At this point, is there any one person who thinks this game is balanced?

[Deleted member 64931]

These people are legit sub humans dawg. They don't actually remember these things correctly. I still have a copy of the ORIGINAL MKX, I might get a video with the unpatched version and show the bitching about armor was completely wrong. I mean, I DIDN'T LIKE IT, but a lot of the complaints about it are obviously just incorrect.

I mean I didn't like get launched after a minus 3 string... that was kind kid bullshit to eat 40% from kung Lao because I disrespected his negative poke. But yeah man, lot of scrubs talking a big game on here and I'm the bad guy for saying you don't know what you're talking about??

But MKX 10/4/16 onward is one my favorite fighting games to date. But Demo Sonya can rot in hell.

 

[Chernyy Volk]

Please explain the differences between "power level" and "balance" in regard to a competitive game.

Balance to me is, how the power level is distributed among the cast (and I also think how matters too). MK11 has worse power distribution BY FAR compared to MKX. This really does make current MKX more balanced than MK11. Now you can argue that you don't like WHY MKX achieves it's balance, everyone has mix or insane pressure, but everyone in that game does work with their opportunities. MK11, the power is lower on the whole, but the power distribution is absolutely terrible. Some characters can't do basic essential functions to the games meta like U2-ing jabs out of hit stun like the top tiers can on top of other things like the insane movement disparities, anti air disparities, access to KB's etc.

In short, MKX has way more power as a whole, but that power is more evenly distributed across the cast. Power in MK11 is toned down, but the concentration of who has it and who doesn't where it matters is very poor. MK11 by virtue can't be more balanced than MKX except by it's worst aspects, fatal blow, breakaway and flawless blocking, mechanics that all circumvent punishment, the penalty of mistakes or simply give the loser all the yomi power in any exchange.

 

[colby4898]

Balance is overrated. Who gives a fuck so long as the game is fun. This game isn't. MKX wasn't very balanced, though not quite as bad by the end, and most people would say it was more fun I think.

Balance only effects the top 1% of players that actually decide to compete really. Casuals just play the characters we find fun. And people in this community need to stop acting like their pros. Why were you excited about customs being allowed in one extra game mode with additional limitations when they were in the game from day 1 and you just opted not to play them? Again the decision to make customs rtournament should only effect those competing, but this community likes to pretend like their competitors and limit their own fun. Kinda sad.

 

[Juggs]

People criminally overrate how much balance impacts the competitive viability of a fighting game. People have this common misconception that balance is the be all end all of what makes a fighting game “competitive”. Balance is important when it comes to how fun the game is to play, from low levels to high. It’s important as far as having a lot of options. Which leads to a more in depth fighting game that has a higher skill gap, and a higher knowledge requirement because you need to know how a lot of characters work and all the Match-ups that are relevant to your character.

While all of these things are true and are definitely positives, balance isn’t the only thing that determines whether or not a game is competitively viable. I would argue it’s not even the main thing.

Technically speaking, you don’t need half the roster able to compete with each other or able to compete with the top tiers. Of course, it is obviously preferable, but it isn’t technically necessary.

I could get into all the different elements of a fighting game that matter so much more in determining whether it is competitively viable or not, but I’m pretty sure most people are fully aware of what these things are. It seems fairly axiomatic to me. If anyone wants me to go down the list, I’d be more than happy to.

And to be clear, I personally believe fighting games are better overall the more balanced they are. They just are, in the end, more fun when that is the case. And I also believe you should buff characters waaaay more often than you nerf characters, but that’s another discussion. But anyway, what I’m responding to is that if a game is unbalanced, that somehow means it’s not a serious fighting game or it’s not a “competitive” fighting game. That simply just isn’t the case, objectively speaking.

 

[Zyns]

People criminally overrate how much balance impacts the competitive viability of a fighting game. People have this common misconception that balance is the be all end all of what makes a fighting game “competitive”. Balance is important when it comes to how fun the game is to play, from low levels to high. It’s important as far as having a lot of options. Which leads to a more in depth fighting game that has a higher skill gap, and a higher knowledge requirement because you need to know how a lot of characters work and all the Match-ups that are relevant to your character.

