Why we can't wait to ban Metaknight

[Eddie G]

OS your a great writer.
I'm still not sure if he should be banned though. Unless someone can convince me that he "really" needs to be banned.

For some that is simply an impossible thing to do and you know it. Some are simply too stubborn to change their minds. That's all there is to it.

 

[Matador]

Couldn't you just save this for the SBR, WE DON'T NEED ANOTHER GOD**** MK THREAD.

It's Clearly Impossible To Use Any Of The Other Fifty Mk Threads To Convey New Info.

hey guys maybe if we flood the board with threads about mk people will have no choice but to think MK is this new and urgent issue that clearly has never been adressed before!

Except the information presented here, clearly deserves it's own thread.

I find it hilarious how everyone's suddenly concerned with forum etiquette. If you don't want to read the thread, then why in sam hill do you click on it?

I thought the purpose of this forum was to discuss things of this nature...

 

[Dabuz]

one statistic i tihnk you forgot to include, in all the MK ban votes the community had more votes in favor of ban instead of against, but the SBR, less than 1% of the community won the vote by not too large numbers



BTW, im anti-ban i just think its important stats

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

How far was Marth's dominance rating in melee at it's highest?

 

[Nanaki]

A lot of your "data" in the OP just shows that he's a really popular character.

While I am pro-ban, I think you gotta do better than that to convince the masses. ;/

I like where your head's at, and it's a good point, but it's not really possible to come up with data that proves 'popularity' independently from 'supremacy'.

For example:

If I had access to ALL the tourney data, I could look up how many MK's entered, how well those MK's placed, and an adjusted weight scale to how well they did in comparison to other mains. If, hypothetically, MK did substantially better on this weighted scale, you would undoubtedly receive the argument back:

"MK mains are just better - they're the best players in the country. M2K, Tyrant, Judge, Shadow, it's obviously because they're good players".

At this point, you've reached a dead end. You can't come up with any data proving that it's not a result of the players, or that these people would do equally good with other characters, or anything that would separate characters from each other.

The point you make only really leads to ridiculous theories about pitting lvl 9 CPU's against each other in a round robin enormous tournament, which we know would NEVER work.

tl;dr: There's no way to separate 'popularity' from 'supremacy' from the data set we have available to us.

 

[Ripple]

How far was Marth's dominance rating in melee at it's highest?

probably high with M2K and all but you have to remember that there weren't hoards of marth players taking the top spots. there were always foxs, falcos, falcons, sheiks, and jiggs

 

[¯\_S.(ツ).L.I.D._/¯]

It's easy to predict what will happen if we fall back on that though. People (particularly some anti-ban and MK mains) will use that issue to prolong any sort of decision whatsoever for as long as they can.

True.

Then, if and when it comes time to make a decision regarding criteria, it is highly likely that an unattainable requirement for ban criteria will be presented and all of the previously relevant data on MK and his dominance/character use influence will be bumped to moot.

Although that's possible, I was thinking that the SBR would propose ban criteria and therefore would be fairly non biased (or at least not to the extent that you're implying).

It'll all be one giant process designed for us to fail, that's all it is at this point since criteria had not been established early and without so much personal gain or possible anterior motives involved like it should have been.

Although I agree that it should have been established earlier on, what's happened has already happened, we can't really change that.

I believe it is time to ditch formality and take action already.

Should this be done as quickly as possible? Yes.

But should we create a decision based on information alone without knowing exactly why we're banning/not banning Meta Knight? I don't think so.

 

[Turbo Ether]

I find it hilarious how everyone's suddenly concerned with forum etiquette. If you don't want to read the thread, then why in sam hill do you click on it?

I thought the purpose of this forum was to discuss things of this nature...

I wasn't posting sarcastically. I actually do think this information was deserving of it's own thread.

 

[UltiMario]

You know, thank god for Garchomp existing, and the competative Pokemon scene as well, or else there could be no way you could compare this as a minor problem.

