastating options to punish people who try to work around the gay tactics? Who's the one that has the most diverse options while undertaking said tactics? And of course, who's the best character in the game regardless of gay tactics? Seems to me like he was given too much, more than any character should've been given while maintaining a balance (even unbalanced characters fall short of what MK has becomes in our metagame).

Good read, but you honestly are implying that Metaknight should be banned, or "honorably banned" like how Japan did with Old Sagat/Akuma.

I'm trying to bring info to the table and keep players informed on anything that I might find/others might find that concerns the threat that half the community dislikes, be them offline or online tourney players. I don't see a reason why we should cater to casual gamers since we ARE the competitive gaming community, but comparing both casuals and competitive gamers in this forum... It's obvious who we should be concentrating on. If I'm coming off as implying "the ban should be accelerated" or some other statement, it's not my goal here; I just want to see constructive discussion on what people think, if my comparison between both games' fates is grounded, or farfetched.

But on an honest note, Metaknight isn't going to kill Brawl. It's the "Play to Win" logic that obviously plagued all of the players to the point where I bet the players could give two ****s about the Brawl community.

The "Play To Win" logic is always in every single competitive game. Why WOULDN'T you want to win? What's the best option to wn, is it better than the 2nd best option? What's keeping you from using the best option... Honor? Fairness? Friends? The point of P2W is to get to the money, regardless of what you have to go through to get it.

MK is a tool that is undoubtfully and unarguably the best in the game to use to win money, and it is also one of the reasons people dislike the top-level competitive scene... I remember the good ol' days where everyone adored M2K and his aggressive MK, and how it worked for him while everyone was campy and defensive... Shame it all had to disappear due to there being a better and easier-to-win option: playing gay.

Pit, Wario, ROB, and a few others can do the same thing, most notably Pit. MK isn't the only one, he's just the most obvious (and comparably the best at it).

Yes he is. He has by far the most options out of all the characters. He has gay tactics, overpowered on-stage attacks, one of the best recoveries, one of the most annoying-yet-very-effective attacks in the game (tornado), unclankable attacks, a great momentum-cancelling attack (uair is one of the fastest attacks in the game), and is definitely the best gimping character. His damage output isn't even considered "average", the only average thing he has is his killing power, which doesn't really matter since he can follow you anywhere offstage and finish the job with a single sweep.

Look @ Melee, especially P4 melee results(do you see the diversity?). ALL of the top tier characters, high, and a few mid tiers are pretty viable competitively. This is not the case for Brawl.

In Brawl, if you want to win with a mid-tier/high tier (stretching it at low-tier), you HAVE to have MK as a secondary. He may not be the best option for individual MUs, but seeing his MU spread being all advantages and few even MUs, he definitely is the best overall choice. Why split time between 3-4 characters for a couple of MUs, when you can just use a single character for all the MUs except the ones you excel at with your main? Remember, this is P2W logic here, so no amount of "Why not choose ZSS against Rob" or blahblahblah-crappy-statement-that-is-easily-refuted will refute the reality that is MK and his great matchup spread.

ADHD may have won Pound 4, but it's pretty obvious that the Brawl metagame is becoming overcentralized around MK.

I agree. In more balanced games, there's more than one character that overcentralizes. We got a good number of Snakes and Diddies, but... Just look at MK's mainers and how many are top players, for Sakurai's sake.

But as said before, no one wants MK banned.

What.

This single statement frustrates me. How is "half the community" a vast majority? Wasn't this same counter-argument used before when pro-ban tried to make anti-ban agree that everyone wanted MK gone? This logic is flawed and has no basis.

Lmao, Melee isn't THAT hard to play, especially since most of the commands are muscle memory. It just depends on whether Brawl players are willing to invest the time to practice.

I disagree. The game's known as MvC2 Jr. That pretty much speaks for itself, considering MvC2's competitive scene is pretty **** hardcore.

I can see a lot of points but one that stands out to me is this:
Play to win

or rather, an extension to this argument. What simply prevents the characters that camp really well from stopping once MK is gone?

