Arturito_Burrito
Smash Master
no one is next snake does horrible against olimar he can't approach nor out camp him. We simply end up with more olimars.Snake's score is more than twice d3's. So after MK is banned, who's next?
-
Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!
You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!
Should Metaknight be Banned? ***Take 3***
- Thread starter SamuraiPanda
- Start date
- Status
ZHMT
Smash Lord
Marth has really bad stages...like Jungle Japes.
Marth doesnt have answers to Meta's, Dedede's, and other characters offstage edgeguarding, he just dies.
Marth doesnt have safe kill moves, Meta does. Marth isnt comparable to Meta.
Meta has MORE options and BETTER options.
Nidtendofreak
Smash Hero
Marth also has a harder time getting around projectile spam and planking. :\
I voted no. It's not like I use MK or anything, in fact I suck terribly playing as him, but he's not much of a big deal. All you have to do is learn whoever is playing as MK's fighting techniques so you can counter and therefore beating him/her.
ShadowLink84
Smash Hero
Marth sucks? Do explain further inui.
Syde7
The Sultan of Smut
Even though I voted yes, its a "soft yes". I see both sides of the argument, really.
I agree that the Brawl metagame has been overcentralized around MK due to the top pros having him in the top drawers of their character repetoires. It is a valid point, but it has been discussed to death.
The idea that "If we ban MK, then another character will take over, and we'll want to ban that" is a slippery slope argument, and in the rules of debate can NOT be used as a viable assertion. But, to humor those with this view: presently, each character CAN be countered in some way; either through character selection or stage counterpicks while MK does not.
There is no "anti-meta" stage, or "anti-meta" character. Even characters that supposedly go 45/55 or 50/50 often times suffer more from THEIR OWN stage counterpicks than MetaKnight because of this lack of counterpicking viability. No matter how good a stage is for any character, they ultimately forego some facet of their game that enhances another part while usually attempting to shut down the most effective facet of their opponent. MK does not have this problem as his options are far too numerous to effectively shut down. Also, bear in mind that the characters that go 45/55 or 50/50 (supposedly) may be outshined on their own counterpick, not because the player is better, but because MK does better at their own stage than they do.
Whenever counterpicking systems break down into the main of EVERY CHARACTER being forced to say, "There's nothing to do but just hope he doesn't know how to play on this stage" as opposed to it being solely based on the current matchup at hand... something is wrong.
As someone said before, it isn't about stopping the "top pros" from winning with MK. I, and I am sure anyone else can concede that the tertiary characters of these players are probably capable of handling most other people's mains- which means that regardless of what character they use, they will do well. To them, MK is a luxury as opposed to a necessity.
It is to those whom MK is a necessity that those who are "pro-ban" seek to deter. Surely, MK mains; you can at least concede that you have personally seen, or know of, or maybe ARE a player who is thoroughly outclassed in all facets of a match, and still manage to eek out a win with MK... on a REGULAR BASIS. Of course, you could have the argument of "Well, learn to play against broken MK abusing nubs". Taking that stance is counter-productive to the game itself. Without MK, the advice would be totally different; first because in a "hypothetical-mk-banned-situation" the problem would never have arisen (that is to say, the better player would have clearly won) and the advice would be more like "look, you need to practice more". Second, the advice would be to the LESSER SKILLED player, as opposed to the MORE SKILLED player who happened to lose BECAUSE it was MK. Or, an even easier question: how many times have you heard either said in humor (as humor is the truth in a different light, taking you by surprise) or in seriousness: "**** this is tough. Forget it, I'll just pick up MK"? Without the magical elixir that is MK, these players would be forced to LEARN matchups, and develop viable secondaries, or re-focus on improving their character. ML is simply a crutch.
Furthermore, I think the focus should not be put ENTIRLEY on the "money placings" of large tournaments, or even the top 20 (although I admit its important!). Instead, look farther down the line. Look to the regional (in terms of the nation) tournaments, or the smaller state-level tournaments, or even to the regional (in terms of state-level) tournaments. Look to the "solid" players that get beaten by MK, solely because it is MK.
