Official Metaknight Discussion

[Overswarm]

Just ban MK from everything around them and... what choice do they have?

 

[iRJi]

But how to log them?

Each month we make a log on results from tourneys that have a 24 man count or more. By doing this, we can take note on how all of these variables change over time, and can determine if it was a benefit or not.

Of course this does not answer your question, so I need to be more detailed.

We can attempt to log them through smashboards. Make a thread with the results of it each month, with of course, taking note on what needs to be answered, and asking the players their opinion on the metagame. The issue with this is we would need more then one person collecting data because of the amount of tourneys that happen a week, it can be easy to miss results. We can do this for a sheer 6 months, and then compile the data into one thread, and again, ask the same questions from the previous months that it was tested. We then use the data to measure the growth or decline of the things being asked. Accurate imo, of course, this is just my first proposal.

Edit: Trying to make it more specific. This is just the general analysis of it. I will surely come up with a more thorough, details way of how to log each section of it.

 

[etecoon]

NJ might be the most strongly anti-ban but I don't think atlantic north as a whole would be that receptive to it. NE and MD/VA might not be MK infested, but a lot of us that play other characters don't want MK banned either. in this metagame characters that are currently ranked well depend on meta knight. snake, diddy, wario, falco in regions where planking is banned...they feed off of MK's success because he happens to hard counter a lot of their worst matchups, just because an area isn't 9000 MK mains doesn't mean it's going to be pro-ban

 

[fkacyan]

Just ban MK from everything around them and... what choice do they have?

Our local tourneys will just continue to have the best players in the country attending for 100 dollar pots.

Gogo 30 person tourneys with M2k, ADHD, and Ally all attending.

 

[OverLade]

I personally think the repeated strategy of "laser to 200% and f-tilt" was the first clue it was a bad matchup

I said nothing about the matchup, all I said is that homeboys logic was terrible.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

That leads to skewed results though. Dominate MK area's would lean to not bother to test it, and because of that the results would drastically vary. Also if people were given the option to do either/or, the people who want Mk playable would just wait out the tourney that does not have him allowed, since they know another one with him allowed would appear eventually. This issue comes down to attendance, and because of this the results will also be skewed.

None of this doesn't change the fact if we were wrong, we just forced MK mains to change to change for six months when their character was innocent. If he was proven banworthy then people wouldn't complain, because he was proven guilty, but if he was innocent multiple MK mains would get pissed. Some may even leave the community as a result of doing this.

Now granted if he was banworthy then some of those hard cores would have left anyways, but if hew wasn't then we just made multiple people leave in a situation that could have been avoided.

This also leads to problem #1 I talked about earlier.

Not everyone wants to follow this idea of forcing MK banned tournaments. The only way you can is if you tell all TO's to go along with it, which many won't unless the SBR says otherwise and even then some will still resist.

There is no large majority of people willing to go along with this. I think people are better off first defining what broken is before trying to test something like this, especially when many people don't want to do this.

Sorry but I'm not a supporter of a temp ban at all.

 

[iRJi]

None of this doesn't change the fact if we were wrong, we just forced MK mains to change to change for six months when their character was innocent. If he was proven banworthy then people wouldn't complain, because he was proven guilty, but if he was innocent multiple MK mains would get pissed. Some may even leave the community as a result of doing this.

Now granted if he was banworthy then some of those hard cores would have left anyways, but if hew wasn't then we just made multiple people leave in a situation that could have been avoided.

This also leads to problem #1 I talked about earlier.

Not everyone wants to follow this idea of forcing MK banned tournaments. The only way you can is if you tell all TO's to go along with it, which many won't unless the SBR says otherwise and even then some will still resist.

There is no large majority of people willing to go along with this. I think people are better off first defining what broken is before trying to test something like this, especially when many people don't want to do this.

Sorry but I'm not a supporter of a temp ban at all.

I think you might have missed the past couple pages my friend. Might wanna look back a few and read up. =]

 

[Scidadle]

You would be the one to deny someone getting ***** Lade.

