Thats the issue though, as I see it. There are things that cannot simply be defined as "is it advantage or not".
I understand you are not trying to be rude or obtuse, I'm simply stating that for a character like Ferra/Torr, there is so much to consider when you have the dynamic of both of them and things like variable blockstun.
I'd be lying if I said I was unsure of the impact that ripping 84% off of someone's lifebar can have on a match, but if you take that into account, then it's hard to say exactly what the numbers are.
So if you asked me what the MU was between Ferra/Torr and character X, I'd have to clarify questions like "Do they know about this" or "Can they deal with that" or "Can they comeback from 16%?"
If I felt something was advantageous to them, I would need to give credit to the opponent's possible options out of it. I wouldn't be able to just slather on a 6-4 sticker, especially if the MU changes based on something as player-dependent as a hard read for a trade. This is the issue I have with the point of saying "If yes, then this. If no, then that." It entirely discounts the players. On paper it may be one thing, but in practice it can't be so clear.
"Boss Toss can confirm for 48% when trading with a poke" is not the same as "Boss Toss has/hasn't traded with a poke for 48%". The possibility vs the reality of the situation can't be broken down in such a way.
If I won by 1% because of a lucky guess or a really hard read on the player's habits, then is that my character winning or is it me winning?
If a person pokes at me and eats 90% in a bad trade for them, is that my character's ability to do it, or is it my ability to get the situation to happen in the first place?
I don't think it gives enough to the aspect of the game actually being played. Full numbers are what theories are made of, in my opinion.
