How do you think the mechanics could be made more solid? I agree with you on the other stuff (I just don't care, personally), but I love DoA5's core gameplay and I'm wondering how you'd improve it, as you seem to know your stuff.
I have a feeling that changes that might make DoA better for high level players might make it less friendly for casuals like me and in that case I'd hate to see that happen. I've always considered DoA similar to being the 'Mario Kart' of fighters. Unlike most of them, anyone can pick it up and immediately have a chance, and look good doing it, but an decent player will still win 8 or 9 out of 10 matches vs a new player and an expert 10/10. In other fighters just learning to play is an obstacle, let alone jumping in, mashing out some combos and being at least somewhat competitive.
It would definitely be a balancing act, and I would never want to alienate casuals (too much), since I know that's the reason we're up to DoA5, TTT2, whatever. They pay the dollars. But one of the things that's so frustrating is that the game is very close, imo, to being as good as SC or VF, but too much of Itagaki's "I love to gamble" mentality permeates the design decisions. The problem I have is that it eschews in favor of the defender far too often.
In DoA, from the outset, it is a danger to attack. The counter system ensures this. Currently there are three different timings for counters (normal/counter/hi counter). I would get rid of the "normal" hold timing and make it so that it's only counter/hi counter. It's a difference of a few frames, but would help a lot.
So if I'm the attacker, and I've navigated your defense and managed to hit you. I'm rewarded with a stun. I'm not guaranteed any further damage for successfully landing an attack. THIS is the main problem that most people who play fighting games have with DoA. It's not the stupid outfits. It's this core tenet of pretty much every fighting game ever. In DoA, it's twisted on its head and it now becomes a RISK for me to attack you even though you've already made the mistake that put us into this position in the first place.
The stun game is here to stay in DoA. I accept that. But I think there are some things they could do, and have started to do things in DoA5, that could help. Sitdown stuns are an excellent start. I would like to see moves that are unholdable, and also more moves that make that prevent the next move from being countered. Or, as an alternative, maybe the person in the stun cannot hold from the initial hit of the stun. The way things work now, the more hits/damage you do in a stun, the higher they are launched. If you are guaranteed one free hit on stun, then you can do a launcher, but since you've done little damage prior, the launch isn't very high, so the juggles you can do will be limited. I think this would be a great way to preserve the risk/reward mentality that DoA has always had.
Frame data is stupid silly in this game. The best, and often only way, to punish is with throws, and the frame data is designed around that. Lots of attacks are unsafe (another downside to attacking), so it's a guess to mount an offense. It doesn't need to be drastic changes. I'm not looking for anything like Tekken. I think DoA3.1/.2 was about perfect in this regard.
I think you should be able to escape throws. Not hi-counter throws, or throws during recovery, but if somebody just runs up and throws me, I think I should be able to get out of it.
I typed a lot. Geez.
I don't think any of these things would take away anything more casual players like about the series. I think they're pretty small changes individually that would add up to an even better game overall. I love this game and would love to see it become even more popular. Until that time, I understand why people avoid it.