ALL I EVER HEAR FROM YOU AND YELE AT SMASHFESTS IS OOOHHHH GET *****

Just ****in' with ya mayne

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

I think you might have missed the past couple pages my friend. Might wanna look back a few and read up. =]

I didn't.

I'm aware of the discussion from before but I'm picking up where I left off.

People are talking about getting it set-up when we still don't have a definition of broken yet, and that's hard enough as is when one side is going to make it fit MK exactly and the other is going to make it nothing like him.

 

[Kewkky]

We should tally the data the way Ankoku is logging his, for starters. He's got a very nice format, and he has the tourneys in text documents for us to view whenever (at least, I think it was text documents). We should just do what he does, but in a separate thread so we don't get both things mixed up, nor force Ankoku to do something he hasn't agreed to doing. Tourney name, entrants, location, entrance/participation fee, top 3 payouts, top 8 players, 13-player minimum entry, and a link to the original tourney thread.

Who should be in charge of the thread? If MK does get a temporary ban, and my laptop gets fixed (**** you Hyper, and your crawling-into-the-hotel-bed-after-sleeping-in-the-floor-and-tripping-with-my-laptop's-power-cord-thus-making-it-so-it-can't-charge accident!), I could be in charge of it. It would give me something to do, and make me feel important.

 

[iRJi]

I didn't.

I'm aware of the discussion from before but I'm picking up where I left off.

People are talking about getting it set-up when we still don't have a definition of broken yet, and that's hard enough as is when one side is going to make it fit MK exactly and the other is going to make it nothing like him.

That's because Playing theory isn't going to solve anything. All we are doing is coming up with alt. solutions and methods of how to get this done. people asked for a proposal from me, and i provided one. This isn't a set -in-stone idea, but this seems to be a very, very good one. From there, people are asking how I would go about doing this, and I only provided them with an answer. Honestly providing a definition of what broken is isn't going to solve anything of the sort. Their are too many variables, not enough concrete information. You know me better then a lot of people who read my posts because you are a custom to seeing it all day because of the lucario boards. You know better then probably anyone here that I don't play the theory craft game. If you want to know the truth for a situation, put yourself in the situation. It is the only way of actually getting data that isn't just based off of "What I think" This proposal is about getting information so that turns into a "What I know"

Making a definition of what defines broken is, like I said, non irrelevant for getting information. This would only lead to people making a definition, and then too early applying that definition without proper explanation. Making a definition is not a bad idea, don't get me wrong, but it would be more beneficial if it was to happen after tests because then you will have hard evidence from both sides of the spectrum. It becomes less skewed.

 

[GunmasterLombardi]

I said nothing about the matchup, all I said is that homeboys logic was terrible.

The Falco v Kirby matchup is no worse than 40:60 Kirby. Don't understand why staying away from Kirby is so difficult.

 

[N.A.G.A.C.E]

i am pro temp ban, but the major problem i see with a temp ban is that Mks who don't want MK banned might stop going to tourneys for however long the ban is to show tourney attendance is going down with MK gone.

I guess what i am saying is if there is a temp ban the temp part should be secret and most should think its full time ban so we get a better idea of what a MK banned meta game would look like.

(sorry if its hard to read headaches are *****es)

 

[Kewkky]

Here's my own coined definition of broken: A primary element that makes a game overall unplayable when pitted against every other secondary element in said game, when the choice to use the primary element is accessible. Akuma might be broken, but if no one is using him in tourneys because he's universally (soft) banned (essentially removing him from tourney play everywhere), he stops being broken and detrimental to the game. There's a number of ways to make a broken element less broken, but apart from a complete removal, we are left with the option of surgically removing (a) component(s) until the element is no longer broken, and more limited when used. Enforcing such minor surgical changes is tougher than a radical change such as an outright ban to the element, which in itself stops all problems that might be caused before the competition begins.

That's MY definition! Make your own, people!

The Falco v Kirby matchup is no worse than 40:60 Kirby. Don't understand why staying away from Kirby is so difficult.

