Why MetaKnight (MK) is the most Broken Character in SSBB

[RPGMasterTurk91]

while your not supposed to revive threads(even your own), if you have a valid reason its usually okay.

mindgames against Meta are hard to pull off but if you can then you've pretty much rendered him powerless. if you can outpredict a Meta then he's no threat.

heres what i mean; at the last tourney i entered my first opponent was Meta. I choose Kirby and the stage was Battlefield. he would be coming at me and at first he was winning. But then i started to see through his strategy and predict him. the result was he barely landed any hits for the rest of the match. now this guy wasn't a pro, but he was way better then your average Meta.

its hard but outpreducting Meta makes him harmless

While what you say is true to an extent, it doesn't change the fact that with MK you can still move around clumsily and if the opponent is lucky enough they will hit. So while you saw through and predicted this particular person, Meta Knight still has his unrealistic speed and priority to rely on as a sort of ultimate defense, something other characters simply do not have. It all goes down to the same concept: the match becomes rigged; if you beat a Meta Knight, chances are your skill level is actually significently greater than the Meta Knight you faced, or you got really lucky.

 

[SolidSense]

Whether or not Meta Knight is actually broken, I have to disagree with the logic of your argument; some of your claims are also simply untrue and many of the terms you use (e.g. atmosphere) are exceptionally vague.

his overall speed on land and in air is comparable and too similar to fast characters in MELEE

Empty claims such as these leave me scratching my head.

Meta Knight is _extremely_ slow in the air; in fact, his airspeed is one of the slowest in the entire game. If you play Meta Knight, you'll have noticed that his wings tend to impede easy movement through the air. Even _Jigglypuff_ is faster than Meta Knight in the air. Kirby and Dedede are about the same.

You might say--so what? He's still fast on land. True enough, he's fast, but three points:

1.) You were talking about overall speed, not just land speed.
2.) Other characters are comparably fast on the land--Diddy Kong, Sonic, etc.--without having Meta's slow airspeed.
3.) Airspeed is absolutely critical to playing against certain characters like Snake. In fact, many pro Snakes and pro Marths now actually claim that Marth has an easier time defeating Snake than Meta Knight does--indeed, this is true. Meta vs. Snake is even while Marth vs. Snake is very slightly in Marth's favor--why? Simple: airspeed. Because Marth is faster in the air, he can actually approach Snake. Meta tries to do so and what happens? Meta eats a Snakedash (yes, Snakedash goes through MK's f-air), gets grabbed (Meta's aerials are highly susceptible to shieldgrabs), or gets f-tilted upon landing.

Now, had you said aerial manueverability, your claim would have had more leverage. Having five jumps certainly gives MK a lot of leeway and many options--but note that the most mobile character in the air is actually Wario, and that the highest jumps actually belong to Falco; Meta is impressive as far as aerial manueverability, sure, but the gap between Meta's mobility and that of other characters' is not terribly great.

Finally, as relates to aerials, yes, Meta has fast aerials. This is probably what gives you the feeling that MK has speed. In fact, Meta's aerials are his most notable asset.

I'll paraphrase one of your more implicit points:

Meta's specials have priority, and his moves have priority in general

First, Meta only has two specials worth using most of the time--Tornado and Shuttle Loop. His dimensional cape attack, regardless of its priority, is almost worthless except for occasional mindgames, and his side-b is extremely easy to predict and shield (it also is extremely punishable because of its tremendous lag).

Second, Shuttle Loop itself is not that safe to use, especially if you're below the opponent. Many d-airs in the game go right through it--you can never S. Loop Donkey Kong, for example (even a u-air is dangerous because of that d-air). For certain characters like Snake, it might be safe, but in many, many cases (the most annoying cases are Toon Link and Game and Watch, who will always d-air you and kill you when you S. Loop), Shuttle Loop simply is not appealing.

You claim that Tornado will go through "any attack" but you provide absolutely no empirical evidence to support this claim; did you know that Dedede's d-tilt actually goes through Tornado? Or Dedede's f-air? Or Snake's u-tilt? Or ZSS' side-b? Or Game and Watch's d-tilt, f-smash, d-smash, f-air, and b-air? Did you know that characters such as ZSS and Olimar can actually grab MK out of his Tornado? Did you know that nearly half of the projectiles in the game go through Tornado? This includes the very important Falco lasers (Wolf's blaster shots also go through, in case you were wondering).

Yes, Tornado is a fantastic move; I fail to see how it's broken, however. Also, do note that it can be shielded--if you tilt your shield up, you can make it last through the whole animation and subsequently punish MK.

