Why our current CP/Ban System doesnt work / make any sense

[Dark 3nergy]

People realised, and proved beyond any doubt, that MK completely and utterly within every definition of the word, 'breaks' the counterpick system 2 years ago.

But you know smashers, doing everything they can to convince themselves this is a competitive game and will bend the rulesets so they dont look scrubby by banning MK. herp a derp.

yo them top MK users need da money so they can actually get back to what ever hole they crawl out under. Surely all that 4yrs~220k pot money is being put to good use my friend

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

@BPC: Do you think with those stages, more attention can be placed into character metagames rather than stage techs? I see that it would makes stages provide less of an impact in determining a winner. Now that I think about it, people would learn how to transverse those stages BETTER, and create more stage based set ups, etc. due to the fact of constant play on a small stage list. I often think of Euro's love for SV, and how that translated into amazing platform cancel usage. Perhaps trickier setups could be learned on BF, ( yay more SL cancels) etc. I think with a small stage list we could get more complex gameplay on these stages. I mean till this day some people dont realize that BF has markers for the perfect ledge positions, auto canceling + buffered drop throughs on BF could create new strings ( like Falco's AutoCancel nair>bair). I mean even now in top play we RARELY see proficient SL cancelling on BF; i think that concentrating on a select few stages could increase depth by allowing people to really dive into the depth stages give. Ideally, that should case with our general stage list but you know how people are. It would also remove stupid CPs while still having stages that are obviously better for certain character types ( provided if there was no bans). This is just a thought anyways.

But wouldn't this happen anyways? Wouldn't a "play to win" community learn tricks like that regardless of how "niche" the stage is? More complex gameplay on those stages could happen without removing the equally complex and nuanced gameplay on other stages like YI, PS1/2, Frigate, and RC.

 

[King Funk]

http://www.eventhubs.com/news/2009/mar/21/akuma-banned-evo-hd-remix-tournament/




What the solution, again???? BAN META !!!!

Comparing Meta Knight to SSF2T/HDR Akuma? o.o

 

[-LzR-]

Comparing stuff to other games is a very bad argument since they just aren't Brawl. The last pages were pretty much about if Akuma is broken or not. I don't even care, I have never played SF in my life and I never want to.
On topic, I have nothing to say.

 

[Juushichi]

Btw, in TMNT tournament fighters Asuka is the best character in the game with the Shark already banned.

If you want to complain about the character that's broken, use the shark.

 

[vato_break]

why is everyone talking about street fighter?

 

[-Mars-]

FD isnt broken for projectile characters because you would have to be dumb to walk straight into projectiles duh.

 

[Akaku94]

^FD isn't broken for anyone. Neither are RC, Brinstar, or any other stages that don't overcentralize. MK is ridiculously good everywhere, which is why pocket MKs are doing huge damage to the CP system.

I do think we should pick Characters, then stage. That's the order the game does it, and it places the emphasis on picking a good stage for your character in the current mu (which varies) than picking the best character for the stage (Always MK)

 

[-Mars-]

nah they are stupid, rainbow is about who has the most marshmellows and so is brinstar because they VASTLY change the way the game is played. as do most any stages that arent BF FD or SV.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

nah they are stupid, rainbow is about who has the most marshmellows and so is brinstar because they VASTLY change the way the game is played. as do most any stages that arent BF FD or SV.

They change the way you think the game should be played.

All of the fundamentals of gameplay still exist on RC and Brinstar. If they didn't, the Japanese would all get 3-stocked on those stages by random Americans just because they don't play on them.

And it's interesting that you included Final Destination in that list which is:
a) The only stage in the game with no platforms and
b) One of only 3 stages that is completely non-moving.

By your logic, FD would be banned because it VASTLY changes the way the game is played.

Or I could bring up some bizarre match-ups like Sonic vs. Jigglypuff, which is played completely differently to any other match-up in the game. Would you like to ban that too?

tl;dr: Old argument that has been refuted countless times doesn't hold up any better now than it did a couple of years ago. What a surprise.

