I’m with jem on it. If frame have hitbox - count it as active; if not - startup/recovery.
Also we should revolutionize names’ abbreviations while we’re still at it. I’m so against vowels you have no idea >_>
I’m hugely pissed of by all other people using them.
But the word, “Startup,” is exactly the problem. What is startup? Is it the time it take for a move to hit or is it the time just before a move hits? You can debate that all you want, but there is no answer. If you want to get rid of the ambiguity all together then you need to get rid of the word, and call it time-to-hit or time-before-hit.
And then we’ll be those guys. Just like Guilty Gear is those guys who use number notation.
But anyways, back to how awesome the CvS2 framedata book is. It has graphs, and graphs are awesome because you can illustrate the frames with clarity.
I always rewrite framedata to include the min & max +/- frames. If you did that, that’d save me the work. But I understand if you don’t. May bloat the table.
Stand/crouch/jump normals get written out s.LP/c.MP/j.HP. Everything that requires a motion uses the unicode arrows.
I actually care about making this stuff as agreeable and understandable as possible. Have you seen that ridiculous joystick direction table I made for the front page of the guide? That’s because udfb vs 8264 is powerful flame bait and I’m scared.
Active means the frames of the move where there is a hitbox, therefore before the active frames is startup and after the active frames is recovery. How is this debateable? How is this ambiguous? It’s quite simple and straightforward, actually.
You just lost any credibility with that number notation remark; that is exactly the flame bait that Pizzarino is talking about and is trying to avoid. You’re not helping by instigating an off-topic argument like that. There’s nothing wrong with number notation and letter notation is tradition so many people still like using it and will continue to use it. There’s no budging from either side, so it’s best to just live with it and accept that both notations will be used.
I will agree, though, that graphs triumph over all.
Yeah, this looks good.
OK. I was reading DL wiki jem linked.
For startup it says "number of frames until this move is active, meaning this value includes the first active frame"
And for Ragna first move have number 5. So if they said that they included one active frame it means that actual move have 4 frames without hitbox AND on the 5th frame hitbox is appearing. Did I get it right? Then what does that 3 in “Active” column means? That besides that one frame that already was mentioned in “Startup” column you have 3 additional frames with active hit box? Or does 3 means that there are only 3 active frames total INCLUDING that one from startup column?
I never played BB. I tried read frame data for the first time for this game. I can’t understand a shit. I need another person to explain it to me. Hence I don’t think it’s a good way to arrange data. SG will have its own newbies after all. If you’re going to use this way of arrangement you need to write instructions to explain all this stuff to rookies. Because I being rookie do not understand it.
While jem’s version is clear as day: if he said that startup is 4 frames - that means that after 4 frames are passed I will get my hitbox on the 5th one.
It will make more sense for me if 5th was stated as “5th” meaning that 5th frame of animation - is where active part of move is starting. And even in this case what the hell something regarding active frames are doing in the startup column?! Startup is the part of move where you’re not attacking. Why this column should contain active stuff at all? Like you made two separate columns to guess what? - SEPARATE those kinds of frames and mixed them up again at the very same moment. I can’t understand it. It’s blowing my mind.
If all this stuff really has some utilitary meaning as 4r5 said - then this stuff should be explained in paragraph beforehand. Because I can’t understand A THING.
And if “those guys” made up such ridiculous method of counting - frankly it’s their problems. Repeating other’s mistakes is a bad practice. It won’t do any good to you >_>
Anyways, I think those graphs are much more clear and comprehensive way to arrange data. I suggest to use them.
Just do startup how everybody else does startup. It doesn’t matter if you don’t like it, just follow the standard. We don’t want unnecessary confusion just because of nitpicking on a definition.
BB does it like SF4 does it, meaning move startup means time-to-hit. So it means a move’s startup is the startup animation frames + first active frame. The active frames column includes the total number of active frames. So move with 6 frame startup (5 frames of startup animation+1), 5 active frames (incl. the +1 from move startup) and 5 frames of recovery has a total duration of 15 frames (6-1+5+5, the -1 is for the overlap).
The reason to do it like this, is that if an enemy’s move leaves them at -6 disadvantage, you can punish it with any move with a 6 frame (or faster) startup. If you listed the startup as concrete animation frames (5 frames), then you’d have know to add one to startup, 5+1=6, and moves with startup of 5 frames or lower would punish moves with -6f disadvantage, which is more confusing.
I think startup should be listed the industry standard way in SG frame data too (meaning time-to-hit).
In the long run though, it would be even better if frame data was presented somewhat like how WAMO does it (Admittedly WAMOs user interface is not the easiest, but you get the concept I hope). Rather than calculate by hand, a program calculates the best answer for you.
OK. Then how about we say “if an enemy’s move leaves them at -6 disadvantage, you can punish it with any move with less then a 6 frame startup” instead?
Problem solved >_>
I can’t believe they started all this MESS just because X>or=6 is easier to understand for them than X<6. In fact you have two conditions (either it should be =6 or >6) instead of one (<6). I’m failing to see any advantages of this way of counting. It isn’t easier in this case and making things more complicated in others (like you mentioned that you need to substract 1 for counting frames’ summ). It isn’t even laziness - it’s… I don’t know what it is.
It’s not like I’m hating stupidly and I’m sorry if I sound arrogant but seriously - by far I can’t see any advantages to do it that way besides the FG players bad habits.
And if it is the only reason - it making me a sad shark T_T
It’s because there is already a standard way to do it and this will cause a lot of confusion. If every person who writes frame data does it differently then nobody is going to know how to read it. Every other game does it as time-to-hit so why would they expect it to be any different when they play Skullgirls?
because it’s clattered and no good shrug
I can understand that veteran players en masse are accustomed to this scheme but on the other hand I’m so sorry for SG newcomers who will be fucking themselves in the brain because you see that’s how we doing it in those games you are NOT playing.
This is the same kind of thinking that has kept the Imperial System in the US for so long. “Let’s not change to something proper because it’s too much of a bother.”
The standard way is already causing confusion. At least if you list startup as true startup, the frame data isn’t lying to you and making you subtract a 1 every time you want the actual startup of a move.
Old fogeys can learn that startup is startup, not time-to-hit, and the newbies won’t be lost when reading it.
Yo don’t get me started where this kind of thinking led Russia… >_>
It’s our national motto and goddamn is it bad…
Except that this way is simpler so it’s like changing from metric to english, not the other way around. If it bothers you so much don’t call it startup, just call it time to hit.
Is there a reason to not list both? It would be one more column in a table so I don’t think it would cause too much clutter at all…
I think everyone is making a tad too much of a deal over this haha.
This is the best.
http://ensabahnur.free.fr/BastonNew/index.php
http://ensabahnur.free.fr/BastonNew/index.php?id=18
3S frame data - Start Up = Frames before 1st Active Frame (so 4 frame start up hit on frame 5)
SF4 frame data - Start Up = When is the first active frame
And you typed throw frame data wrong.
this stuff is gooooooood. looks like an ideal. although graphs for frame data are welcome too.
Please explain to me what is simpler about it. I’m honestly failing to understand T_T
As long as it’s noted what start up is defined as, either is fine.
If Skullgirls did something similar to what the ST wiki does for frame data, Peacock’s s.LP would look like this:
What do you all think of that?
That looks super good imo.
And if it is done this way, there isn’t any need to argue more on time-to-hit or startup and whatnot.
Because pictures!
Hey, if you wanna do that Pizza, I’m aaaaaaall for it. Looks super-sweet.