In fact, Meta Knight would be better if he had Snake's grenades (or perhaps Pit's arrows) instead of his Tornado.

You make the claim that MK's recovery outweighs his lightness--to me, this seems like another unsubstantiated claim. Yes, MK has the best recovery in the game, but what good is recovery going to do him when he's one of the lightest characters in the game? If you're getting star-KO'ed, you can't really recover, now can you? According to Mew2king's weight charts, MK is only heavier than a few characters in the game--characters like Game and Watch, Jigglypuff, and Squirtle. Snake's u-tilt can kill Meta at 100% easily, or possibly lower if the stage has a low ceiling (e.g., Halberd). Wario's 2-minute fart can spike-kill Meta at 30%, and his 1-minute fart kills at 70%. Dedede's u-tilt is similar to Snake's. Marth's tipper f-smash can do the job at 80% or so depending on stage. Meta Knight basically needs his recovery in order to be a Top Tier character--if he didn't have exceptional recovery, his lightness would murder him.

You say that the combination of speed, range, and priority make Meta Knight broken--that no other character in the game has such an unrealistic combination. I ask, then, what about Snake? Snake's attacks are also extremely fast--f-tilt, for example, is a 6-frame move, which is the same as Meta Knight's f-air. F-tilt also outranges _every single one of Meta Knight's attacks_ except for d-tilt and side-b. And Snake's projectiles such as u-smash and grenade offer ridiculous range--they're not even comparable to conventional projectiles because of their power and ability to remain on the field. They're more like extended attacks than anything. Snake has a lot more priority than Meta Knight, as well. This applies to literally all of Snake's moves--no move that Meta Knight has can outprioritize a Snake move.

As long as we're on the subject of priority, let me just point out that Meta Knight's regular attacks actually don't have inhuman priority. Game and Watch's attacks have more priority than Meta Knight's--b-air, d-air, etc. go through Shuttle Loop, for example, as well as all of Meta's aerials. Wario's Bite and fart have more priority. Snake has more priority. Link, Ganondorf, and Dedede all have more aerial and ground priority (yes, both). Even Peach has more priority--Peach's u-tilt has more priority than _any_ move Meta Knight has. Please convincingly demonstrate that Meta Knight's priority is excellent or even close to absurd. Comopared to substandard-priority characters like Sonic and Jigglypuff? Certainly. But these characters are substandard for a reason (namely, priority and range).

Range? Of his fellow Top Tiers, Snake, Dedede, and Marth all substantially outrange Meta Knight, and Game and Watch and Diddy are hardly far behind. Wario, sure. Falco? Well, yes, but he has lasers and chaingrabbing anyway; he doesn't need to outrange because he won't be using his tilts on Meta Knight in the most cases. Oh, let me point out that Meta Knight has no dash-attack cancelled u-smash, and his u-smash itself has a terrible hitbox and tremendous lag--all of the other characters I named, especially Snake/Falco and except Dedede, have a DAC u-smash and a fairly good one, I might add. This is an example of MK's deficiencies.

Also, you give little proof as to the actual "unrealistic" nature of this combination of speed, range, and priority. Meta Knight being allowed in competitive play conforms to the status quo--if you would like to see him banned, you are challenging the status quo. Therefore, the burden of proof falls on you. Where is your empirical evidence? I can detail a number of aspects where Meta Knight comes up subpar and list a number of match-ups which are either even or even possibly against him (Snake, for example).

Did you know that the best Meta Knight player in the world and former Melee Marth champion, Mew2king, recently lost a total of 3 tourneys to the world's best Snake, Ally? Or that a Diddy Kong player, ADHD, beat both Ally and Mew2king in the same tournament? Of course, such examples don't prove that Meta Knight isn't broken; they're matters of skill, I freely admit--however, if Meta Knight were truly broken, then at the _absolute_ top level, it would make sense that the best Meta Knight would consistently trump the best players of other characters. This, however, is not the case, making it highly doubtful that Meta Knight is, in fact, worthy of being deemed broken.

You also say that you have played pro Meta Knights--who, pray tell, are these pros you speak of? As a tournygoer, I'm fairly positive I know all of the big names in Brawl. Ally, Mew2king, DSF, Fiction, Anther, Tyrant, Dojo, DEHF, teh_spamerer, Afro Thundah, chudat, Lain, Azen, perhaps? Or, maybe not quite at the top professional level--meep, SK92, HugS, etc? Claiming to have played or beaten pros is well and good, but the claim goes unsubstantiated unless you can actually name these pros.