While all of these things are true and are definitely positives, balance isn’t the only thing that determines whether or not a game is competitively viable. I would argue it’s not even the main thing.

Technically speaking, you don’t need half the roster able to compete with each other or able to compete with the top tiers. Of course, it is obviously preferable, but it isn’t technically necessary.

I could get into all the different elements of a fighting game that matter so much more in determining whether it is competitively viable or not, but I’m pretty sure most people are fully aware of what these things are. It seems fairly axiomatic to me. If anyone wants me to go down the list, I’d be more than happy to.

And to be clear, I personally believe fighting games are better overall the more balanced they are. They just are, in the end, more fun when that is the case. And I also believe you should buff characters waaaay more often than you nerf characters, but that’s another discussion. But anyway, what I’m responding to is that if a game is unbalanced, that somehow means it’s not a serious fighting game or it’s not a “competitive” fighting game. That simply just isn’t the case, objectively speaking.

A good example of this would be Melee. Beloved by all and more relevant today than it was 10 years ago despite only a handful of characters being viable, and a lot of characters being completely useless.

 

[DoDaMuSiC]

I understand this but you gotta realize that is happening for reasons that aren't good. Your opponent shouldn't be intimidated because you're losing and the game handed you a free 30% armored move that in some cases, literally fundamentally alters the way the game is played. Your opponent should be afraid of you because of your skill, your character and what they're good at etc. The problem is, as all American fighting game studios besides Iron Galaxy can't seem to figure out, is NRS are typical dumb Americans who don't understand balance concepts and lovingly crafting a game with the kind of depth we think this game lacks in mind. They like instant gratification shortcut measures instead.

Im not arguing whether or not the game is balanced in a good or a bad way, im simply giving my 2 cents that the game IS balanced because of all that
Dont get me wrong, i hate plenty of mechanics in the game that is comeback related, but imo fatal blows and krushing blows shouldn’t be completely removed, they just need to be fixed so they aren’t as powerful as they are rn
My concern with fatal blows isn’t that they are a free armored 30% moves, my concern is that some characters are completely safe due to pushback, that some characters can do it full screen for free, and that it doesn’t go away on block when doing it yolo

Like, in another fighting game, ALMOST ANY OTHER ONE ON THE MARKET RIGHT NOW, you wouldn't be feeling like you need fatal blow. At least I hope you wouldn't.

I cant speak on that because i dont play any fighting game other than nrs’ , and that’s exactly why i think those comeback mechanics should exist because of how unbalanced the past games felt without them
Try playing jax against grandmaster sub on mkx today and tell me if that isn’t a damn near 0-10 mu, and now think how different that could be if kbs and fbs were a thing in that game.
That may sound scrub as hell, but I’ll always be in favor of having mechanics that help every single character in a game to be usable and be able to perform against every other in the roster.

 

[Juggs]

A good example of this would be Melee. Beloved by all and more relevant today than it was 10 years ago despite only a handful of characters being viable, and a lot of characters being completely useless.

Yes exactly. Some would even point to UMK3 that has lopsided top tiers. But I would argue that the game is more balanced than people believe. Regardless, it’s another good example of a game that not many would argue is very balanced, yet it’s one of the most competitive fighting games I’ve played at high levels.

Another example is 3rd Strike. SF3: 3rd Strike is similar to UMK3 to me. Where in both games have a universal mechanic that kinda helps every character, even the lower tiers. In 3S it’s the parry, in UMK3 it’s the Kara Jabs and GJ’s.

But it highlights my original point that balance isn’t absolutely necessary in order for a game to be a “serious competitive fighting game”.

 

[Trustful_Whale]

If you believe anything else, you just can’t resist that Japanese cock I guess.

I'm sitting on the can reading this and it gave me the push I needed, thanks.

 

[Infamous718]

Why would anyone keep playing that POS? Lol, you Tekken dickriders are something else. Been releasing the same game since Tekken 3, and been more and more janky ever since. Look at those fucking combat animations. Exact same for 20 years.
The discrepancy between the highest and lowest in T7 is bigger than the discrepancy in MK11. If you believe anything else, you just can’t resist that Japanese cock I guess.

