Why we can't wait to ban Metaknight

[Matador]

I agree matador, but it is a rediculous amount imo.

If I'm reading this properly, then he's only got 36% of tourney winnings. That doesn't seem all that ridiculous, especially since he isn't even winning the regionals.

Banning him only caters to the weaker players who can't beat him.

 

[shaSLAM]

hey guys, why dont you learn the matchup and stop johning about it?
it's not like there has been any new groundbreaking techs that have came out for mk since the last "ban meta knight because i suck at brawl." argument.
until someone figures out how to make tornado last for 7 minutes, this topic should not even be discussed... again...

 

[_Keno_]

This, this, this.

Ironically he doesn't even win as much as Melee Jiggs.

He's the best character, OF COURSE you're going to see him more than anyone else.

And you'd think if he was as dominant as you say, he'd WIN the tournaments, instead of merely filling the top 8.

This post doesn't make any sense. First you falsely state that he doesn't win as much as melee jiggs, but assuming jiggs does win more, you state that "of course the best character is going to have the largest crowd of followers"

Melee jiggs has probably the lowest crowd of followers in the top 7 (maybe peach has less).

 

[Cook]

36% is a lot in a game with like 38 characters or whatever.

 

[shaSLAM]

im not a metaknight main btw.
i lykez wario

 

[adumbrodeus]

DID Sirlin say that? I don't really care if he did because I don't suck his nuts. But it will be pretty hilarious to me if he did say MK should be banned considering that pro-ban people DO tend to suck his nuts.

Keep doing good things, OS.

"Suck his nuts" and "generally agree with his ideas and criteria" are two radically different things.


He's honestly just a prominent person to point to with those core ideals that's intelligent and given them a voice as well as an argument behind them. He's not Jesus.


An argument like "Sirlin supports the ban" strikes me as very similar to the ID "Darwin is wrong" argument. Just because he was the first person to do it doesn't make him completely infallible about the implications.

 

[MarKO X]

clearly few, if any people here, have actually read playing to win in its entirety.

It's not just about Street Fighter. The articles/chapters refer to Street Fighter, Virtua Fighter, StarCraft, possibly another rts that I don't remember, Magic, and chess.

if people here did in fact read playing to win, then you'd realize that the ledge grab rule is a problem because planking does not fit the criteria of a ban.

http://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/what-should-be-banned.html
read the warranted section. tell me if planking doesn't sound like it fits right there.

 

[BSP]

He wouldn't because it doesn't fit his ban criteria. Except it ISN'T a problem because MK CAN be beaten. He's an easy to play and good character, of course he is going to be popular. And THAT'S ALL IT IS.

Him being very popular doesn't warrant a ban. Sucks for you that you're not as good as them.

I agree, popularity shouldn't be criteria for a ban. But, where do we draw the line and say, "This is too much"?

That's the only possible way MK can go IMO.

 

[_Keno_]

im not a metaknight main btw.
i lykez wario

hi shaslam, i disagree with your pro-meta sentiments.

He is killing the competitive scene, and that is all that matters to me.

 

[¯\_S.(ツ).L.I.D._/¯]

Sucks for those players that aren't good enough.

That would be EVERYONE OTHER THAN ALLY AND AND ADHD. Just because two players can beat M2K, the best MK, does not mean that MK should automatically not be banned.

It DOES debunk the pro-ban argument. It shows that MK is beatable. The only way that he'd ever be bannable would be if it gets to the point where you must play MK to win.

You clearly don't understand why people want MK banned. No one is doubting that he is beatable. Seriously, use your ****ing head and think. Would we be having this argument if pro-ban was trying to get MK banned solely because they believe he's unbeatable? It is a FACT that MK can be beaten. It is a FACT that the BEST MK can be beaten.

Also, it's not up to you to decide the criteria needed for a ban.

ADHD and Ally show that THAT IS ENTIRELY FALSE.

ADHD and Ally show that M2K is beatable. Your point?

 

[zeldspazz]

He is killing the competitive scene, and that is all that matters to me.

Same. To me I want the competitive scene to last as long as possible. And that tournament attendance graph scared me. Now I know when people are saying tourney attendance is going down, there is actually proof.