Why? Because particular pros have particular weaknesses. There may well be a Snake pro who occasionally loses to Captain Falcon, for example (and I know of one who does), but that doesn't mean that the average Snake pro will lose to Captain Falcon. Ally is the best C. Falcon player--and I mean quite literally the best--yet he cannot defeat Snake pros using Falcon. It's tried and tested.

 

[BradBoz]

I heard this a lot but...:idea:I think they just dont like his attacks because they are weak. I like being him because I went to this ADHD group, All girls. In sudden death, I killed 2, but 1 left. I fly around around until she gets hits by a bomb!:lol: It works, try it!:lol:

 

[Shadow*91]

Whether or not Meta Knight is actually broken, I have to disagree with the logic of your argument; some of your claims are also simply untrue and many of the terms you use (e.g. atmosphere) are exceptionally vague.

his overall speed on land and in air is comparable and too similar to fast characters in MELEE

Empty claims such as these leave me scratching my head.

Meta Knight is _extremely_ slow in the air; in fact, his airspeed is one of the slowest in the entire game. If you play Meta Knight, you'll have noticed that his wings tend to impede easy movement through the air.

You might say--so what? He's still fast on land. True enough, he's fast, but three points:

1.) You were talking about overall speed, not just land speed.
2.) Other characters are comparably fast on the land--Diddy Kong, Sonic, etc.--without having Meta's slow airspeed.
3.) Airspeed is absolutely critical to playing against certain characters like Snake. In fact, many pro Snakes and pro Marths now actually claim that Marth has an easier time defeating Snake than Meta Knight does--indeed, this is true. Meta vs. Snake is even while Marth vs. Snake is very slightly in Marth's favor--why? Simple: airspeed. Because Marth is faster in the air, he can actually approach Snake. Meta tries to do so and what happens? Meta eats a Snakedash (yes, Snakedash goes through MK's f-air), gets grabbed (Meta's aerials are highly susceptible to shieldgrabs), or gets f-tilted upon landing.

Now, had you said aerial manueverability, your claim would have had more leverage. Having five jumps certainly gives MK a lot of leeway and many options--but note that the most mobile character in the air is actually Wario, and that the highest jumps actually belong to Falco; Meta is impressive as far as aerial manueverability, sure, but the gap between Meta's mobility and that of other characters' is not terribly great.

Finally, as relates to aerials, yes, Meta has fast aerials. This is probably what gives you the feeling that MK has speed. In fact, Meta's aerials are his most notable asset.

I'll paraphrase one of your more implicit points:

Meta's specials have priority, and his moves have priority in general

First, Meta only has two specials worth using most of the time--Tornado and Shuttle Loop. His dimensional cape attack, regardless of its priority, is almost worthless except for occasional mindgames, and his side-b is extremely easy to predict and shield (it also is extremely punishable because of its tremendous lag).

Second, Shuttle Loop itself is not that safe to use, especially if you're below the opponent. Many d-airs in the game go right through it--you can never S.Loop Donkey Kong, for example. For certain characters like Snake, it might be safe, but in many, many cases (the most annoying cases are Toon Link and Game and Watch, Shuttle Loop simply is not appealing).

You claim that Tornado will go through "any attack" but you provide absolutely no empirical evidence to support this claim; did you know that Dedede's d-tilt actually goes through Tornado? Or Dedede's f-air? Or Snake's u-tilt? Or ZSS' side-b? Or Game and Watch's d-tilt, f-smash, d-smash, f-air, and b-air? Did you know that characters such as ZSS and Olimar can actually grab MK out of his Tornado? Do you know that nearly half of the projectiles in the game go through Tornado? This includes the very important Falco lasers (Wolf's blaster shots also go through, in case you were wondering).

Yes, Tornado is a fantastic move; I fail to see how it's broken, however. Also, do note that it can be shielded--if you tilt your shield up, you can make it last through the whole animation and subsequently punish MK.

In fact, Meta Knight would be better if he had Snake's grenades (or perhaps Pit's arrows) instead of his Tornado.

You make the claim that MK's recovery outweighs his lightness--to me, this seems like another unsubstantiated claim. Yes, MK has the best recovery in the game, but what good is recovery going to do him when he's one of the lightest characters in the game? If you're getting star-KO'ed, you can't really recover, now can you? According to Mew2king's weight charts, MK is only heavier than a few characters in the game--characters like Game and Watch, Jigglypuff, and Squirtle. Snake's u-tilt can kill Meta at 100% easily, or possibly lower if the stage has a low ceiling (e.g., Halberd). Wario's 2-minute fart can spike-kill Meta at 30%, and his 1-minute fart kills at 70%. Dedede's u-tilt is similar to Snake's. Marth's tipper f-smash can do the job at 80% or so depending on stage. Meta Knight basically needs his recovery in order to be a Top Tier character--if he didn't have exceptional recovery, his lightness would murder him.

