Meta Knight Officially Banned!

[DJ Arcatek]

Have you ever played decent Meta Knight? As a matter of fact, have you ever been to an offline tournament period? The only people who could POSSIBLY say the **** you're saying are the people who obviously haven't dealt with MK's ****. Or MK mains. Suck it up, he's banned.

 

[Shwaffles]

Pretty much. His argument is like the equivalent of Ash thinking he can beat a Rhydon with his Pikachu by shooting electricity at its horn, except...anime logic certainly doesn't apply here. In the real world, Rhydon would stomp Pikachu into a bloody mess and Ash would cry himself into deep depression.

Those of you who preach the "get better" speech regarding MK, need to join reality with the rest of us.

This not a "get better" speech. I agree with you guys that metaknight is a bull**** character which is reality, but he isn't good enough to be banned which is also reality.

 

[IhaveSonar]

Arcatek, you're either trolling or just dug us Pro-bans into a hole. : /

 

[iRJi]

I said what I said because of the two terms I used. So what else would it be? MK isn't god. MK isn't undefeatable..

So what would you most likely say when somebody doesn't want to face something that is perfectly tolerable?

I already said MK has all the advantages he can have. He is still not undefeatable, nor is he God.

So what does this imply? That people aren't approaching this the right way. See how I came to that conclusion?

This is the part where you stop assuming I am a troll and work with me instead.

My statement still stands bro. I never said you were a troll. Those words never hit my post bulletin in text. Reread my post, and the bold sums up your argument and stops it.

Mk is not god.
MK is not indestructable
MK IS too powerful in comparison to the rest of the cast for reasons I mentioned in my trolling manner..

He is better then the rest of the cast to the point where he does not belong or stand next to them in comparison.

 

[DJ Arcatek]

I don't understand how I dug the "pro-bans into a hole", but alright.

 

[Alien Vision]

Have you ever played decent Meta Knight? As a matter of fact, have you ever been to an offline tournament period? The only people who could POSSIBLY say the **** you're saying are the people who obviously haven't dealt with MK's ****. Or MK mains. Suck it up, he's banned.

I don't care either way. This has nothing to do with me playing a top MK.

I am basing this off the ONLY conclusion by using what they've implied. I'm not saying what I am saying as fact. I am playing chess, and now they aren't able to move because there is no move to make; thus their opposition is null.

What do you think of when somebody says ''God''. What about ''undefeatable''?

Now, what do you think when they still want to ban a character that can be handled, but would take arduous work to do so?

You say what I said that gave you the impression I was trolling. I'm playing chess.

Not a game that you can't win from the beginning.

 

[Chuee]

Going mighty hard aren't you? lol

He has 6 jumps so does jigglypuff
He has trensendant priority in over 80% of his moves
he has 5 recoveries So does Lucas
He has invincible planking
He has on average top 3 fastest movesets, while in combination some of the most ranged moves in the game.

We molded our metagame and stage list just to keep him into the game But:

he can't be counter picked to any Stage Uh, you can definitely CP him to places and get a better MU lol........ I know what you mean is that he has no 'bad' stages, and while I agree to an extent, most good characters have decent options to CP him to.
He has no losing matchups in combination of him not being able to be counterpicked to stages suitable enough. No losing MUs is a terrible reason. Last time I checked the Melee chart Fox and Falco both had no losing MUs. Are they broken? More than likely not. What makes MK overpowered regarding MUs isn't that he doesn't lose any, but rather that he has so few that go -1/0 against him.

I said what I said because of the two terms I used. So what else would it be? MK isn't god. MK isn't undefeatable..

So what would you most likely say when somebody doesn't want to face something that is perfectly tolerable?

I already said MK has all the advantages he can have. He is still not undefeatable, nor is he God.

So what does this imply? That people aren't approaching this the right way. See how I came to that conclusion?

This is the part where you stop assuming I am a troll and work with me instead.

Uh, weren't you arguing for pro-ban just like a few days ago?
and now you're arguing against pro-ban.............

 

[Pathetiqu3]

Tell me why, and I might bite.

I've been a part of plenty of competitive communities: Melee, Brawl, WoW, SC2, Pokemon, MtG, and plenty of outdated or niche other games. I think that qualifies me to have a say on it.

Even the most hyper-competitive games with communities 10x larger and 10x more intense pro gamers are capable of acknowledging imbalance and its negative impact in the game. The Smash community INSISTS on being a major outlier in their complete non-desire to invoke change through rules or mods(the greatest tragedy ever is that the modding community never got into the mainstream).