Because Kirby will eventually get near, and your options to get away from him are limited and eventually used against you (sideB away the first few times, but what if the Kirby catches on and now bairs your sideB and you're left with the ledge to retreat to?). And if Kirby gets your lasers (I never do this cuz I'm special! :F) he can cut off some of your favorite options, since now he has a projectile and you'll be put into a couple of tighter situations than before.

I guess what i am saying is if there is a temp ban the temp part should be secret and most should think its full time ban so we get a better idea of what a MK banned meta game would look like.

I don't think anyone should keep any secrets from the public. If it's going to be a temp ban, that's already a reason as to why MK mainers shouldn't drop their character instantly, and instead continue to keep their skills from unrusting until the temp ban ends... If the ban is lifted, then they're back where they started and nothing was lost in the process, if anything they gained some more experience with their secondaries and pro-ban got what they have been asking from the very beginning: a country-wide/universal MK-less Smash scene.

 

[iRJi]

i am pro temp ban, but the major problem i see with a temp ban is that Mks who don't want MK banned might stop going to tourneys for however long the ban is to show tourney attendance is going down with MK gone.

I guess what i am saying is if there is a temp ban the temp part should be secret and most should think its full time ban so we get a better idea of what a MK banned meta game would look like.

(sorry if its hard to read headaches are *****es)

Read the last couple of pages. I explained how the length of the ban time would provide people to actually go, and not skip out on tourneys.

Edit: Secrets can't be held. Simply put, it does not work that way.

Here's my own coined definition of broken: A primary element that makes a game overall unplayable when pitted against every other secondary element in said game, when the choice to use the primary element is accessible. Akuma might be broken, but if no one is using him in tourneys because he's universally (soft) banned (essentially removing him from tourney play everywhere), he stops being broken and detrimental to the game. There's a number of ways to make a broken element less broken, but apart from a complete removal, we are left with the option of surgically removing (a) component(s) until the element is no longer broken, and more limited when used. Enforcing such minor surgical changes is tougher than a radical change such as an outright ban to the element, which in itself stops all problems that might be caused before the competition begins.

That's MY definition! Make your own, people!

Like i explained earlier, it is too early to provide a definition of it just yet in regards of brawl. One reason because we lack proper concrete information. The other one, which I will say now, is the bigger reason. Brawl is not comparable to any other fighting game, and because of that it needs to be brought to square 1 on terms of definition. On normal traditional fighters, You have characters, and stages. Stages, although have unique colors and themes to it, all function the same. Because of this, stages on most occasions don't play a factor. In brawl, you have too many variables to compare it too as of right now. Character weight, launch distances, mobility, stages that actually take a roll on hindering a character or not, Etc, etc.

Please people, save the definitions for a later date. What you might say for a definition can be very useful at a later date, after we get solid information.

 

[GunmasterLombardi]

"With a temporary ban MK players may leave"

Who the **** cares? Good 4 them.

@Kewky, tbh I recall Falco having good close combat moves. Kirby's grab range isn't like D3 so that alone makes jab and d-tilt (...) GTFO'ers. Why retreat when you can fight? Falco doesn't have something like Jiggs ground game. Kirby can't force a swallow unless he ends his combo early which isn't worth it so a good Falco doesn't worry about swallow if he/she knows this awesome strategy called spacing.

 

[iRJi]

"With a temporary ban MK players may leave"

Who the **** cares? Good 4 them.

@Kewky, tbh I recall Falco having good close combat moves. Kirby's grab range isn't like D3 so that alone makes jab and d-tilt (...) GTFO'ers. Why retreat when you can fight? Falco doesn't have something like Jiggs ground game. Kirby can't force a swallow unless he ends his combo early which isn't worth it so a good Falco doesn't worry about swallow if he/she knows this awesome strategy called spacing.

I must bump this. I don't agree with your reasoning and ways of approaching the topic. I think you input as of right now is not valid nor suited for this topic. If you are pro ban, please do us a favor and try not to post too much on this topic. You as of right now are hurting more then helping.

