Should Metaknight be Banned? ***Take 3***

[adumbrodeus]

....

Careless, supposed to be one post multiquote, sorry

 

[SamuraiPanda]

I asked M2K immediately after his set with Ally if he threw the games on purpose. I was the very first person to ask him this. Without hesitation, he told me "No way. I hate losing. Its a matter of pride, you know? I can't just lose on purpose."

 

[Flayl]

I asked M2K immediately after his set with Ally if he threw the games on purpose. I was the very first person to ask him this. Without hesitation, he told me "No way. I hate losing. Its a matter of pride, you know? I can't just lose on purpose."

What the hell?

Way to give that tactless and absurd question credit.

 

[SamuraiPanda]

I asked M2K that immediately afterwards specifcally because of the people on the livestream who were claiming he was sandbagging. I didn't believe he was, personally. The reason I asked him that was with the intention on relaying the response after I got backed to quell some rumors. It seems like the entire ordeal was blown out of proportion by the time I returned, however, and I returned far later than I had intended.

I would go into more detail into my reasoning behind why I believe he was not sandbagging or anything of the sort, but I don't really have the time or patience to do so.

 

[ShadowLink84]

That is what practically the anti-ban side points at... MK being NOT broken. It was the root of our whole argument tree, that's where we all branched apart and tried to prove in different ways, wordings, etc... Some people got it, others didn't.

And many anti-ban peolpe were trying to prove that he over centralizes the metagame even though he is not vbroken. There ahve been several arguments placed that did not involve it. So why ignore their arguments?

Why would anti-ban NOT want to ban something that's broken? We're clearly saying MK ISN'T broken, and that he can be beat if people dedicate lots of time to the MK matchup... And the majority (if not all) DOES say that he isn't broken (in the anti-ban side)...

Being beatable is NOT the only factor. It is the degree of being beatable. The degree to which MK can be beaten.
Is he beatable? yes.
Theoretically EVERY character in every game is theoretically beatable, including Shin Akuma in SF2.
That does not mean we do not ban them.

nor does a character need to be broken either.
If they overcentralize the metagame by nature, they get banned due to their effect on the metagame.

Ok I admit I jumped the gun. I might have mixed up the message while thinking of what to reply, and followed my train of thought... But still MK shoudln't be banned.

mmk

How can a republican be a republican, if he does NOT shares conservative views? He will still be labeled under the republicans' decisions for BEING a republican.

Fix'd primarily because Republicans are the more conservative party.
being conservative is just that, being conservative. While the party may be extremely conservative on some issues, this does not mean they cannot have some liberal views while still remaining republican.
They have different ways of going about it but they are still republican.

it is possible to be republican but have a different idea of presenting ones arguments in differeny ways.

The point of arguing is refuting all the opposing side's points, and convincing them that your viewpoint is THE correct one... Unless arguing is simply two angry people shouting at each other, which wouldn't be as attractive as persuasive conversations/discussions.

I do not need the definition of a debate.
Considernig I have jumped on your case before.

They may not reflect upon him, but they DO have their weight. The point of arguing (at least in my eyes) is refuting all of pro-ban's points and trying to prove them wrong. If I fail to prove them wrong then it's my fault, and we'll just have to wait for people like Yuna to appear and make obscenely long posts and multiple tiring replies in order to explain something that could've just been said in one sentence.

No.. The point of the debate is to refute any logical points that make sense.
We do not address arguments that go "WOMFG METAKNIGHT IS SOOOOO BROOOOKEN!'
Or "metaknight had two of his things banned thats an indication!" because such arguments are illogical and flawed already that we have no need to respond or refute them, merely point out their weaknesses.

This also applies to an individual who shares the groups opinion, whihch he does not.

My purpose was to refute what he was saying, AND refute anything else that he might want to say (or anyone else) by ALREADY inputting my arguments before the statements were made. I know he didn't say stuff that I argued about, I'm not dumb. I said it BEFORE anyone else would reply with one of those points in order to speed things up.

So you have gained the ability of foresight that magically tells you what he will say afterwareds in an attempt to defend his position? No.
In fact, times that we have done such a thing lead to some confusion so its best not to do so.

Simply refute the current argument he is presenting and refute any possible explanation provided you have adequate justification.

