Fourth and final community vote about Meta Knight.

[Cloud9157]

So what do you do when you're down 1-0 against a MK? Do you whine and ***** about how you don't have an advantage anywhere and cry about how you're going to lose simply because of that, or are you going to CP the character you want at the stage you want and give yourself the best chance of winning, even if you aren't at an advantage?

Answer carefully now, lest you contradict yourself.

As for the part you edited again, I didn't quote the whole thing because the emphasis was still "I said it!" The "and other people, too" is only a minor part of the sentence.

And curse you SpadeFox for responding to same thing earlier than I am...

Then obviously I'm going to pick something like Diddy@FD or Snake@Halberd to give me the best chance I have. I don't ***** about playing MKs, I adapt and give my 100% best at taking them down. I get sick of how people who work so hard with characters like Diddy and Snake who actually have an existing LC lose to someone with such a **** LC.

But the thing is, I cannot do to MK what I CAN do to everyone else. Snake has bad stages, Falco has bad stages, Diddy has bad stages, EVERY CHARACTER DOES EXCEPT MK.

Oh, but let me use the correct form of "bad stage" for MK. He doesn't get hurt by any of their hazards/playing fields, but he cannot perform his usual **** as much.

But see, other characters fall to some stage. ICs suck at Norfair, giving you a viable pick there, and they don't even do that well at RC iirc.

MK? The one stage you have that does well against him, he can ban. Snake@Halberd? No problem, ban Halberd. Obviously he has GGs then, but that was an example. Plus MK will just counter what you did with a CP of his own.

Oh, but then I'll switch to Diddy and go FD! No problem, I'll go Falco or simply play the matchup since I'm fricking MK and have a pretty much guaranteed even/45-55 no matter what.

See, having to main 2 characters that require a decent amount of skill and time be put into them, all to give you an even with MK. Don't know about you, but that sounds like utter BS.

 

[Clai]

...i'm still lost on how to respond to this...but, as i said before, putting yourself at the best possible advantage is what a smart player would do...however, there isn't a character/stage combination out there that truly beats MK, let alone puts the match up on an even ground.

some players think snake/halberd and diddy kong/final puts the match up at 50:50, but this is only 1 match...and with dave's stupid rule, you can't play that stage more than once during that set. an MK player also has the ability to ban either one of those stages to avoid the match up...

Bardull, check out some of my responses to your questions, maybe I have the answers you're looking for:

You're right in saying that counterpicking allows you to take every possible advantage to raise your chances of winning as much as they can. Nowhere, though, does it say counterpicking has to let you have a greater chance of winning than your opponent based on characters/stages. It doesn't matter if the chances of winning are 51% or 49%, as long as the odds are reasonable.

 

[etecoon]

Let's hear why then.

Boat: a lot like a standard neutral, it's pretty difficult for MK to approach snake here, right blast zone is pretty close so this can lead to early KO's for snake, snake's stage control during this phase is very good. MK has dtilt on the wall so I'll call this even

Vertical scrolling phase: this is the only part that really gives snake any problems, he has great vertical camping though and he has a TON of options on where to land when retreating, this is not optimal for MK because MK as a character is very dependent on option select, if he can't cover options then he loses one of his biggest advantages. MK's advantage none the less because one mistake from snake can mean death.

Pendulum: snake doesn't have much for stage control here but he can retreat whenever necessary pretty easily too, this is pretty neutral

Side scrolling phase: ultra low ceiling and a pretty wide open space, frequently multiple landing options, this phase is probably in snake's favor.

maybe still MK's favor because of the severity of the vertical phase but it's not that bad really IMO

 

[Red Arremer]

...i'm still lost on how to respond to this...but, as i said before, putting yourself at the best possible advantage is what a smart player would do...

I never opposed this point. Never. That's why I said that an advantage is favourable.
I just said that you having an actual advantage is not necessary, because if you at least go even vs. your opponent, and you are of better skill, then you will win.
Of course a smart player will choose the most favourable option for themselves, no questions.

however, there isn't a character/stage combination out there that truly beats MK, let alone puts the match up on an even ground.