WTF

 

[mastermalone]

In my opinion there is not even a single one game made by nrs that could be called balanced and competitively viable. Don't get me wrong: They are fun. Beautiful....but, marketing of WB is fucked up and balance is not even a thing in their games.

We tend to say that x or y game is balanced based on comparison, and I think this is not a good way to evaluate the games.
I think MK11 is so broken that people are missing another mess, which is MKX. Did you forget how shitty it was? As Tom described, it was mix or get mixed. People running like crazy....characters winning by just getting near you. Insane 50/50s like....another party game, right?
Saying that MKX is balanced because it is not mk11....I don't get it.

And I honestly think that the most neutral based game from NRS is MK11....but....neutral mean shit if you don't make the frame data logical, if jump ins are free, the break aways, fatal blows almost plus ahahah....we all know the intentional bullshit for casuals, right?

The fair example that I remember in FGs is alex valle against daigo in 2010 tournament in super street fighter 4. That was fair.

This man speaks the truth. MKX had a 50/50 run and gun blender meta that I would not wish upon my worst enemy. I play fighting games from almost every company. I take the time to learn the in's and out's of the game. I like finding the set ups, punishes and little nuances in these games.

What I found in MKX was a dumpster fire disguised as a fun game. Sure, it was fun online but at high levels the game was a pain in the ass to play. It was unlike my experience with Ultra SF4, BlazeBlu, Guilty Gear Xrd Rev 2, KI, Fighting EX Layer etc. etc.

I recommend all those that love MKX to just simply continue to play it. You will feel fulfilled.

For example:

I love Street Fighter Alpha 2. I play it regularly on FightCade against other players online and I'm having a great time. Instead of bashing Street Fighter 5 for not playing like Street Fighter Alpha 2, I just play Street Fighter Alpha 2. Mission accomplished.

 

[DeftMonk]

I don't think you actually pay attention to Tekken tournament results or player to character statistics. Tekken 7 has more viable characters than MK11 for sure. Leroy and Fakrumrham don't even have the highest character win rate in the fucking game. It's GIGAS OF ALL CHARACTERS.

That’s because no one plays gigas. If u do fight a gigas u aren’t used to the matchup most likely and they get away with jank. In Tekken more often than not it just bowls down to who has more mu knowledge and if ur playing Leroy vs gigas ...99% of the time the gigas knows the Leroy matchup 1000% better. Doesn’t mean some gigas beat Leroy and gigas is top tier Leroy sucks.

 

[DeftMonk]

No one cares.
NO ONE CARES.
Tekken has been the same game for almost 20 years. People love it because it doesn’t evolve, and people hate it because it doesn’t evolve. You can only play the game one way, and whenever a character goes outside that box, they are called broken and nerfed until they play that one way. It’s boring to play if you’ve played from T3 on, and it’s actually embarrassing to watch with those terrible ancient strike, hit, spin, launch, juggle and fall animations.
people can like what they like, but let’s not pretend that Tekken is a great game. Strip away all the useless mechanics and moves, of which there are a shitload, and the game is the most basic of bitches.

Bro we get it u hate Tekken. I used to think u were amusing, but after seeing all these crazy ass posts explaining ur deep seeded hatred for Tekken I’m starting to worry some guy wearing a Tekken 3 shirt did some horrible shit to u. Also how in the hell does someone who likes MK11 refer to Tekken as “the most basic of bitches”? Let’s not fool ourselves bro come on now.

 

[MadPropz101]

Balance to me is, how the power level is distributed among the cast (and I also think how matters too). MK11 has worse power distribution BY FAR compared to MKX. This really does make current MKX more balanced than MK11.

 

[M2Dave]

Leroy, Fakumram and a number of others don’t care about your meta. But, stay on brand, Davey.

If any characters do not care about the meta in Tekken, they are the 2D characters like Akuma and Eliza. Leroy and Fahkumram follow the Tekken meta. The reason some people dislike them is the fact that they are too easy to use for what they do.

You are astonishingly ignorant and ought to do less posting and more researching.

