Top tier swordsmanship is ILLEGAL! Should we ban MK? - Page 19

So? Someone has to. It's a non-issue because he's not the only character winning.

quote P Z

But he is winning far more often then the other players.

Is that maybe because the people that play as MetaKnight know how to use him, eh?
I use Fox and I have beaten nearly everyone I have brawled against. Same as I did with Mr Game and Watch. Do note all the people I brawled aainst used MK. That is because they had no idea in hell how to use him.
If people start using Peach and Ness right, soon enough everyone will be using them and will be asking if they could be banned.

quote P Z

Lets just say that I think we should all stop drinking root beer and give a few facts as to why. And you dont want that. But I tell you we should because its gunna become a monopoly for every other drink in the world. Then I give you reasons and ideas about how this is going to come about, but you dont believe me. And I ask you why do you think it wont. Then you turn around and say that "they are just guesses" and that you "dont need to answer them". If we were in a real debate with an audience and a judge, wouldn't you still have to say how I am incorrect. And how that if everyone keeps buying root beer its not gunna dominate every other drink in the world and that our health is not gunna go down the drain.

What on earth? That's a really poor comparison. The crucial piece of information missing here is what exactly your reasoning is for wanting us to stop drinking root beer. Actually, let me fix your analogy:

P Z: We should all stop drinking root beer, otherwise nobody will drink anything else!

Barmy: What possible reason could you have for thinking that?

P Z: Well, root beer is really popular now! And it tastes better than other drinks! So nobody will want anything else!

That's a more direct comparison to what's going on now. And in that case, I'd do exactly the same thing I'm doing here: I'd point out that you can't possibly know whether people will in fact stop drinking everything but root beer. Once again, I wouldn't have to provide any counter-points because your argument has no substance. If we were in a real debate with an audience and a judge, I'd simply stand up and say to you "Prove it" and sit back down; You'd have no choice but to sit there unable to actually prove any of the claims you'd made.

Basically, what WiseLugia said: Assumptions about the future, no matter how logical, have no place in a debate that directly relates to the present. "Should we ban MetaKnight" is a present-tense question, so what may happen at some point in the future is absolutely irrelevant.

quote P Z

You need to tell me why I might be wrong. You dont necessarily need facts to win an argument. You have to prove your point better than the others. I'm trying to prove my point as to why I think he should be banned and youre not stating how I might be wrong.

This technique, in argumentative terms, is called "guarding". You've guarded your argument by regressing from "Prove me wrong!" to "Show me how I might be wrong". Usually, guarding makes arguments tougher to beat, but in this case I'm lucky; It makes it easier.

Why? Because while I can't prove your predictions wrong, there are literally infinite reasons why your future "might" not come true. MetaKnight might have peaked already, meaning he won't get better. Advanced techs for other characters might be discovered that allow them to go toe-to-toe with Meta. Meta might simply lose popularity for whatever reason and get used less. There are so many conceivable ways that the future you're predicting won't come to fruition, it's rather pointless to ask me to list them all. The thing is (as I've already pointed out several times) I can't prove your statements wrong just as much as you can't prove them correct. And if you can't even be sure they're true, then they have no place in a factual debate.

MetaKnight might be banned. MetaKnight might not be banned. The only facts we have to decide are things that we can see right now; Things that may or may not happen in the future are totally useless in this debate because nothing anyone predicts about the future can ever be realistically proven.

And given that right now, characters other than MetaKnight are still beating MetaKnight and winning tournaments basically says in black and white that he is not the overcentralizing force you're making him out to be. He isn't rapidly improving and he certainly isn't the only viable character, which means he doesn't qualify for a ban. Anything you think might happen in the future is irrelevant because right here, right now, MetaKnight is not broken and you simply cannot prove that he may be in the future.

quote Barmy Brat

What on earth?

I started to laugh as soon as I got done reading that.

Hey guys, let's ban Melee Fox because he makes a majority of the characters fight an uphill battle. Not to metion the few characters who can stand up against him can be gimped easy or have some other weakness he can exploit.

*shot*

quote P Z

Dont say that my earlier comparison is a bad one. I gave you reasons why when I said that I stated "a few facts as to why". That comparison was a very good one. How did you not see that. Read it again if you have to.

No, it wasn't a "very good comparison". It was a pretty shit one, because the key element - your reasoning process - was left out.

quote

You are finally putting up reasons why!

You're not very intelligent if you actually needed me to give you reasons why Metaknight "might" not be banned. Any idiot could list hundreds of reasons why he might not be banned. This isn't rocket science.

stabbedbyahippie got it right: He provided a list of things that he thinks make Metaknight overpowered, and he explained why he thinks those things make him overpowered. All you've done in nearly 20 pages of discussion is say "I think MetaKnight is overpowered, I predict he will be banned, so let's ban him". Every attempt you've made to provide actual points has been almost immediately refuted (such as WL did just above). Your argument has no substance. If stabbedbyahippie can do it right, you have no excuse to make flippant, irrelevant statements and call it an "argument".

quote P Z

quote WiseLugia

Hey guys, let's ban Melee Fox because he makes a majority of the characters fight an uphill battle. Not to metion the few characters who can stand up against him can be gimped easy or have some other weakness he can exploit.

*shot*

Let me change it a little for you.

Hey guys, lets ban Deoxys because he makes a majority of the characters fight an up hill battle due to his superior stats. I mean the few who can stand up agians him have weaknesses he can exploit.

Its not crystal clear. But you see what I'm getting at. Or do you need another example. How about 9tailed naruto from CoN. That seems easy to picture.

Nice try, but Pokémon and Smash are two entirely different worlds with entirely different needs.

But hey, let's go with this anyway. Meta Knight does not overcentralize Smash (yet), hence why he does not need to be banned. Deoxys does overcentralize Pokémon (now), hence why it should be.

quote Menkoy

quote Mario_1

Metaknight =/= best, so I see no reason to ban him.

quote SBR Tier List

Top
Metaknight

Need I say more?

Tiers are BS. Need I say more?