Anti-bans who go "stfu scrub" are doing it in one of two ways:

Don't car for the firest because OBVIOUSLY I was talking about the second because the majoritym of anti ban people have done it.
Which by your logic previously, we should have attempted to refute despite the individuals argument.
Which is silly.

2) skipping the arguing and going to the point: shutting them up with insults, and lacking in viewpoints which would back up their "stfu"s better than what they're doing...

This right here.

... I'm trying to do it in the first statement's way. You could do whatever you desire, it IS your voice you're voicing.

of course an individual can do it any which way, what matters is the method by which they present it. Even though Yuna comes off rough, his points are valid.
We address his points.
We ignore mango's or dmbrandon's who go "lol n00bs"

 

[bobson]

M2K loses when playing his absolute hardest to Ally, maybe *gasp* ally's better now, or M2k was having an off day.

The fact that the best Metaknight player in the nation is capable of losing while playing his hardest proves simply to me that either A) Metaknight is not far enough ahead of the rest of the cast to be banned or B) Snake needs to be banned, too.

Right now it isn't a question of if Metaknight is broken or not; it's provably true that he isn't. It's a matter of whether the SBR has the balls to ban something because a lot of people don't like it.

 

[ShadowLink84]

The fact that the best Metaknight player in the nation is capable of losing while playing his hardest proves simply to me that either A) Metaknight is not far enough ahead of the rest of the cast to be banned or B) Snake needs to be banned, too.

Or it may mean that player skill was high enough to cover the disadvantage or many other million things. Hence why its bad to use the pl;ayers as evidence.

Right now it isn't a question of if Metaknight is broken or not; it's provably true that he isn't. It's a matter of whether the SBR has the balls to ban something because a lot of people don't like it.

Even if the SBR bans MK i doubt TO's will follow them. =\

 

[Chileno4Live]

Horrible argument, the other top tiers have legitimate counter-picks, their dominance is nowhere near as great as MK, though Marth would probably be the best in an MK-less environment.

I ws mainly taling about Marth here, but i also think Falco and D3 can be even more painful. Falco is already hard to deal with, and when MK is gone, Falco and D3 have an easier time in matches because 1 of the biggests threats are gone. Even if they have legimate counter picks, it doesn't change the fact that without MK, they're gonna dominate, maybe not as much as i claim, but they will get harder to deal with. For example, D3's hardest match-up, or 1 of the hardest, is Ice Climbers. IC are really hard to learn, very hard especially wth the alternating chaingrabs and all, would people learn them just to get past D3? Maybe some will, but not all. If MK is around, and they have enough skill and knowledge to play with MK, then he has good chance to win. This is just an example on how some will Dominate. MK is, on the other hand, very easy to learn. See where i'm getting?

Though, Marth will place higher in tourneys when MK is gone, i mean, MK was the best choice VS Marth o.o;

 

[P. O. F.]

After looking at the results of Apex the amount of Meta Knights in that tournament were actually, extremely low. In my opinion, this was the highest player usage diversity ever in a tournament.

Neo-marth
icylight from CT-Olimar
Darc-Marth
m2k-mk
ally-snake
lain-ic's
Dazwa-Zero suit
omegablackmage-GAW
etc etc

The amount of meta knights that PARTICIPATED in this tournament were low. That's like saying "Man, we just destroyed the Celtics even though Kevin Garnett, Ray Allen, and Paul Pierce did not dress." Nice, attendance was low for MK's in this tournament.....

Do any of you HONESTLY see the Brawl tier list change to the extent that Meta Knight will no longer be the best character? Snake going up? Marth making it to top tier? I'm sure we all think and know Meta Knight will remain top tier unless a bull**** ness/lucas crap infinite is discovered.

Now, let us imagine if Meta Knight WAS BANNED.