Remember that in the competative Pokemon scene, Garchomp had potential for sweeping entire teams, unless you have something that revenge killed it, and literally, a Pokemon's ONLY purpose would be to revenge kill Garchomp, otherwise it would be nearly useless on a team. But remember, you had to deal with Garchomp and 5 other Pokemon beside it that could beat what counters it. Garchomp was at a whopping 42% at the top of its usage, and alone it was like the buffed Meta Knight of Pokemon, beging fast, just as frail, and stronger. The Pokemon community is a VERY patient one, it took a year and a half or so of D/P to this very day, about 3 years since its release, they're still testing Chomp to see if hes not broken, and they still say no.

I'm not convinced MK is bannable until he even hits the usage of Garchomp. Remember, 1/39 at 36% is SIGNIFICANTLY less than 1/60-ish usable pokemon at 42%. Did I mention that Garchomp's #1 Revenge killer, Scarf Gengar, was at about 29% of terms of usage, just to get rid of it? Theres nothing even close to that against MK.

Yes, I realize you have 6 on a team as Pokemon, but remember, you also have stupid amounts of Meta Knight secondaries that should be secondarying a different character because of the better Mach-ups a different secondary could give....

I'd say this is a fair expression.

No bans until it gets rediculous. If you think MK's current usage is rediculous, then you've seen nothing. NOTHING.

 

[gallax]

you guys realize that this is only a video game right? banning without a clear cut reason other than "we want to attract more people and make the usage of other chars more diverse" is a fine reason for most people. its not like u r passing a law like the House of reps/Senate does. i know why you want to be democratic about this on the flip side, but we are not being paid by the people for making judgement calls.

 

[GreenFox]

Finally a banning metaknight thread that has actual data

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

There have been situations where great players who play other characters switch to MK or pick him up as a secondary because they just can't compete with Lucario/ZSS/Luigi/Game & Watch/whoever and just place higher. These are isolated situations but saying there is no link between using and placement is crazy.

I did the math and checked the data last night myself and the list of characters who would become instantly tournament viable at the highest level if MK was eliminated is staggeringly large. Marth, Toon Link, and Peach are the most obvious (because their only very very difficult matchups are MK), but there are others like ROB, Game and Watch, Pikachu, and King Dedede who would benefit. The addition of these characters (well, in some cases, re-addition) into the high-end game would undoubtedly increase the diversity of the competitive scene which can not be a bad thing. Yes, I realize that this isn't a good reason to ban a character, but with all of the other evidence we now have, I thought it was a point worth making.

 

[UltiMario]

you guys realize that this is only a video game right? banning without a clear cut reason other than "we want to attract more people and make the usage of other chars more diverse" is a fine reason for most people. its not like u r passing a law like the House of reps/Senate does. i know why you want to be democratic about this on the flip side, but we are not being paid by the people for making judgement calls.

The problem is with your logic its not a fine reason for most people. That'd be a fine reason for some casual or something, but not Meta Knight mains or ANYONE thats anti-ban, AKA about half the Smash community.

 

[Dabuz]

you cannoy compare any RPG to fighting games, RPGs are numbers and luck games with preset strategies bound to win or fail right away, fighting games (and smash) are games of who has the best otpions in each situation and how good the players are at using those options to be as safe as possible

 

[Braxton2011]

Enough data, not enough caring.
Anti Ban.
Meta is basically Fox from Melee. He's good, but he can be beaten.

 

[AvaricePanda]

I'm confused. If ADHD won Pound 4 and SNES, how come he only has 14 points? Can you provide tournament results links showing where you got your points data (or is that too much work)?

Same with the Tournament attendance decline thing: it's not that I don't trust you, but anyone can just make a graph and label it. Can you provide links where you got that information?