Their flaws. I see no other character with a great ground game, great aerial game, great recovery, gay tactics, great momentum-cancelling, great moveset, great traits, and great gimping game... MK has a lot (doesn't have it all, he has no CG nor projectile), he seriously was given too much as a character compared to the other campers. Hell, he has a great offensive game that's tough to punish unless the opponent really knows what's going on at all times and is great at reading patterns, yet it's been virtually abandoned due to his even greater defensive game. Campers don't have this, they can be punished waaaaay easier than MK can be. Falco has flaws and bad MUs, Olimar has flaws and bad MUs, Pit has flaws and bad MUs, TL has flaws and bad MUs, DDD has flaws and bad MUs... No one is as good as MK, he literally is in a completely different level than the rest of the cast, no matter what people want to say to disagree.

It's the sad truth.

About 90% of that 55% are forum dwellers that don't go to tournaments.

Can you prove this without making me do ALL of your work? Tally up the votes for me, come on. Even forum dwellers who don't go to tournaments often have a surprising amount of knowledge, loke coaches and football teams: they don't HAVE to play to prove their smarts, yet people trust them nonetheless. There are both good, bad and mediocre coaches... The example might be a bit hard to follow due to the huge difference in competitive scenes, but it still shows that theory alone isn't always as bad as people make it out to be, as long as there are people to put to the test such theories in tourneys.

The current argument against that is the strategies are legit except when MK uses it because he's already too good.

I agree, he IS too good as a character, even without planking/scrooging/etc. But before said gay strategies were completely implemented in his metagame (even by the best MK player), MK was completely winnable by a nice amount of characters if the players learned how to fight him. Now that MK has a better defensive crutch to fall back on, one that is virtually unpunishable, and is used by top MKs everywhere, I don't see how people can argue "learn the MU" with a straight face, when they themselves haven't tried first-hand to "learn the MU" against top players. It's ALL oh so facepalming.

No, though if you wanna dissect every vote on here, be my guest.

Why can't YOU do it? Aren't you the one providing the argument? Are you SURE that there's a large amount of competitive gamers for the anti-ban compared to the pro-ban? What's your proof of this? Did you tally them before, or is it some wild speculation while deeply hoping it hits the mark when someone DOES tally the votes?

That's no argument, that's just looking for a decoy to make your argument seem better than it really is. Be more specific with me... How many tourney-going anti-banners and pro-banners voted there?

Another thing: MK can plank and scrooge, but what cant he do that other characters can?

No CG
No momentum cancel
All specials leave in helpless
Subpar vertical recovery (not including jumps)
No spike
No projectile

*You're right, he has no CG... Neither has Diddy nor Snake and look where they're at. So much for your argument.
*Are you serious? His momentum cancelling move is the best attack to momentum cancel with. How fast is that **** uair? MK can do 3 uairs in a single shorthop! How's THAT for a fast momentum-canceller? And gliding to lower the momentum drastically is also a great option to have... Other gliders don't have such a fast attack to live as long as MK can.
*Who cares? MK mainers don't use specials offstage without keeping the ledge in mind, nor use it too high up while their opponents are below them waiting to **** them. His helpless state is barely -if ever- seen in a match.
*His vertical recovery is great. 5 jumps and a crazy sideB that can help him recover from incredible depths... I don't see how he's gonna get gimped unless he messes up and loses all of his jumps beforehand.
*He has a semi-spike... Which is worse since it pushes you lower AND away from the stage.
*He doesn't need a projectile with the range he can cover with his attacks. That might be one of his only missing qualities, but he certainly doesn't get destroyed by campers, I can assure you of THAT.

 

[ETWIST51294]

LONG A$$ POST.

****

 

[Kewkky]

LONG A$$ POST.

****

Thank Jebus I didn't realize it was long until I posted it, as well as gave a warning. I actually ate my dinner while typing it. I lurve ribs and hash browns.

The length of my post doesn't deter from my points, though. I mean what I say and I believe in what I say (unless I got something jumbled up in there and answered a wrong quote).

 

[HeroMystic]

I'm trying to bring info to the table and keep players informed on anything that I might find/others might find that concerns the threat that half the community dislikes, be them offline or online tourney players. I don't see a reason why we should cater to casual gamers since we ARE the competitive gaming community, but comparing both casuals and competitive gamers in this forum... It's obvious who we should be concentrating on. If I'm coming off as implying "the ban should be accelerated" or some other statement, it's not my goal here; I just want to see constructive discussion on what people think, if my comparison between both games' fates is grounded, or farfetched.

Not sure where casual gamers came from, because that never came to mind, but to everything else: Okay. I do agree your comparison has relation.

The "Play To Win" logic is always in every single competitive game. Why WOULDN'T you want to win? What's the best option to wn, is it better than the 2nd best option? What's keeping you from using the best option... Honor? Fairness? Friends? The point of P2W is to get to the money, regardless of what you have to go through to get it.