 

[Swindle]

Bro we get it u hate Tekken. I used to think u were amusing, but after seeing all these crazy ass posts explaining ur deep seeded hatred for Tekken I’m starting to worry some guy wearing a Tekken 3 shirt did some horrible shit to u. Also how in the hell does someone who likes MK11 refer to Tekken as “the most basic of bitches”? Let’s not fool ourselves bro come on now.

I thought it was 100% clear that this is a troll account. If you want my true Bandai Namco stan account, it’s KingsFurryPecker.
Seriously, I’m just winding people up. I haven’t played Tekken in almost 20 years. Hell, I’m not entirely sure I even enjoy MK, tbh.
Or do I...

 

[Swindle]

If any characters do not care about the meta in Tekken, they are the 2D characters like Akuma and Eliza. Leroy and Fahkumram follow the Tekken meta. The reason some people dislike them is the fact that they are too easy to use for what they do.

You are astonishingly ignorant and ought to do less posting and more researching.

In case it wasn’t entirely obvious, I don’t play Tekken. Never even tried T7. I’m just annoyed with all these balance/tier list arguments that crop up all the time here.
“Balanced” isn’t fun. And tier lists are a waste of time. If you are the type of player who really needs a tier list to determine who you want to play, then you aren’t good enough to make use of it. And if you’re the type of player who can create an accurate tier list, then you don’t need one.

 

[Juggs]

“Balanced” isn’t fun. And tier lists are a waste of time. If you are the type of player who really needs a tier list to determine who you want to play, then you aren’t good enough to make use of it. And if you’re the type of player who can create an accurate tier list, then you don’t need one.

This is unironically the best post in this thread.

 

[M2Dave]

“Balanced” isn’t fun.

Balance is fun, when implemented properly, because reasonably balanced, fun, deep, and execution-heavy fighting games with diverse gameplay styles can and do exist. Unfortunately, Mortal Kombat 11 is not one of them. The game has almost been out for two years. Some type of modification to the meta is due soon.

Anyone who defends and apologizes for NRS is part of the problem and should be held accountable if nothing gets accomplished.

 

[Juggs]

Balance is fun, when implemented properly, because reasonably balanced, fun, deep, and execution-heavy fighting games with diverse gameplay styles can and do exist. Unfortunately, Mortal Kombat 11 is not one of them. The game has almost been out for two years. Some type of modification to the meta is due soon.

Anyone who defends and apologizes for NRS is part of the problem and should be held accountable if nothing gets accomplished.

Balance can be fun. It entirely depends on how the balancing takes place. For instance, if you balance a game by nerfing every character into the ground to the point where every character has nothing good, or fun to play with or mess around with, to me I don’t find that fun. However if you balance the game where you buff every character to have really good moves and in turn most characters can compete with one another, that type of balance is fun. Unfortunately I do think NRS tends to take the “not fun” approach to balancing. Which has consistently been my criticism of NRS. But not everyone agrees and I acknowledge that.

 

[Swindle]

“The Aristocrats”.
jazz hands

 

[Ilthuain]

Balance to me is, how the power level is distributed among the cast (and I also think how matters too). MK11 has worse power distribution BY FAR compared to MKX. This really does make current MKX more balanced than MK11. Now you can argue that you don't like WHY MKX achieves it's balance, everyone has mix or insane pressure, but everyone in that game does work with their opportunities. MK11, the power is lower on the whole, but the power distribution is absolutely terrible. Some characters can't do basic essential functions to the games meta like U2-ing jabs out of hit stun like the top tiers can on top of other things like the insane movement disparities, anti air disparities, access to KB's etc.

In short, MKX has way more power as a whole, but that power is more evenly distributed across the cast. Power in MK11 is toned down, but the concentration of who has it and who doesn't where it matters is very poor. MK11 by virtue can't be more balanced than MKX except by it's worst aspects, fatal blow, breakaway and flawless blocking, mechanics that all circumvent punishment, the penalty of mistakes or simply give the loser all the yomi power in any exchange.

I'm unsure of what you mean by "power level". Are you talking about deviations from the core gameplay ruleset? It's unclear because you show how there is significant deviation in MK11 and give examples as to why MKX has less deviation. Maybe it's the opposite, where more deviation is less "powerful"?