We were lucky with Melee, the mechanical requirements were high enough that even blatantly overpowered mechanics never had a major impact due to the immensely high skill ceiling they demanded for their employment.

MK, and Brawl in general, has an extremely low mechanical skill ceiling. The metagame is much more like chess than a true fighter. MK forced insane split-edge timings on other characters, and demanded few in return. Because of huge margin for error when fighting non-mk's, a lot of weaker players were winning at the character select screen.

He killed the community, even for melee veterans like myself (I've made more than a few trips along the east coast). I don't care for your intense logical debates about hair-thin fractions of seconds that show that mk is perfectly acceptable character. The fact is that he hemorrhaged players from the community, and the powers that be let him.

The Smash community acted stupidly, and they're reaping their rewards. The MK change will not change anything, but that's not because it was the wrong change to make, but that the extremely poor and narcissistic people who kept him in the game for so long delayed the change long enough for it to be of minimal importance.

I don't believe the smash community will ever really recover, but I certainly know that Brawl is dead and I'm worried about Wii U Smash's ability to resurrect it.

Anyway your opinion is stupid because you won't accept glaring imbalance and believe that it's possible to overcome insane odds. Problem is that MK mains that don't sit idly would never EVER let that happen. Learn more about competitive gamers and be a little less ********.

 

[Alien Vision]

Uh, weren't you arguing for pro-ban just like a few days ago?
and now you're arguing against pro-ban.............

I'm neutral about the ban's already made decision.

I'm against the reason why the ban was made in the first place.

Does that make sense?


@RJ - It doesn't matter if he overshadows the other characters. He is still not god, and thus is viable to be a competitor; may he be the worst of them all.

 

[Shwaffles]

My statement still stands bro. I never said you were a troll. Those words never hit my post bulletin in text. Reread my post, and the bold sums up your argument and stops it.

Mk is not god.
MK is not indestructable
MK IS too powerful in comparison to the rest of the cast for reasons I mentioned in my trolling manner..

He is better then the rest of the cast to the point where he does not belong or stand next to them in comparison.

The bold part is not the definition of a god. It means he is extremely overpowered, but he still is not good enough to warrant a ban. To warrant a ban he needs to absolutely DESTROY THE ENTIRE CAST with ease. I'm not talking about lots of 7-3 matchups, I'm talking about 10-0. Every character needs to have an absolutely unwinnable matchup vs him. Currently this is not the case.

 

[El Duderino]

I'm just going to cut straight to the main issue here, I hope you don't mind.

Now tell me this: Why do you think cheating is the answer?

The type of Mod we are talking about here does not apply to the definition of cheating. It is not unfairly creating an advantage or depreciating the value. It does the exact opposite actually. The worst you can possibly accuse of it of is fraud, but that does not in itself make something a cheat.

Either way, I support the idea of a Mod fix because it means we can establish a more complete and fun version of the game to play competitively without all the drudgery of the current rule set.

 

[Exceladon City]

Let me get this straight. You only support the ban because of your personal experiences with MK?

MK is not invincible.

MK is not God.

MK is MK, and is going to be a tough fight. MK can be defeated. Nobody has given a solid point as to why he should be banned. It's all bias, whining, exaggerating, overcentralising, and just being completely, and utterly ludicrous.

The maturity of some of you can be very dim.

No. I support the ban because of the data. I am one of many who can back up the claims. I was anti-ban for a while. I believed that I could take whatever MK came my way that was within my skill range. Then, they just abused everything that makes MK the force that he is now.

When you HAVE to ban stages and instate rules SPECIFICALLY to nerf a SINGLE character, it's time to get rid of that character.

IDC was banned.

Planking was SOMEWHAT nerfed because of LGLs. Not that the LGL mattered because the MK players would just space out their ledgegrabs and it hurt other characters in the process.

Scrooging was banned.

The fact that other characters can do these techniques means nothing because every character has a limitation or some kind of flaw to prevent them from abusing it indefinitely. MK truly doesn't.

You can call what I say "bias, whining, exaggerating, overcentralising, and just being completely, and utterly ludicrous." but the facts are there. You refuse to accept them. I may not have the charts and graphs and the numbers but they (the facts) are there.

MK is literally pick me or lose. No ifs, ands or buts about it. Even then, picking MK isn't the answer to the problem. So you're basically adding to the problem by trying to find a solution.