Stuff about M2K.

The P2W logic is what allowing MK to stay unbanned. That's all I'll say on that.

What.

This single statement frustrates me. How is "half the community" a vast majority? Wasn't this same counter-argument used before when pro-ban tried to make anti-ban agree that everyone wanted MK gone? This logic is flawed and has no basis.

People need to stop cherrypicking my posts.

Stop looking in a magnifying glass and read my posts completely and comprehensively. I have constantly said over and over again that MK being banned would restore a large amount of game balance.

Can you prove this without making me do ALL of your work? Tally up the votes for me, come on.

More stuff

More stuff

How many tourney-going anti-banners and pro-banners voted there?

I don't feel like tallying, and of course it was a baseless assumption, because that poll no longer matters. It was TWO YEARS AGO.

Opinions have changed, and most certainly players have come and gone into the competitive scene. The metagame developed, therefore that poll is irrelevant. Someone would have to make a new official poll to give an accurate percentage in today's metagame.

 

[Kewkky]

Not sure where casual gamers came from, because that never came to mind, but to everything else: Okay. I do agree your comparison has relation.

I mentioned them because the last "Ban MK" poll probably DID have casual gamers in there. I'm not denying it, it's too probable it had a lot of 'em.

The P2W logic is what allowing MK to stay unbanned. That's all I'll say on that.

A couple of reasons are actually making MK stay unbanned... Criteria from other types of fighting games not being met by ours is one, other characters being able to replicate (but not to the same level) MK's tactics, and the extra rules implemented to try and keep MK under control.

It's OK if you don't answer on this, I'm not trying to pick a fight with you.

People need to stop cherrypicking my posts.

Stop looking in a magnifying glass and read my posts completely and comprehensively. I have constantly said over and over again that MK being banned would restore a large amount of game balance.

You had that post separated from the rest of your posts, how was I supposed to know you had some deeper, second meaning to it? I'm only human.

Regardless, it has nothing to do with any discussion here, so I apologize... Now let's leave it there.

I don't feel like tallying, and of course it was a baseless assumption, because that poll no longer matters. It was TWO YEARS AGO.

Opinions have changed, and most certainly players have come and gone into the competitive scene. The metagame developed, therefore that poll is irrelevant. Someone would have to make a new official poll to give an accurate percentage in today's metagame.

Then why bring it up at all, if you yourself agree that your statement is flawed?

 

[Arturito_Burrito]

melee tard? I don't play melee, I've only touched it a few times since brawl came out. that's just my observation, brawl players are more likely to give up on something and say something is cheap and can't be beaten or that they can't do things with their current main(everyone switching to MK) etc. as I said, there are definitely exceptions, just on the whole that's what I've seen. it has nothing to do with the game itself, just the community.

I was talking to armada last night. We both want Jiggs banned.

Are you sure its the brawl community? I think most people didn't decide that the character was banworthy or cheap or gay or broken till 3+ tournaments where they had seen it.

 

[HeroMystic]

I mentioned them because the last "Ban MK" poll probably DID have casual gamers in there. I'm not denying it, it's too probable it had a lot of 'em.

Fair enough, I'm very sure it did since I participated in the thread myself.

A couple of reasons are actually making MK stay unbanned... Criteria from other types of fighting games not being met by ours is one, other characters being able to replicate (but not to the same level) MK's tactics, and the extra rules implemented to try and keep MK under control.

It's OK if you don't answer on this, I'm not trying to pick a fight with you.

Don't worry, I'm a big boy.

The points are true, but I remember the main argument of the anti-ban was quite simply, the metagame has not developed properly. Thing is, back then, it was very true. Momentum cancelling was just introduced back then, and character-specific ATs were hardly discovered. Hell, not a lot of players knew Metaknight had transcended priority either.
Now we're smarter players, and the metagame evolved fruitfully, but Metaknight evolved with it (as many people predicted back then). Things haven't changed besides the obvious Diddy hype based off one player.

A secondary argument was Metaknight didn't over centralize the metagame. That was false back then and it still is now. The results of Pound 4 (which stems the entire revival of the ban MK criteria) is actually a bannable offense, but the fact that ADHD won luckily gives the anti-ban side a defense.

Which goes to the last major argument that players suck against MK. It's been 2+ years, I think this argument just doesn't hold anymore water.

