Free Step Dodge

I'd like to see Ein return, but I'd also like to hear a good reason why he should return. No one has made those yet, so were I Team Ninja, I'd be asking why he should be a priority. I'm not saying this just to be antagonistic. I legitimately want Ein players to interrogate their positions and present a logical, compelling argument for why his return would be a genuine contribution to the game.

They are omitted for the same reasons. Leon and Ein have no place in DOA6 because of the story. Leon simply has more potential to be re-integrated later on because of that. As for Ein's reasoning to be added to the game, the better question would be why wouldn't he return? You take fighting games as a whole and base the roster inclusion on story which has varying degrees of success.

A solid month after a fighting game comes out and story goes out the window, at that point there is only the gameplay. With that in mind, why would Ein be added and what does he contribute to the roster? 1. Senority, he's been in every title since his debut 2. His gameplay style remains unique, there are more differences between him and Hitomi then there are between Ryu and Ken.

No other character perfectly represents his stun > launch/zoning style of play. The biggest problem with this arguement stems not from his originality or lack thereof, or even what unique aspects of him add to the game's life, but that it does nothing for sales. How well would Ein sell as DLC? That's the issue, he's
not a female.

Rachel is the spartan replacement so she's not entirely unique, but regardless people want her and believe she contributes to the game as well, but not out of purity for her gameplay, but because she's sex appeal incarnate. What makes Ein a geniune contribution to the game isn't the question you should be asking. The real one is "what would make him sell as DLC?". That's a question that's much tougher to answer.

They were not ommitted because of story irrelevance. I've already discussed why TN's claim that their roster is based on story significance is BS.
Seniority is not a good reason. Just because something is old doesn't mean it's good. I don't really care what people want unless they can articulate their concern in a manner that is both coherent and sound. Sympathy for Rachel is irrelevant unless that condition is met.

Ryu and Ken put together don't justify a single character, let alone two. I would be aiming to uphold a slightly higher standard were I in TN's position.
"Differences" is not enough to justify a character. Those differences must establish a distinct identity that is incompatible with pre-existing characters. Otherwise, you're just plaguing your game with superfluous bullshit (see: Honoka et. al).

Stun>launch could suggest a gameplay identity. But why does no other character represent Ein's brand of stun->launch (and why should they not be modified to)? What is it that makes it so idiosyncratic? That's what I'm interested in hearing.

Sounds like there's a bit of bias talking. Seniority, regardless of your stance on it is important, especially in fighting games. That's like saying characters like E.Honda, Marshall Law and Leifang don't have good reasons to be included in the next iterations of their games. They add nothing to the story and characters like Jann Lee have playstyles that can be more or less experienced in another character.

Despite that, it would be seen as downright criminal if any of those characters suddenly vanished in their game's future iterations. It goes beyond seniority, they're iconic. If Ein didn't have a distinct Identity different enough from Hitomi, or Hayate for that matter, he would have never returned after 2.

As far as gameplay identity, his stun > launch gameplay represented a simplistic style of play reliant on fundumentals. He wasn't necessarily the only character that could play this way, but unlike other characters it was all he had. Then comes in his zoning and whiff punishing playstyle, sure it could be somewhat replicated with Hitomi or Hayate, but those characters were not designed with that playstyle in mind.

Hitomi and Hayate are agressive characters that represent a different style of play. You say "differences" aren't enough justification and they must establish an identity. They do that here. I don't know what grandiose reason you're looking for as to why a character would deserve a spot in a series they're known to be included in, story or not. I'd be interested in hearing that.

But I'll say this, Leon is in the exact same boat as Ein from a gameplay perspective with the sole exception of "Leon has an aimable air throw."
If a character unique gameplay feature was really a pre-req for a spot, a 3rd of the roster would be getting cut.

Actually, it's bias to think that universal incumbency is inherently valuable, not the other way around. Divorcing yourself from nostalgia is going to be more objective than reverence for it. Maintaining a series' identity is important, of course, but the supporting characters you mentioned aren't essential for that. Their worth should be easily identifiable outside "legacy/iconic" status.

Again, the story isn't dictating the roster, nor should it. If you're suggesting that Jann Lee should always be included on the grounds he has always been present since DOA1, I will disagree. Leifang should theoretically occupy a functional gameplay slot between Hitomi and Bayman. I don't think they did a good job balancing that in DOA5, however. Hopefully she's been retooled in DOA6, but I doubt it.

Your claim that Ein was the only character that had to rely solely on fundamentals is pretty uncompelling. You could argue that resets & punch parries are just as much "fundamentals" as telekinetic hitboxes or OHs & now Hitomi is equally as fixated on fundamentals as Ein. Unless you're advocating that Ein should lose those qualities & become even more "fundamental" with no room for any gimmicks (interesting concept).

A 3rd of this roster should be cut, honestly. There are a lot of really dumb characters that have somehow weaseled their way in here.

As for a potentially grandiose reason? Honestly, I think Ein's most interesting qualities are not his stun->launch, but rather his potential capacity to avoid stuns altogether. Hitomi is a character that is built on extended strings with input delays and reset throws to apply pressure

Even her lows tend to cause frame advantage in place of KND. Ein should focus on heavy, single-strike damage with immediate KNDs or launches. He had many options like that in 5, but I'd advocate sending them into overdrive should he return. Stuns should rarely be a factor for him, instead focusing on immediate damage for any opening. That'd be my pitch, anyways.

Well I can see that I was a fool to think all of those notifications were going to be likes.

The problem with your arguement is that a character's worth in fighting games is based on an absolute number of things when it comes to roster selection to the sequel of a fighter. 1. Popularity, 2. Playstyle, 3. Diversity, 4. Status. 5. Relevance. 5 accounts for story reasons but the other 4 are just as important. All it takes is one of these to shoehorn, or even justify a character's inclusion.