 

[Pathetiqu3]

The bold part is not the definition of a god. It means he is extremely overpowered, but he still is not good enough to warrant a ban. To warrant a ban he needs to absolutely DESTROY THE ENTIRE CAST with ease. I'm not talking about lots of 7-3 matchups, I'm talking about 10-0. Every character needs to have an absolutely unwinnable matchup vs him. Currently this is not the case.

Any matchup that's not 50/50 is a tragedy of balance and you are terribly misinformed and ignorant to believe that it is okay.

 

[Chuee]

I'm neutral about the ban's already made decision.

I'm against the reason why the ban was made in the first place.

Does that make sense?


@RJ - It doesn't matter if he overshadows the other characters. He is still not god, and thus is viable to be a competitor, may he be your worst of them all.

I guess..........but I still find it odd because I remember you saying a few days ago something along the lines of MK being completely and utterly broken and a tumor(?) in the smash community or something.

 

[iRJi]

Stuff

I didn't go into detail lol. In regards to jigs and lucas, yes you are right. Combine everything I just said into one character though.

Part 2: Making the MU just a tad better by changing stages does not mean anything in regards to actually being counter picked. You can combine to fact that Fox and Falco have bad stages, which puts them at a disadvantage at one point. In brawl, the best you can do is break even.

 

[JPOBS]

Even the most hyper-competitive games with communities 10x larger and 10x more intense pro gamers are capable of acknowledging imbalance and its negative impact in the game. The Smash community INSISTS on being a major outlier in their complete non-desire to invoke change through rules or mods

I'm sorry, but this is entirely incorrect. In fact its quite the opposite, Smash is looked down upon by the larger fighting game community exactly becaus eof our insstence on changing the rules and the game to our liking.

if this is your thesis, you have already lost the argument.

 

[Shorts]

This is coming from a non-competitive player, so bear with me. I have a few questions regaurding the tier list.

Firstly, will there be an significant jumps from characters? Or will it be more like everyone just got bumped up a spot?

Secondly, will the G and S rank still exist? Or will it go back to an A-F or whatever it was?

Thanks, and sorry if this is the wrong place for these questions.

 

[Alien Vision]

I guess..........but I still find it odd because I remember you saying a few days ago something along the lines of MK being completely and utterly broken and a tumor(?) in the smash community or something.

Mhmm.. MK is broken, but he is not god.

I was just correcting Eldude.

@ Oreo - You state all of these points why MK is broken. You have not stated why he should be legitimately banned. He is still defeatable, and isn't even invincible.

See the logic in that?

 

[Pathetiqu3]

I'm sorry, but this is entirely incorrect. In fact its quite the opposite, Smash is looked down upon by the larger fighting game community exactly becaus eof our insstence on changing the rules and the game to our liking.

if this is your thesis, you have already lost the argument.

Or maybe you're just wrong, stupid, and spouting words that you were told rather than ones you thought.

One or two communities does not equal the whole. Any computer gamer would never tolerate a situation like brawl's.

 

[Chuee]

I didn't go into detail lol. In regards to jigs and lucas, yes you are right. Combine everything I just said into one character though.

Yes, transcendent priority and speed are good, especially combined with 6 jumps. Invincible planking doesn't really matter too much since the LGL unless you try to do the whole play safe for like 6 min. then plank the rest of match thing.

Part 2: Making the MU just a tad better by changing stages does not mean anything in regards to actually being counter picked. You can combine to fact that Fox and Falco have bad stages, which puts them at a disadvantage at one point. In brawl, the best you can do is break even.

It isn't game changing, but it's a lot different from your CP being useless.

 

[Shwaffles]

Any matchup that's not 50/50 is a tragedy of balance and you are terribly misinformed and ignorant to believe that it is okay.

Great so you want to completely homogenize the entire cast of characters. There is a game for that already it's called chess. Good luck and have fun. After spending time with the fighting game community I can assure you that balance between movesets and sprites isn't everything. It helps, but your putting too much emphasis on 50/50 balance rather than spiderweb balance.
You want to know how SC:BW got balanced? It was due to the players and not Blizzard patching it every few weeks.

Or maybe you're just wrong, stupid, and spouting words that you were told rather than ones you thought.

One or two communities does not equal the whole. Any computer gamer would never tolerate a situation like brawl's.