 

[Ghostbone]

nah they are stupid, rainbow is about who has the most marshmellows and so is brinstar because they VASTLY change the way the game is played. as do most any stages that arent BF FD or SV.

 

[-Mars-]

They change the way you think the game should be played.

All of the fundamentals of gameplay still exist on RC and Brinstar. If they didn't, the Japanese would all get 3-stocked on those stages by random Americans just because they don't play on them.

And it's interesting that you included Final Destination in that list which is:
a) The only stage in the game with no platforms and
b) One of only 3 stages that is completely non-moving.

By your logic, FD would be banned because it VASTLY changes the way the game is played.

Or I could bring up some bizarre match-ups like Sonic vs. Jigglypuff, which is played completely differently to any other match-up in the game. Would you like to ban that too?

tl;dr: Old argument that has been refuted countless times doesn't hold up any better now than it did a couple of years ago. What a surprise.

battlefield moves? since when?????? lol by your logic fd spins and norfair doesnt have lava.

 

[Elyssa Xey Hexen]

If the older threads were working, I'd like to know how is it we came to have the system we have now and what had been tried before it.

 

[ShadowLink84]

A character needs to be 100% unbeatable to be banned?
Akuma was definitely broken in ST though, but that doesn't mean it's impossible to beat him, just unlikely.

Um, no, and it is clear yo o not understand what constitutes a character ban.
This would mainly be the issue of overcentralization and the degree to which they overcentralize.

Akuma is a prime example of a character who is worthy of being banned.
Simply because you have a small chance of winning does not at all mean you should keep the character legal.

I wouldn't consider MK's MU spread fairly decent LOL.
It's amazing.
Yun has counters and even match-ups, and doesn't take all the top places. (we're talking about SSF4:AE here, as that's the Yun BPC brought up)

I was thinking of Yun from 3rd strike. My error in that case dude.

I'm the thread creater, so ofc I want my thread to stay on topic.

The discussion regarding stages is relevant to the matter of counter picking.
You simply don't want a discussion that you dislike, at least be honest rather than trying to BS.

I
Who are YOU that you think you have the right to insult me in such a way?

Shadowlink84
You're being stupid.
So stupid people deserve to be insulted.

I
You have a very childish behaviour, nothing more, quit the thread or be quiet.

Or or or! You can cry a river and drown in it you big baby.
One cannot call others childish after that little tantrum you through a few pages ago.

U mad?

 

[Akaku94]

Brawl was created with around 40 stages if I remember correctly, and the only ones that are completely static (and reasonably playable) are FD and BF. To me it seems like dynamic stages are the norm...

Mario Bros. changes the way the game is played.
Warioware changes the way the game is played.
RC is nowhere near changing the way the game is played! Brawl is designed to be a platforming fighter game, and considering FD is the only stage in the entire game without platforms, I would say that it changes the game more than RC!

You've invented this idea of 'the way the game should be played" that involves no competetive depth regarding stages. Sure, Falco does quite well on FD, BF, and SV, but he has major problems on RC, Brinstar, or a bunch of other CP stages. That's a character limitation. Kirby or G&W, on the other hand, excel on all sorts of stages, an inherent character strength. Who are you to say what traits are or aren't competetive?

 

[ShadowLink84]

Yes, he is:

Keep in mind I was considering the fact that an LGL is often used.

Fairly decent = solid advantage against every other character in the game on every stage, hard countering several otherwise viable characters with simple strategies and invalidating almost everyone below mid tier with those same strategies?

DDD hard counters several characters with simple strategies.
Ban him as well?
Fact of the matter is, if it wasn't for MetaKnight's ledge grab shenanigans, he would be considered a legal, albeit power, character.

No "/troll face" required.

Shhhhhhhhh

Oh, and I'm a SF2 noob, but he doesn't look unbeatable...