 

[Kewkky]

@Kewky, tbh I recall Falco having good close combat moves. Kirby's grab range isn't like D3 so that alone makes jab and d-tilt (...) GTFO'ers. Why retreat when you can fight? Falco doesn't have something like Jiggs ground game. Kirby can't force a swallow unless he ends his combo early which isn't worth it so a good Falco doesn't worry about swallow if he/she knows this awesome strategy called spacing.

So, you're telling me that spacing is this awesome strategy that prevents punishment, and that good Falcos will space properly always, therefore never be punished. Hmm, never thought about it that way.,..

Okay, so Falco has a good ground game. Kirby can time his utilts to lock Falco until pretty nice %s, then bair him away for that GTFO combo finisher. Falco's grab might do some damage too, but a whiffed grab is much more punishable than a whiffed utilt, and Kirby also has the option of grabbing in case you're a shielding Falco, and even do rising fh bairs while you hold onto the hope that he'll try and hit your shield with a sh aerial/grounded move. Not to mention that so many things can go wrong for Falco is he's knocked offstage vs Kirby, whereas an offstage Kirby is very much safe against Falco since his gimping approaches are risky. That gives a clear advantage to Kirby in one of the 3 fundamental areas where there will be fights happening: offstage. On-stage and in the air, that's a whole different discussion that could go both ways depending on how the people play, but Kirby should still feel slightly safer in the air than Falco...

And for that "But a good X character will..." argument: stop it, don't ever use it again. It's insulting the opposing team's experiences by calling them non-legit, and "good X character mainers" are apparently the most perfect players in the world since the argument's used for everything. "But a good Falco will never approach", "but a good Snake will space his tilts", "but a good Wario will never get grabbed", "but a good ICs will never fail is CGs so it's 3 grabs = gg"... This argument really irks me because it revolves around theory way too much instead of practicality, which is what should be discussed more.

And don't worry, I'm not saying it's a **** MU or anything, I'm just stating why it's not as easy as people make it seem for Falco when fighting against Kirby. I've read some Falco mainers' replies in your MU threads (though old), and some of them even say it's Falco's advantage 60:40. I facepalm.

Like i explained earlier, it is too early to provide a definition of it just yet in regards of brawl. One reason because we lack proper concrete information. The other one, which I will say now, is the bigger reason. Brawl is not comparable to any other fighting game, and because of that it needs to be brought to square 1 on terms of definition. On normal traditional fighters, You have characters, and stages. Stages, although have unique colors and themes to it, all function the same. Because of this, stages on most occasions don't play a factor. In brawl, you have too many variables to compare it too as of right now. Character weight, launch distances, mobility, stages that actually take a roll on hindering a character or not, Etc, etc.

Please people, save the definitions for a later date. What you might say for a definition can be very useful at a later date, after we get solid information.

How can you type this in and expect me to accept your opinion for what it is? Avoiding an issue isn't the way to resolve it, if MK doesn't get banned we still won't know what "broken" is according to your statement! If anything, since we're forcing a non-competitive game into being a competitive fighter, we should base some things off of other fighter's communities' definitions and rules. I personally think my definition is broad enough to cover all games in general, but specific enough to pinpoint what is broken and what is not (of course, I don't expect people to agree with my definition, I said it's my own coined term to back this up)... I agree that we should first finish with the MK issue before forming a ban criteria, but defining what is broken? That's something each player has individually done since the Smash64 days, what the SBR-M has done during the lifespan of their game without banning any characters, and what the SBR-B probably has done by now without using MK as a basis for their definition.

A definition is such a small thing and worthless by itself if not used in a sentence, but a ban criteria is a very important rule that is very difficult to create. The former can be done at any time, and can also be used to help with the creation of a criteria for banning future harmful elements of a game, while the latter needs some ground to sprout from. Arbitrary criteria without back-up is not as reliable as criteria set from a past example.