Regardless of that, I think you're going to have a hard time convincing me that the game bears some dreadful imbalance when I can see in tournament results (which is the only analytic we have access to) that character representation is broad. Anything other than measurable analytic data is guesswork. The best analytic data we don't have access to, unfortunately, which would be breaking down matchup results within skill cohorts. Everything we can see, though, suggests that most of the cast is viable in most matchups and that counter-picking shifts outcomes slightly, but not enough to overcome serious skill gaps.

There are some significant internal balance issues, where some tools in a character's set are more valuable than others, but that's like, every fighting game. Even games with incredible tuning, like VF5FS, have moves that you just don't use.

 

[Chernyy Volk]

I'm unsure of what you mean by "power level". Are you talking about deviations from the core gameplay ruleset? It's unclear because you show how there is significant deviation in MK11 and give examples as to why MKX has less deviation. Maybe it's the opposite, where more deviation is less "powerful"?

Regardless of that, I think you're going to have a hard time convincing me that the game bears some dreadful imbalance when I can see in tournament results (which is the only analytic we have access to) that character representation is broad. Anything other than measurable analytic data is guesswork. The best analytic data we don't have access to, unfortunately, which would be breaking down matchup results within skill cohorts. Everything we can see, though, suggests that most of the cast is viable in most matchups and that counter-picking shifts outcomes slightly, but not enough to overcome serious skill gaps.

There are some significant internal balance issues, where some tools in a character's set are more valuable than others, but that's like, every fighting game. Even games with incredible tuning, like VF5FS, have moves that you just don't use.

To try to make this as succinct as possible

MK11 top tiers have a lot of similar traits, one or both direction oki throws, insane movement or insanely degenerate no risk movement options (cet teleport), base combo starters, U2's that launch jabs or pokes, and kits that overall literally give them everything at no cost. There are multiple jack of all trades characters in this game that literally have zero weaknesses except in the most minute of ways, in a game with characters who are hard archetyped (Skarlet) while the hard archetyped characters also tend to be bad or lacking.

Comparatively, in MKX, everyone has pressure, everyone has 50/50's, everyone is doing big damage on punishes or openings, everyone has scary jail scenarios etc. More characters in MKX have the means and the ability to do work if the player playing the character is skilled enough.

Now, I can't PROVE my next point here, but I think it's logically deducible. As I said above, the problem is there is an illusion of balance to this game. Yes, any character is "viable" in a game with this wakeup system, fatal blows and the ability to use flawless blocking to consistently reduce the penalty of bad decisions. The problem is, this is all what leads to people just never feeling good about winning or losing in this game. They loaded all the power in comeback mechanics and things that added hella variability into situations where their used to be definitive consequences. That is inevitably going to lead to outliers, but that doesn't address the fact some characters are clearly gimped compared to the top 10 or so and are playing seriously limited games compared to them. Look at my character Nightwolf, all he can do is D3, 111 or throw pretty much. Against the top tiers, FOR THE MOST PART, his rewards off basic situations just are not as good as any top tier in this game. Yeah, I might be able to theoretically win cause of flawless blocks, fatal blow and the wakeup system, but I'm winning off of the game holding my hand for me, not because my character is that good or I'm that good.

As far as what I mean about power distribution, you just have to critically look at these characters and look at who has what and how much. Everyone in MKX 50/50's you, pressures you and puts you in fucked up situations. You cannot like that, and that's fine, I didn't, but everybody played the game. Keep in mind, I'm talking CURRENT MKX, XL MKX. MK11, not everyone can fundamentally play the game, their power levels are artificially boosted by all these mechanics meant to make it so you're never at too much of a disadvantage. At the end of the day, even if this facilitates some idea of balance, this isn't interesting or fun to people. I still don't think it does though, especially when people aren't paying attention to the current climate. No one is HELLA GRINDING this game. No one cares. If people were in like, full on offline pro komp mode grind time? You'd be seeing the 4-5 characters in top 8. That also dramatically changes how the perception of the game ends up to other people.