Snake is our new top tier character and has an advantage over everyone except DDD (arguably) Falco, and Pikachu creating much more of a balance. Every character in Brawl needs to play defensively against a Meta Knight. Someone find me a match where a Donkey Kong, Mario, Marth, Zelda, Snake, or GAW plays aggressive against Meta Knight and WINS please! Every character now has their flaws and areas where they do well in and where they suck. Isn't that half of the reason why Brawl players prefer Brawl to Melee? A more BALANCED game? Tell me with an honest face that Meta Knight is a balanced character and i'll buy you a cookie. Meta Knight is the most broken character in smash history, period. Eliminating him would create a much more friendly and interesting competitive community. If we keep him the constant thought on our mind will be "How do I beat Meta Knight?" not "How can this game develop further or what can I do to help it develop?" The game will also see a larger variety of mains and is that not what Brawl players want? To get away from the Fox's, Falco's, Marths, and sheiks in melee? Isn't that the whole **** point of playing brawl competitively? I'll put anything on the fact that if Meta Knight STAYS we will see a drastic increase in the amount of Meta Knight mains and Brawl players will see a repeat of the thing they did not like about Melee...the same 4-5 players. You will lose many Brawl players if Meta Knight stays and the poll shows this to be true. People do not like Meta Knight and despite the fact that some of those people may be "whining" or "complaining" about how "broken" he is youw ill either see a high icnrease in Meta Knight mains because hes so stupid and is now allowed or you will see a decrease in tournament attendance.

Take your pick.

 

[Red Arremer]

The amount of meta knights that PARTICIPATED in this tournament were low. That's like saying "Man, we just destroyed the Celtics even though Kevin Garnett, Ray Allen, and Paul Pierce did not dress." Nice, attendance was low for MK's in this tournament.....

LOL!!!!!! It's getting more ridiculous with every posting the Pro-Ban side makes.

First it was the sheer pressure of playing Meta Knight making people not choose him, then it was Mew2King sandbagging, and now that this also has been disproven, it's suddenly a low attendance of Meta Knights.

You are aware of the fact that almost all top Meta Knight players were there? M2K, Dojo, Plank, Seibrik, etc.
The only 2 Meta Knights who weren't there were Tyrant and DSF.

Wow, how horrible! 2 Top Meta Knights were missing! They sure would've changed the tournament results by so much more, like suddenly there would be 30 more Meta Knights or something, right?

 

[Furbs]

I'm sure that if the ban wasn't being dicussed right now, we would have seen m2k win and a lot more metas in attendance,

instead of OMG snake winning and almost no metas wtf!?

 

[bobson]

Or it may mean that player skill was high enough to cover the disadvantage or many other million things. Hence why its bad to use the pl;ayers as evidence.

What, then, do you propose is good evidence, if actual tournament matches with actual top-level players are not valid?

 

[Chileno4Live]

After looking at the results of Apex the amount of Meta Knights in that tournament were actually, extremely low. In my opinion, this was the highest player usage diversity ever in a tournament.

Neo-marth
icylight from CT-Olimar
Darc-Marth
m2k-mk
ally-snake
lain-ic's
Dazwa-Zero suit
omegablackmage-GAW
etc etc

The amount of meta knights that PARTICIPATED in this tournament were low. That's like saying "Man, we just destroyed the Celtics even though Kevin Garnett, Ray Allen, and Paul Pierce did not dress." Nice, attendance was low for MK's in this tournament.....

Do any of you HONESTLY see the Brawl tier list change to the extent that Meta Knight will no longer be the best character? Snake going up? Marth making it to top tier? I'm sure we all think and know Meta Knight will remain top tier unless a bull**** ness/lucas crap infinite is discovered.

Now, let us imagine if Meta Knight WAS BANNED.

Snake is our new top tier character and has an advantage over everyone except DDD (arguably) Falco, and Pikachu creating much more of a balance. Every character in Brawl needs to play defensively against a Meta Knight. Someone find me a match where a Donkey Kong, Mario, Marth, Zelda, Snake, or GAW plays aggressive against Meta Knight and WINS please! Every character now has their flaws and areas where they do well in and where they suck. Isn't that half of the reason why Brawl players prefer Brawl to Melee? A more BALANCED game? Tell me with an honest face that Meta Knight is a balanced character and i'll buy you a cookie. Meta Knight is the most broken character in smash history, period. Eliminating him would create a much more friendly and interesting competitive community. If we keep him the constant thought on our mind will be "How do I beat Meta Knight?" not "How can this game develop further or what can I do to help it develop?" The game will also see a larger variety of mains and is that not what Brawl players want? To get away from the Fox's, Falco's, Marths, and sheiks in melee? Isn't that the whole **** point of playing brawl competitively? I'll put anything on the fact that if Meta Knight STAYS we will see a drastic increase in the amount of Meta Knight mains and Brawl players will see a repeat of the thing they did not like about Melee...the same 4-5 players. You will lose many Brawl players if Meta Knight stays and the poll shows this to be true. People do not like Meta Knight and despite the fact that some of those people may be "whining" or "complaining" about how "broken" he is youw ill either see a high icnrease in Meta Knight mains because hes so stupid and is now allowed or you will see a decrease in tournament attendance.

