So, do I understand it correctly that if you use a character that don't have real options in many cases or that has to risk a lot, that's the case of character holding you back, but when you use one that automatically nullifies half of your opponent gameplan when you just tell him to, regardless of your ability to deal with what that gameplan comprises otherwise, and with little risk at that, that's somehow not the case of you being carried by your character?
Props to people with enough dedication to place high and win events, sure - you can't be there without being hella good, character or not. But please, let us not pretend that characters don't matter. I still remember times when people (and not some random joes, but actual game designers behind actual popular games) could get away with statements that boil down to "there are bad characters, you know it and so if you pick them you are scrub and deserve to lose to competitive player". Let us not go back there, hm?
I mean, the argument that nobody forces you to play a shitter is exactly that in essense - "the game is balanced because everyone can pick top tier".