You say that the combination of speed, range, and priority make Meta Knight broken--that no other character in the game has such an unrealistic combination. I ask, then, what about Snake? Snake's attacks are also extremely fast--f-tilt, for example, is a 6-frame move, which is the same as Meta Knight's f-air. F-tilt also outranges _every single one of Meta Knight's attacks_ except for d-tilt and side-b. And Snake's projectiles such as u-smash and grenade offer ridiculous range--they're not even comparable to conventional projectiles because of their power and ability to remain on the field. They're more like extended attacks than anything.

Snake has a lot more priority than Meta Knight, as well. As long as we're on the subject of priority, let me just point out that Meta Knight's regular attacks actually don't have inhuman priority. Game and Watch's attacks have more priority than Meta Knight's--b-air, d-air, etc. go through Shuttle Loop, for example, as well as most of Meta's aerials. Wario's Bite and fart have more priority. Snake has more priority. Link, Ganondorf, and Dedede all have more aerial and ground priority (yes, both). Even Peach has more priority--Peach's u-tilt has more priority than _any_ move Meta Knight has. Please convincingly demonstrate that Meta Knight's priority is excellent or even close to absurd. Comopared to substandard-priority characters like Sonic and Jigglypuff? Certainly. But these characters are substandard for a reason.

Range? Snake, Dedede, and Marth all substantially outrange Meta Knight, and Game and Watch and Diddy are hardly far behind. Wario, sure? Falco? Well, yes, but he has lasers and chaingrabbing anyway; he doesn't need to outrange because he won't be using his tilts on Meta Knight in the most cases. Oh, let me point out that Meta Knight has no dash-attack cancelled u-smash, and his u-smash itself has a terrible hitbox and tremendous lag--all of the other characters I named, especially Snake/Falco and except Dedede, have a DAC u-smash and a fairly good one, I might add. This is an example of MK's deficiencies.

Also, you give little proof as to the actual "unrealistic" nature of this combination of speed, range, and priority. Meta Knight being allowed in competitive play conforms to the status quo--if you would like to see him banned, you are challenging the status quo. Therefore, the burden of proof falls on you. Where is your empirical evidence? I can detail a number of aspects where Meta Knight comes up subpar and list a number of match-ups which are either even or even possibly against him (Snake, for example).

Did you know that the best Meta Knight player in the world and former Melee Marth champion, Mew2king, recently lost a total of 3 tourneys to the world's best Snake, Ally? Or that a Diddy Kong player, ADHD, beat both Ally and Mew2king in the same tournament? Of course, such examples don't prove that Meta Knight isn't broken; they're matters of skill, I freely admit--however, if Meta Knight were truly broken, then at the _absolute_ top level, it would make sense that the best Meta Knight would consistently trump the best players of other characters. This, however, is not the case, making it highly doubtful that Meta Knight is, in fact, worthy of being deemed broken.

You also say that you have played pro Meta Knights--who, pray tell, are these pros you speak of? As a tournygoer, I'm fairly positive I know all of the big names in Brawl. Ally, Mew2king, DSF, Fiction, Anther, Tyrant, Dojo, DEHF, teh_spamerer, Afro Thundah, chudat, Lain, Azen, perhaps? Or, maybe not quite at the top professional level--meep, SK92, HugS, etc? Claiming to have played or beaten pros is well and good, but the claim goes unsubstantiated unless you can actually name these pros.

Why? Because particular pros have particular weaknesses. There may well be a Snake pro who occasionally loses to Captain Falcon, for example (and I know of one who does), but that doesn't mean that the average Snake pro will lose to Captain Falcon. Ally is the best C. Falcon player--and I mean quite literally the best--yet he cannot defeat Snake pros using Falcon. It's tried and tested.

first off, welcome to wiichat.
secondly, this entire post is win.

 

[SolidSense]

I had to leave before I finished my preceding post, so I have one more thing to address about your argument: your definition in the opening post.

You say that if 50% of the Brawl community votes for Meta Knight to be banned, he should be. This definition fails for two reasons:

1.) 50%+ is what is known as a "simple majority," and when making decisions such as actually banning a character from a game, simple majorities are so dangerously close to even splits that it makes no sense to simply assume it as the standard.

Rather, 66%, which is used in the United States' government, seems much more appropriate for banning a character. Remember, this is challenging the status quo--in the history of smash, no character has ever been banned. The amount of leverage one needs to ban a character should be substantially high; this is not a simple decision. The Brawl elite argue extensively about this issue.