 

[theunabletable]

This post doesn't make any sense. First you falsely state that he doesn't win as much as melee jiggs, but assuming jiggs does win more, you state that "of course the best character is going to have the largest crowd of followers"

Fox, Marth, Falco, Sheik, etc were the best in the game for a much longer time, so people already have learned them and don't feel like learning an all new character.

MK is obviously REALLY popular, but I don't see anything with that data that presents that he is broken and should be banned.

I agree, popularity shouldn't be criteria for a ban. But, where do we draw the line and say, "This is too much"?

When it gets to the point where you have to play MK to win a tourney.

We are OBVIOUSLY not there yet.

That would be EVERYONE OTHER THAN ALLY AND AND ADHD. Just because two players can beat M2K, the best MK, does not mean that MK should automatically not be banned. You clearly don't understand why people want MK banned. No one is doubting that he is beatable. Seriously, use your ****ing head and think. Would we be having this argument if pro-ban was trying to get MK banned solely because they believe he's unbeatable? It is a FACT that MK can be beaten. It is a FACT that the BEST MK can be beaten.

Also, it's not up to you to decide the criteria needed for a ban.

Tell me, then. What IS the criteria for a character ban?

 

[Matador]

36% is a lot in a game with like 38 characters or whatever.

Think about it, more than half of that 38 aren't even close to being viable, and of the characters that ARE viable, more players are switching to MK from them. How many good Pikas and Kirbys are there? Then tell me how many good MKs there are.

HeroMystic said awhile ago that Play To Win mentalities were killing Brawl, and I think he's absolutely right...I've believed it for awhile now. If you play to win, there's no reason to use any character other than the best (MK). However, if everyone (or at least the majority of top players) are using MK and actually winning tourneys, we get bombarded with charts and graphs saying "this needs to stop! He's winning too much!".

If you Play to Win, there's no reason not to go around the rules and plank or grab the ledge 49 times or fly underneath the stage or play extremely campy. You do this, but then people complain when it happens...I think that's all that this "Ban MK" business is about.

Brawl becomes a broken game when you play to win.

 

[adumbrodeus]

That would be EVERYONE OTHER THAN ALLY AND AND ADHD. Just because two players can beat M2K, the best MK, does not mean that MK should automatically not be banned.



You clearly don't understand why people want MK banned. No one is doubting that he is beatable. Seriously, use your ****ing head and think. Would we be having this argument if pro-ban was trying to get MK banned solely because they believe he's unbeatable? It is a FACT that MK can be beaten. It is a FACT that the BEST MK can be beaten.

Also, it's not up to you to decide the criteria needed for a ban.



ADHD and Ally show that M2K is beatable. Your point?

They beat M2k, plenty of other people beat Mks, there is however, a large amount of high-leveled MK players.

Same. To me I want the competitive scene to last as long as possible. And that tournament attendance graph scared me. Now I know when people are saying tourney attendance is going down, there is actually proof.

The problem there is, we dunno why the numbers are going down, could be as simple as "fewer tournaments reporting".

Think about it, more than half of that 38 aren't even close to being viable, and of the characters that ARE viable, more players are switching to MK from them. How many good Pikas and Kirbys are there? Then tell me how many good MKs there are.

HeroMystic said awhile ago that Play To Win mentalities were killing Brawl, and I think he's absolutely right...I've believed it for awhile now. If you play to win, there's no reason to use any character other than the best (MK). However, if everyone (or at least the majority of top players) are using MK and actually winning tourneys, we get bombarded with charts and graphs saying "this needs to stop! He's winning too much!".

If you Play to Win, there's no reason not to go around the rules and plank or grab the ledge 49 times or fly underneath the stage or play extremely campy. You do this, but then people complain when it happens...I think that's all that this "Ban MK" business is about.

Brawl becomes a broken game when you play to win.

If it's a broken game when you play to win them it's a bad competitive game.

 

[_Keno_]

Same. To me I want the competitive scene to last as long as possible. And that tournament attendance graph scared me. Now I know when people are saying tourney attendance is going down, there is actually proof.