 

[JRob]

MK doesn't pose a threat to this community if we just ban all his stuff.

I say we take away his air fireball and teleporta...

Oh wait...

 

[iRJi]

MK doesn't pose a threat to this community if we just ban all his stuff.

I say we take away his air fireball and teleporta...

Oh wait...

Yay, another guy who is afraid to go on his main account and post lol. Just stop while your ahead, you people doing this are really not getting anywhere other then showing your idiocy to the world. lol.

Anyway guys and gals, I am writing the proposal in full detail. It should be up by tomorrow. xP

 

[MKOwnage]

Why is this discussion even happening? What will make the 5th vote any different from the last 4? Hes not going anywhere.

 

[Kewkky]

Why is this discussion even happening? What will make the 5th vote any different from the last 4? Hes not going anywhere.

The power of persuasion, and actually having smart discussion before it happens. Before polls 1-4 (which count as 1, since there's only been a single official SBR Stance), we were all just talking here and there about MK being a problem, never really going into detail and having nothing to back up claims/fuel our arguments but theories and personal experiences. Now we have much more to look back at, much more to use to aid arguments, and people are much more experienced than before. It's also been 2 years after the game has been released and not less than 1, like the first time the MK issue was presented in an universal scale (all levels of play).

These arguments have more persuasive power to aid the 5th vote (if it ever needs to happen).

 

[JRob]

Actually, I'm on my bro's iPod touch and don't feel like logging off his rarely used account to get a very simple point across. I may expound on it later when I have access to my MacBook once again. Good day.

Edit: btw, you're right, it is dumb, which was my point.

 

[Chuee]

"With a temporary ban MK players may leave"

Who the **** cares? Good 4 them.

With mk people will quit the game
Who the **** cares? Good 4 them.

 

[MKOwnage]

Can this ban (if it is to happen) affect me at a regional level?

 

[iRJi]

The power of persuasion, and actually having smart discussion before it happens. Before polls 1-4 (which count as 1, since there's only been a single official SBR Stance), we were all just talking here and there about MK being a problem, never really going into detail and having nothing to back up claims/fuel our arguments but theories and personal experiences. Now we have much more to look back at, much more to use to aid arguments, and people are much more experienced than before. It's also been 2 years after the game has been released and not less than 1, like the first time the MK issue was presented in an universal scale (all levels of play).

These arguments have more persuasive power to aid the 5th vote (if it ever needs to happen).

This. All of this.

 

[fkacyan]

Yay, another guy who is afraid to go on his main account and post lol. Just stop while your ahead, you people doing this are really not getting anywhere other then showing your idiocy to the world. lol.

Anyway guys and gals, I am writing the proposal in full detail. It should be up by tomorrow. xP

He's making a valid comparison to the only other mainstream ban, Akuma, in SF2, who was so mind bogglingly good that he simply shut down the rest of the cast. Like, made completely unviable.

 

[Kewkky]

Can this ban (if it is to happen) affect me at a regional level?

Well, it would really depend on your TO, and all the players around you. If the majority want MK gone, then the TO will be forced to ban him because it'll affect his turnout and he won't be able to pay venue fees and whatnot. If the majority DON'T want him banned and the TO wants him banned, then it's up to the players to persuade the TO into unbanning MK in his tourneys (like not attending... I would find it very unfair if anti-ban would stop attending tourneys just so pro-ban never gets anything done, that would be incredibly childish and selfish of them).

 

[iRJi]

He's making a valid comparison to the only other mainstream ban, Akuma, in SF2, who was so mind bogglingly good that he simply shut down the rest of the cast. Like, made completely unviable.

You quoted the wrong post from me, man xD. Cool cool I understood xP

 

[-Mars-]

People like you shouldn't be allowed in these kinds of threads.

DEHF airdodged and fell off the stage, and got staged spiked. He didn't get *****, he was ahead a whole stock.

So how does that prove ANYTHING about the matchup? All it proves is that if Falco gets offstage he potentially loses a stock (DEHF could've teched even then), but he was ****** Chu otherwise.

