Lol at Fenrir and Tyr posting in the same discussion... sorry about your hand there...
To Tyr:
The original thought was that the match would move from something like an 8-2 to a 7-3 or so... Therefore, I had thought that either player could put a handicap on at pretty much any time... While it does make it a somewhat better match, it still does not in any way limit your CP.
There would be an alternate situation, though.. One could treat it as with picking a character. Basically, if you CPed Pika on me, and I didn't already have a % on, I couldn't put one on.
To be honest, I don't know that the handicap would really change the match very much at all, so it seemed to me that putting a handicap on would be a pretty much any time, and really not change the fairness of the match. Against Pika, I'm not even sure that putting a handicap on is the right choice for Fox, to be honest. I've been a huge proponent of the "Fox can avoid grabs" argument for a while, so when you're basically giving him a free 60% for something you might avoid, I'm not sure it's the best choice... but I digress.
Basically, I think that while it does make matches a bit more playable, it certain doesn't change that one character has a large advantage over the other as a CP, so I really don't see a reason that Fox couldn't set a handicap even after char choice.
To AP:
You do not alter match-ups when the thing in question that you are altering is not ban-worthy in the first place.
Are you directly banning Pika's D-throw CG? No. Are you making it completely out of the question, because it's unable to be used? Yes.
by banning walk-off ledges, DDD's CG is greatly weakened, too, but that is the best choice... Yes, we are trying to limit the use of a single move unbreakable CG. Pika's dthrow would still be used as a good setup to other things, just the CG factor of that would be gone... so yes, we are trying to do that, and think it's best for the metagame's development.
The only difference between Marth's F-air and Pikachu's D-throw CG is that the latter is guaranteed to wreck if the first D-throw connects, while the former is an amazing spacing and zoning tool that will wreck certain characters throughout the match.
The only difference between Marth's match-up against much of low tier and Sheik's match-up against Fox is that the latter is bad because of a lock, while the former is bad because of a really good spacing tool.
They're still both 7:3 match-ups. So you don't only alter the latter simply because it's a lock, but not alter the former.
Well, not exactly. Marth's zoning takes quite a bit of patience and spacing... and at any point, can be beaten by pretty much any character in the game. Zoning exists in every fighting game I am aware of, and is pretty much a staple of good play. Regardless of that, though, there's no way you can say that landing a single grab with Pika even compares in difficulty and skill level involved to proper Marth zoning. The same is true with Sheik, except even more so... Sheik can ftilt out of shield even, having good range and speed..
Basically, for Marth to properly zone a whole match is no comparison in skill than for Sheik/Pika/Falco to land one attack or grab...
Let's take this as an example: Falco. Falco has a 0-40% CG on most of the cast, which can lead to an onstage late DACUS or an off-stage D-air spike. The CG doesn't work if you're grabbed at roughly 20%, and you can SDI the D-air on the stage, tech, and punish the Falco while he's D-airing. Is this a broken strategy? No. Does this make some match-ups bad? A little; it shouldn't drastically as no one should ever die from his D-air spike after the CG.
In a normal match, Falco's opponent is afraid of being grabbed, because they fear the 0-50% onstage or the 0-possible death. So they play more wearily of a grab, and good Falco players will react on this, and punish them for playing safer or predict their actions better. If you set the handicap to 20%, Falco doesn't have this low percent to 50 or death chaingrab anymore, and Falco's opponent doesn't have to be nearly as weary of a grab, not only being an unequal exchange but changing the match-up, as some characters don't have good safe options to play well while still avoiding a grab, but with the handicap they don't have to worry.
Falco is not a good character only because of his CG... I agree it helps hima lot, but he has many other options. And while the teching thing is correct, it does not always hold true in matches (some stages, and etc), and some characters cannot simply get back on stage from it.
And I agree, this ruling would certainly make it interesting for Falco players. I do not feel that it would greatly alter his metagame, or even change his position in the teir list, but some matches would be better, yes.
Answer me this: Would you think it's fair to set a handicap to 10% against Marth players? Would you think it's fair, as a Fox, to set a handicap to 10% to avoid Peach's D-throw CG or some of her low percent combos?
Yeah, I would.
This rule eliminates low percent set-ups, whether or not their broken (which none are). The opponent doesn't have a choice, and has to trade off for an unequal exchange. In Fox vs. Pikachu, Pika can CG Fox to like 90%, then U-tilt or U-smash out of it, and you're proposing to trade that for a 60% handicap. Will Pikachu grab you at 0-30% every time in a match? Probably not. But does he lose the option to play off of your inanely safe playstyle and have a CG that can lead to 100%, in place of 60%? That alone isn't fair.
Point is: you don't change match-ups. You're saying that, "Well we aren't banning a move, so using Marth's F-air and Diddy's bananas example is out of the question," but you are essentially. By setting the handicap to 60%, Pikachu can't do his D-throw chaingrab. It doesn't exist anymore. By setting the handicap to 10%, Marth can't F-throw->F-smash or F-throw->D-air. While you aren't banning the move, you're eliminating his usage for it, which you still just can't do.
They all still have 7:3 match-ups, some because of locks and chaingrabs, and some because of very good tools. You don't restrict a character's tools in a match-up to make the match-up fairer.
Again, banning walk-offs and walls makes DDD's matchups fairer... So yes, at times you do limit the usage to make matches fairer...
I think that's our key difference. You feel that the game's matchups need to stay the same, and I feel they need to change. Any 0-100% (ish) unbreakable combo needs to be seriously considered here... because honestly... is it fair? I've never really thought so. I don't know why they wouldn't add throw DI there.
While I agree that other low-% setups aren't really broken, there are a few that just plain are... and they should be reconsidered here. That's our main point in bringing this up. since the game came out, basically, the Fox pika thing has been well known... and has kept Fox from being a more tourney viable character than he is... Falco has kept a couple of the lower tier characters from doing better, as well... I don't think that easy 100%ish or death combos should really be allowed here... but I agree that actually banning a move is very hard to legalize and not the right choice.
That's where the handicap comes in... you give yourself a set lesser damage than what they could give you, but it's free damage... idk, it doesn't change matchups from bad to even, or anything like that... it changes them from very bad to bad