Action

What is your opinion on acting vs reacting?

I am of the strong opinion that sufficient foresight, created by experience, planning, etc, can allow one to see openings which lead to a stronger position. Seizing the initiative in other words. My blogs are all gone explaining reaction times and stuff but in general the further you all are away from each other the more time you have to react depending on the various kwirks of the matchup. The more point blank you are, where many players in CvS2 think they like to be, the more it’s a guess. The knowledgeable though know, that this close, the one who controls is the one who will win–unless they are limited somehow and thus predictable to the defender, who in this case effectively becomes the one looking ahead.

Both have their place of course—acting and reacting. They are intertwined. I think strong players need to master both acting and reacting, but the strongest master seizing the initiative, and if the opening doesn’t exist, to bait out an “expected” response that, to the other player, seems like they’re “acting,” but in reallity they were reacting just like a puppet.

A good example:

  1. Someone throwing a series of strong frame advantaged, quick recovery moves vs Blanka who is close to but doesn’t have CC, yet can modestly RC ok when not under duress. If you nail him with a +7 or +8 move, that reversal timing for his RC becomes tighter, because Blanka isn’t the one throwing the block string out there with his comfort zone executable RC’s thrown in. He has to “guess” where that 2 or 3 frame window is and properly insert his own 2-3 move window for his own RC.
    Ideally, if you can walk up on Blanka with Nakoruru’s walking jabs or O.Iori’s (yes I know he’s not tourney viable, STFU), you aren’t really in danger of his RC Electricity unless this guy is truly on point, meaning he is comfortable with 2 frame +7 or +8 frame advantaged, quick recovering moves and RC’ing through them.

  2. After he gets CC from the repeated blockings though, he could easily mash CC repeatedly if he wanted to blast through moves like that, though it’s somewhat risky doing such things against some characters in the game, most people do not plan that far ahead in this scenario anyway so it’s a low risk maneuver with the right timing (and a sufficiently fast move to CC into to beat the recovery of Nak’s or Iori’s jab).
    In a different light, this could be what the Nak or Iori player is counting on since Blanka may feel truly helpless and try going for the mashable move to break out, and punish, thus robbing the Blanka of the CC.—there are other ways out of this but lets keep it simple for the subject in the title.

The difference between these two scenarios is you can mash the latter, but not the former, though as your skill goes up perhaps you are one of those “truly on point” people who can mash RC’s with 199% consistency in these instances. There are other moves in the game in this scenario that you can mash out invincible moves with of course to “blast through” Nak’s jabs, but they all come with a high price tag for punishment if you did it at the wrong time, though they are arguably easier since you can “buffer” these strings in while in block stun and the game seems more forgiving here, like Ken or Akuma’s jab DP’s or whatever.


I digress?

The point is Blanka would be more comfortable applying these same games towards Nako with his own Frame advantaged moves, and as the player is more at home with Blanka’s moveset, knows exactly when to execute his own RC’d moves especially to counter reprisals that are easy to see coming depending on the player he’s fighting, running Nako’s moveset. He’d be more comfortable acting, so he can easiliy “react” to what he saw coming, especially if his actions limit Nako’s reprisals to a few predictable outcomes.

There are many levels of this, but he must first close the distance on his terms to apply this, just as Nako must close on her terms to apply her own stuff.

In my opinion, knowing the ins and outs of that distanced fighting is key to seizing the initiative, to “seeing the future” and responding quicker to what was expected via training or experience vs the clueless one who knows nothing of this fight and plays completely reactive and instinctively hits back at the earliest opportunity.

Even the turtle is watching, looking for a recognizable pattern to take advantage of and when he see’s the cues, he acts/reacts (however you want to look at it, because in this case it is the same?!?)

Risk means nothing if you don’t know how to take it, so it all goes hand in hand.
Taking advantage of a situation doesn’t have to necessarily do with just waiting, it could be positioning, waiting for something to whiff, moving a certain way, anything really. The player just has to have a plan for every action.

Over time, I have learned that flow-chart play is actually GOOD if your flow chart allows for variations that are within your comfortable execution limits.

I was always a reactionary player. One of my better skills was reacting to jumpins with lvl2 supers all the time, every time. If they didn’t jump, I’d wait for their whiffed move to punish. But if they turtle, then I have a limited set of offensive options that certain people can read easily. I would have a lot more wins if I had more offensive styles. There are times where I just rush down and kill people (did that to Poongko a couple of times, gave him a taste of his own medicine muahaha), but I don’t feel that my offense is terribly unique or frightening during a session of 50 casual games.

Action is much preferred to reaction. The advantage of leading out strong reaches across many games. You could trap someone with pocket kings by just calling pre-flop but you run the risk of them catching something dumb like trip 6s or a flush. Best to play it strong to weed out garbage hands. White always has the advantage in Chess because White moves first and has that initial tempo that sets the pace for the rest of the match. Aces in tennis. There are probably lots of examples in other competitive activities that reward the one who takes action.

Knowing how to react to certain situations-
Being a reactionary player-
Action is better than reaction-
Flowchart play is good–sometimes-
hand in hand-

Ultimately hints at you have to have knowledge of the matchup to get by, but with so many different matchups and playstyles, I think at base you need your basic functional gameplan which provokes certain predicted responses. If there are none, say you don’t recognize the matchup or the other guy’s playstyle is different or he opts for different responses from the norm, then you are initally playing while searching for whatever his responses are, and when you recognize them, give em the bait then punish.

It goes beyond searching for a particular "move."
Sometimes if they mash out something the second they come out of blockstun, all the time, you have something to use against them now. If you feed them a blockstring that destroys a ton of guard bar, they might do something rediculous every time you do that string, every time, treating it like a health bar even. Whatever the case, you now have something to use against them.
–say blockstring which leaves you both at neutral, he attacks with this.
–repeat said blockstring, leaving you both at neutral, he attacks with this, again…
(or even that. The point is he does something, leaving his guard open)
**respond with your own, invincible bam

Sounds like we all know what we’re talking about at least, or have that general idea.
Just wanted to get some healthy conversation going.

Kindling Interest

So I haven’t played in about maybe 9 months now.
I guess I’m starting to feel that itch to play once again.
Of course I cannot afford to head to local arcades and loose trying to regain how I used to play, so upon return from my deployment I’ll seek out my brother and attempt to destroy him proper once again.
While the details of many matchups might be out of sight out of mind, the bottom line is getting back on point with the baseline of my team’s playstyle, and to regain a previous level of execution that must obviously be diminished.

Good times.

Thought-provoking reads. Anything else brewing?