Actually, I believe Mopreme once wrote up a long explanation on how Judgement works the last time we all argued about this. Lemme see if I can find the thread, and I’ll link it up here.
EDIT: Here we go. Post 15. Also my opinion along with others from years ago. Check it out!
http://www.shoryuken.com/forums/showthread.php?t=29998&highlight=judgement
So i can roll with Akuma is SF2 and Gill in SF3? Neither is game breaking. You just dont like them. Who ACTUALLY likes judegment? That logic is retarded. And its what you suggested.
Haha.
;D
Just because Judgement does not break the game doesn’t mean it is healthy for a tournament setting. It is not a just not a good method for determining a winner, period, and anyone saying otherwise is lying or just riding the bandwagon. Everybody knows they don’t want to lose to that garbage in a tournament, period. The non-gamebreaking argument doesn’t cut it. It is unfair to the players in the tournaments.
Can we make a poll of this issue in the Evo thread and let the players decide? I think that is the fair way to settle this issue…
If there were to be a poll, it would be between:
A) Changing the rules everytime someone cries.
-or-
B) We accept that some methods of victory will be unpopular, but should be allowed anyway because we play the game, not a popularity contest.
If A) wins, then we can open 100 new polls on everything from roll cancels to custom combos to judgement to whatever else there’s a complaint about on the forums somewhere, and just rewrite the entire game based on public opinion.
The idea behind the rule was not literally “health bars are the only way to determine a winner”, but just to say that the players ideas of cheap shouldn’t be allowed to overrule the methods in use by the game, at the time it was only a health bar, so they were used interchangably. That was a mistake, now there are ways to win in fighting games without draining the opponents health directly, they were never meant to be excluded.
I’d rather flip a coin, then go by judgement.
FYI, our rules on banning are not borrowed from Japan. We’re using Sirlin’s criteria explained in great detail here:
http://www.sirlin.net/archive/playing-to-win-part-2-mailbag/
For a better explanation, buy the book “Playing to Win” by David Sirlin. (Really, buy the book. It’s quite good).
Judgement is not banned because a ban would be unwarrented. Only a tiny percentage of the games played will come down to judgement. Every game you ever play outside of a tournament will be decided by Judgement. If this has certain subtle effects on the game, you should factor them into your strategy when playing the game. For example, some have mentioned that Chun Li always seems to win Judgement. If this is true, it’s a legitmate strategy for a Chun Li player to go for a trade leading to a draw match and a Judgement which she’ll probably win. Conversely, if you’re playing against Chun Li, know that you can’t afford to go to Judgement where you’ll probably lose.
Does this make Chun Li better? Yes. Does it make her gamebreakingly better? No. So no ban.
I’m glad P1 finally got something!
Why cant we use Gill?
Dude, the issue is determining a victor from a draw in the tournament, roll cancels/customs etc have nothing to do with this. They have nothing do with breaking a draw in a tournament. I will comply with whatever rule is in place, because I am not running it. Stop bringing in unrelated stuff though. The issue is whether the judgement in 3S should be used to determine draws in a tournament setting, whether or not it is fair. Well we obviously have differing opinions. I mean it’s all good in casuals of course. I just would like to have sudden death over judgement on technical things, on top of that by a system that seems to be bias. But I guess if I make it, then I would follow protocol and have to switch my character, lol.
Can the snap out bug be used? There are ways for Cable, Sentinel, Storm, Magneto, and Iron Man to get the person out of the corner…So I don’t see why not.
EDIT* HERE is the video link (please ignore all the chopiness and the lack of detail)
HERE is the photobucket version of it. for those who have probs with file forge.
?
Yes, it does. The ultimate goal of EVERY FIGHTING GAME EVER is to deplete your opponent’s ENTIRE life bar. So regardless of who you are, if you are fighting Chun-Li, your objective is to kill her, because you know that if you don’t and you go to Judgement, you will lose.
