I mean Snake never has to approach the wall ever, so what's the point of mentioning it? DK has to get through Snake's wall, not the other way around.
I was saying that more in response to Dekill saying that Snake can always just DA DK's landing.
All his moves that "outrange" Snake and poke his shield blow up the nade. In practice, DK rarely is trading with snake but instead getting hit by his nades and struggling to land and approach without taking damage.
Are you forgetting that DK has one of the largest grab ranges in the game? He also has access to some excellent throws for this MU. At mid-range, DK can be very dangerous. On top of the tilts and grab, he has Hand Slap as well.
Basically, DK has a lot of the same strengths that DDD has in this MU, but he has a few of his own as well and he's also missing a bunch of DDD's weaknesses.
I believe you overestimate your own character too, as well as underestimate others.
I overestimate my own character? So that's why I've adamantly argued that DDD:Snake is even despite providing enough results evidence to convince nearly everyone interested that DDD actually wins the MU? <__<
Sounds like you're describing yourself when you were saying D3 beats Snake. Once again, an irrelevant opinion so why mention it?
I don't think I've yet even begun a discussion that had anything to do with a character beating Snake other than Pika +2'ing him.. Stop skimming and start reading, man.
Focusing on the characters strengths and ignoring their weaknesses. You make it sound like DK has no weaknesses in the match up, which is a bias approach to presenting "evidence," that DK vs Snake is even.
Both char's weaknesses are already well-known, lolz! I don't need to re-iterate them. Right now I'm combating the strongly-instilled opinion that Snake bodies DK, so I'm clearly listing strengths that counteract or make up for the weaknesses and show that the MU isn't lopsided. If I was truly ignoring weaknesses, do you think I'd be arguing for an even MU? Put things in context, man!
If you want to speak of ignoring weaknesses, then why do you constantly assume that, up close, Snake will never lose because his shield will always be hit while there's a 'nade at his feet? It's like you forget that grabs exist unless it's Snake doing the grabbing (at which point, he suddenly gains a tech so powerful, it 0-100's the entire cast
). Grenades do cover Snake but they don't make him
invincible in CQC.
You also assume that Snake will always shield quick moves that out-range him. The very
advantage of those moves is that I can surprise and hit Snake because my effective range bubble is larger than his and my moves are fast enough to tag him before he realizes/reacts. If one could always shield greater-ranged attacks via prediction/reaction, then range would never be a strong point for
anyone and chars like Marth wouldn't be as good as they actually are.