Of course there are those who will say "but they don't matter", and I will adamantly disagree. Its called the "Smash COMMUNITY" for a reason. By definition, anyone who seriously attempts to develop their character, and plays for the competion and thrill of winning as opposed to the "lulz", is part of the community. The guy hosting tournaments in a rec center, or in his college's student center is JUST as much of an important part of the COMMUNITY as DSF, M2K, Azen, Ally, etc.
To say that they aren't renders the argument of "?but is it best for the community?" invalid. You can't arbitrarily define what the community is just because you belong (or THINK) you belong in its upper echelons.
I do see the argument of "Why should MK mains have to change their mains, which they would have to do if there was a ban". It is valid, and it does seem to be unfair for that to be asked of them- on the surface.
I say "on the surface" becuase I could pose the SAME question to MK mains. "Why should players, of nearly 90% (rough estimate) of the characters BESIDES MetaKnight have to change their mains? IMO, its more fair for the x% of MK players to be forced to give up their mains because of an imposed RULE that would be put in place in an attempt to HELP the community as opposed to X% (difference in capitalization used to show the comparison between MK and non MK mains; X=non, x=mk) being forced to give up theirs because of MKs sheer broken-ness?
I apologize if this is a long read, but I just wanted to raise some points that might not have been thought about before. Thanks for readin'.
I agree that the Brawl metagame has been overcentralized around MK due to the top pros having him in the top drawers of their character repetoires. It is a valid point, but it has been discussed to death.
The idea that "If we ban MK, then another character will take over, and we'll want to ban that" is a slippery slope argument, and in the rules of debate can NOT be used as a viable assertion. But, to humor those with this view: presently, each character CAN be countered in some way; either through character selection or stage counterpicks while MK does not.
There is no "anti-meta" stage, or "anti-meta" character. Even characters that supposedly go 45/55 or 50/50 often times suffer more from THEIR OWN stage counterpicks than MetaKnight because of this lack of counterpicking viability. No matter how good a stage is for any character, they ultimately forego some facet of their game that enhances another part while usually attempting to shut down the most effective facet of their opponent. MK does not have this problem as his options are far too numerous to effectively shut down. Also, bear in mind that the characters that go 45/55 or 50/50 (supposedly) may be outshined on their own counterpick, not because the player is better, but because MK does better at their own stage than they do.
Whenever counterpicking systems break down into the main of EVERY CHARACTER being forced to say, "There's nothing to do but just hope he doesn't know how to play on this stage" as opposed to it being solely based on the current matchup at hand... something is wrong.
As someone said before, it isn't about stopping the "top pros" from winning with MK. I, and I am sure anyone else can concede that the tertiary characters of these players are probably capable of handling most other people's mains- which means that regardless of what character they use, they will do well. To them, MK is a luxury as opposed to a necessity.
It is to those whom MK is a necessity that those who are "pro-ban" seek to deter. Surely, MK mains; you can at least concede that you have personally seen, or know of, or maybe ARE a player who is thoroughly outclassed in all facets of a match, and still manage to eek out a win with MK... on a REGULAR BASIS. Of course, you could have the argument of "Well, learn to play against broken MK abusing nubs". Taking that stance is counter-productive to the game itself. Without MK, the advice would be totally different; first because in a "hypothetical-mk-banned-situation" the problem would never have arisen (that is to say, the better player would have clearly won) and the advice would be more like "look, you need to practice more". Second, the advice would be to the LESSER SKILLED player, as opposed to the MORE SKILLED player who happened to lose BECAUSE it was MK. Or, an even easier question: how many times have you heard either said in humor (as humor is the truth in a different light, taking you by surprise) or in seriousness: "**** this is tough. Forget it, I'll just pick up MK"? Without the magical elixir that is MK, these players would be forced to LEARN matchups, and develop viable secondaries, or re-focus on improving their character. ML is simply a crutch.