A common argument I've recently been hearing (actually I've been hearing it for a year, just moreso now) is that MK is a problem in low-mid levels of play. In general, large 150+ tournaments have predicted results (the top players get top, and a lot of top players main MK), and IMO are more reflective of player skill and availability to go to tournaments rather than character dominance. I've been wanting to do something similar, but with tournaments with people around [50-60] to [100-120], that way there's still definitely good, valid competition, but isn't as predictable (oh M2K and Ally are going to get top 5 at insert national here).

Also, what about information concerning who these MK players are? Are they all relatively the same good players, or are there random unranked or low ranked MKs that just pop up and start placing top 8? How many new, not well known people are placing with MK? How many good people are switching to MK? How does MK look to certain regions? Numbers are great, but these are all things you also have to consider (and they've been said by both sides, so I don't think they're biased questions).

Thanks.

 

[GreenFox]

The only difference is its impossible to play consistant with fox at top level

 

[Nova9000]

Good stuff OS. Maybe now we can take action rather than have people "plank" for time in the ban MK argument.

 

[rPSIvysaur]

I did the math and checked the data last night myself and the list of characters who would become instantly tournament viable at the highest level if MK was eliminated is staggeringly large. Marth, Toon Link, and Peach are the most obvious (because their only very very difficult matchups are MK), but there are others like ROB, Game and Watch, Pikachu, and King Dedede who would benefit. The addition of these characters (well, in some cases, re-addition) into the high-end game would undoubtedly increase the diversity of the competitive scene which can not be a bad thing. Yes, I realize that this isn't a good reason to ban a character, but with all of the other evidence we now have, I thought it was a point worth making.

QFT, this should be quoted into the OP

Just ban him then the suspense is killing me.

ADHD SAID IT!!!

 

[gallax]

The problem is with your logic its not a fine reason for most people. That'd be a fine reason for some casual or something, but not Meta Knight mains or ANYONE thats anti-ban, AKA about half the Smash community.

ok u have a good point. i concede that to you. but i dont think there will ever be a agreed upon criteria for banning MK.

 

[ADHD]

Just ban him then the suspense is killing me.

 

[GreenFox]

This would defintley help the community whats wrong with variety? arent you guys tired of seeing all MK its the main reason why brawl is boring to watch

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

probably high with M2K and all but you have to remember that there weren't hoards of marth players taking the top spots. there were always foxs, falcos, falcons, sheiks, and jiggs

From what I remember the number is higher than MK's dominance rating has been thus far.

While it's probably because the three best players all mained Marth at the time.

You know, thank god for Garchomp existing, and the competative Pokemon scene as well, or else there could be no way you could compare this as a minor problem.

Remember that in the competative Pokemon scene, Garchomp had potential for sweeping entire teams, unless you have something that revenge killed it, and literally, a Pokemon's ONLY purpose would be to revenge kill Garchomp, otherwise it would be nearly useless on a team. But remember, you had to deal with Garchomp and 5 other Pokemon beside it that could beat what counters it. Garchomp was at a whopping 42% at the top of its usage, and alone it was like the buffed Meta Knight of Pokemon, beging fast, just as frail, and stronger. The Pokemon community is a VERY patient one, it took a year and a half or so of D/P to this very day, about 3 years since its release, they're still testing Chomp to see if hes not broken, and they still say no.

I'm not convinced MK is bannable until he even hits the usage of Garchomp. Remember, 1/39 at 36% is SIGNIFICANTLY less than 1/60-ish usable pokemon at 42%. Did I mention that Garchomp's #1 Revenge killer, Scarf Gengar, was at about 29% of terms of usage, just to get rid of it? Theres nothing even close to that against MK.

Yes, I realize you have 6 on a team as Pokemon, but remember, you also have stupid amounts of Meta Knight secondaries that should be secondarying a different character because of the better Mach-ups a different secondary could give....

I'd say this is a fair expression.

No bans until it gets rediculous. If you think MK's current usage is rediculous, then you've seen nothing. NOTHING.

Most people go MK because he is an answer to anything as a secondary. Sounds like people do it out of choice rather than they are forced to.