2.) This is the most important reason, both against your definition and for my posting here at all: banning Meta Knight does not affect everyone. Because this is a discussion of competitive, tourney play, the ban on Meta Knight should not be decided by "50% of people who play Brawl."

How many people do you think play Brawl? Say, 100,000 worldwide? Of those, how many do you think attend tournaments consistently? 5,000? That's a mere 5%. Of that 5%, how many do you think actually have a shot at winning money consistently (especially at majors or regionals)? Maybe 1,000 at best? So that's 1%. So 50% of the population (of which that 1% might not even be a factor) decides on the fate of 1% of the population. The decision will barely affect 98-99%, yet that 98-99% has the final word (since there are more votes there). Is that fair?

The ban on Meta Knight should be decided by people whom it actually affects--people who participate in tournaments regularly and, more importantly, people who actually have a stake in the victory--people who could possibly win money from participating (the real professional elites).

Of course, everything I said in the post 2 posts above this one still applies; this is just an additional, very important item I didn't have time to mention.

Oh, by the way, I was mistaken about Snake's f-tilt--it actually comes out in 4 frames, which is _faster_ than Meta Knight's f-air. His u-tilt is the move that comes out in 6.

Everything I said in my previous post and in this one just scratches the surface of this debate; if you want to actually convince any real pro about Meta Knight being broken, you definitely need to use some logically cogent arguments, not just say "this combination is deadly" without substantiating your claim with empirical evidence. Moreover, you're really theorizing in your post; you would need to discuss specific match-ups to make your case, not just discuss Meta Knight by himself.

I don't mean to insult you; rather, I mean to tell you that your argument has no weight at all--had you presented analyses of Meta Knight vs. Snake, Meta Knight vs. Wario, Meta Knight vs. Falco, etc., and demonstrated convincingly that Meta Knight has an innate advantage against all of these characters, maybe your logic would have seemed more sound. But as it is, you're really not going to be able to convince anyone but those who already believed MK was broken in the first place.

And to the poster above me, thanks for the welcome.

 

[Shadow*91]

no prob but now i noticed just a single problem with the second post.

you say that it should only be those with a stake at winning tourneys that should decide, but that itself is quite vague. i've come to a closest of 16 in the last big tourney i entered. now would you qualify that as i had a stake at winning? many would say no but a good amount would claim yes.

another thing is many would argue they do have a stake if Meta was banned. many that would lose to Meta are quite confident that they would've won if thier opponent was a different character.

so in all you arguement about only those with a stake at winning is far to vague. you yourself are arguing for specifics so i thought i'd point out how vague you were in your last post.

 

[SolidSense]

i've come to a closest of 16 in the last big tourney i entered. now would you qualify that as i had a stake at winning? many would say no but a good amount would claim yes.

Indeed, there is a fair amount of ambiguity as far as drawing that line is concerned. However, I wasn't concerned about drawing the line specifically--rather, my point was that there should be a line in the first place. The initial post doesn't recognize the necessity of this line--my post proposed that the definition set by the OP was flawed. Nowhere did I lay claim to having established a counter-definition.

So in that sense, I meant to be vague; there would be no purpose in my being more specific.

In addition, there is a matter of prestige associated with tournaments that, while secondary to money, can also be put to use in drawing the line. Your placement of 16th in a tournament is more prestigious than another person's placement of 25th, for instance. Therefore, you too have a stake in the tournament scene, albeit a lesser one than those who get the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd places (since monetary gains are tangible and prestige is abstract).

another thing is many would argue they do have a stake if Meta was banned. many that would lose to Meta are quite confident that they would've won if thier opponent was a different character.

To an extent, you are right; however, do note that skill level is substantially independent of character choice. Boss places high with Luigi. Anther places high with Pikachu (beating out many top Metas and Snakes). Lain places high with Ice Climbers. Et cetera. So I would expect the really good players to place highly despite the presence or absence of Meta Knight--it's true that they might place higher in one case or the other, but they'd still place in the same general area.

In other words, I don't expect someone placing 25th in a tournament right now to suddenly rise to 1st place with Meta Knight gone--do you? That is an extremely unlikely event. I do acknowledge that someone placing 8th could rise to 1st, but the person placing 8th already has a stake in the tournament anyway. Does this seem to be a reasonable assertion?

 

[Shadow*91]

yes it does and i completely agree with you. i was just merely pointing out that in your talk of specifics, you were pretty vague about that one part.