Furthermore, I think the focus should not be put ENTIRLEY on the "money placings" of large tournaments, or even the top 20 (although I admit its important!). Instead, look farther down the line. Look to the regional (in terms of the nation) tournaments, or the smaller state-level tournaments, or even to the regional (in terms of state-level) tournaments. Look to the "solid" players that get beaten by MK, solely because it is MK.
Of course there are those who will say "but they don't matter", and I will adamantly disagree. Its called the "Smash COMMUNITY" for a reason. By definition, anyone who seriously attempts to develop their character, and plays for the competion and thrill of winning as opposed to the "lulz", is part of the community. The guy hosting tournaments in a rec center, or in his college's student center is JUST as much of an important part of the COMMUNITY as DSF, M2K, Azen, Ally, etc.
To say that they aren't renders the argument of "?but is it best for the community?" invalid. You can't arbitrarily define what the community is just because you belong (or THINK) you belong in its upper echelons.
I do see the argument of "Why should MK mains have to change their mains, which they would have to do if there was a ban". It is valid, and it does seem to be unfair for that to be asked of them- on the surface.
I say "on the surface" becuase I could pose the SAME question to MK mains. "Why should players, of nearly 90% (rough estimate) of the characters BESIDES MetaKnight have to change their mains? IMO, its more fair for the x% of MK players to be forced to give up their mains because of an imposed RULE that would be put in place in an attempt to HELP the community as opposed to X% (difference in capitalization used to show the comparison between MK and non MK mains; X=non, x=mk) being forced to give up theirs because of MKs sheer broken-ness?
I apologize if this is a long read, but I just wanted to raise some points that might not have been thought about before. Thanks for readin'.
Fox Hater
Smash Journeyman
Good point there. I recomend the SBR to read Sirlins take on banning akuma on Super Turbo and how akuma destroyed every other chararcter.
Like I said before read why akuma was banned and u will see MK fits in akumas shoes its like MK was made to destroy every other char.
I use samus too and all MK attacks out prioritze samus so there is no way I can really hurt him. Also MK cant be edge guarded ,has no weakness while the rest of the cast has some. So Why the hell I'm going to practice other chars if MK exists. People say DDD, diddy snake but come on they know its not a fair match up. I have seen M2K last 200% against ninja link because diddy has no power to kill and since MK cant be edge guarded he gets the advantage easy.
Also there was an MK ban tournament where M2K finished 4 with DDD so come on dont be blind MK has a lot to do. Of course he is going to defend MK and say MK is not broken as long as he keeps winning tournaments and MONEY. And some fools with no knowledge about fighting games overall eat his BS and other Tops BS.
Marth has an answer and he doesnt sucks, he can be beaten different to MK. Maybe u do suck but Marth doesnt.
Falconv1.0
Smash Master
MK is no where near as bad as Akuma, and you just said Inui sucks.
I think you might be high.
I think you might be high.
TriforceMaster5282
Smash Apprentice
- Joined
- Aug 13, 2008
- Messages
- 84
Not to bash, but I disagree
I think we should because really, hes a broken spammer.
almost all his moves have high priority, you can rack up high damage and not recieve any yourself just by spamming tornado, a three year old could take down an actual player with MK, in this situation its unfair to rate him in tournaments because there is no skill needed to handle metaknight.
Fox Hater
Smash Journeyman
I'm not stop sucking his ....
he is just average smasher. The good smashers play melee
ShadowLink84
Smash Hero
nah inui doesn't suck, he's pretty good.
not up there but pretty good.
Max Ketchum
Collegiate Starleague Smash Director
Lmao. Inui was also good at Melee.
Falconv1.0
Smash Master
DtJ XeroXen
The biggest fraud
MK doesn't need to be banned. He's not broken to the point where he's unbeatable.
But honestly, I don't care either way, but I still would rather see him not banned before he does get banned.
Blah.
But honestly, I don't care either way, but I still would rather see him not banned before he does get banned.
Blah.
MikeSanti
Smash Journeyman
I've read quite a few pages in this thread and have seen responses involving player skill is what should count. Let's take a minute to actually analyze what's going on here.