Yeah you're definitely an SF2 noob. I' have ot get ot class but I'll find the stuff regarding SF2T Akuma for you later.

 

[Juushichi]

Chun Li is the best character in 3s.

 

[cHp]

battlefield moves? since when?????? lol by your logic fd spins and norfair doesnt have lava.

http://forums.kc-mm.com/Gallery/BrawlView.php?Number=13901

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Keep in mind I was considering the fact that an LGL is often used.

And I have proven countless times that ledge-grab limits introduce double standards and don't make any sense.

If you agree that MK is broken without one, put 2+2 together.

DDD hard counters several characters with simple strategies.
Ban him as well?

I actually made a post earlier dissecting character viability without King Dedede and Meta Knight. I can't be bothered digging it up, but let me give you a hint as to the result: Meta Knight stopped more characters from being viable than Dedede, not to mention that EVERYONE would become more viable to different degrees with an MK ban, while a D3 ban would hardly affect over half the cast.

Fact of the matter is, if it wasn't for MetaKnight's ledge grab shenanigans, he would be considered a legal, albeit power, character.

Even without his ledge shenanigans, he still has MANY arguably banworthy traits.

MANY.

 

[Ghostbone]

Um, no, and it is clear yo o not understand what constitutes a character ban.
This would mainly be the issue of overcentralization and the degree to which they overcentralize.

Akuma is a prime example of a character who is worthy of being banned.
Simply because you have a small chance of winning does not at all mean you should keep the character legal.

Umm, that's exactly what I said.
MK also fits this criteria in many people's (around 75% going from that poll on AiB not too long ago) opinions.

Fact of the matter is, if it wasn't for MetaKnight's ledge grab shenanigans, he would be considered a legal, albeit power, character.

Yea naaaaah.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

battlefield moves? since when?????? lol by your logic fd spins and norfair doesnt have lava.

I missed this earlier, so let me reply to it now.

1. I never said Battlefield moves.
2. My logic has nothing to do with Final Destination spinning, or Norfair not having lava.
3. WHAT THE **** ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?

I'm not going to discuss this with someone who obviously has the reading comprehension of a 2 year old, sorry.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Lmao, someone pass the popcorn, this is awesome.

 

[Akaku94]

The only thing missing is Jebus... (uh oh, namesearch)

 

[-Mars-]

I missed this earlier, so let me reply to it now.

1. I never said Battlefield moves.
2. My logic has nothing to do with Final Destination spinning, or Norfair not having lava.
3. WHAT THE **** ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?

I'm not going to discuss this with someone who obviously has the reading comprehension of a 2 year old, sorry.

you said yourself that FD was the only one of 3 stages that doesnt move.... 3 neutrals... FD SV BF.... only SV has something that moves... therefore by your logic = FD spins.

 

[Akaku94]

I think he said "One of only three stages that don't move" saying that in the whole game, there are only three stages that don't move and FD is one of them. Sheesh...

 

[-Mars-]

I think he said "One of only three stages that don't move" saying that in the whole game, there are only three stages that don't move and FD is one of them. Sheesh...

then he ignored BF's existence. which is also the same as spinning FD.

 

[C.J.]

You're daft.

Grim said, while looking at the stage select screen, out of every stage there is, both legal and banned, there are only 3 stages that have nothing about them that moves. Those three stages are BF, FD, and Hyrule Temple.

Nowhere does he mention starter stages or... anything else you might be thinking.

 

[ShadowLink84]

Umm, that's exactly what I said.
MK also fits this criteria in many people's (around 75% going from that poll on AiB not too long ago) opinions.

Yea naaaaah.

My misinterpretation then sorry.

I would not consider AIB an example of people who know what they are talking about dude.
MetaKnight, without his ledge grab game wouldn't be illegal.

And I have proven countless times that ledge-grab limits introduce double standards and don't make any sense.

If you agree that MK is broken without one, put 2+2 together.