 

[MarKO X]

The problem is with your logic its not a fine reason for most people. That'd be a fine reason for some casual or something, but not Meta Knight mains or ANYONE thats anti-ban, AKA about half the Smash community.

For anyone that's anti-ban without maining MK, this won't hurt them unless MK is keeping characters that have painful matchups against their main out of tourneys.

For anyone that's pro-ban and mains MK, they'll simply go to the character that they wanted to main in the first place.

For anyone that's anti-ban and mains MK... well... . If you're so good at this game, picking up another character and winning with him/her/it shouldn't be that hard, right?

And see, that's one of the issues I have with banning MK... you are "punishing" in a sense, the people who main MK. Unfortunately, you can't make everyone happy either way...

 

[6Mizu]

OS your a great writer.
I'm still not sure if he should be banned though. Unless someone can convince me that he "really" needs to be banned.

For some that is simply an impossible thing to do and you know it. Some are simply too stubborn to change their minds. That's all there is to it.

Beef I'm neither of those; I'm simply someone stuck dead in the middle and need some more convincing. I'm not sure which to support.

-I feel if we ban him it be a "domino effect"; it'd also be very good for everyone and I'd feel like a Pu$$y................

because, I makes me feel like I want to ban him because I can't overcome the challenge.

-If we don't ban him it wouldn't be very good, but I would feel like a loser cause that way I would "want" to overcome the challenge.

So, all I need is some more convincing.

 

[UltiMario]

you cannoy compare any RPG to fighting games, RPGs are numbers and luck games with preset strategies bound to win or fail right away, fighting games (and smash) are games of who has the best otpions in each situation and how good the players are at using those options to be as safe as possible

Because, like fighting games, something new CAN be discovered that is Metagame changing, in the form of a new moveset, item, and EV combination on a Pokemon, which can significantly expand a Pokemon's possiblity. Take Salamence, that has about 14 trillion different movesets, but what it does most the time is the same: Sweep. While every person's fighting style in Brawl is a little bit different, the overall idea of what to do in a certain matchup in the same.

Its the same idea, different application. Just is much is set in stone with RPG stats as they are with each character's Speed, Air Speed, Attack Speed, Damage output on each move, weight, etc etc etc.

 

[Nova9000]

Just ban him then the suspense is killing me.

This.

 

[Braxton2011]

I say we ban him for a certain amount of time, and see how the tournament results come out. See if he actually changes the tournaments that much.

See what other potential threats there are to tournament scene (I'm interested in witnessing what happens when MK isn't able to be used).

This post will be ignored.

 

[UTDZac]

And FD isn't even a bad stage for MK. It's actually a pretty solid stage. For example, it is the very best stage for MK against G&W, AFAIK.

Just wanted to clarify. G&W does better on FD against MK than the other way around. If MK screws up once with a B move, G&W gets a free smash/judgment on MK. I also find FD easier to live on against MK because of how far away the blastzones are and G&W's bucket braking.

On Topic:
I thought a while back that if I picked up MK, which I did, and started using him in tourney matches, which I did, I would do better... or at least have an easier time beating people, which I did. However, I decided to stick with G&W because so many people don't want me to switch. They like my G&W. I'm one-of-a-kind, or something.

So I did... and after playing through tournament after tournament flooded with MKs (thanks TX) and having to fight so hard so many times... it's just not worth it. People tell me to stay G&W, but they don't know what it's like to play against smart MKs (well maybe they do, but not AS G&W). It's so hard, so annoying. I find in those times I can just switch to MK for MK dittos and do much better with less effort. It makes me feel horrible knowing my favorite character is flat-out hopeless.

So I have three options:
1) Continue to use G&W, since you know I'm the best at that character, and train/work hard to beat those stupid MKs who's popularity won't be dieing down... cause the SBR decided MK isn't going to be banned.
2) Switch to using MK because more and more of them keep showing up to tourneys... cause the SBR decided MK isn't going to be banned... and G&W isn't cutting it.
3) Quit competitive smash on the bases that I'll never see another tournament without MK... cause the SBR decided MK isn't going to be banned. Sure it sounds like I'm just giving up, but hey, I wasn't placing in the money anyway because I wasn't using MK or just got fluke-lucky.