Metaknight in Brawl is quite an extraordinary character. Metaknight is fast, has 5 jumps including a glide, has fast frame attacks from start to finish and has plenty of options for recovering. Metaknight can also gimp a majority of the character roster fairly easy along with having a quick and easy learning curve.
Now let's look at the types of Metaknights. One can turtle, and have the opponent attempt at being aggressive but due to Metaknights quick attacks, Metaknight would be more likely to punish said aggressor. Aggressive Metaknights on the other hand utilize Metaknight's speed and options, disabling the opponent from options to use and is all narrowed down to quick judgment due to Metaknight's ability to continuously string attacks.
Now I mention this because I voted "Yes" to ban him for the CHARACTER, not the PLAYER behind it. If we were to ban MK only for how many players consistently place high with him then that would be stupid. When banning something, we should strictly be banning said thing for it's characteristics; i.e one should not look into several tournament results and make haste to decide that MK has got to go due to the many MK's in said results. Sure, tournament results do play a role regarding a character (hence the concept of a character's metagame and tier lists) but just because Player A (not using MK) beats Player B (using MK), it does not mean that MK should not be banned.
Metaknight in Brawl is quite an extraordinary character. Metaknight is fast, has 5 jumps including a glide, has fast frame attacks from start to finish and has plenty of options for recovering. Metaknight can also gimp a majority of the character roster fairly easy along with having a quick and easy learning curve.
Now let's look at the types of Metaknights. One can turtle, and have the opponent attempt at being aggressive but due to Metaknights quick attacks, Metaknight would be more likely to punish said aggressor. Aggressive Metaknights on the other hand utilize Metaknight's speed and options, disabling the opponent from options to use and is all narrowed down to quick judgment due to Metaknight's ability to continuously string attacks.
Now I mention this because I voted "Yes" to ban him for the CHARACTER, not the PLAYER behind it. If we were to ban MK only for how many players consistently place high with him then that would be stupid. When banning something, we should strictly be banning said thing for it's characteristics; i.e one should not look into several tournament results and make haste to decide that MK has got to go due to the many MK's in said results. Sure, tournament results do play a role regarding a character (hence the concept of a character's metagame and tier lists) but just because Player A (not using MK) beats Player B (using MK), it does not mean that MK should not be banned.
Crizthakidd
Smash Champion
I PROPOSE that after genesis and apex we will decide once and for all for a PERMA ban or NO BAN AT ALL and leaving it that way so no debates, ect
AvaricePanda
Smash Lord
This is just a bad match-up for your individual character. I could complain about Fox vs. Pika, how in general Pika has higher priority, can't get gimped by Fox, can camp well, and has a 0-80% CG on him, but that doesn't mean Pika should be banned.
Sure, MK is a bad match-up for a lot of characters, but as aforementioned, most middle-low tier characters have other people as their worst match-up.
"but come on they know its not a fair match up"
Where'd you get this baseless statement from? A lot of pros who use these characters feel the match-up is even or better.
M2K lasts up to 200% because yes, Diddy doesn't have the greatest killpower, but M2K also has amazing DI and isn't stupid enough to get himself in the way of kill moves at high percents.
wait lol. You're comparing M2Ks MK that he's used since forever and that actually has experience against top pros, to his D3 secondary which he hardly ever uses? Of course he's going to place lower, his D3 is worse than his MK because he doesn't play as much with him. Sure MK has some to do with it, but he's just a really good player and devoted a lot of time into MK, so he places very well. Ally's a really good player who devoted a lot of time into Snake, so he places very well also.
lol@saying Inui sucks.
MikeSanti
Smash Journeyman
Pretty sure they meant Inui not being good at using Marth, not his General Skill level. If they did mean his skill level, then Oh Hellz No.
Palpi
Smash Hero
Just because there is a best character in a game that obviously isn't unbeatable doesn't mean he is ban worthy.
I am pretty sure Inui used to main marth.