Except we are not discussing the LGL, which I am against anyway.
I presumed the LGL because it is used so very often, despite the many, many flaws in it.

I actually made a post earlier dissecting character viability without King Dedede and Meta Knight. I can't be bothered digging it up, but let me give you a hint as to the result: Meta Knight stopped more characters from being viable than Dedede, not to mention that EVERYONE would become more viable to different degrees with an MK ban, while a D3 ban would hardly affect over half the cast.

Naturally a banning of the BEST character would have a greater effect than banning a character who is nowhere near as strong.
There is absolutely no need to disect anything.
The matter becomes how much is invalidated and if it is enough to constitute a ban.
I would argue that top through high tier would be considered competitively viable, which would be perfectly acceptable.

Of course that's ignoring the fact when M gets on the ledge, you're pretty much boned.

Even without his ledge shenanigans, he still has MANY arguably banworthy traits.

MANY.

Name them.
Outside of his ledge grab game, MetaKnight does not have the tools necessary to make it a "play Metaknight or lose".

Of coure, it is a bit problematic since the same players tend to win.
In anycase let's not go down this road any further, then we really are going off topic and we all know XD has a massive stick in his rear if things don't go his way.

 

[| Big D |]

Lmao, someone pass the popcorn, this is awesome.

 

[Grim Tuesday]

Except we are not discussing the LGL, which I am against anyway.
I presumed the LGL because it is used so very often, despite the many, many flaws in it.

But we both agree it shouldn't be used, so in theory, Meta Knight should be banned under that premise.

Naturally a banning of the BEST character would have a greater effect than banning a character who is nowhere near as strong.
There is absolutely no need to disect anything.
The matter becomes how much is invalidated and if it is enough to constitute a ban.
I would argue that top through high tier would be considered competitively viable, which would be perfectly acceptable.

Ok. You were the one who brought up the "why not ban D3, then?" argument, not me. Lol.

Of course that's ignoring the fact when M gets on the ledge, you're pretty much boned.

Yep.

Name them.
Outside of his ledge grab game, MetaKnight does not have the tools necessary to make it a "play Metaknight or lose".

Tools that are broken:
Forces opponents to perform a double guessing game on many of his moves. Normally with the large majority of moves, you only have to win a single RPS game to punish your opponent's move. Many of MK's moves, due to their incredible speed, force TWO RPS games, which instantly puts him at a level quite far above the rest of the cast. Some of these moves are Ftilt, Dtilt, Uair, Dair and Shuttle Loop.

He is completely impossible to edge-guard for most characters at the highest level of play, which removes a large portion of the metagame where most characters are vulnerable. This, again, sets him apart from the other characters. NO ONE has a recovery even close to MK's.

His tornado, scrooging and dair camping completely destroy the viability of almost every low tier with ease, allowing pocket Meta Knights to easily take out low tier mains (there are obviously exceptions to this). No other character invalidates as many characters as Meta Knight.

More broadly, his lack of disadvantageous match-ups and stages effectively breaks the counter-pick system, as MK fundamentally CANNOT be counter-picked.

It doesn't necessarily have to be "play Meta Knight or lose" for him to be banned. Though using Meta Knight has basically become a requirement to win or even place well in majors now, is that ban-worthy enough for you?

Of coure, it is a bit problematic since the same players tend to win.
In anycase let's not go down this road any further, then we really are going off topic and we all know XD has a massive stick in his rear if things don't go his way.

We can continue via PM, if you'd like.

you said yourself that FD was the only one of 3 stages that doesnt move.... 3 neutrals... FD SV BF.... only SV has something that moves... therefore by your logic = FD spins.

3 Stages that don't move: Final Destination, Battefield and Temple.
Your logic about my logic is illogical, try again.

 

[-Mars-]

cycle spin, bro.

