Correction. No one in Brawl has the capabilities to go even with MK.
nobody goes even with mk because he is a god and CANT be beaten right?
Hmm. interesting point, there.
To call me the "leader" of the Fox boards is the most comical thing in this thread. I never said I was the leader...nor did anyone appoint me that. Not everybody on the board agrees with me...I'm just the one who doesn't kiss EL's *** here. I don't believe he's right in this...and I won't just let it go. He is trying to force the Fox board into "Oh noes! fawks sucks!" and I simply don't believe it. If you honestly think that makes me the leader... whatever for you... I'm not. I neve will say I am.
The character board does not need a leader.
and then you go "appoint" somebody who said false claims...and never refuted any of my points on the Tornado issue, in which he was obviously wrong...and yet posted it as fact, and then argued that it was indeed fact? hahaha. good call on our leader.
Scotu, to say I haven't given evidence of my claims is ridiculous. I've posted up and down these boards my reasons for Fox beating MK, it just gets really old regurgitating them every time somebody wants to feel special and make their own thread.
I read your final paragraph. I don't see any reasons why MK vs Fox is not 100:0... I see a blanket statement
"You have to realize why your character has a disadvantage, so you can try to work around the disadvantageous points and try to get a win out of a situation that's 70-30 against you"
I don't think the character has a disadvantage...much less a 3-7.. so how would I realize WHY that happens? your write-ups have stated wrong "facts" as to why he's a 7-3... one of your main points in another thread was that tornado ***** Fox... >.>
Again, I don't think Fox has no weaknesses. I understand that he has them...and I understand how to work around them. I do not get stuck on that, though, and completely rule out Fox's chances in higher play.
Again, if you do not consider the different situations that each character will be in in a matchup, you are limiting your view on it. I am trying to base my claims on who is more likely to win in a tournament setting... I understand that's not how you see it... I factor in "if A then B" relationships into my arguments that make everybody cringe... however, I do not think I'm wrong in doing so. Again, pulling a GW Fox matchup for this... Fox can usmash GW's SH aerials. Yes, that's baitable... yes... GW can react to that... but GW's main approaching strategy is beaten by a simple move. That should factor into the debate. Plain and simple.. that should be a factor in this.
I UNDERSTAND that I'm one of the only ones thinking this... and that you think matchup thread should be purely about frame data and range and such... but I simply don't think so. *shrug*
Fox is one of the best punishers in the game, when he is able to predict. that's not hard to see. Therefore, baits and situations will have to take a place in discussions to accurately portray what the matchup is like.
I understand why EL is backing Scotu... that's not the issue. I'm telling him to find another lackey because you're far too incompetent. : )
CO18, I agree that because I do well against MKs, it shouldn't be used as an example here... I may just be an amazing player who wins a 7-3 matchup. ; )