I am pretty sure Inui used to main marth.
Max Ketchum
Collegiate Starleague Smash Director
M2K also had to play Chillin's Falco with DDD, which is a totally unwinnable matchup.
Falconv1.0
Smash Master
He called him an average smasher for playing Brawl only. Which makes no ****ing sense not even adding the fact that Inui is good at both.
Inui
Banned via Warnings
Marth can pull off awesome movestrings as well... Marth is really good at gimping, and better at gimping certain characters, like Toon Link, Falco, and Fox.
Ban planking so he can't abuse that gay strategy we all hate! There.
Would you say Marth can't ever win there? He gets to live way longer against characters like Snake and Dedede. He can move quickly horizontally to deal with camping. He gets kills off the side easily enough to not cry about the crazy ceiling height.
Marth can use counter, beat their moves with his f-air, use his invincible up b, or airdodge NOT predictably. Pierce7d just attacks a lot, and MK's sword is smaller, so he can't win the trades.
All of MK's kill moves are punishable. You have less frames to punish them, but who cares? D-smash is -25 on block. You need more than that to punish something? Dropping your shield takes 7 frames. You have 18 frames to punish it after that. -25 and -35 on block are barely different. Both suck a lot and let you do anything to punish them.
MK is better, yup. Not denying that. I'm just destroying the logic of "answers to everything = banworthy."
Planking, yes. Ban it. Atlantic North has planking banned and has for a long time, and WHOBO banned it.
Marth gets around projectile spam more easily. MK is a slow puffball in the air. Marth's horizontal mobility in the air dwarfs MK's massively. I get around Toon Link and Snake's camping much more easily with Marth due to that and the bigger sword.
He loses 60/40 to Snake, Meta Knight, Donkey Kong, Dedede, and ROB as far as I'm concerned. That's too much to be a "good" character. He loses to 90% of the tournament scene.
Samus has absolutely no hope against Marth, Dedede, Snake, Falco, Game and Watch...and many others. What does banning MK do for Samus? Nothing.
I'm terrible at Smash.
http://allisbrawl.com/medals.aspx?id=4424
Look at how poorly I do in tournaments.
Yeah, it's obvious that Akuma was much more broken.
I do suck. Look at the link I posted.
Yeah, I just place averagely and no good players play Brawl at all. I'm also horrible at Melee and was never good at it.
http://www.smashboards.com/showpost.php?p=2499192&postcount=597
See?
Yah, and I won some big events and placed 5th/~130 at FAST 1 with Marth.
But I can only win with MK and I suck.
I vote yes. I can see both sides of the argument and I thoroughly enjoy playing MK myself but I'm leaning towards the pro-ban side. I just don't see the justice when a highly skilled...let's say...Fox player loses to a noob Meta Knight player. He's just too dominant. Iunno, that's just my take on it.
Master Raven
Smash Master
That MK-free tourney where M2K got 4th, everyone in top 4 decided not to play out and split.
ShadowLink84
Smash Hero
yo inui I have to sig that part where you say you suck It was too awesome.
Kimchi
Smash Ace
You know, this is what we get at our hands when Sakurai didn't realize all of the brokenness that MK had and could exploit.
Inui
Banned via Warnings
I do not understand why people say this.
If a "highly skilled" Fox player loses to a noob MK, that Fox player was obviously not highly skilled at all. That Fox player was also a noob.
Rookie recently took Korn, a really good MK, to last game, last stock, in Fox vs MK.
Noob MKs don't beat actual good players. Even good and amazing MKs fall to actual good players.
Juno McGrath
Smash Hero
MK will always destroy the competitive game as long as he exsist.
we dont NEED brawl+ to make the game more balanced we need to ban the basically unbeatable character. maybe in bigger tournaments MK is beaten. but you know what? in smaller tournaments its all MK. across the boards. no MK means better competetion. end of story.
we dont NEED brawl+ to make the game more balanced we need to ban the basically unbeatable character. maybe in bigger tournaments MK is beaten. but you know what? in smaller tournaments its all MK. across the boards. no MK means better competetion. end of story.