 

[RPGMasterTurk91]

I wrote a whole response to what you had to say SolidSense, complete with a welcome to WiiChat and appreciation of your well-thought and detailed comments, then unknowingly clicked off-screen and hit "backspace" to delete a letter, which brought me back to the previously viewed page and subsequently deleted everything I wrote...I will have to get to the response at a later date, I'm a bit upset at the time I put into it going to complete waste. But I promise a response, and I'll write it in a Word Document for precautionary measures this time...I'm not too fond of time being wasted for absolutely nothing, especially when it's precious (I have two exams coming up in the next 3 days, and this was actually a small break I took from studying. Without further ado, We'll discuss this later.

 

[RPGMasterTurk91]

EVERY character has weaknesses and their own set of deficiencies in EVERY competitive game there is (some are meant to be unbalanced in certain games, such as bosses who require skill rather than a balance of stats to beat). This is a basic concept game designers use when ATTEMPTING to balance a game. They are human when attempting to do this, and by the time finish they are still imperfect humans. You are telling me that Meta Knight is a balanced character thanks to all of those “weaknesses” you point out, I am here to tell you that it’s nearly impossible for a game so broad to be completely balanced and perfect as you put it. Even the “most perfect” human will have flaws—and they’re not necessarily well-hidden either. Meta Knight, being the nearest to "perfect" is not excluded from this "rule"! So no matter how much you ramble about how “bad” or “weak” or even “balanced” Meta Knight is, it will not change the fact that he is too much of something or has unrealistic capabilities above all other characters. Meta Knight happens to be a failure as a character—more like a mistake added into Brawl. Thus why I suggested that he needs to be patched, avoiding the process of taking him out or banning him altogether.

And if you actually read my posts in their entirety instead of picking and choosing certain parts, you would see that I CLEARLY state that Snake is not too far behind Meta Knight in the realm of broken aspects of certain characters. Also, a game doesn’t have to be limited to one broken character—Snake is next up in line, and is almost as broken, but not quite as much as, Meta Knight. And the inbalances are not necessarily related to one another--that is, they both have a DIFFERENT set of stats that constitute to them being broken.

It doesn’t matter that Meta Knight’s physical speed in the air is slow. This is a true statement—one of the slowest in the game, but NOT regrettably so. The point you are making is vague—are you actually suggesting that Meta Knight is highly vulnerable in the air and that his air speed (or lack thereof) is partially responsible for him being balanced? It doesn’t hurt Meta Knight as much as you would like to believe; with an arsenal of high-priority, range and speed attacks in the air, Meta Knight has THE best off-stage game as WELL as recovery. Notice how I didn’t mention that he has a lot of power in those moves—you see, while it’s true that they don’t have insane knockback, this factor is not necessary to deem it “not broken”. Because Meta Knight (as I have just pointed out) is so flexible and dangerous both off-stage and on-stage, he can attack defensively with absolute ease, racking up damage that other characters have to be cautious about going about doing and have to do more planning because they know that if they just throw a bunch of moves, it is not only making them vulnerable, but those moves probably will not hit. The nature of Meta Knight's moves and overall amount of "stats" (i.e things like speed, priority, range, power etc.) allow him to kill EVEN LIGHT characters at low percentages, and makes heavy characters (or any that lack vertical or horizontal recovery such as Donkey Kong or Olimar) working twice as hard in the air, forcefully accepting a total racked damage of 25% damage, for example, in exchange for remaining alive, provided the situation even allows for it!)

And about the mach tornado (spamnado)—you tried your best to make it sound like a highly unreliable and vulnerable move, not only did half the moves you mentioned not break the tornado all the time, but the tornado is very fast and maneuverable as well as takes in anything it touches (and it can do so with ease) that landing Game and Watch’s “FSmash” for example is not a likely possibility, and surely cannot be done with ease. The overall successful pulling off of such moves with the exception of Game and Watch’s dash (which always goes through the tornado) is an unrealistic occurrence, not to mention Game and Watch’s DAir only works occasionally (and yes even directly up top the tornado). I also simply do not agree with some of your not-so-well thought claims, such as Meta knight's side B being "extremely predictable as well as extremely punishable due to its tremendous overall lag" (I'm paraphrasing, let me know if I've misconstrued what you said, even though I just read it and am choosing not to copy-paste it, because it is my interpretation). There are other direct claims you made that are simply not true or are not very plausible, all in your attempt to make Meta Knight look like a balanced, not-as-cheap-as-EVERYONE-thinks-and-realistically-flawed character.

You said:

if Meta Knight were truly broken, then at the _absolute_ top level, it would make sense that the best Meta Knight would consistently trump the best players of other characters. This, however, is not the case, making it highly doubtful that Meta Knight is, in fact, worthy of being deemed broken.

