this only reflects a change in opinion, fluctuations happen. why is it suspect when people change their mind and say MK does have one even matchup/soft counter but not when they flipped on that in the first place? saying that "lol people only say snake > MK now because they don't want MK banned" is equatable to "people only said MK > snake because they wanted him banned", we can all make BS arguments about where peoples motives lie...and for that matter, most people are sheep, half of them aren't really "deciding" anything. MK being broken is now a popular consensus opinion and so many people will jump on the bandwagon without even being able to justify it themselves.
Because the change-over happened prior to this whole mess.
Barring a few hold-outs such as M2K, when MKs learned to space (which was when he became top in tournament standings) it became pretty much universally accepted that Snake beats MK.
This was a major change-over that changed the situation from very limited calls to ban Snake, (which was idiotic in the first place, because MK was ALWAYS controlling the metagame by playing elimination, therefore was always the most bannable character, Snake was only top because he beat MK at the time, and even now, he beats weak MKs which is why he's number 2), to MK being accepted as top tier, to very low calls for banning, to the current furor which we have now.
This is not a sudden change-over, this is established fact, and was so prior to anyone saying that MK was bannable (myself and others who accepted the my argument excluded, because that was mere possibility in an unforseeable future). The fact that I think that banning MK is fundamentally too early a measure doesn't mean I can't see that the anti-ban crowd is grasping for any possible disadvantagious match-up in order to prevent a ban.
Anyways, what am I spouting that has been refuted? Snake beats Meta Knight. That's never been actually refuted because tournament data at the highest levels shows that this is true and most good players agree with MK losing to Snake.
Only because you believe the "highest levels of play" = "Atlantic North".
Regardless, it's an appeal to authority fallacy. FACTS dictate match-ups, not personalities.
"omg if u space the d-tilt frame perfectly and pixel perfectly ull **** snake!1!!!!1"
When a factual refutation fails, you resort to appeal to ridicule?
Is it any wonder why people have such a low opinion of your debating skill?
While it doesn't mean you're wrong, lack of a valid counter-argument doesn't help your opinion.
Heck, I agree with your overall opinion about MK (too soon to ban him), but your terrible arguments force me to oppose you.
okay cool and what about what's actually possible and what about other moves which snake *****?????
So... spacing isn't possible. I dunno, I think just about any Marth player will disagree with you, in both theory and practice.
Sure, you can be mindgamed, but assuming that a player will be mindgamed results in us all agreeing that Ike's f-smash is the best move in the game.
If people learned how to powershield consistently, punish with proper options, and DI well, MK wouldn't be nearly as troublesome. He's only "broken" on the garbage level of skill.
Against what?
We're dealing with reaction times of 7 frames aprox.
How do you expect to consistently powershield a frame 3 attack if you react to it on frame 7?
Nah, it's just my favourite point to make. It's also hilarious when people say MK doesn't lose the match-up and it's funny when people do so because they're usually randoms and then top players like me, Mew2King, Atomsk, and NinjaLink can come in and say otherwise and get ignored despite being billions of times better and more educated on Brawl.
Firstly, I son't remember Ninjalink actually agreeing with either side on this, a post citating would be nice.
Regardless, appeal to authority fallacy.
As I explained MANY times because, being a good player gives no edge to interpretation of data, it gives you an edge towards winning, and an edge on average at interpretation.
Problem is, education gives you additional knowledge, but without a disagreement on data, having additional knowledge means nothing.
Really, the only reason that it's hilarious to you is because of your poor logical skills.
Again, I shall ask you something. Why do you put so much effort into arguing for the pro-ban side and arguing against anti-ban people when you voted anti-ban? Why not use some of your sarcasm to help the side you actually voted for?
Probably same reason as I do it. I'd prefer the community makes a PROPERLY informed decision, even if it's one I disagree with. The information itself must be correct, regardless of which side it helps.
Translation: Your bad arguments annoy me.
You also weigh the opinions of foxandfalcomasta666 equally with Mew2King's, so we have extremely differing opinions when it comes to...opinion, lol. I have absolutely 0 care for what a random player says and only care about the top levels in terms of results and opinions, and that's where I'm seeing that MK loses to Snake. I'm not going to suddenly count the common man's opinion and not be an elitist because you say I should. I'm too stubborn.
The entire point was that he doesn't CARE about opinions. He weighs arguments, and arguments are origin-blind.
Why would I consider you anti-ban? Because you clicked "no" on the poll? You've yet to do/say anything that supports your vote.
Because he has, on many occassions, said that it is too early for an MK ban. He can disagree with you on every other point, but THAT is what counts as far as his alignment.
You're trying to pull a no true scottsman fallacy here, and nobody likes it.