There is a difference between appearance and functionality. Besides, moves being "dumb" is subjective in the first place, I don't think falcos dair is "dumb" because he has to commit his entire body to a move without disjoint. The reason it is such a good move is because of the way his moveset interacts with the move, not the move itself. Again, you cannot just look at another characters move and justify all you changes based off that move, movesets would have no sort of fluidity or intuitiveness. While links nair may be technically "objectively worse", it really isn't. You can use his nair in every single situation you could use it before without fail by just pressing the button slightly later(by slightly I mean literally a few frames which you can't even distinguish with eyesight because of how little it changed). Links nair still outlasts all dodges and still brute forces it's way through pretty much every recovery in the game, it was simply polished. I hope you also understand that spacies were nerfed and Link was buffed. Buffing characters by just simply increasing stats on random moves is bad design, link's playstyle was changed to be more versatile and he was given several new tools, the things that were actually nerfed on him I've yet to see anyone mention at all. Overall Link is a much much better character than he was before.
I'm not missing your point, I think your point is made out of ignorance. You clearly don't know what intuitive means and to your last sentence apply that to link himself.
Uh, if you take 2.5 Link(who has lingering nair) and 2.6 link(who doesn't) you tell me which one is "objectively" worse. Whole movesets need to be taken into account when balancing a character not just one move. Link was given several tools he didn't have before and several of his moves were buffed. You don't buff a character by just making every move they have better and you don't buff moves without considering implications and altering movesets accordingly.
You're now mixing up the aspects of utility, which I was under the assumption you were ignoring when you took away the lingering hitbox out of aesthetics. I realize the drawbacks and whatever for the Dair, but I'm talking about individual properties and how in the realm of Melee/P:M, Link's Nair wasn't outside the threshold to make it ridiculous or change-worthy. But whatever I'll concede/ignore that if I must because I don't really care to argue it. You're saying **** that I already understand, but you're completely ignoring my point, regardless of whether you say you are or not. You're essentially arguing that there's virtually no difference. Thus there was NO REASON TO CHANGE IT. Seriously.
You're really arguing that reducing hitbox length on a move doesn't make it objectively worse? Nice. I said even if it was slightly worse, it's still objectively worse. If it was such a minuscule change and hardly noticeable, then why ****ing change it?
I know that spacies were nerfed, hence why I didn't say that they had invincibility on their shines when making my above statement. Apples and oranges. I don't give a damn about the general link buff, I'm saying there wasn't really a legitimate reason to remove that aspect of the hitbox when it wasn't causing any issues. It didn't balance out any bonuses he got, it was just taken for nary a legitimate reason or purpose. Seriously, how many extra frames was it actually out and was it really that big an issue?
And on the subject of being counter-intuitive, do you think it's intuitive to have his grab miss if the opponent is a pixel above the ground? Why are things not being held to equal standards?
Yes. 2.5 link is worse than 2.6 link. But you're neglecting the fact that his nair was not the only thing to change. Now YOUR point is made out of ignorance. You can't disregard every single other change simply to make a faulty point. There's a fallacy for that and if I remembered the name I'd call you out on it further. Obviously you know I meant if you take two versions of Link whose other properties are exactly the same and give one the lingering Nair, that one will be objectively better. Thanks for not even trying to think about what I said. Thanks a ton. Faulty logic is faulty and I'm glad to just be disregarded and to have my "bad" logic shot down by even worse logic. I understand you hold the authoritative edge in this debate, but seriously dude.
I'm not even really trying to create a huge argument over this. It's not worth the time of either of us. I just found a flaw in the reasoning and I felt like pointing it out. Do with it what you will. Disregard, pull a veil over your eyes, justify it in any way that you wish. It was completely unnecessary in my eyes and now I've gotten that across. So whatever.
. I have some crazy bomb tricks.