If you read my whole post carefully and not subjectively, you would not make such a statement. I have said it countless times and have given even more examples for purpose of explanation: I'M NOT HERE TO ARGUE THAT META KNIGHT IS UNBEATABLE; HE IS BEATABLE! So what then am I trying to say? I know Meta Knight is beatable, what character isn't in any game? Surely, you can name a game with little thought who has a notorious character for being obviously overpowered and is shunned from use. Is it because that character is literally impossible to beat? It would be absurd for one to think that that is the case. This case is true only when that character LITERALLY cannot lose. In the case of Brawl (or ANY other competitive game for that matter, ANY), no character is actually IMMUNE to losing a stock/life, and thus they are all capable of losing all of their stocks/lives, thus making them beatable. In fact, the jist of my argument lies not in being beatable, but rather in the fact that the match is rigged. Take for example a theoretical Squirtle: This Squirtle, an obvious terrible mistake to put into the game, is four times as heavy as he is in the actually SSBB (equating to losing a life much, much less often), three times as powerful (equating to having much, much more kill potential) and is twice as fast. Is he unbeatable? Nope, he is capable of losing a stock, but the chances of beating him with another character are completely rigged: it is slim, at best. The more unrealistic a character is, the closer the win rate against that character gets to 0%, though never actually touching the zero mark. While this extreme Squirtle does not (one can easily admit) compare to the case of Meta Knight in Brawl, he represents a character who is beatable, but unrealistic for realistic competitive gameplay. Thus, the fact that he is beatable fails to convey that he is a fair, realistic character, because all characters are beatable, except some not as much as others, and there are few and far in between!

You also spoke about Meta Knight being out-ranged by several characters. Assuming what you said is true, and it may very well be (I'm not here to argue otherwise right now), they don't by any means possess the same ratio of combined stats that make them too unrealistic (although I personally believe that Marth is slightly too flexible in the air for all his speed and range in the air, or rather, has too much speed and range for all the flexibility he has in the air). I was not claiming that Meta Knight has more priority, range, and speed than all other characters. However, the amount of each is just too high for realistic gameplay. He's more like a Melee character in Brawl, in which Melee is a generally faster-paced game than Brawl.

The whole 50% majority thing is simply the “majority rules” concept, which I don’t get is so hard to understand, is really quite simple. When any group of people are making a decision over TWO direct things, choices, or concepts, the unanimous vote applies. You don’t wait until 66% of the population wants that certain thing, because if 65% wants one choice and 35% wants the other, how does that work? You are mixing up the decision among more than one thing and between the passing of a bill, which understandably requires the vote of 66% of the Senate to be passed in order to give that vote a sense of "overkill" and ensuring it was a better decision because you are dealing with laws and such.

Is it a coincidence that Smash Back Room had to hold a vote about banning Meta Knight? Surely, being the only character in Brawl to go through such a process, Meta Knight’s potential was and is deemed questionable. Is keeping such a character really fair? This very fact alone suggests that Meta Knight is not simply a misunderstood balanced character, but instead a questionable one where banning him was a real possibility (of course, banning Meta Knight for good would be admitting that the game makers have made countless errors with Meta Knight and this admittance will not look good for them in the long run, and thus the vote was probably influenced by such a philosophy).

Listen to what you are saying; I did, and alls I see is a barrier in front of you that cannot allow you to realize that Meta Knight is even the slightest bit overpowered, and thus your absolute unchangeable attitude towards this case earns you an “invalid license” of making true points. I’ve read everything you had to say, and I have never seen anyone do a better job of making Meta Knight seem like he is pretty much an UNDERbalanced, horrible character filled with weaknesses and vulnerabilities (it's funny because you actually twisted some of his strengths and made them out to actually be weaknesses). Like I said, if you take note of all the flaws of the “most perfect” human (theoretical, of course, and we’re assuming that a “perfect human” is one who makes no mistakes or unintentional accidents), you can make a whole list of flaws he or she has, and can make him or her look like dirt in front of someone who has no clue you’re talking about the “nearest to being perfect” human being. Not surprisingly, you can do the opposite as well—you can argue that a horrible character (just take any obviously and completely unbalanced game and you will see just how ridiculous the reality is of what you’re saying) is actually the best character by pointing out all of their strengths and brushing off their weaknesses. In fact, someone who has absolutely no idea what Super Smash Bros. is will most definitely assume that Meta Knight is a weak, horrible character with countless flaws. With the way you’re going, people who are playing for the first time with other first-time players will say “oh don’t pick that guy, I heard he sucks”. Basically, what you're doing is saying "yeah, Meta Knight is strong, but he has weaknesses that are easy to spot that makes him balanced or even just average". What I'm saying is that, yes Meta Knight HAS weaknesses (what character or person, as perfect as they may seem, are without weaknesses/flaws? It's not a realistic claim), but his strengths outdue his weaknesses and his weaknesses are easy to mask because he always has a way with things thanks to his overall flexibility of moves and stats, which allows even a clumsy player to get away with lots of careless mistakes.