There are many stage/character combinations that do so, and you know that. You say it yourself in the next paragraph. And it's not only "some players", it's actually the majority.

some players think snake/halberd and diddy kong/final puts the match up at 50:50, but this is only 1 match...and with dave's stupid rule, you can't play that stage more than once during that set. an MK player also has the ability to ban either one of those stages to avoid the match up...

Dave's Stupid Rule prohibits the winner of a match to choose the stage they won on. So if you lose on Final Destination, you can pick Final Destination.

As for the matches - I think Snake goes even with Meta Knight on more stages than just Halberd, and I also think that Diddy Kong does very well on most Neutral stages - Final Destination and Smashville are definitely even.
Furthermore, there are other characters like the Ice Climbers that don't do all too bad against Meta Knight on certain stages.

Of course, matchups are as of now highly subjective, but I honestly believe that most of S Tier performs well enough against Meta Knight to be even or almost even (45:55).

 

[Clai]

Then obviously I'm going to pick something like Diddy@FD or Snake@Halberd to give me the best chance I have. I don't ***** about playing MKs, I adapt and give my 100% best at taking them down. I get sick of how people who work so hard with characters like Diddy and Snake who actually have an existing LC lose to someone with such a **** LC.

But the thing is, I cannot do to MK what I CAN do to everyone else. Snake has bad stages, Falco has bad stages, Diddy has bad stages, EVERY CHARACTER DOES EXCEPT MK.

Oh, but let me use the correct form of "bad stage" for MK. He doesn't get hurt by any of their hazards/playing fields, but he cannot perform his usual **** as much.

But see, other characters fall to some stage. ICs suck at Norfair, giving you a viable pick there, and they don't even do that well at RC iirc.

MK? The one stage you have that does well against him, he can ban. Snake@Halberd? No problem, ban Halberd. Obviously he has GGs then, but that was an example. Plus MK will just counter what you did with a CP of his own.

Metaknight doesn't have bad characters or stages that we can easily exploit. Big deal. MK's the best character in the game- he gets that luxury. You can win against MK even though you don't have the advantage, you know...

Oh, but then I'll switch to Diddy and go FD! No problem, I'll go Falco or simply play the matchup since I'm fricking MK and have a pretty much guaranteed even/45-55 no matter what.

See, having to main 2 characters that require a decent amount of skill and time be put into them, all to give you an even with MK. Don't know about you, but that sounds like utter BS.

If you have to rely on the counterpick system to win matches, you are weak and have no confidence in your mains, who probably has a very good chance to beat MK even when they don't have the advantage. With that kind of mindset, you'd probably lose no matter what you do when you fight MK. Nobody ever has to pick up another character just to fight MK. They can choose to do so, but they don't have to. Many people just stick with their mains to fight MK and win without having to resort to counterpicking.

 

[Dark 3nergy]

When you CP someone with a stage, you are supposed to gain a clear advantage.

LOL

what

 

[Master Raven]

I really think Snake players need to study the Snake/MK matchup on RC more often. I think it could be a potential alternate CP vs MK (not saying Snake counters him there, but with the strange blastzones and low ceiling, I'd be interested to see how they advance the matchup for this stage).

 

[BarDulL]

Bardull, check out some of my responses to your questions, maybe I have the answers you're looking for:

yeah i finally understood the point and i addressed it in the second part of my post.

what if an MK bans FD. where is the diddy kong player going to go? there isn't a stage diddy can play on that would put the match up at 50:50...no matter where the diddy goes, the diddy is at a disadvantage. same with snake, what will snake do when an MK bans halberd?

your only option is to put your odds at 40:60/45:55. sure, it doesn't say anywhere that a counterpick should always put you at an advantage, but what happens if you're put in a position where, wherever you go, you're at a disadvantage?