Yeah, but we do not have, and probably never will, proof that it is (mainly) because of metaknight. It could be argued that brawl is pretty bad competitively and that is why it is going down. I would guess that it is a combination, but brawl will last much longer without MK (i believe).

I'm also annoyed about variety (doesn't have to do with my pro-ban-ness), I get bored playing only metas. Everyone is either maining or secondarying mk nowadays. =/

 

[Chuee]

It's funny because more than half of mk's results come from a select few mk mains.
This one guy actually found how much of mk results is m2k. If he was a character he would 6th best on that list.

 

[BSP]

Same. To me I want the competitive scene to last as long as possible. And that tournament attendance graph scared me. Now I know when people are saying tourney attendance is going down, there is actually proof.

We can't assume that ALL the decline is because of MK though.

ninja'd.

But yeah, some people just don't like the defensive game that brawl is...and that CF sucks.

 

[Browny]

Erm... Sirlin's criteria is for COMPETITIVE GAMING, period.

wtf. have you ever played any game competitively other than smash/fighting games?

ive been in many competitions for a wide variety of games and always some stuff is banned.

Halo? Everything except BR lol.
Dota? multiple mekansms
BF/COD series? unlocks

All stuff playable in normal games but always banned in comps. sirlins arguments mean NOTHING to these games. none of those tactics break the game, multiple mek in dota is debatable but its not like all gameplay is centered around the non-banned things when they are allowed.

if you told any of those players the game should be played as it is they will laugh in your face and abuse you, rightfully so. Yes you can deal each with those tactics, and no surprise, the best way is to use them yourself. sounds like a certain character in brawl.

 

[Luxor]

Same. To me I want the competitive scene to last as long as possible. And that tournament attendance graph scared me. Now I know when people are saying tourney attendance is going down, there is actually proof.

I'm still not completely convinced that the increase in other mains will offset the loss of all those MKs.
And it seems that there are other factors contributing to declining tourney attendance, such as the accessibility of WiFi and the economy. I'm sure that attendance would be decreasing anyway, but I think external factors may have amplified it.

edit: ninja'd hard

 

[Overswarm]

It's funny because more than half of mk's results come from a select few mk mains.
This one guy actually found how much of mk results is m2k. If he was a character he would 6th best on that list.

And Metaknight was still winning by a significant margin when you did the same for Ally, if I recall correctly.

 

[Palpi]

Chuee that is because m2k uses smash as his main source of income, meaning he goes to as many tournaments as possible. Other top mk's don't travel nearly as much.

 

[theunabletable]

This one guy actually found how much of mk results is m2k. If he was a character he would 6th best on that list.

lol

Same. To me I want the competitive scene to last as long as possible. And that tournament attendance graph scared me. Now I know when people are saying tourney attendance is going down, there is actually proof.

What everyone else has said including me several times, there is NO PROOF that the attendance going down is because of MK.

It's just as likely because Brawl sucks.

 

[zeldspazz]

I never said it was because of MK.

But tournament attendance is going down, and by the looks of all these threads and discussing lately it's an extremely hot topic and is most likely a reason.

 

[BSP]

Has anyone thought about the idea of a temp. ban?

 

[Matador]

I never said it was because of MK.

But tournament attendance is going down, and by the looks of all these threads and discussing lately it's an extremely hot topic and is most likely a reason.

If people are quitting simply because MK is too hard or invalidates their character or anything along those lines, they don't belong here.

However, if people just are tired of shelling out money to tourneys to lose to planking or spammy MKs...I'd be lying if I said I don't sympathize.

 

[MarKO X]

Has anyone thought about the idea of a temp. ban?

yup. multiple times.

 

[_Keno_]

MK is obviously REALLY popular, but I don't see anything with that data that presents that he is broken and should be banned. When it gets to the point where you have to play MK to win a tourney.

Is popular supposed to replace "over half of competitive scene plays him because they know it is impossible to win without doing so"? Even you must realize that the only reason you play meta is because he is the only viable character (for anyone not naturally amazing) to use in a competitive environment.

 

[HeroMystic]

Smart Man Post.

Us Mario mains are intelligent.

