What’s wrong with you?
First of all, if you haven’t noticed, after my posts were made, everyone in this thread(including you) have finally used Strategy and Tactics, in their proper context. Secondly, how you are going to say that I made a bad point, and then go on to say that you didn’t even read my posts beforehand?
What are you? Some kind of aristocrat? Adjust your monocle and re-read my posts then, and understand that alot of what’s been going on has been covered, and the proper use of two of the most important words in this thread, have now been corrected.
And I’ve already made a distinction between execution-intensive mechanics that are necessary or inevitable. I brought up the 360 slams for example. Shortcuts are used to pull them off, a 270. A 360 should be rewarded more in damage than a 270. That way strategy would remain the same, but if your execution is better, than you get more out of it than someone else who can’t do it. FRCs don’t need to be in Guilty Gear, but have you ever considered that maybe some people play the game because of FRCs and difficult things similar?
Where do you draw the line then?
You might aswell go play DOA then, because yes, DOA has some strategy in it and there’s more to the game than meets the eye. Buuuutt, execution is not a strong point on that game, so people can get highly rewarded for random feats of reversals and comebacks. Execution can help take the randomness out of obtaining damage and such.
Chess doesn’t have execution(to the extent we’re all talking about here), but Chess is also turnbased and you have plenty of opportunities to rectify mistakes, cover up randomness, and mount a comeback. You also start with the same exact pieces as your opponent does. Everytime the game is played. Did you know in Chess, you could just play the board more than your opponent? That’s part of the ‘thinking x# of moves ahead part,’ even when playing your opponent for the first time.
Any competitive sport, or competitive fighting game will always have imbalances in them. Basketball, you have a point guard just like the other team has a point guard, but one point guard is better than the other in something or both(whether it be strategy or tactics, and even technique for both).
I don’t care if you don’t read this long post. Someone will. Don’t comment on some shit you haven’t read.
How does a long combo not have strategic relevance aswell?
Are you an idiot?
Even if you take the damage aspect away from it, matches have a time limit and long combos effect the clock.
(sidetrack- a good strategy against CC infs in A3 is to waste the clock down to point where, your combos become just as powerful as their CC inf. That’s a reason why resets are done in the game too, to get faster damage otherwise they wouldn’t KO due to time. A normal VC can become just as good when there’s 30 seconds left.)
If Player A can do a long combo, SURELY, that’s going to change Player B’s strategy. Player B isn’t going to play unsafe and take as many risks, as a part of his strategy.
Player B might know how difficult that combo is, and takes into consideration a percentage Player A can complete it.
Ambiance -> can this dude do the combo under pressure? Let me make it a part of my strategy to pressure him with other moves(make him use his meter for other purposes, taking the combo away, etc.)
There’s a reason why some people can do so many cool combos and shit in training mode, but when they actually play someone, even given the opportunity… they fuck it up.
Hate to break it to you guys, but Adam Warlock is all over this part with his Basketball analogies.
Like a said before, a great solution is to have an easier(shortcut) version of a move do less damage than when it’s performed the harder way. That way it retains it’s utility, but if you can perform it better, then that’s the plus.