 

[Katakiri]

You know, thank god for Garchomp existing, and the competative Pokemon scene as well, or else there could be no way you could compare this as a minor problem.

The Pokemon community is a VERY patient one, it took a year and a half or so of D/P to this very day, about 3 years since its release, they're still testing Chomp to see if hes not broken, and they still say no.

Garchomp is in Uber Tier atm, which means he's basically banned from standard play. They can test Garchomp all they want, just like the SBR can test MK all they want. But as of now, MK is far past ban-able.

I don't care if it's a period where MK's banned, then a period where the SBR unbans him backed up with testing, then he gets banned again for the same reasons, and the cycle goes on. BUT SOMETHING'S GOT TO GIVE.

Yes, I realize you have 6 on a team as Pokemon, but remember, you also have stupid amounts of Meta Knight secondaries that should be secondarying a different character because of the better Mach-ups a different secondary could give....

I'd say this is a fair expression.

No bans until it gets rediculous. If you think MK's current usage is rediculous, then you've seen nothing. NOTHING.

Okay, 6 pokemon on a team, only 1 can be Garchomp.
2 Characters per Smash Player, only one can be MK.

To make it a fair comparison, take Garchomp's usage and divide it by 3.

I GUARANTEE you, MK usage will be much higher.

 

[Renegade TX2000]

Are you stupid? A lot of the SBR members aren't even that good of players, they're just knowledgeable (for the most part).

While some members are clearly biased, I don't see how you can think that as a group they're just corrupt, self-centered idiots.

i stopped taking you seriously when you said, "Are you stupid". clearly NO, if m2k can just bribe the TO's to agree with him, and not go with their own definite answer then we need to reset the TO's. LOL that's very very bad, bribing people to agree with you and them actually agreeing with you just because of the $$ this community is pretty ****ed were just trying to atleast save it by banning mk. we should sell smashboards to the shoryuken forums.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I say we ban him for a certain amount of time, and see how the tournament results come out. See if he actually changes the tournaments that much.

See what other potential threats there are to tournament scene (I'm interested in witnessing what happens when MK isn't able to be used).

This post will be ignored.

Almost. Your last post plus your post count kinda screamed beginner who doesn't really know their way around the argument.

Banning MK temporarily has the disadvantage that if he comes back, nobody knows the matchup any more. >.> Or something like that. Also, some TOs run tournaments sans MK.

Just wanted to clarify. G&W does better on FD against MK than the other way around. If MK screws up once with a B move, G&W gets a free smash/judgment on MK. I also find FD easier to live on against MK because of how far away the blastzones are and G&W's bucket braking.

On Topic:
I thought a while back that if I picked up MK, which I did, and started using him in tourney matches, which I did, I would do better... or at least have an easier time beating people, which I did. However, I decided to stick with G&W because so many people don't want me to switch. They like my G&W. I'm one-of-a-kind, or something.

So I did... and after playing through tournament after tournament flooded with MKs (thanks TX) and having to fight so hard so many times... it's just not worth it. People tell me to stay G&W, but they don't know what it's like to play against smart MKs (well maybe they do, but not AS G&W). It's so hard, so annoying. I find in those times I can just switch to MK for MK dittos and do much better with less effort. It makes me feel horrible knowing my favorite character is flat-out hopeless.

So I have three options:
1) Continue to use G&W, since you know I'm the best at that character, and train/work hard to beat those stupid MKs who's popularity won't be dieing down... cause the SBR decided MK isn't going to be banned.
2) Switch to using MK because more and more of them keep showing up to tourneys... cause the SBR decided MK isn't going to be banned... and G&W isn't cutting it.
3) Quit competitive smash on the bases that I'll never see another tournament without MK... cause the SBR decided MK isn't going to be banned. Sure it sounds like I'm just giving up, but hey, I wasn't placing in the money anyway because I wasn't using MK or just got fluke-lucky.