He's 100% correct actually.
You go onto SRK, Dustloop, or any other competitive fighting game site. Your going to get laughed off it, because of your opinion.

 

[Chuee]

Mhmm.. MK is broken, but he is not god.

I was just correcting Eldude.

He's not 'god', however I don't think I could name a banned fighting game character that could be considered 'god' besides maybe Ivan Ooze.

 

[Pathetiqu3]

Great so you want to completely homogenize the entire cast of characters. There is a game for that already it's called chess. Good luck and have fun. After spending time with the fighting game community I can assure you that balance between movesets and sprites isn't everything. It helps, but your putting too much emphasis on 50/50 balance rather than spiderweb balance.
You want to know how SC:BW got balanced? It was due to the players and not Blizzard patching it every few weeks.

Oh really? I remember a few changes that were quite significant. Also, no bonjwa lasted more than a year. How long has M2K been sitting on his throne again?

The starcrafts are a perfect example of 0 homogeny and beautiful balance.

Smash has never had a caring dev.

 

[Alien Vision]

You want to know how SC:BW got balanced? It was due to the players and not Blizzard patching it every few weeks.

See this? This is when you can bring other games into your argument. When you explain something that has everything to do with that game alone.

Do not compare games to strengthen your arguments; as if they had any similarities to begin with. People will not take you seriously.

@ Chuee - My main point I am making is that MK isn't invincible. He can be dealt with.

 

[JPOBS]

Or maybe you're just wrong, stupid, and spouting words that you were told rather than ones you thought.

One or two communities does not equal the whole. Any computer gamer would never tolerate a situation like brawl's.

What are you even talking about?

Sure I get it, computer games have the luxury of having patches and mods released frequently, thats great. Smash games don't. Instead, we are left to ban stages, items, specific strategies, and anything else we can to balance the game the way we like it.

You said smash is an outlier because it refuses to change to solve its problems. that is entirely INCORRECT.
You don't even have an argument. Your entire thesis is a flat out lie.

Like I already said, almost every other game and community within the Fighting genre hates smash because we bend the rules and change things. You're just flat out wrong, you have no argument. I won't be responding to anything you write because you literally couldnt be more incorrect.

 

[Ripple]

You obviously aren't making a good point yourself. You are basically enforcing that you think everything you've said was fact--when it's obviously not-

quote where I say something that isn't fact.

because I'm pretty sure the only thing I've said up up til now, is MK breaks the CP system

 

[Pathetiqu3]

See this? This is when you can bring other games into your argument. When you explain something that has everything to do with that game alone.

Do not compare games to strengthen your arguments; as if they had any similarities to begin with. People will not take you seriously.

You didn't even bother to respond to a post directly responding to your own. Now you cherry-pick comments that strengthen your argument. You really are ********.

 

[Shwaffles]

Oh really? I remember a few changes that were quite significant. Also, no bonjwa lasted more than a year. How long has M2K been sitting on his throne again?

The starcrafts are a perfect example of 0 homogeny and beautiful balance.

Smash has never had a caring dev.

Umm sorry, but SC2 is a joke, end of story. It's the community that makes these games amazing not the developers.

 

[Pathetiqu3]

What are you even talking about?

Sure I get it, computer games have the luxury of having patches and mods released frequently, thats great. Smash games don't. Instead, we are left to ban stages, items, specific strategies, and anything else we can to balance the game the way we like it.

You said smash is an outlier because it refuses to change to solve its problems. that is entirely INCORRECT.
You don't even have an argument. Your entire thesis is a flat out lie.

Like I already said, almost every other game and community within the Fighting genre hates smash because we bend the rules and change things. You're just flat out wrong, you have no argument. I won't be responding to anything you write because you literally couldnt be more incorrect.

And you're still really ********. Street Fighter has a CARING dev team that WANT balance. So does Tekken. Smash does not.

You just don't get it, and I don't think you will. The community taking this game into their own hands is the only way that this party game ever got noticed by big communities like that in the first place. The half-assedness of making Brawl for the players, by the players, has killed it.

 

[Wave-Guiding Hero]

This is coming from a non-competitive player, so bear with me. I have a few questions regaurding the tier list.

Firstly, will there be an significant jumps from characters? Or will it be more like everyone just got bumped up a spot?

Secondly, will the G and S rank still exist? Or will it go back to an A-F or whatever it was?

Thanks, and sorry if this is the wrong place for these questions.

