Stop twiddling your thumbs with these minuscule attempts at getting people to answer these types of questions as it is clear that they are unanswerable by any one individual. I apologize if that came out as rude but I tend so see posts like these as cheap cop-outs from putting forth some effort to make the playing situation (obviously not perfect...) overall more improved for the community in a quick, yet efficient manner. 'Free' damage chaingrabs, low percent (to possibly death) uair/nado juggles by Meta Knight, infinites, seem to all be removed with just this one "arbitrary" proposal for change. Why not pursue knowledge on ^ this instead of focusing on questions that will obviously change nothing in the long run?
There were countless people (like yourself) who were too busy philosophizing about what an acceptable competitive standard should be in the MK threads, which from my observation only further contributed to the procrastinating nature and outcome of said topics (although the BBR didn't really budge either from my perspective) because attention eventually deviated from the main issue and onto those and other ultimately unrelated topics. What I'm saying is...try to focus a little less on these "larger than life" type of questions and more on what would obviously have a shot to turn out best for the community/competitive play without outright changing the overall layout of what has been accepted by the majority of the community as standard play like ISP clearly would.
I think by avoiding my questions, you are the one "copping out." I don't think that these answers are unanswerable, I think they are difficult to answer and would require us to take step back and figure out what it is we want to do, what are we willing to do, and what can practically be done. Once we answer those questions as a community we will be able to solve any problem the current meta has fairly easily and quickly.
1.1 would change the game pretty fundamentally as opposed to adding an item that heals 5 percent if you pick it up. =/ I also think that if more people were clear about the real advantages and disadvantages of ISP they would be more open to it, after all the main reason we set items to none was lost when brawl came out.
Lastly, you may not like my questions, but you never actually gave a good reason as to why they aren't relevant.
edit: @WoodyWiggins: Learning a new ruleset would be far easier than learning a new metagame.
@ripple: When I say a new game, I mean it in the sense that it was a separate game released separately from SF4.
And I don't really care for any change. I'm fine with the meta as is, but as I said earlier in this post, it would be easier for the community to make a change if it new exactly what it wanted.
@SFP: SF4 to SSF4 is a lot more like Melee to Brawl.
edit2: I was actually thinking about the answers to my own questions and I realize, the reason I appear to be against 1.1 is I feel like making a singular change is a contradiction in itself. Its like your saying that there's some value in keeping the game as close to its "original" as possible, but still saying its okay to change the game. I think my point is either ditch this idea that we can't change the game and go all out (therefore implementing everything that would make the game deeper and more balanced such as items and a better ruleset) or stick to the ideal that the game shouldn't change and leave it as is.