Someone who only sees near-absolute perfection and balance in something as complex as a video game is an unrealistic person whose mind is very obviously causing a blockade of things he or she does not want to hear or believe, most likely because he or she uses that thing, in our case, a character from Super Smash Bros. Brawl, Meta Knight, and does not want to believe that their being good of that character is based solely (well, mostly) on unbalanced and unrealistic means. This does not necessarily mean that they are without skill, but determining a true skill factor is hard to determine when you’re playing as a character who has the most potential and by far than any other characters and is thus an unrealistic addition to the game as a whole. It is true however that it takes much less skill to use that character with all the advantages they have over all other characters (against some much more advantages than others, but nonetheless obvious advantage over all characters).

I will write more as this discussion goes on, I am really tired so let me know if something isn't clear or doesn't even make sense, and I will do my best to clarify for you (or anyone else for that matter). Thanks, and I'm looking forward to you response.

Oh and remember to answer me this: Why was there a Smash Back Room vote that took place that was to decide whether Meta Knight was to be banned or not? You can tell me if you think the vote was influenced in any way by other forces in the case while you're at it. Thanks.

 

[FinalFantasyVII]

wow I read everything Turk had to say and boy do I agree with all of it. That SolidSense kid never did show up again to refute your claims, but you put them out so well I don't think he has a reason to lol. Great job! Meta Knight is TRULY broken!

 

[RPGMasterTurk91]

wow I read everything Turk had to say and boy do I agree with all of it. That SolidSense kid never did show up again to refute your claims, but you put them out so well I don't think he has a reason to lol. Great job! Meta Knight is TRULY broken!

Haha thanks a lot for your comment and thumbs up =P

Anyone else have any input or say into Meta Knight being broken?

 

[Shadow*91]

besides the fact that he's not broken, no.
every point brought up in this thread has been argued beyond a doubt. evidence has been brought out stating all of Meta's strength and weaknesses and each have been argued about.
pretty much though, none of the arguements have changed my mind and i find that overall this thread reinforces the fact that he's not broken. many probably feel the same way. at the same time many will read this thread and claim that it proves Meta is broken. two very different conclusions from the same evidence and arguements.

so overall this thread has proved nothing but proved that Meta is the best character, broken or not.

 

[RPGMasterTurk91]

besides the fact that he's not broken, no.
every point brought up in this thread has been argued beyond a doubt. evidence has been brought out stating all of Meta's strength and weaknesses and each have been argued about.
pretty much though, none of the arguements have changed my mind and i find that overall this thread reinforces the fact that he's not broken. many probably feel the same way. at the same time many will read this thread and claim that it proves Meta is broken. two very different conclusions from the same evidence and arguements.

so overall this thread has proved nothing but proved that Meta is the best character, broken or not.

I have proven not just that Meta Knight is the best character in SSBB, but unrealistic overall. I hate to say it, but if you are not in agreement with this, you are simply too stubborn and probably an excited Meta Knight user yourself filled with bias (and even if you don't use Meta Knight, it doesn't change the fact that most defenders of Meta Knight NOT being broken are avid Meta Knight users.) There are quite a few honest Meta Knight users out there who claim without studdering that Meta Knight is indeed broken, and they pick him to win simply because they cannot do it so well with others, as they are not equipped with the same arsenal of unrealistic moves and traits as Meta Knight is.

These things are not mere coincidences, the atheist mindset is such a fail one.

 

[Shadow*91]

first off, i'll occasionally take Meta for fun but i won't lie, my Meta sucks.
i'm actually a Kirby and Olimar user. and although both have an unfavorable match-up against Meta, i only have trouble with top Meta's.

if you want to claim i'm biased in my opinion then fine, but its only because i don't see Meta as a threat nor do i see him worthy of a ban.
in fact i could similarly claim you are biased likely cause you probably have massive trouble with Meta. and most people that want Meta banned are ones that are almost always losing to him, just like most against banning him use him as thier main.

so as i said, we could both read this argument and while i would claim it proves Meta is not broken, you would claim it proves he is. and we both would have many that would agree with one and disagree with the other. so this thread has really done nothing but prove Meta is the best, broken or not.