As said before though, the points you made in your quote are true (though implementing rules to control MK is a bannable offense), and after that this is where P2W or Conservative knowledge steps in. Ban MK for sake of game balance or keep him and allow the metagame to hopefully find a counter for MK? If a counter steps in, then banning MK goes completely out the window.

Then why bring it up at all, if you yourself agree that your statement is flawed?

Because I didn't realize the 55% came from the poll till I remembered where that number came from.
Then I posted the poll and realized ten minutes later that the poll was two years ago.

I just have this tendency to ramble and try to make my arguments stronger with more detail, but instead I go off on tangents.

So basically same reason as you, I'm only human. The poll is completely irrelevant regardless however.

 

[Kewkky]

The points are true, but I remember the main argument of the anti-ban was quite simply, the metagame has not developed properly. Thing is, back then, it was very true. Momentum cancelling was just introduced back then, and character-specific ATs were hardly discovered. Hell, not a lot of players knew Metaknight had transcended priority either.

A secondary argument was Metaknight didn't over centralize the metagame. That was false back then and it still is now. The results of Pound 4 (which stems the entire revival of the ban MK criteria) is actually a bannable offense, but the fact that ADHD won luckily gives the anti-ban side a defense.

Which goes to the last major argument that players suck against MK. It's been 2+ years, I think this argument just doesn't hold anymore water.

Ah, you got some good memory remembering those. I don't even remember what I ate yesterday. Probably nothing... But who cares?

1) The metagame will develop either way, MK banned or not banned. What we are doing while MK is allowed to further deter the game's playability is postpone the stress-free gay-less metagame that would develop with the absence to MK's best tools (or the absence of MK as a whole), as well as frustrate small amounts of players every once in a while and have them leave the competitive scene. Are people actually believing that MK's absence would make more people leave than him staying and resuming all of his gay tactics even at top-level play? I find that hard to believe...

2) Metagame overcentralizes, and it did back then... But people didn't want him gone cuz Ally was around. Now Ally is being subjected to MK's tactics and their old crutch broke, so they're flocking to ADHD like bees on honey. If you ask me, it's pretty sad that brawlers have to use a player as a crutch for their own argument, instead of proving it themselves...

3) Hah! With the large amount of MKs everywhere, I'm pretty sure people know the MK matchup well enough to only lose against gay tactics. I might be wrong here, though, and many brawlers may NOT know how to fight against MK, and they MIGHT depend on someone else to 'teach them how to fight the MU'... Which is where the problem to increasing their skill levels is located.

... But then again, this is not a "Ban MK!" topic, I merely want to hear whoever else's opinions are yet to be voiced.... So I'ma drop this and just read until I feel like I need to do some posting again.

As said before though, the points you made in your quote are true (though implementing rules to control MK is a bannable offense), and after that this is where P2W or Conservative knowledge steps in. Ban MK for sake of game balance or keep him and allow the metagame to hopefully find a counter for MK? If a counter steps in, then banning MK goes completely out the window.

The chances of a legit "MK Counter" appearing are so slim, hell I don't think they even exist. How can anyone counter planking/scrooging/smart tornado spamming/dair camping altogether? All of this together make up the problem that MK creates in our tournament scene, yet people hold on to the top players who play the best against MK as if they were living proof of what can be done... When they themselves lose against MK. Pretty much it means that their argument isn't even theirs to begin with.

 

[MarKO X]

Bralw players are natural scrubs.

Instead of playing MK as gay as humanly possible to get him fully banned, MK is played gay in spurt, honor holds priority over playing to win, and rules are made to adhere to the Brawl scrub. Everytime someone says, "oh, that's gay," there's a rule against it.

 

[etecoon]

Bralw players are natural scrubs.

Instead of playing MK as gay as humanly possible to get him fully banned, MK is played gay in spurt, honor holds priority over playing to win, and rules are made to adhere to the Brawl scrub. Everytime someone says, "oh, that's gay," there's a rule against it.

good point about MK, I don't understand pro-ban people who won't play MK out of pride or whatever. if you really wanted him banned you'd be helping his tournament placings as much as possible and annoying as many people with him as possible.

I mean he's never going to be nationally banned anyway but you should do anything you can to help your argument

 

[GunmasterLombardi]

Something has to happen w/ dis dumb bat 'cause apparently our leaders don't have any idea of what 2 do 'bout this.

Some1 though of this earlier: New Rule: can only CP neutrals.