Nidtendofreak
Smash Hero
MK is a smaller target, good ground speed (not sure who is faster, tbqh), has a good roll, and doesn't have a air dodge that is made of fail. His Nado can also block some types of projectiles if he wanted to go that way.
But "average" MK players do beat "great" players.
Sandtrap beating RoyR's MK for example.
And some MKs beat comparitively better players overall. Not to use you specifically as an example, but you beating Bum in that one tourney, when in New York Bum overall places higher than you would.
Overall MK is comparable to steroids in baseball, though not illegally obtained.
#HBC | Red Ryu
Red Fox Warrior
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2008
- Messages
- 27,486
- Location
- Milwaukee, Wisconsin
- NNID
- RedRyu_Smash
- 3DS FC
- 0344-9312-3352
Teh Brettster
Smash Master
If there were some kind of rule where MK dittos were fine, but other matches were out of question, I'd be okay with that.
MK can be dealth with... by another MK. But against a really good MK, it's a near impossible match for a significant portion of the cast.
My vote goes to yes, especially if dittos are still allowed.
MK can be dealth with... by another MK. But against a really good MK, it's a near impossible match for a significant portion of the cast.
My vote goes to yes, especially if dittos are still allowed.
Inui
Banned via Warnings
Both are good at it, but Marth's horizontal speed > being slightly smaller.
The argument of "MK has answers to everything and should be banned" is terrible and must be destroyed, which is what I did.
MK is obviously better than Marth.
Stuff happens... Roy_R lost in his character's worst match-up. He beat DSF's MK at WHOBO. We all know Roy_R can beat MK with Marth when he's on his game.
I've been doing better than Bum lately. I won because he had no idea what to do against MK, not because MK is broken. He learned the match-up a lot recently and I still do better than him like half the time and **** his balls off in doubles. When I teamed with him, I went all Snake, and I carried like crazy, especially against Wes and DireVulcan.
Noobs don't beat actual highly skilled players in anything, dude. I can **** noob MKs all day with my Ganondorf.
you know the multiquote button is there for a reason.
Sure, me too. But what's the point?
It's easy.
Max Ketchum
Collegiate Starleague Smash Director
It's a pain in the *** to sort through all the tags, delete parts of certain entire posts, insert more quote tags, etc.
Fox Hater
Smash Journeyman
Sirlin 4th case of banning something because:
“It’s Too Good!”
Only in the most extreme, rare cases should something be banned because it is “too good.” This will be the most common type of ban requested by players, and almost all of their requests will be foolish. Banning a tactic simply because it is “the best” isn’t even warranted. That only reduces the game to all the “second best” tactics, which isn’t necessarily any better of a game than the original game. In fact, it’s often worse!
The only reasonable case to ban something because it is “too good” is when that tactic completely dominates the entire game, to the exclusion of other tactics. It is possible, though very rare, that removing an element of the game that is not only “the best” but also “ten times better than anything else in the game” results in a better game. I emphasize that is extremely rare. The most common case is that the player requesting the ban doesn’t fully grasp that the game is, in fact, not all about that one tactic. He should win several tournaments using mainly this tactic to prove his point. Another, far rarer possibility is that he’s right. The game really is shallow and centered on one thing (whether that one thing is a bug or by design is irrelevant). In that case, the best course of action is usually to abandon the game and play one of the hundreds of other readily available good games in the world. (ex. melee)
Only in the ultra-rare case that the player is right and the game is worth saving and the game without the ultra-tactic is a ten times better game—only then is the notion even worth fighting for. And even in this case, it may take time for the game to mature enough for a great percentage of the best players and tournament organizers to realize that tactic should, indeed, be banned. Before an official ban takes place, there can also be something called “soft ban.”
Maybe there are better games like melee but if people are persitent to play a game then I think the soft ban may be an option.
In my opinion brawl should not be played but if its then ban MK or at least soft ban him.