Take your pick.

You're wrong. MetaKnight is good, but not broken, therefor not ban worthy. Some top tier characters will dominate. However, look at the tourneys now, mainly APEX. I first thought the same: "MK is a annoying piece of whorenado crap who can only spam 1 move". I even wanted him to get banned. But after reading the to good arguments for not ban worthy, i completely changed my mind. People are finally rebelling against MK. Yes, rebelling. He's dominating right now, but people are learning how to deal with him step by step. Ally did, he beated the best MK player, and he was not sandbagging because SamuraiPanda just said that. Check the Marth boards, you'll find like 2-3 threads about: "How to deal with MetaKnight". People are learning. you're also forgetting, if people would all play MK, then the people who know the match-up can easily take them on, and eventually everyone knows how to deal with MK. Sure, MK will always stay top tier, or at least for very long, but he's not broken, he's not unbeatable, people are learning how to beat him.

The whole point is, people who constantly are losing to MK are pro-ban. Because they cannot beat him, they just ban him. That is stupid in my opinion. It's clearly that people are learning how to deal with him. Yes, i'm telling you that like 5 times or something, but it's true.

 

[ShadowLink84]

Well since this controversy about m2k tossing the match has come up.
We might as wel have some fun with it.
(warning stupidity will be said).

I would say the rest of the top players were in on it too.
Candy beating dojo? Naw man.
He sandbagged.
m2k? he sandbagged too, got Faire spiked, repeatedly landing on explosives.
Seibrik? scrub He sucks, you know it I know it, the world knows it.
Plank? Also a scrub, dude plays a defensive MK even when he is down a stock. Scrub. Not worth mentioning.

Every other MK. They suck too.
So obviously apex results don't count.

Ally won cause m2k just didnt feel like winning. 1000 dollars? No biggie.
Take 2nd place, cover some of your loses, then make it up in future tournaments.
Oh and anyone notice how m2k loses everytime the ban mk thnig comes up?

Mk ban comes up, he loses to NL (then proceeds to defeat him every other time.)
Ban MK comes up, loses to ally (yet we have seen him beat him).

So yeah, its a conspiracy. I think we should all believe it and ban MK.
Just like how in SF2 HD remix, people were mysteriously avoiding the use of AKuma before he was banned.
Its all being messed around with by players who want to make money.
Trufax


*note, the above was a joke*

What, then, do you propose is good evidence, if actual tournament matches with actual top-level players are not valid?

Provided that the trend keeps up.
For example Ally beat m2k (who we know seemed off in those games we cannot ignore it).
If Ally was to continously beat m2k's metaknight in a similar or greater fashion, it would point to a trend concerning mk vs snake and several other things.

It can be used as an indication, to introduce the possibility, but it cannot work as something to prove the argument.

 

[gallax]

i just wanna say that even though seibrik is really gaood, his snake is better. his MK still needs work. basically he is at an awesome skill level who can read people like books. give him a few more tournies and his MK will rival that of dojo and m2k.

im not bashing seibrik in any way. love that dude. im just saying that he hasn't had enough time to fully develope his MK.

 

[ShadowLink84]

galax did you not see my awesome post? Seibrik suuuuucks. ^_^

 

[adumbrodeus]

The fact that the best Metaknight player in the nation is capable of losing while playing his hardest proves simply to me that either A) Metaknight is not far enough ahead of the rest of the cast to be banned or B) Snake needs to be banned, too.

Right now it isn't a question of if Metaknight is broken or not; it's provably true that he isn't. It's a matter of whether the SBR has the balls to ban something because a lot of people don't like it.

It shouldn't...

Just because a character is capable of being beaten by one other character doesn't mean that they're not bannable.