Now, Chun-Li players get TWO outs, just for selecting Chun-Li: either win, or draw game. Sure the draw game scenario only happens 1 out of 1000 matches, BUT IT STILL HAPPENS. If there were was a move in 3s that totally reset the PS2 one out of 1000 times, would you allow it in tournament play? NO, because you would say that theres the potential to totally screw up the match.
REGARDLESS of the frequency of an occurrence, in a competitive tournament atmosphere you cannot allow something that gives an unfair advantage to another player…i.e. a “gamebreaking” glitch or practice…to be used.
Judgement gives Chun-Li two outs instead of one, for free, every time you select her. It’s unfair and game-breaking by those criteria. Regardless of HOW FREQUENTLY it can be game-breaking, it still is.
Who cares what David Sirlin says in his book? He’s trying to make a buck. Last I checked, he wasn’t a top 3s player either. Why don’t we try using logic for once, instead of just doing what all of our buddies tell us is cool to do?
LOL yeah. I don’t hear people complaining about 2p corner glitch:razzy:.
Actually she gets 1.001 if judgement happens 1/1000 matches as you say. And when that odd case does happen, it’s not a case of breaking the game.
If your argument is that favoring chun 1/1000 of the time is unfair and gamebreaking, 3s may not be a great game to get into. Chun is pretty unfair in the rest of 3s too.
DSP: you’re arguing this for the sake of it. Why? Because this
has had zero thought put into it. Your “i.e.” doesn’t follow at all. That sentence actually implies that anything that makes a tournament match “unequal” should be banned. That automatically includes characters with different strengths, players with different levels of skill and strategy, even playing on a side of the machine where the direction of inputs for a move is even “slightly” more difficult than the other side.
“Gamebreaking” is meant to clarify that you only mean “unbalanced stuff that prevents the game from being played”, right? Well, you still fail to get anywhere with that because resolving a draw at random doesn’t break the game. Yes, it’s a different rule about how the game is played, just like parry is different to basically every other SF series. So what? Replaying drawn games was a choice made by tourney organisers in the absence of a solution from the game. 3S gives a preset solution - no need to come up with anything. Fairness is meaningless. None of your examples about “why we play fighters” even comes close to the point about why judgement is any better or worse than someone tossing a coin or replaying a match when a draw occurs.
Judgement is not a glitch, and it doesn’t stop the game from being played. It actually helps the game proceed in the event of a draw which would otherwise impede the progression of play. Anything you’ve had to say about fairness could be equally applied to Chun’s SA2. Unless you can come up with something that actually makes judgement stand out from the rest of the unbalanced game that is 3S, you should probably go pick an argument about something where you might have a chance of making a point in your favour. So far everything you’ve said has been pro-judgement. I’m more in favour of judgement myself simply from reading your comments.
If that explanation is correct, I see no reason to ban judgement. The advantage to 1p is nowhere near the calibur that the 2p crossup glitch advantage is. Even a miniscule preferance to a side would have more of an impact than that.
Edit: After reading more of that thread, I can’t see why anyone that knows how judgement works would be against it(assuming the post 15 explanation is correct). Its basically a point system…just like lifebars! Damage = points, get enough points and you win! If you both get the same points in the time limit or you both score enough points at the same time it goes into…point system 2! Whoever has the higher rank wins. If that gets tied, it goes into…point system 3! Flat out whoever has more score. If that gets tied…it goes to p1. There you have it, abuse judgement to the fullest. Of course getting you and your opponent to have the same life or causing a double KO, all while maintaining a higher rank or score, might be a challenge.
get some real judges and make them replace the computer judges 
Thats the dumbest thing ive ever heard in my life. Hugo’s 720 does 3 hits and Chuns SA2 does what, 17? Hugo’s does more damage and Chun gets more points. As far as rank, some players need to delibrately whiff moves to control space. That rapes your grade. As previously stated, Judgement is in the game to keep people off the machine in arcades so they can make more money. If the staff is concerned about time, have the tiebreaker be 1 throw of Ro-Sham-Bo, just as random but way more fun.
Edit, just have the two players in question street fight for real.
I vote “Why cant we use Gill?” for the dumbest thing.