I'm actually legitimately interested in an answer to this question (lol I'm a noob too). Does MK's removal actually do enough to justify creating an entirely new tier list (although I guess it would happen anyway)? Anyone?

 

[Chuee]

Yes, because there were some characters who were held back solely from having a bad MU with MK. With him gone those characters can now perform better in tournament setting, warranting a rise in the tier list.

 

[Vyse]

Honestly, the only reason I support the ban is so that **** like what happened at SNES and when Plairnk got 3rd through ledge stalling at that tournament doesn't happen again.

Like really, MK has closer to even matchups only because of surgical alterations. Why should we have LGLs?

Planking is rediculous. Unlike an infinite for example, it is an action that requires no interaction with the opponent. You retreat, grab the ledge, then stall.

Other characters can play run away, but it doesn't mean they're always in an advantageous position, and are much more realistically dealt with. Traditionally, having your back in the corner is a bad thing and the opponent has options in most fighting games to beat your blocking game.

MK is always at an advantage on the ledge if you go after him. You don't have any fairly balanced risk vs reward mechanism for dealing with planking. And nevermind scrooging.

To me, it's on par with idc, except if the MK plays it right, they could score a stock from a position that by definition should be a disadvantage.

I am fine with MK otherwise. And am fine with him in the current meta. That is, with the LGL.

Sent from my Desire HD using Tapatalk

 

[Pathetiqu3]

Umm sorry, but SC2 is a joke, end of story. It's the community that makes these games amazing not the developers.

You should tell the people who get paid to live, eat, and breath SC2 that it's a joke. Or David Kim or the countless others at Blizzard who put more hours than anyone here would ever with anything in their lives.

Brawl may be dead, and I may criticize its community's decisions, but I would never say that they DON'T CARE about their game.

Thanks for being one less person I have to respond to.

 

[~tgm_Zeej]

Is no one getting that MvC2's gods were not as broken as MK just on the merit that there were four of them? Four characters with very diverse play styles, as well as different strategies to be employed. Putting Sent on point was completely different from Anchor Sent, for example, and that's just getting started.

Let alone the fact that these characters weren't limited in any fashion, and the metagame still thrived. Take away LGLs, the scrooging ban, and IDC ban. This game will be dead inside a week, guaranteed.

It's simply not a viable comparison to support anti-ban. It's quite the opposite, actually.

 

[Alien Vision]

@ Ripple -

MK prevents this on all levels

he strengths allow him to do that, I'm not even making the claim he's too good.

you can't deny he breaks the system.

Show me proof that MK, the character, dominates everything.

We all know he is broken, but we also know he can be defeated aswell.

What system? You don't even care for the system because MK just destroys it that much (as you imply). So if MK isn't God, or undefeatable.. As you seem to imply, then what is he?

 

[Verde Coeden Scalesworth]

I'm just going to cut straight to the main issue here, I hope you don't mind.



The type of Mod we are talking about here does not apply to the definition of cheating. It is not unfairly creating an advantage or depreciating the value. It does the exact opposite actually. The worst you can possibly accuse of it of is fraud, but that does not in itself make something a cheat.

Either way, I support the idea of a Mod fix because it means we can establish a more complete and fun version of the game to play competitively without all the drudgery.

It still does apply to cheating. Cheating is using an outside influence in a game. This includes Cheat Devices, Steroids, Looking at test scores, Using hacks, Switching around your cards for other ones(like in a TCG), and so on. Right now, that's what's happening. Once again, fun is completely subjective. Not everybody is interested in your kind of fun, to note.

Likewise, a game can be played competitively without any modifications to the original game. Note that about the only thing the game is worth modding for that is even close to heavily agreed upon is removing tripping for the competitive scene. The rest is changing around what makes the characters exactly how they are. The thing is, mods are very extreme compared to what banning a character is. You're essentially making your own game, instead of making rules with the original game for the purpose of running a tournament. There is quite a huge difference here.

Also, since we're talking about the sole video game community. Let's go by the definition of video games: Hacks are no different from Cheat Devices right now. You're doing the same thing as using one. Note that codes for invincibility, whether possibly without a device or not is actually CALLED Cheat Codes.

Also, you cannot say it's "fair" for everyone either. "Balanced" is hard to say, after all. If we have to use codes/hacks to "fix" a game, then there's a problem with the game. Saying banning a character is not solving the problem, when the problem is the character alone(and honestly, tripping is really the only relevant thing that can be argued for using hacks for that even has close to a change of working here), then how is banning the exact problem the WRONG thing to do?

