What's up guys. First post here, so first off I'd like to say thanks to everyone here for all of the awesome info and videos you guys have compiled/created! This really is the premiere online KoF community.
Now then, just thought I'd throw in my 2 cents on this ratio idea. As a ubiquitous competitive standard, I think it's ridiculous. In a tournament setting, I think everyone should be able to use whichever tools are available to them to give themselves the best chance to win, and limiting character selection simply because you don't want to deal with certain tactics or teams goes against that. Sure, K' and Raiden are annoying and I'm sure I'll complain about them when I inevitably fall victim to their shennanigans, but I've also seen plenty of players work around these characters and beat them with a variety of characters. Is the ratio system really encouraging character variety or is it simply a reactionary measure founded on frustration? This isn't to say I "know better than Japan" or anything. Obviously they're leagues ahead of anyone in terms of skill level. However, recall that Japan commonly engages in plenty of other practices widely regarded as anti-competitive here in America, such as single-elimination brackets and character locking. There's just a cultural gulf when it comes to the nature of competition, and I happen to fall on the opposing side.
All that being said, I think AI's implementation of the ratio system as explained by Kane makes perfect sense. In their case it's more of a gentleman's agreement than a hard rule, a situation where a particular community determined amongst itself how they could most enjoy the game, while outsiders who show up and just want to play K' because they like his sunglasses are free to do so. I'm just saying it's not a rule I would support at a national-level competition (something I greatly hope XIII ends up garnering).
Ultimately I just support people playing whichever characters they want for whatever reasons they want. Those who want to win by any means necessary are likely to gravitate towards top tiers, and that's fine. Others may choose characters they are comfortable with or enjoy, and they may end up choosing top tiers as well, who's to say. I mean, maybe there's a player out there who's always been challenged execution-wise, but finds that the technical ease of Raiden's "hold B/D, release at opportune moment" gameplan finally allows him to have fun with the game. Should he be punished for his idiosyncracies as a player by being forced to compose the rest of his team from 0-ratio characters he may or may not have any interest in?
As others have stated, it's going to to be the players who play the characters they enjoy but are also driven to win who are going to rise to the top and show us the really hype stuff. They'll be the ones proposing strategies to beat S tiers rather than rules to gimp them. And I don't think there'll be any shortage of those players when the console version hits. Hell, I plan on being one myself. Way too many interesting characters to know what team I'll be running for sure, but right now I'm big on Ash/Benimaru/Iori, aka Team Handsome Fighters Never Lose Battles (guess who I play in SF...).
This post has gone on way too long, but I feel the need to mention one last thing. The MvC2 hate makes me sad. Sure it's incredibly unbalanced, but it's also managed to sustain a large community for several years with unmatched levels of hype. If XIII achieves a fraction of MvC2's success, balanced or not, I will be ecstatic.
See you folks around!