 

[ShepherdOfFire]

I think it would be really difficult to give an objective answer. However I'd like to say that I find the game... poorly balanced. Not balanced, not unbalanced, but somewhere in the middle.

I2 might be better balanced but I have not played the game in quite some time so... I'm not really sure about this. Because there is still a lot of dumb stuff in I2.

I think most of the balance issues in MK11 are tied with how base designs of the characters interact with the ability moves. Take Liu Lang, great rushdown character with a strong base kit, add to this kit the low fireball and whatever you choose and you've got a jack-of-all-trades type of character that does everything so good that it's actually better than the (very) few characters archtypes centered around a gameplan. Liu Kang can easily outzone Skarlet (and a lot of characters in this game can) and it makes the character archetypes in the game pointless.

Take Jacqui. Her base kit is honestly very well designed, a rushdown character with no projectiles that struggles to get close to the opponent but once she managed to close the gap the opponent will struggle to get out of her pressure. Now let's apply the Upgraded abilities, now Jacqui has access to the leap and a air move that makes it very risky for the opponent to challenge it either with an anti-air or with a flawless block and you've got a rushdown character with a quick, safe to use (since it avoids any kind of space control/zoning) low risk high reward way to not only directly close the gap with the opponent, and since that competitve kustom variations are a thing add to the mix the grenade launcher that grants her a projectile (and since it's an arcing projectile and with good plus frames on hit it's perfect to get a trade and setup the fullscreen pressure) and a DOT that will pressure the opponent to get out of it and you've got a character with almost no weaknesses. How can we consider this as balanced ?

And all of this makes not only the game feel dull since everybody can do everything, but also makes it feels unbalanced (rightfully or not) because, in the end, people will go to the strongest character that does everything a bit better than everyone else. If one wantx to zoner why would one pick Robocop that is quite good at zoning but... let's say lacking up close, when you have Liu Kang that has a better zoning and a god like up close game ?

The abilities are of course not the only thing that creates gaps between characters, I know it's more complex than that, but I'm convinced the ability system is far from resolving the balance issues like intended but rather create even more unbalance within the game. Not only that, but it also strip the characters from their identities and their purpose. And its so disappointing when you realise how many fun and balanced character archetypes there are in Injustice 2, we know they know how to create good characrer archetypes and yet it seems they wanted to play it safe with MK11 they just went with "Everybody can do everything so all players will be pleased"

And while I'm aware that the overall balance is important to fully enjoy the game, my question would rather be ; Is the game fun ?

I think this is why some people are nostalgic of MKXL, yet this game is honestly a mess balance wise, but at least it's fun. I think MK11 is definitly more balanced than MKX but my god MK11 is DULL. The only reason I have not dropped the game is because I truly love Skarlet's and Robocop's design otherwise i would have deleted the game long ago.

 

[DoDaMuSiC]

imo for a fighting game to be fun it has to be balanced. If I’m playing a certain character is because i have the most fun with him and thats the character i wanna play, but in the moment where the game is unbalanced and my character simply cannot play the game because of certain mus, it becomes not fun to play anymore.
I bought inj2 only to play scarecrow and i had one of the best times in my life on fighting games playing him during the game’s life, but when i saw my opponent picking launch deadshot or dr fate or starfire or any other of his terrible mus, i just felt like turning the game off and doing something else because its not fun to play like that.
Now i look at mk11 and how my main (dvorah) is arguably a bottom 10 character with tons of bad mus, and yet i can still use her because despite all her issues, she still can play the game against anyone else.
To me, thats what is fun, being able to use who you like and who you want to play and don’t care about mus.

 

[Ilthuain]

To try to make this as succinct as possible

MK11 top tiers have a lot of similar traits, one or both direction oki throws, insane movement or insanely degenerate no risk movement options (cet teleport), base combo starters, U2's that launch jabs or pokes, and kits that overall literally give them everything at no cost. There are multiple jack of all trades characters in this game that literally have zero weaknesses except in the most minute of ways, in a game with characters who are hard archetyped (Skarlet) while the hard archetyped characters also tend to be bad or lacking.

I disagree that they have no weaknesses, but that's opinion. Well, sort of. I also have proof in tournament results, but we'll get to that later.