 

['V']

The counterpick system was always broken/overused to me.

 

[Sosuke]

http://super-smash-bros.wikia.com/wiki/Counterpick

 

[Cloud9157]

LOL

what

That would be the definition of "Counter" wouldn't? To turn things around so that you gain the upper hand?

Maybe supposed to wasn't the best word. Let's go with generally. I don't word what I mean very well sometimes.

 

[Red Arremer]

I really think Snake players need to study the Snake/MK matchup on RC more often. I think it could be a potential alternate CP vs MK (not saying Snake counters him there, but with the strange blastzones and low ceiling, I'd be interested to see how they advance the matchup for this stage).

As far as I know, SamuraiPanda likes to take his opponents to Rainbow Cruise. I, personally, think it's a very exciting stage for Snake, as well. While his vertical mobility is crippling him a bit in the vertical scrolling section, his performance on 2 of the other 3 parts (Ship and horizontal scrolling section) could be exceptionally good.

what if an MK bans FD. where is the diddy kong player going to go? there isn't a stage diddy can play on that would put the match up at 50:50...no matter where the diddy goes, the diddy is at a disadvantage. same with snake, what will snake do when an MK bans halberd?

your only option is to put your odds at 40:60/45:55. sure, it doesn't say anywhere that a counterpick should always put you at an advantage, but what happens if you're put in a position where, wherever you go, you're at a disadvantage?

As I said, especially Snake and Diddy have more options than Halberd and Final Destination respectively - those 2 are just the best choice, and perhaps put Meta Knight even into a disadvantage.
Diddy even does very well against Meta Knight on Battlefield, Meta Knight's best stage. It can't be worse than a slight disadvantage for Diddy on this stage, in my opinion - Diddy's banana game has been developed further than "Uh oh, my banana landed on a platform, what am I gonna do! QQ".

Snake's performance is good on many stages, too, especially on bigger ones like Final Destination or Smashville, he can use his camping game to keep Meta Knight away from himself.

 

[Twin_Scimitar]

yeah i finally understood the point and i addressed it in the second part of my post.

what if an MK bans FD. where is the diddy kong player going to go? there isn't a stage diddy can play on that would put the match up at 50:50...no matter where the diddy goes, the diddy is at a disadvantage. same with snake, what will snake do when an MK bans halberd?

your only option is to put your odds at 40:60/45:55. sure, it doesn't say anywhere that a counterpick should always put you at an advantage, but what happens if you're put in a position where, wherever you go, you're at a disadvantage?

It doesn't say anywhere that a counterpick should always put you at an advantage. This statement is true. However I'm confused as to why everyone seems to think that our community is unanimous on the fact that within the rules of a tournament it is okay that it is impossible to have an advantage on your counter pick. What I mean by this is why should I accept that the opposite is also true. We can argue 50-50 and 55-45 all day, but I guess I'm confused as to why Spadefox and Clai seem so clandestine as to the fact that it's okay that the best you can possibly do in many qualified peoples' opinion is even. This seems like a VERY subjective issue and you aren't making it out to be one. Just my thoughts.

 

[Red Arremer]

http://super-smash-bros.wikia.com/wiki/Counterpick

Interesting, yet this text doesn't prove anything, since it's also written by players.
The basic concept is true - though instead of "advantage over your opponent" it should read "a more favourable position against your opponent".
If you're in a sincere disadvantage (say, 30:70), a 35:65 is already leagues better than your former situation, and already more favourable than the old situation.
If you're in a small disadvantage (40:60), an even matchup is already better than your former situation, and already more favourable than the old situation.

I think the concept is not that hard to grasp.

 

[adumbrodeus]

I love how you chew me out when he also asked "says whom?" Obviously me, or he wouldn't have felt the need to ask that. No need to troll me.

I don't troll you, it's called "constructive criticism".

"says who", is when you say that "x,y,z" persons also do to give credibility to your argument, you didn't so you phailed.