 

[Exceladon City]

Mhmm.. MK is broken, but he is not god.

I was just correcting Eldude.

@ Oreo - You state all of these points why MK is broken. You have not stated why he should be legitimately banned. He is still defeatable, and isn't even invincible.

See the logic in that?

He's only marginally defeatable because of the rules that have been instated to keep him in the game in the first ****ing place. If you left all that untouched, we'd no longer have a competitive game. It would literally be who can play gayer with MK.

I swear I'm repeating myself. If you have to make rules to keep something legal and it's still breaking the checks and counter system, it needs to go. Period.

M2K has literally found loopholes to every rule made to keep MK at a somewhat viable status. With those loopholes exposed, he pretty much opened the door to every MK that has tried to improve their defensive playstyle.

I'm over this. You're purposefully ignoring the math here. "Broken =/= bannable" is all I'm getting out of you.

What does broken = to you? I'd like to hear it.

 

[Shwaffles]

And you're still really ********. Street Fighter has a CARING dev team that WANT balance. So does Tekken. Smash does not.

You just don't get it, and I don't think you will. The community taking this game into their own hands is the only way that this party game ever got noticed by big communities like that in the first place. The half-assedness of making Brawl for the players, by the players, has killed it.

Yeah it only took 10 ****ing years for SF4 to come out. Astounding developer support! AMIRIGHT?? Guess who kept the games alive? Oh yeah! It was the dedicated players.

Now they listen to the scrubs who do nothing, but complain about things they don't understand. Then the scrubs drop it for the next flavor of the month game.

Brawl was intentionally made to NOT be competitive, and you need to accept this. Brawl was for the players, but not the ones who play in tournies.

 

[Pathetiqu3]

It still does apply to cheating. Cheating is using an outside influence in a game. This includes Cheat Devices, Steroids, Looking at test scores, Using hacks, Switching around your cards for other ones(like in a TCG), and so on. Right now, that's what's happening. Once again, fun is completely subjective. Not everybody is interested in your kind of fun, to note.

Likewise, a game can be played competitively without any modifications to the original game. Note that about the only thing the game is worth modding for that is even close to heavily agreed upon is removing tripping for the competitive scene. The rest is changing around what makes the characters exactly how they are. The thing is, mods are very extreme compared to what banning a character is. You're essentially making your own game, instead of making rules with the original game for the purpose of running a tournament. There is quite a huge difference here.

Also, since we're talking about the sole video game community. Let's go by the definition of video games: Hacks are no different from Cheat Devices right now. You're doing the same thing as using one. Note that codes for invincibility, whether possibly without a device or not is actually CALLED Cheat Codes.

Also, you cannot say it's "fair" for everyone either. "Balanced" is hard to say, after all. If we have to use codes/hacks to "fix" a game, then there's a problem with the game. Saying banning a character is not solving the problem, when the problem is the character alone(and honestly, tripping is really the only relevant thing that can be argued for using hacks for that even has close to a change of working here), then how is banning the exact problem the WRONG thing to do?

Everyone should care about a balanced game, or am I in the wrong subforum? Mods are the easiest, most precise, and most mature choice in that regard. Or at least were.

Regardless of how you want to call it, sometimes that community should be able to say "okay, we need to do this our own way." Just ask schtserv.com who's only means of playing an abandoned game was through the "cheating" of several community members adopted wholesale.

Brawl was abandoned at birth.

 

[Alien Vision]

He's only marginally defeatable because of the rules that have been instated to keep him in the game in the first ****ing place. If you left all that untouched, we'd no longer have a competitive game. It would literally be who can play gayer with MK.

I swear I'm repeating myself. If you have to make rules to keep something legal and it's still breaking the checks and counter system, it needs to go. Period.

M2K has literally found loopholes to every rule made to keep MK at a somewhat viable status. With those loopholes exposed, he pretty much opened the door to every MK that has tried to improve their defensive playstyle.

I'm over this. You're purposefully ignoring the math here. "Broken =/= bannable" is all I'm getting out of you.

What does broken = to you? I'd like to hear it.

Broken basically means he is overpowered.

Although I will admit that I wasn't under the impression MK was barely defeatable with the rules being used.

I will say this though. It still seems bias, and I don't seem to see enough people complaining that MK is as bannable as some of you guys do. You tend to question the turmoil within an uproar only in a small population of people.