Here is my question. Why is it ok when someone puts you in a standing reset/5050 and one touch of deaths you like Cap Cold, Cheetah, Canary but when zoning is actually good and you can keep them out the entire match its cancer?
your premise is entirely wrong so is the question
zoning is not just unreactable, unpunishable projectile spam
tods should not exist especially when there's no rounds in a match
standing resets into guaranteed stuff is just bad character design
all of these subs to the main topic can be treated the same
they should not exist in a genre that is supposed to reward player strategic thinking, creativity and reactions
if we're still debating this, we failed as players and community
now this is the theory
but since at least some of us intend to play i2 for its whole cycle let's try and go deeper
an 'overpowered' tool should be adjusted only when:
- there's no way around it despite tools that are designed as counters
- the defending player is completely taken out of the equation made of frames, hit levels and a human player
possibly the defender's options should be modified to the point they can be viable and only if they don't break other areas or aspects of the game rather than taking out the attacker's
but this is an ideal scenario and applies to situations in which a character isn't entirely built around a single strategy so in general 'nerfing' is almost always the correct solution but not in the way/amount we've seen so far where the character viability has been mostly compromised
building on all of this, to evaluate a character tool or strategy we should ask a few questions in the form of a flowchart, in the case of this 'broken' zoning:
- do I have options against it? (leaping moves possibly with invincibility, MB roll, jumps, teleports, flying)
- can I use these options to bait my opponent into a mistake? (ie wrong projectile timing, wrong distance, minus frames)
- can I capitalize on my opponent's mistake to my own advantage? (ie getting my big rewarding punish and damage starting my own setplay aswell)
- is it correct to play like this?are my/opponent's skills really tested?
if the most predominant answer to all of this is 'no' (including having to resort to a counterpick) it's just another case of bad design
true, the average user here has a tendency to quickly jump to conclusions but this behavior comes off more than a bunch of non rewarding scenarios in which even guessing right could've been used at our own disadvantage
I would really like to hear a few opinions on this so plz respond