He was not ****** Chu lmao. He was up a stock and Chu was just waiting and abiding his time to get that one grab in.

Since Falco can't kill Kirby till like 200% I don't think there was any indication that Chu was being "*****" and Chu was merely playing really smart.....not worrying about lasers too much and just concentrating on getting DEHF offstage....which happened.

Chu didn't even need to stage spike him he just did for some reason....the airdodge killed DEHF but after that grab Chu had the momentum.

People like you should not try to nitpick over small stuff in these type of threads lmao.

 

[PK-ow!]

MK ban issue is simple. Is he the only viable option in competition?

MK is beatable. Yes, he ***** lots of characters. He does stupid things in almost any matchup, and pulling out some craaaaazy strings on punishment is silly easy sometimes.
But you do still have to think, somewhat, when using him. Again, he can be beat. He is not a perfect character, although he has two, arguably three factors to him which break otherwise universal rules for this game.


I can't think of one thing that has made me better at this game then the umbra of Meta Knight looming over my local area of Southern Ontario. Him and the forty billion Falcos (much less intimidating).


Banning Meta Knight for these experimental other reasons - reasons admittedly not sufficient for Sirlin's criterion - would just, I think, kill the buzz for me. The game wouldn't grind me to the wall anymore. Not even Snake is as menacing.

Basically, the mid and low tier mains should start respecting and cherishing their options more. Play garbage tier for a while. It'll learn ya what matters. It'll learn ya to take your frame 3 jab and like it.

 

[gunterrsmash01]

Not to mention DEHF wasn't SDIing out of the kirby grab combos and still was giving Chu hell. i believe he made a comeback both game 2 and 3. Its a very patient campy matchup but all Falco really has to do is recover smart, jab a lot, not fall for kirbys spacing and grab at high percent instead of forcing a kill. Falcos favor 55-45.

btw Falcos CG to dair on kirby at 0% does more damage then Kirbys grab combos on Falco at 0& (because you can SDI out + footstool after the throw)

 

[Kewkky]

Wait, what does it matter if Kirby is advantaged or not? Point is, I wouldn't mind a temp ban on MK.

 

[Chuee]

Point is, he isn't getting banned. Try harder.

 

[Inaphyt]

Ban the problem already.

Just make mk players pay 3 times more to enter tournies for their unfair advantages.

 

[Kewkky]

Point is, he isn't getting banned. Try harder.

Try harder, huh...

Chueee, do yo go to tourneys? What are your placings? Have you ever have to deal with MKs who live in the ledge after gaining leads, and refuse to come on-stage no matter what? ... I see you main Lucas, I can see why you don't think it's a big deal, since all you have to do is upB and MK gets off the ledge (and rushes you down while you go through the whole cooldown phase).

Whenever you post, I really think you don't even know what we're talking about, and that you're just in to increase your post count by going full theory and not understanding the MK deal at all from first-hand experience.

 

[etecoon]

MK can plank pretty much any character, the characters that can supposedly stop him don't do so nearly as well as reported...and as you said, some methods of "anti-planking" are just an invitation for MK to increase his lead for free

that's just an example of planking being broken though, it doesn't mean MK has to be banned, it's not an MK specific issue to begin with.

 

[Laem]

MK can plank pretty much any character, the characters that can supposedly stop him don't do so nearly as well as reported...and as you said, some methods of "anti-planking" are just an invitation for MK to increase his lead for free

that's just an example of planking being broken though, it doesn't mean MK has to be banned, it's not an MK specific issue to begin with.

superior planking is MK specific.

 

[etecoon]

not really, other characters can do it fine. MK is the easiest to gain a lead with, easiest to regain a lead with, and the easiest to fight with when planking fails you, but his planking isn't really in its own class, not in the same fashion that he is as a character overall(seriously he should be alone in S tier...)

 

[Inaphyt]

Mk can't plank against diddy, pikachu, pitt, mario, peach. Correct me if i'm wrong.