Characters have character-specific tricks that allow them to do unusually well against characters that are far superior to them all the time, and Snake has a ton of unusual abilities that make the match-up closer then it should be, that's why Snake thrives so well in an enviroment with MK, not because he's such a good character (he has quite a few legitimate counters even though he is a good character) but because he's good at fighting MK.

Heck, he could be a hard counter to MK and MK could still overcentralize the metagame.


And then there's simple skill, it can easily throw off individual sets and tournaments.

After looking at the results of Apex the amount of Meta Knights in that tournament were actually, extremely low. In my opinion, this was the highest player usage diversity ever in a tournament.

Neo-marth
icylight from CT-Olimar
Darc-Marth
m2k-mk
ally-snake
lain-ic's
Dazwa-Zero suit
omegablackmage-GAW
etc etc

The amount of meta knights that PARTICIPATED in this tournament were low. That's like saying "Man, we just destroyed the Celtics even though Kevin Garnett, Ray Allen, and Paul Pierce did not dress." Nice, attendance was low for MK's in this tournament.....

Do any of you HONESTLY see the Brawl tier list change to the extent that Meta Knight will no longer be the best character? Snake going up? Marth making it to top tier? I'm sure we all think and know Meta Knight will remain top tier unless a bull**** ness/lucas crap infinite is discovered.

Now, let us imagine if Meta Knight WAS BANNED.

Snake is our new top tier character and has an advantage over everyone except DDD (arguably) Falco, and Pikachu creating much more of a balance. Every character in Brawl needs to play defensively against a Meta Knight. Someone find me a match where a Donkey Kong, Mario, Marth, Zelda, Snake, or GAW plays aggressive against Meta Knight and WINS please! Every character now has their flaws and areas where they do well in and where they suck. Isn't that half of the reason why Brawl players prefer Brawl to Melee? A more BALANCED game? Tell me with an honest face that Meta Knight is a balanced character and i'll buy you a cookie. Meta Knight is the most broken character in smash history, period. Eliminating him would create a much more friendly and interesting competitive community. If we keep him the constant thought on our mind will be "How do I beat Meta Knight?" not "How can this game develop further or what can I do to help it develop?" The game will also see a larger variety of mains and is that not what Brawl players want? To get away from the Fox's, Falco's, Marths, and sheiks in melee? Isn't that the whole **** point of playing brawl competitively? I'll put anything on the fact that if Meta Knight STAYS we will see a drastic increase in the amount of Meta Knight mains and Brawl players will see a repeat of the thing they did not like about Melee...the same 4-5 players. You will lose many Brawl players if Meta Knight stays and the poll shows this to be true. People do not like Meta Knight and despite the fact that some of those people may be "whining" or "complaining" about how "broken" he is youw ill either see a high icnrease in Meta Knight mains because hes so stupid and is now allowed or you will see a decrease in tournament attendance.

Take your pick.

Why Snake?

He's good, but his greatest advantage is his ability is his metaknight-fighting ability. Marth still seems to be best placed to be top character without MK.

 

[ShadowLink84]

We cannot ban MK because then, ioif marth goes up, I'll become a tier ***** as he is my secondary.

 

[FB Dj_Iskascribble]

I'm sure that if the ban wasn't being dicussed right now, we would have seen m2k win and a lot more metas in attendance,

instead of OMG snake winning and almost no metas wtf!?

LOL no top player would miss a tournament because of a stupid ban issue. Even if he was banned, it would only be RECOMMENDED ruleset. there is still going to be regions where he will never be banned.

The way i see it now, is no matter what logical arguments the anti-ban side gives, the pro-ban side will just keep spewing out more and more dumb arguments. The people who really did champion for your cause intelligently dont even post here anymore.

 

[Chileno4Live]

^That^

It's just that people can't fight VS MK's so they want him banned. Thats how i see it. They cannot find a way to beat MK, or are to lazy or something like that to learn the match-up. I cannot see how he is broken, and i cannot see how he's ban worthy. He might be a dominating character, but c'mon he's beatable, and people ARE ACTUALLY TRYING TO BEAT HIM.

 

[Remzi]

If the SBR says to ban him, almost every TO will.

Come on now, lets be serious.

 

[Plairnkk]

This thread is so ****ing funny.

 

[bobson]

If the SBR says to ban him, almost every TO will.