4) Play Brawl- where MK is just as stupid but you have a frame 6 aerial kill move with a massive hitbox and a stupidly good spike :V

1. Whoops. I heard this from AA, basically Shuttle Loop completely shuts G&W down (AFAIK).

 

[MarKO X]

we should sell smashboards to the shoryuken forums.

R
O
F
L

Actually, I'm perfectly fine with more tourneys like that of Evo 2k8.
Too bad TOs will stick to their predetermined methods regardless... at least most of them will.

 

[¯\_S.(ツ).L.I.D._/¯]

i stopped taking you seriously when you said, "Are you stupid". clearly NO, if m2k can just bribe the TO's to agree with him, and not go with their own definite answer then we need to reset the TO's.

Two things about that. 1., whoever the TO is should never be allowed to host a tournament again. 2., M2K is one player. I don't care how good he is, he isn't ****ing jesus, people need to understand that. Basing your opinion about the SBR around one player makes you stupid in my book.

 

[Supermodel From Paris]

MK will eventually be banned because in the end reason and logic win out. Anti-ban arguments are flimsy and emotionally-driven (only scrubs can't overcome him, he's not unbeatable, not "overcentralizing").

 

[UTDZac]

4) Play Brawl- where MK is just as stupid but you have a frame 6 aerial kill move with a massive hitbox and a stupidly good spike :V

1. Whoops. I heard this from AA, basically Shuttle Loop completely shuts G&W down (AFAIK).

I do. I've spent the last 30 out of my 35 hrs of smash playing brawl-. It's a ton of fun. Great relief from casual smash. I can use any character and have tons of fun.

Also, the idea that "Shuttle Loop shuts down G&W completely" is false. Way back then it was thought to be true, which is was for the most part. Most G&Ws couldnt figure out how to get around it. But it has since then had very little effect. MK's UpB doesn't shut down G&W. It's his ftilt and dair.

 

[Eddie G]

Enough data, not enough caring.
Anti Ban.
Meta is basically Fox from Melee. He's good, but he can be beaten.

Funny, Melee has a very balanced set of high-top characters that can contend with one another on an overall balanced basis. I don't even know why you'd compare MK to Melee in any way at all. The effect he's had on Brawl is entirely the opposite from what Melee turned out to be. Ironically the data presented shows that Brawl would be similar in terms of high-top character viability and balance without the independent variable (MK) in the picture.

 

[#HBC | Red Ryu]

While I'm anti-ban I need to address something.

There are three main reasons that come up when banning a character can be considered.

1. Over-centralization - This is debatable if he is doing this. IS MK dominating because he is shutting down most of the cast or is he dominating because people are choosing to play him? People CP MK for Snake while Olimar and debatably DDD are much better CP choices for Snake. MK has no bad MU's so people just pick him.

2. Attendance - This may be a legit point. While attendance does go down during winter it doesn't change the fact that attendance in some areas is still declining. Is MK responsible for this? Well if we ask people who quit it would shed some light on the debate.

3. The game is better without him - This is a very hard point to prove, would the game be much better without MK around? Yes, but how much is the real question. To ban a character it has to justify the metagame to improve to astronomical levels to warrant this. Does banning MK make the metagame much better, dunno.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I do. I've spent the last 30 out of my 35 hrs of smash playing brawl-. It's a ton of fun. Great relief from casual smash. I can use any character and have tons of fun.

This is mostly for the other people. I know you play Brawl-. This is why you are awesome :3

Also, the idea that "Shuttle Loop shuts down G&W completely" is false. Way back then it was thought to be true, which is was for the most part. Most G&Ws couldnt figure out how to get around it. But it has since then had very little effect. MK's UpB doesn't shut down G&W. It's his ftilt and dair.

Ah, okay, good to know.

 

[Jonas]

There should be MK tournies and low tier tournies.