Now, I can't PROVE my next point here, but I think it's logically deducible. As I said above, the problem is there is an illusion of balance to this game. Yes, any character is "viable" in a game with this wakeup system, fatal blows and the ability to use flawless blocking to consistently reduce the penalty of bad decisions. The problem is, this is all what leads to people just never feeling good about winning or losing in this game. They loaded all the power in comeback mechanics and things that added hella variability into situations where their used to be definitive consequences. That is inevitably going to lead to outliers, but that doesn't address the fact some characters are clearly gimped compared to the top 10 or so and are playing seriously limited games compared to them. Look at my character Nightwolf, all he can do is D3, 111 or throw pretty much. Against the top tiers, FOR THE MOST PART, his rewards off basic situations just are not as good as any top tier in this game. Yeah, I might be able to theoretically win cause of flawless blocks, fatal blow and the wakeup system, but I'm winning off of the game holding my hand for me, not because my character is that good or I'm that good.

Hmm, I don't think I can agree with your assessment of comeback mechanics in this game and their ability to sway a match. If the winner of a match was more determined by character selection and luck-of-the-draw boneheaded uses of fatal blow, we would see more variance in tournament outcomes than we do. If a character could really hold a player's hand to the extent you say, and comeback mechanics added variability to the extent you suggest, I wouldn't be seeing The Mighty Unjust crushing the competition week after week, or be seeing the same people in top 8.

Volatility to the extent that you describe should be observable via data, and there isn't data to support your hypothesis. In fact, data suggests that your perception isn't reality.

As far as what I mean about power distribution, you just have to critically look at these characters and look at who has what and how much. Everyone in MKX 50/50's you, pressures you and puts you in fucked up situations. You cannot like that, and that's fine, I didn't, but everybody played the game. Keep in mind, I'm talking CURRENT MKX, XL MKX. MK11, not everyone can fundamentally play the game, their power levels are artificially boosted by all these mechanics meant to make it so you're never at too much of a disadvantage. At the end of the day, even if this facilitates some idea of balance, this isn't interesting or fun to people. I still don't think it does though, especially when people aren't paying attention to the current climate. No one is HELLA GRINDING this game. No one cares. If people were in like, full on offline pro komp mode grind time? You'd be seeing the 4-5 characters in top 8. That also dramatically changes how the perception of the game ends up to other people.

First, you don't know that "no one is HELLA GRINDING" this game. In fact, I see streams every day of people playing for hours on end, so I'm going to say that your statement is likely inaccurate.

Second, let's take a look at the results of a fairly recent offline tournament...

1. NASR|TekkenMaster (Jacqui, Jade)
2. PxP|A Foxy Grampa (Sub-Zero, Sheeva, Shang Tsung)
3. PG|Hayatei (Fujin)
4. Konqueror249 (Sub-Zero)
5. DF|Grr (Geras)
6. AVirk (Scorpion)
7. Dubasik (Kabal)
8. MCG|MK_Azerbaijan (Rain, Sonya)

Jacqui, Jade, Subs, Sheeva, Tsung, Fujin, Geras, Scorps, Kabal, Rain, Sonya. The top 8 repped 11 different characters. I don't think your assertion holds water.

Now, let's get back to your original hypothesis, that the good characters don't have weaknesses except in minute ways. If this was true, there wouldn't be incentive to character swap, as top tier characters lack weaknesses that can be exploited in a meaningful manner. Everyone plays a top tier character with no exploitable weaknesses, there would be no counterpicking, and we wouldn't see what we see in tournament results.

Anyway, I respect that you don't dig the game and you prefer another iteration. We all have different tastes. You may also find that the balance isn't to your liking because strategies you prefer to use aren't powerful. If we're looking at data, though, the game does appear to have strong balance between characters, especially when compared to other entries in the last 30 years of fighting games.

Edit: I wanted to add this last bit to keep you from wasting effort.

If you don't have data, you probably won't change my mind. I'm not saying your opinion is wrong, necessarily, it's just something I'm going to require in order to reassess my position. If you have some results that support your claims, I'm totally open to checking it out.