 

[Cloud9157]

Metaknight doesn't have bad characters or stages that we can easily exploit. Big deal. MK's the best character in the game- he gets that luxury. You can win against MK even though you don't have the advantage, you know...



If you have to rely on the counterpick system to win matches, you are weak and have no confidence in your mains, who probably has a very good chance to beat MK even when they don't have the advantage. With that kind of mindset, you'd probably lose no matter what you do when you fight MK. Nobody ever has to pick up another character just to fight MK. They can choose to do so, but they don't have to. Many people just stick with their mains to fight MK and win without having to resort to counterpicking.

Why should he have that luxury? Because he is the best as you claim? Let's say he never existed in this game and Snake was the best. What luxury does he have? He has actual bad matchups, and he has bad stages, some things MK does not have.

So if I'm playing someone's GaW with Falco, I'm weak for CP'ing Japes/another character? If that isn't what you're saying or I am misinterpreting your words, explain please.

 

[MarKO X]

http://super-smash-bros.wikia.com/wiki/Counterpick

OH SNAP!!!
Well......... does this help or hinder....... anything?

 

[adumbrodeus]

Why should he have that luxury? Because he is the best as you claim? Let's say he never existed in this game and Snake was the best. What luxury does he have? He has actual bad matchups, and he has bad stages, some things MK does not have.

So if I'm playing someone's GaW with Falco, I'm weak for CP'ing Japes/another character? If that isn't what you're saying or I am misinterpreting your words, explain please.

Why SHOULDN'T he have that luxary?

Only if it makes him dominant enough to overcentralize does it matter.

 

[POKE40]

what if an MK bans FD. where is the diddy kong player going to go?

Go to Smashville:

From the Diddy Boards (and backed up with their reasons):

• With only one platform and small horizontal stage gives banana's to be close for offensive play
• MO Best CP for MK

evil doesn't look that evil.
:/

 

[Cloud9157]

Why shouldn't he? Because that derails the CP system and only causes more people to main him, slowing the MG of Brawl as a whole?

 

[superyoshi888]

Just getting MK to a 5-5 using your character AND a stage doesn't mean he does not break the CP system. He walks into the match with nothing worse than even or 45-55, which no character has ever done in SSBs.

And from what I read on the SmashWiki, Pikachu has few, if any, bad stages in SSB. Should we ban him?

 

['V']

If they haven't seen a reason for banning him, then no.

 

[Vyse]

Sagat doesn't have anything worse than 5:5 in SF4
Though, I'm sure that argument (like every other one) has been done to death.

 

[Kamikaze*]

And From What I Read On The Smashwiki, Pikachu Has Few, If Any, Bad Stages In Ssb. Should We Ban Him?

Get Muhfuggin ***** Pro Ban

 

[The Brigand]

And from what I read on the SmashWiki, Pikachu has few, if any, bad stages in SSB. Should we ban him?

Granted I'm not taking '64's gameplay into account here when I say this, but judging solely by that picture and this comment, then yes, you really should.

Of course, '64 is just so different from both Melee and Brawl that I doubt banning Pikachu would have a point at all.

 

['V']

Seriously... the "no bad matchups" argument is just plain old. It really needs to stop.

Even in 64's case, if Pikachu were banned, then Fox would be right after that with that stupid criteria... Then so on and so forth. In this case, the slippery slope WOULD have to take place.

Come on, people.

 

[phi1ny3]

How about "overcentralization"? Even some anti-bans agree this is true, but don't care. And I haven't seen what each side has said to that besides just quoting HOBO 17, which is actually a pretty lame counter point (C'mon anti-bans, step it up!)

 

[Beta Knight]

Not to mention match-ups are all just theory. Really it depends on each persons play style and overall skill.

 

[The Brigand]

With all due respect, the old "but if you ban this then you're going to want to ban this too" argument is just as old as "no bad matchups".

