> once you are competent you know everything that opponent can do
This reads a little like saying "you are competent at chess when you know all the moves the pieces can make"
In Chess, knowing your opponent's available moves might make the difference between an absolute beginner and a 300 rated player
Knowing some opening theory might make the difference between 300 rating and 1000 rating
But I don't know that I'd call a 300 rated player 'competent', or even say that they 'know how to play' versus 'know the rules of Chess'
It's consistency in knowing what are good options and what are likely choices that makes a competent/good/great player in any game (most fighting games are perfect information, too!)
No, it’s not like chess. Chess has much more entropy. Moves are made one at a time. There’s much, much more stateful considerations to the game.
In fighting games only a handful of options are particularly relevant at any time. often times characters’ entire thing revolve around one move, like a fireball. It’s not to say that spamming fireball is a viable strategy, but all decisions need to be made in the context of remembering that they have a fireball more than anything.
>often times characters’ entire thing revolve around one move, like a fireball
People absolutely hate when a character's entire thing revolves around one move. They're usually a low-tier character, and when they aren't low-tier they are just annoying to play against.
one notable exception to this is the grappler archetype, where their 'close proximity command grab' is a massive tool which you always need to respect
the mere presence of the grappler causes a pressure on your decision-making process, since you always have to respect this option from them
but even here, the grappler has more tools than just 'grab you', they have an entire neutral kit still, as well as specials oriented around space control and 'trapping you' in the range where their grab is effective
This reads a little like saying "you are competent at chess when you know all the moves the pieces can make"
In Chess, knowing your opponent's available moves might make the difference between an absolute beginner and a 300 rated player
Knowing some opening theory might make the difference between 300 rating and 1000 rating
But I don't know that I'd call a 300 rated player 'competent', or even say that they 'know how to play' versus 'know the rules of Chess'
It's consistency in knowing what are good options and what are likely choices that makes a competent/good/great player in any game (most fighting games are perfect information, too!)