 

[ShadowLink84]

trimmed

We largely agree on those matters so I'll just *** it by

Tools that are broken:
Forces opponents to perform a double guessing game on many of his moves. Normally with the large majority of moves, you only have to win a single RPS game to punish your opponent's move. Many of MK's moves, due to their incredible speed, force TWO RPS games, which instantly puts him at a level quite far above the rest of the cast. Some of these moves are Ftilt, Dtilt, Uair, Dair and Shuttle Loop.

That is perfectly acceptable as there are characters in others games with the same behavior.
This is known as option select, sing a single option to cover many of your opponent's options.
It is part of why Marth's Fair and Nair in melee are just so very good, they are very fast, have great range and area coverage making it difficult for your opponent to launch an offense and defend themselves properly.

Simply because a character is capable of covering many of their opponents options with their own is not a sign of a character being illegal.

There have been many individuals who have successfully beaten top MK's, so clearly, his options are not so overpowering that other character's can do nothing against him.
The only case in which he destroys the opponent's options are on the ledge, which we are ignoring for the sake of the argument.

He is completely impossible to edge-guard for most characters at the highest level of play, which removes a large portion of the metagame where most characters are vulnerable. This, again, sets him apart from the other characters. NO ONE has a recovery even close to MK's.

And how is this overpowered?
Keep in mind that MK is still off the stage, there are characters such as Didy and SNake who can establish stage control during that time.
There are many characters whom one is incapable of gimping or KOing offstage, an example of this would be Sonic whose recovery game is one of the best.

His tornado, scrooging and dair camping completely destroy the viability of almost every low tier with ease, allowing pocket Meta Knights to easily take out low tier mains (there are obviously exceptions to this). No other character invalidates as many characters as Meta Knight.

Irrelevant.
Low tier characters are low because of those weaknesses.
Even if MetaKnight did not have the tornado at his disposal, those characters would still remain unviable because of their design.
Metaknight destroying them only cements this fact, it does not create it.
There are characters in high tier such as DDD who use similar tactics to destroy low tier characters.

More broadly, his lack of disadvantageous match-ups and stages effectively breaks the counter-pick system, as MK fundamentally CANNOT be counter-picked.

This I agree with, there is no stage upon which MK can be considered disadvantaged upon.
One can only say that he has less of an advantage but never is truly at a disadvantage.
This ends makes it tricky to counterpick and dangerous for some character mains because of the pocket MK being so very commonly used.

It doesn't necessarily have to be "play Meta Knight or lose" for him to be banned. Though using Meta Knight has basically become a requirement to win or even place well in majors now, is that ban-worthy enough for you?

Actually, it does, primarily because over centralizing will always occur with the best character.
The best character will ALWAYS have the best results and take the top spots most often.
The question is to the degree in which MetaKnight centralizes.

Outside of his ledge game, he breaks the counter pick system which is what bothers me the most.
If you attempt to counterpick, your opponent can go MetaKnight and ensure he is never at a disadvantage on any stage nor to any character.
In that situation, it does create a scenario where it seems like if you do not pick MetaKnight, you will likely lose, especially with the way the CP system currently works.

We can continue via PM, if you'd like.

Sure, it would be much more convenient for me since I have school.

3 Stages that don't move: Final Destination, Battefield and Temple.
Your logic about my logic is illogical, try again.

I was going to say Yoshi's Island until I remembered the ghost/shyguys =(

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

So has anyone tried the counterpick order change detailed in the OP?

 

[fkacyan]

Months after my original post about this, other people are finally starting to realize double counterpicking is ****ing stupid!

Took you all long enough.

 

[Ghostbone]

There have been many individuals who have successfully beaten top MK's, so clearly, his options are not so overpowering that other character's can do nothing against him.

Is it a co-incidence that the most successful of them (Ally) has now switched over to MK, and the next most successful non-MK player (ADHD) is pro-ban?
Clearly there's something wrong here.