Come on now, lets be serious.

SBR said Port Town was a counterpick. When was the last time you saw it allowed at a tournament?

 

[Shirufu]

LOL no top player would miss a tournament because of a stupid ban issue. Even if he was banned, it would only be RECOMMENDED ruleset. there is still going to be regions where he will never be banned.

The way i see it now, is no matter what logical arguments the anti-ban side gives, the pro-ban side will just keep spewing out more and more dumb arguments. The people who really did champion for your cause intelligently dont even post here anymore.

Wait, so since cg ***** metaknight, does that mean its broken since it destroys a "broken" character. Ban CG, its more broken then mk

 

[Maniclysane]

IMO - Meta Knight vs Olimar is around 60:40. MK has several tools to hold Olimar off of his *** and can gimp the lil Captain into oblivion (though that's what pretty much everyone can do, lol), but Olimar's camp and grabgame are far too good to be anything worse than 60:40.

It's 65:35 MK's favor. Olimar's camp game has nothing on MK. His sword cuts straight through his pikmin, and out prioritizes and out spaces everything olimar has, and since MK is almost always in the air, Oli's grab game can't do much. It's easily 65:35

 

[Shao-tan]

Or it may mean that player skill was high enough to cover the disadvantage or many other million things. Hence why its bad to use the pl;ayers as evidence.

How is it not an evidence? Ally defeat not an average Joe, but the best Metaknight player in the world. We can't base ourselves purely in theory, if theory was OMG SO IMPORTANT Fox wouldn't stand a chance in Melee, but still! He's allowed. And guess who dominated tournaments all day? Marth. If skill can overcome even the best MK player in the world, not once but twice(Lain vs. M2K), how's MK SOOOOOOOOOOO B0RKENNNNN? Oh, forgot to mention Dojo was beaten.

The pro-ban side really is ridiculous.

 

[Nic64]

Why Snake?

He's good, but his greatest advantage is his ability is his metaknight-fighting ability. Marth still seems to be best placed to be top character without MK.

snake doesn't have matchups worse than 45:55, marth does even without MK(DDD and a snake that has port priority IMO).

snake has easily abuseable strengths, marth is a finesse character, having a bad game as marth is much more likely to net you a loss than as snake.

marth doesn't tend to **** many characters like snake or other top tiers does.

maybe snake wouldn't be the best character without MK, but I don't see how it's marth over him.

Snake is our new top tier character and has an advantage over everyone except DDD (arguably) Falco, and Pikachu creating much more of a balance.

snake probably has the advantage against falco if anything, and is disadvantaged against wario IMO.

 

[adumbrodeus]

snake doesn't have matchups worse than 45:55, marth does even without MK(DDD and a snake that has port priority IMO).

snake has easily abuseable strengths, marth is a finesse character, having a bad game as marth is much more likely to net you a loss than as snake.

marth doesn't tend to **** many characters like snake or other top tiers does.

maybe snake wouldn't be the best character without MK, but I don't see how it's marth over him.

...

ROB, Pikachu, Olimar, Falco, DDD. 5 disadvantages, take your pick on what degree, but DDD is definately a 60-40 or worse and so is ROB.

Marth's got 2 60-40s (one of which is only 50% of the time), and one arguable 55-45 beyond MK himself.


He's not going to sweeping all the tournaments, but he will be the best when played at the top of the metagame. Of course, Snake is going to be easier, and we might have the fox/marth dynamic from melee (fox WAS the best character, but he was much much more difficult), but because brawl is easier, I doubt it, Marth will be the best.

 

[P. O. F.]

Why Snake?

He's good, but his greatest advantage is his ability is his metaknight-fighting ability. Marth still seems to be best placed to be top character without MK.

yay, someone else who agrees with me that Marth is ARGUABLY top three in Brawl. Marth is amazing in Brawl and is SEVERELY Underrated.

Apex's results DO COUNT...i'm not saying "oh, forget apex...its just one tournament" but at the same time take a look at other tournaments. a good 30% of entrants are MK players.

