You can't make dozens of mistakes against Fox / Falco, because they've got very powerful combos that they can convert into kill moves, and they usually start from very fast moves, like shine, nair, or throw. This is also true of a few other characters, like Marth and Falcon, but they have a few holes in their game to make up for it.
And fox and falco don't have holes in their game? Im pretty sure they do. Like being able to chain grab them easily and gimping them. I fail to see how you are pointing out anything that seems to be particularly unique about fox/falco. Yes they have combos that convert into kill moves, but so does the
majority of the cast in project m. What you are saying here might apply more in melee but is definitely not a unique characteristic for fox/falco in project m.
It's important to note that their recovery is only bad when they're forced to recover low. They're actually pretty competent at recovering high as they have two fairly distinct recovery options. As such, most side-smashes aren't really a huge threat to them due to their launch trajectories. DSmashes and throws are your main gimp tools against spacies.
I disagree. I think there recovery is bad (not entirely bad) in more than just the low area. Many times they are high or same level as stage but too far to recover. At that same exact distance or even further, many of the cast members in pm can recover. Combine this with what I just said above, and you have yourself cast members who can convert combos into kill moves and can recover very well comparatively. Again, if this were melee I might agree with you but since this is pm, the rest of the cast makes a massive difference on how good falco/fox is relative to them. This is true regardless of having frame data from melee.
Of course it does, but you won't get it on every stock. The hits that lead into the gimp opportunity are situational, and if you base your entire gameplan around aiming for a gimp, you'll telegraph your offense and the opponent will be able to defend against your attacks easily.
If you watch tournament videos I think a gimp rate of once per match (which was implied in the math above) is more than fair. It generally doesn't even happen quite that often.
I watch lots of tournament videos and seen it happen multiple times in a single match. Also, what if this 40% death stock is not the first stock but rather the last stock.Your math can no longer apply here because it would have to assume that fox/falco continue with infinite stocks. In other words, you stated "120 * 3 +40= 400" but that's assuming they only lost one of the first 3 stocks with 40%. If it happens on the last stock they lose the game. What Im trying to point out here is that it really is not as linear as you are making it seem. This game has way too many variables and you also have to take into consideration that the percentage death of 100, 120, 140, 160 differ for the entire cast. Way too many variables for you to apply one equation even if you are just being general. Fox may be able to kill one character at 100% and die at 120% but what about killing a character that normally dies at 150%. Fox and falco might still die 120% vs. this character. But even saying this is incorrect because fox and falco don't always die at 120%, probably not even on average. There is no way you can try to make it this linear.
No we don't. Tier lists are always based on the highest level of play currently known to be possible. You also never want to use "ease of use" as a balancing mechanic, because once people become highly skilled at the game it no longer matters. A character who is super strong but difficult to use well will have no weaknesses once people become adept at the game.
You are correct about this. The tier list is based on high level of play. I just thought it would be unfair for the majority of the people who play this game that are not on that level. But that is not what we are talking about here.
Either way, we are not referring to just the tier list. People want to nurf the characters because they believe that they are in such high tier because of something broken they have. Fox/falco do not have anything broken about them and they are not broken characters. They are pretty much the same as melee. Would you say that fox and falco are broken in melee? If not, then they do not need to be nurfed here. Im sure you are going to say that brokeness is not required for nurfing, but I honestly think it does. Because if we are nurfing something that is not broken, then we are nurfing something that is simply good or great about a character. If that is the case, we are nurfing just to nurf and that kind of mentality is extremely toxic and can ruin an entire game once we do it to one character. Thankfully, im sure the PMBR know this and are not stupid enough to be quick to nurf unless they are 100% sure.
Lets look at why nurfing Ike in the past before 3.0 made sense (if im not mistaken, one of the reasons was because of knockback)
1. Ike was broken
2. Ike was broken because of his sword moves
3. his sword moves were broken because their knock back was faarrrrrrrr too much on ALL CAST MEMBERS and Ike was NOT slow enough to balance out such massive knock back in his moves
4. Ike was then nurfed by changing knock back based on area the sword hits (kind of like marth)
However, fox and falco are way more complex and have both very good and very bad things about them. Nurfing the very good things while keeping the very bad will hurt them too much. For example, lets look at what happens if were were to nurf falco's bair:
1. options and chances of killing now decrease (by variable that is unknown)
2. the probability of falco dying before killing off opponent now increases (by a variable that is unknown) since we decreased his chances of killing before dying without increasing recovery.
3. He now has less options to kill at certain percentages.
4. His ability to have this option for mind games now has decreased, therefore, mind games decrease
5. Opponent now has higher chance of killing falco (by a variable unknown) since they are on stage longer.
6. They have less of falco's option's to deal with.
7. Other **** I don't know.......
There are far more things im not taking into consideration. One massive variable is the specific match up with other characters and their mindgames/options vs falco. Imagine doing this analysis for falco vs. every single character. It might balance out one match up or two but might hurt him far too much in another.
Im sure there are other things that come into play that I'm unaware of. Point is, we can't just run around and say "nurf...hes broken... nurf nurf nurf" because we need to see what exactly is it about him that is broken and how much impact will it have on him RELATIVE TO the rest of the cast. When you begin seeing it like this, you'll realize how ridiculous the idea of nurfing falco IN PROJECT M is.