 

[Masmasher@]

No I agree with you. I'm simply saying take whatever you can get. But if it still leaves you at a disadvantage... then you will just have to deal with it.
Heres a example:
lets say that im fighting a character that has a super that does tremendous damage, also it launches you for extra combo opportunity. If i punch you as you do that super i have countered you. But i am not at a advantage because the super still hit me. Though i am in a better position because i have knocked you away so you cant follow up on the launch opportunity.
Im simply saying that countering someone in a game doesnt always mean you will be at a advantage. Even if you pick the best possible option

I think this was missed and those of you debating about how counterpicking is supposed to work should read.

 

['V']

By looking at that chart with the "no bad matchups" argument, almost every character after Pikachu would have none until you get all the way down to Luigi.

Congratulations. Over half of the cast is gone.

 

[The Brigand]

By looking at that chart with the "no bad matchups" argument, almost every character after Pikachu would have none until you get all the way down to Luigi.

Congratulations. Over half of the cast is gone.

Just over, in fact. Hooray for a metagame where Samus replaces Mario as the balanced character, eh?

EDIT: And Yoshi, too! Two characters without any negative or positive matchups if we take the idea "ban any character with no disadvantages" idea and run with it.

 

[Cloud9157]

And from what I read on the SmashWiki, Pikachu has few, if any, bad stages in SSB. Should we ban him?

Yes, because Pika has no other fault, right? If that is the case, then go ahead and ban him.


See, if MK had some serious weaknesses, I wouldn't mind that he has no bad stages.

64/=/ Brawl for the "no bad matchups" argument. Snake has bad matchups, Falco has bad ones, Diddy has matchups, everyone does in Brawl except for MK.

 

[Steelia]

For Ban.
Seeing is believing, and if I hadn't seen... I wouldn't believe...
No other Smash character in the series come CLOSE to the amount of broken power Meta Knight possesses. Knowing he'll be staying out of competitive game play for good... Well, I'm sure that'll help some people sleep at night.

Keep him a casual, sure. But may he kiss goodbye the ground of competitive play.

 

['V']

Just over, in fact. Hooray for a metagame where Samus replaces Mario as the balanced character, eh?

Also hooray for a new metagame that only has 5 characters to show for it. In which the top character still only barely gets countered by one character whose overall metagame is pretty stale to begin with, so he gets ***** by the others.

I'm pretty sure most people would not want to play that.

Wow...

 

[NessBrawler]

people... I'm sure we are smart enough to ue our brains. If we ban meta we won't ban again. We need to know our limits. If snake has a weakness he has a weakness. If we can exploit it then hes not broken and can't be banned like meta thus making banning him not affect anything

 

[Hobobloke]

The difference between Brawl and SSB64 is that on the 64 matchups are much less important as virtually one mistake leads to a stock.

 

['V']

The difference between Brawl and SSB64 is that on the 64 matchups are much less important as virtually one mistake leads to a stock.

And all MK's don't make mistakes?

 

[The Brigand]

Also hooray for a new metagame that only has 5 characters to show for it. In which the top character still only barely gets countered by one character whose overall metagame is pretty stale to begin with, so he gets ***** by the others.

I'm pretty sure most people would not want to play that.

Wow...

Well, just looking at the list: Ness counters Luigi, Luigi counters Jigglypuff, Jigglypuff counters Ness, and Samus and Yoshi do their own thing.

Ignoring the fact that '64 is... well, '64, that sounds fairly balanced, yes?

Honestly, I'm not being all that serious about this. The fact is I'm just making discussion for the sake of it. This topic doesn't seem like it's really going anywhere it hasn't already gone. Hell, I wouldn't doubt it if a hundred pages back there was an argument about what counterpicking really means.

 

[Fatmanonice]

*wakes up*

...

*reads pages*

Great... only one sentence in my arguement was read and they didn't even bother arguing everything else that goes with it. *considers going back to bed*

@ Old Mocha:

Not ones that can lead to 0-death, no. That's why, despite being the best, Fox didn't run away with the competition in Melee like Metaknight does in Brawl.