I can beat Meta Knight just fine, I'll go Meta Knight or GAW but its the fact that I shouldnt have to be a different character that I don't like using JUST TO BEAT META KNIGHT. That's the whole point of Brawl, being able to be any character and be successful. Looking at other fighting games we know that Ryu and Wolverine can beat a Cable and Sentinel team in Marvel VS Capcom II or that a Nightmare can beat an Ivy in Soul Calibur. In Smash 64 a Link can beat a Kirby or a Fox can beat a Pikachu without doing anything different. I am once again saying that IT IS NOT IMPOSSIBLE TO BEAT META KNIGHT but the fact thaty players have to play their character COMPLETELY different when playing a Meta Knight makes it unbalanced and stupid.

Edit-Sorry, I dont really follow nor care to follow who mains MK and who the best players are. I care more about Melee than Brawl. I know DSF, Overswarm, and M2K uses Meta...that's about it. I follow Melee more so than Bawl because well uhh i dont know Melee is more fun to watch.

If Ally did not beat M2K the pro ban arguement would still be incredibly strong. So basically, half of you are saying "Well, this one Snake player beat M2K once even though M2K has beat him in tournament a good 3-4 times...so yeah don't ban him." Most of you are basing it off of one current set. I'll bet you anything the next time M2K plays Ally, he'll win.

Another Edit-

...

ROB, Pikachu, Olimar, Falco, DDD. 5 disadvantages, take your pick on what degree, but DDD is definately a 60-40 or worse and so is ROB.

Marth's got 2 60-40s (one of which is only 50% of the time), and one arguable 55-45 beyond MK himself.


He's not going to sweeping all the tournaments, but he will be the best when played at the top of the metagame. Of course, Snake is going to be easier, and we might have the fox/marth dynamic from melee (fox WAS the best character, but he was much much more difficult), but because brawl is easier, I doubt it, Marth will be the best.

I see you are a debater for a good reason sir. Finally; someone in here with valid, supporting evidence and not coming off as an eltist.

 

[Nic64]

...

ROB, Pikachu, Olimar, Falco, DDD. 5 disadvantages, take your pick on what degree, but DDD is definately a 60-40 or worse and so is ROB.

most of those are even, a few slightly in snake's favor even. ROB is about even and DDD is definitely no worse than 45:55, some people even consider it to be even. the fact that you think either could be worse than 60:40 to me says that you don't really know snake's matchups...

yay, someone else who agrees with me that Marth is ARGUABLY top three in Brawl. Marth is amazing in Brawl and is SEVERELY Underrated.

I'd agree that he's top 3 without MK, but snake is just better IMO

 

[meepxzero]

...

ROB, Pikachu, Olimar, Falco, DDD. 5 disadvantages, take your pick on what degree, but DDD is definately a 60-40 or worse and so is ROB.

Marth's got 2 60-40s (one of which is only 50% of the time), and one arguable 55-45 beyond MK himself.


He's not going to sweeping all the tournaments, but he will be the best when played at the top of the metagame. Of course, Snake is going to be easier, and we might have the fox/marth dynamic from melee (fox WAS the best character, but he was much much more difficult), but because brawl is easier, I doubt it, Marth will be the best.

ice climbers are gonna replace fox in brawl. Learning ice climbers requires almost near perfection to be really good, but if you dont mess up cging they are easily top 3 if you include metaknight. Even match up against mk and gets countered by snake. You people who think marth is good dont realize how awful he is.

 

[Prince Of Fire]

ice climbers are gonna replace fox in brawl. Learning ice climbers requires almost near perfection to be really good, but if you dont mess up cging they are easily top 3 if you include metaknight. Even match up against mk and gets countered by snake. You people who think marth is good dont realize how awful he is.

How awful Marth is? Are you kidding me? If you can space well with Marth he can keep EVEN META KNIGHT on the defensive at times. His tilts are amazing, his aerial game is wonderful, he has probably one of the top three best edge games, his recovery is difficult to gimp unless your name is MK. Play my Marth and i'll change your mind.

I will however agree with you that Ice Climbers are really foogin good. If they are played perfectly yes, they are incredible and arguably top 8.

I personally think R.O.B and Diddy Kong are easily top 8 and that DDD is the most overrated character. I'm sorry but Kirby, Meta Knight, Falco, and even in some cases Toon Link do just fine against him. If he can't chain grab them, it's basically not too difficult. What's he going to do to camp you? Throw waddle dees? LOL. I don't have a problem playing a DDD in tournament and I never have.