I love to beat MK with marth but really MK has just too much advantage against most of the crew. Of course this is smash not ST so u cant really compare ex Akuma or O.Sagat with MK cause smash has more freedom and the way to kill a character is different. But having a character with :
ZERO bad stages
ZERO bad match-ups
Dominates MOST medium-large scale events
5 jumps+glide
4 recovery options(all B moves)
ABSOLUTE AWESOME priority
Fastest down smash in the game(correct me if im wrong) which has good KO power
AMAZING ground dodge
Most of his attacks come out fast and end fast
Nearly EVERYBODY has him as a main or 2nd or falls back on him when losing. notice the increased meta dittos in the top 10 placings.
2-3 frame u-air that can be comboed into tornado or UP+B for low as gimp kills
tilt locks
wall tilt locks
Invincibility on his UP+B(while on ground)
DECIMATES over half the cast
Tornado that eats thru ALL shields(if they are slightly weakened)
A ledge stalling tech that is UN-PUNISHABLE if done right
is hurting the comunity. And people keeps moving to MK just to wins proves a lot
PS: lol at u being good at melee
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrgSRo0OKYI
this is being good at melee
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1yJsYCzs04 (I love his G&W)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cY1YGUP3l_Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f53aeimv8I0
“It’s Too Good!”
Only in the most extreme, rare cases should something be banned because it is “too good.” This will be the most common type of ban requested by players, and almost all of their requests will be foolish. Banning a tactic simply because it is “the best” isn’t even warranted. That only reduces the game to all the “second best” tactics, which isn’t necessarily any better of a game than the original game. In fact, it’s often worse!
The only reasonable case to ban something because it is “too good” is when that tactic completely dominates the entire game, to the exclusion of other tactics. It is possible, though very rare, that removing an element of the game that is not only “the best” but also “ten times better than anything else in the game” results in a better game. I emphasize that is extremely rare. The most common case is that the player requesting the ban doesn’t fully grasp that the game is, in fact, not all about that one tactic. He should win several tournaments using mainly this tactic to prove his point. Another, far rarer possibility is that he’s right. The game really is shallow and centered on one thing (whether that one thing is a bug or by design is irrelevant). In that case, the best course of action is usually to abandon the game and play one of the hundreds of other readily available good games in the world. (ex. melee)
Only in the ultra-rare case that the player is right and the game is worth saving and the game without the ultra-tactic is a ten times better game—only then is the notion even worth fighting for. And even in this case, it may take time for the game to mature enough for a great percentage of the best players and tournament organizers to realize that tactic should, indeed, be banned. Before an official ban takes place, there can also be something called “soft ban.”
Maybe there are better games like melee but if people are persitent to play a game then I think the soft ban may be an option.
In my opinion brawl should not be played but if its then ban MK or at least soft ban him.
I love to beat MK with marth but really MK has just too much advantage against most of the crew. Of course this is smash not ST so u cant really compare ex Akuma or O.Sagat with MK cause smash has more freedom and the way to kill a character is different. But having a character with :
ZERO bad stages
ZERO bad match-ups
Dominates MOST medium-large scale events
5 jumps+glide
4 recovery options(all B moves)
ABSOLUTE AWESOME priority
Fastest down smash in the game(correct me if im wrong) which has good KO power
AMAZING ground dodge
Most of his attacks come out fast and end fast
Nearly EVERYBODY has him as a main or 2nd or falls back on him when losing. notice the increased meta dittos in the top 10 placings.
2-3 frame u-air that can be comboed into tornado or UP+B for low as gimp kills
tilt locks
wall tilt locks
Invincibility on his UP+B(while on ground)
DECIMATES over half the cast
Tornado that eats thru ALL shields(if they are slightly weakened)
A ledge stalling tech that is UN-PUNISHABLE if done right
is hurting the comunity. And people keeps moving to MK just to wins proves a lot
PS: lol at u being good at melee
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrgSRo0OKYI
this is being good at melee
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1yJsYCzs04 (I love his G&W)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cY1YGUP3l_Q
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f53aeimv8I0
- Status