Irrelevant.
Low tier characters are low because of those weaknesses.
Even if MetaKnight did not have the tornado at his disposal, those characters would still remain unviable because of their design.
Metaknight destroying them only cements this fact, it does not create it.
There are characters in high tier such as DDD who use similar tactics to destroy low tier characters.

You have no basis for these claims. I wouldn't have any real justification for saying mid tiers and low tiers would do better with MK gone either, but you can't dismiss the possibility without data from tournaments with MK banned.

Actually, it does, primarily because over centralizing will always occur with the best character.
The best character will ALWAYS have the best results and take the top spots most often.
The question is to the degree in which MetaKnight centralizes.

Read the last few pages or Ripple's thread for how much MK dominates, or I'll just tell you.
MK mains take over 70% of tournament money from tournaments with 45 or more players (and the percentage just keeps going up and up as you raise the cut-off point). And as for just the amount he wins, it's at least 2/3 of tournaments with 45 entrants or more.
That's pretty highly centralised.

I was going to say Yoshi's Island until I remembered the ghost/shyguys =(

Also the floating platform tilts left and right.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

So has anyone tried the counterpick order change detailed in the OP?

10topics

Hey, Schrobenhausner Showdown is already breaking the norm with 7 starters and Brinstar legal (in germany). Maybe I can convince Bilo and Oni to give this a try...

 

[Koric]

More or less, this one:

I lost as Ness against ICs game one.
-He Bans: Delfino
-I CP Norfair, planning to go Wario
-He picks MK
-I'm ****ed

(And similar cases.)

I actually kinda have to agree; it makes a lot of sense. It would certainly up stage viability if you couldn't switch to a pcoket MK after the stage is locked in.

I think I'm starting to understand this, The CP system appears to favor the winning side by allowing them to "counter the stage counterpick" by switching to a character that has an advantage on the round loser's locked character and stage to best ensure his matchup advantage. It would make it very difficult to win more than 1 round in tournaments with most of the people who uses most characters lower than A tier.

Don't worry, guys, I got this.

NEW CP SYSTEM:

Winner is character-locked (cannot reselect character). Loser can either reselect his character, OR loser can select next stage, but he cannot do both.

SET ORDER:

MATCH 1 - Resolves

Winner announces ban(s) (if we decide they're still needed, and they probably will be)
Loser announces choice of either char or stage
Loser announces change / next stage

MATCH 2 - RESOLVES

Lather, rinse, repeat as necessary

Yes, this makes MK a more logical choice. This just reflects his inherent range of options / lack of bad matchups.

Discuss.

(Tries to imagin a 3 out of 5 match)
T.link vs IC at SV - T.link wins
loser picks MK, stage select random to delfino plaza
MK wins, Castle seige was picked
T.link wins, Rainbow cruise was picked
MK wins, Yoshi Island was picked.
MK wins. End match

With this, there would be a chance with a main with any character to win a set from this. Though it would seem like the main must win the first match and maintain the pace for a chance, the question I been pondering is ow the next stages would be picked if the loser decides to change character? I'm thinking random on any non-banned stages that haven't been selected yet, but...

 

[SaveMeJebus]

http://www.smashboards.com/showthread.php?t=280694

Does anyone remember this?

 

[WindMajor]

Can someone explain to me why character locking would be a good thing?

I have no stance on the issue yet, I just want to know.

 

[polarity]

ITT a bunch of people who've never played ST competitively, if at all, argue about the nature of a character in that game so they can justify their opinions on banning MK by appealing to some arbitrary philosophy made up by David Sirlin rather than actually making their own argument.

Btw ST Akuma has like 8-2 or 9-1 advantage vs. every character in the game. It's not simply "an advantage vs. everyone". 3S Chun Li, SF4AE Yun are examples of characters with no bad matchups (and advantage vs. the vast majority of the cast) who are not banned. ST O.Sagat eliminates a good half the cast from tournament viability (assuming you're intent on sticking to one character throughout) and isn't banned.