 

[BSP]

yup. multiple times.

And...why was it shot down? Trying to learn something here.

 

[MarKO X]

And...why was it shot down? Trying to learn something here.

1) because people feel that if a ban is temporary, people will forget how to play the MK matchup.
2) because everybody will go right back to MK once the ban is over and demolish those who don't know the matchup.

there are probably other reason as well...

 

[Matador]

Us Mario mains are intelligent.

Lol, indeed.

 

[HeroMystic]

And...why was it shot down? Trying to learn something here.

Because no one would want MK unbanned. Also, people forget how to play against MK. (I call BS here, but the point is kinda valid)

 

[adumbrodeus]

wtf. have you ever played any game competitively other than smash/fighting games?

ive been in many competitions for a wide variety of games and always some stuff is banned.

Halo? Everything except BR lol.
Dota? multiple mekansms
BF/COD series? unlocks

All stuff playable in normal games but always banned in comps. sirlins arguments mean NOTHING to these games. none of those tactics break the game, multiple mek in dota is debatable but its not like all gameplay is centered around the non-banned things when they are allowed.

if you told any of those players the game should be played as it is they will laugh in your face and abuse you, rightfully so. Yes you can deal each with those tactics, and no surprise, the best way is to use them yourself. sounds like a certain character in brawl.

On Sirlin's forum we discuss a variey of competitive games, DOTA, competitive FPSs, and a variety of other games as well.


I've personally played starcraft, MTG, and chess competitively, beyond my current SF4, brawl, and melee.


While communities may not use them, only IRL competitive games really have the issue that they have true incompatibilities.

 

[theunabletable]

Is popular supposed to replace "over half of competitive scene plays him because they know it is impossible to win without doing so"? Even you must realize that the only reason you play meta is because he is the only viable character (for anyone not naturally amazing) to use in a competitive environment.

Actually I play him for a few reasons: 1) He's the best in the game. Gives me the highest chance of winning. 2) He plays well on the stages that the ICs don't play well on, so he's naturally a good second character to play. 3) He covers ICs bad matchups pretty well.

He isn't the only viable character, he's just the best option and I'd be a fool not to take advantage of that.

It's no different than any other game with a clear best character.

 

[Overswarm]

And...why was it shot down? Trying to learn something here.

Because there is no such thing. Any ban that could be turned around could be a "temporary ban".

If we say "this is a temporary ban", what does that do? We'd need multiple TOs doing it simultaneously to have any real effect. It's just a weaker regular ban.

 

[_Keno_]

1) He's the best in the game. Gives me the highest chance of winning.

Well, yes that is obvious.

2) He plays well on the stages that the ICs don't play well on, so he's naturally a good second character to play.

Well he is extremely good on every neutral, and almost all other stages.

3) He covers ICs bad matchups pretty well.

Well, thats probably because he has no bad match-ups.

I don't see where you are going with this if you are on the anti-ban side...

 

[Matador]

Well, thats probably because he has no bad match-ups.

I don't see where you are going with this if you are on the anti-ban side...

He's the best character, that's the way it's supposed to be. The best character in plenty of games are top in multiple categories. MK is no different.

It's preferable for the top of the metagame to have multiple characters who compete for top (Melee's Marth, Fox, Falco, Sheik + others) but MK is well within his boundaries.

He's the best and easiest character to play.

 

[¯\_S.(ツ).L.I.D._/¯]

They beat M2k, plenty of other people beat Mks, there is however, a large amount of high-leveled MK players.

Well yes, no one's denying that.

Tell me, then. What IS the criteria for a character ban?

There isn't a specific set of criteria. That's what needs to be decided, in my opinion (or at least should have been decided), before the discussion of a ban can truly occur. But saying a character has to be literally unbeatable to warrant a ban is ridiculous. It's obvious that MK can be beaten. That's a fact, it's happened.

 

[Chuee]

And Metaknight was still winning by a significant margin when you did the same for Ally, if I recall correctly.

because without Ally snake really doesn't have that many good players.

 

[Inferno3044]

I'd try a tourney with MK banned, but it probably wouldn't go well because NJ is MK central.