****, I just realized...I logged into my old account by mistake. haha

 

[Ich Bin Awesome]

The way i see it now, is no matter what logical arguments the pro-ban side gives, the anti-ban side will just keep spewing out more and more dumb arguments. The people who really did champion for your cause intelligently dont even post here anymore.

There are still a few that make valid arguments.

 

[Mew2King]

you guys are so ****ing stupid. You really believe I would lie to all of you and give up my chance to win a huge tourney in my favorite matchup in the grand finals. I wanted to **** him, but the opposite happened. Oh well maybe next time but I was definitely trying my hardest regardless. Sorry for not being good enough when Ally goes Super Saiyan mode.

 

[Angel.M <3 C:]

SBR said Port Town was a counterpick. When was the last time you saw it allowed at a tournament?

You havn't been to Texas have you?

Also dedede beats snake 60-40 at LOWER level's of gameplay.

Falco? Snake beats falco,

Olimar? Snake beats him too. Do you know how easy it is to tech chase olimar?

Pika? Even with the chaingrab pika has a hard time with this.

Rob? This has been proven to be an even match-up

Marth top three? Maybe. He loses to d3 and Snake(it's 60-40 without the port prioritytoo. Snake can just camp) and loses to DK 45-55.

 

[Remzi]

How awful Marth is? Are you kidding me? If you can space well with Marth he can keep EVEN META KNIGHT on the defensive at times. His tilts are amazing, his aerial game is wonderful, he has probably one of the top three best edge games, his recovery is difficult to gimp unless your name is MK. Play my Marth and i'll change your mind.

If MK knows the matchup, Marth can do close to nothing against him unless we're talking about Neo, RoyR, or MikeHAZE (not to say they don't have trouble with MK).

Marth's dtilt is amazing, utilt is decent, and ftilt is meh.

His aerial game is very nice, but he has a huge weakness below him.

Offstage, he has sub par recovery (another major weakness) and a slightly above average gimping game.

Also, his biggest problem:
Unlike most top tier characters, he has no safe kill moves.

Marth is most definitely a good character, but he isn't quite top tier. I don't think Meep actually meant he was awful, just in comparison to MK, Snake, D3, etc.

If MK is banned, I can see Marth being top 3. Not #1 though.

Regarding Marth's matchups. He is at a 40:60 to Snake and D3 (who are likely to be the two top characters if MK is banned, which is a terrible disadvantage) and 45:55 to DK and ROB. Sure, overall Marth has excellent matchups, but no better than Snake and D3 (who happen to counter him).

 

[Angel.M <3 C:]

you guys are so ****ing stupid. You really believe I would lie to all of you and give up my chance to win a huge tourney in my favorite matchup in the grand finals. I wanted to **** him, but the opposite happened. Oh well maybe next time but I was definitely trying my hardest regardless. Sorry for not being good enough when Ally goes Super Saiyan mode.

M2k. The pro-ban side have no logic and don't listen to anything that makes their argument bad.

Also m2k you need to train me to play with snake/MK >.>

 

[Red Arremer]

It's 65:35 MK's favor. Olimar's camp game has nothing on MK. His sword cuts straight through his pikmin, and out prioritizes and out spaces everything olimar has, and since MK is almost always in the air, Oli's grab game can't do much. It's easily 65:35

Well, gee, that makes Meta Knight a hard matchup for Olimar. 5 points +/- is an acceptable misjudging, especially since I don't know extremely much about the Meta Knight vs. Olimar matchup. It's still nowhere near as bad as 80-20, that's more like the matchup Dedede has on Bowser or Donkey Kong.

 

[Remzi]

Well, gee, that makes Meta Knight a hard matchup for Olimar. 5 points +/- is an acceptable misjudging, especially since I don't know extremely much about the Meta Knight vs. Olimar. It's still nowhere near as bad as 80-20, that's more like the matchup Dedede has on Bowser or Donkey Kong.

Those are more like 95:5 or worse if the D3 has ANY clue what he is doing >_>

 

[Angel.M <3 C:]

Those are more like 95:5 or worse if the D3 has ANY clue what he is doing >_>

Very wrong. I used to play bum ALOT. Without the standing/walking infinite the match-up is 80-20 at WORST. maybe even 70-30