It depends on the game, situation and the way you look at it. But let’s look at a simple example:
In SF, most newer players tend to avoid footsies because they find it hard to AA on reaction. It’s not that they can’t react in time (SF jumps are quite floaty), they just can’t execute in time, so they don’t put themselves in that position which in many cases limits their strategic options. So this is a case where a player’s strategy depends on how well they can execute. However, this is not necessarily a bad thing. Practicing, and then seeing a positive outcome in actual matches is a very rewarding experience.
That is not due to execution. It’s due, IMO, to lack of foresight and understanding; things that take time to learn/ingrain. New players don’t play footsies until they are told and/or AA’d consistently.
That is definitely execution. AA’ing with a DP at footsie range in ST is not easy. It actually takes practice. Even stuff like walking backwards and then DPing is quite hard for a new comer. They obviously understand that they can DP, but they just can’t execute it time.
If we are at footsie range and I tell you I’m about to jump (I won’t do anything else) you’d be able to DP every time. If you’re not mentally prepared for a jump, you may not be able to react with a normal anti air in time. I don’t think being able to input the command, in this case, is the hard part. It’s the prediction or foresight to expect it that gets newbies killed. I get what you saying though; making the anti air harder to do obviously adds delay to the process.
I don’t even know why this is being discussed. Other topics are getting closed because they seem like wishlists (though the "discuss next year’s evo lineup gets to stay) and speculative garbage, yet here we go with a thread that should be cut and dry being stuffed to the brim with opinions.
Fact: You need both execution and strategies to win matches. Case closed. People saying that there are top players with little execution are simply deluding themselves, and misidentifying details about their play. Dropping combos and botching strategies, a result of poor or minimum execution, would get you murdered in any fighting game. It’s simply a FAILURE to correctly play the character you choose.
I’m in the Sirlin camp. And just to clarify: even when making HDR, he said there was only so much tweaking to move motions you could do before SF didn’t feel like SF. So let’s not get too dug into our war trenches.
A man fighting with only one button who is at the peak of strategic play with no execution can easily beat a man with the ability to pull out the longest, most precise combos in the game who doesn’t think about his moves before he uses them.
Without strategy, but with exceptional execution, you are simply the world’s best button masher.
Ladies and Gentlemen, one of the world’s silliest arguments.
“No Execution” is literally the same as “not pressing buttons at all”. So basically, this guy at his peak strategic play is simply sitting there wishing his opponent to death. Theory fighter is strategizing too, you know
And a guy being able to pull off the hardest, precise timing combo consecutively without fail has some semblance of skill and strategy.
Of all the statements I’ve heard being said in that thread, YOURS actually belongs in scrubquotes.
Congratulations, you completely missed the entire point of the topic/discussion. To condense this much more complex issue into this overly simplisitic framework is misleading, so you’re the one who should stop reaching.
You should keep reading, because taking that sentence out of context is dumb. What Sirlin is saying is actually much more layered than that, and it would be a shame if all you take away from it that he wants to slide a scale all the way left you personally think should be center or right.
If you want pure battles of the mind then look at other genres of games that offer that experience. Fighting games are battles of the mind and ability.
but I don’t see any way how execution hurts strategy. in fact, it adds to strategy. Do I do normal launch punch punch rocket punch or do i go for a fast fly? If I am in the corner do I do an unfly combo to build more meter but deal less damage?
I will agree with him on tiny input windows though. I also dont care for links
both are equally important
like i said on the other thread execution is something that goes hand to hand with strategy
you base your strategy on what you can and what you cant do, having good (enough) execution allows you to capitalize damage and oportunities, not to mention that can open other options that can enrich your strategy
did i say otherwise?
no, that is why i say that you base your strategy in what you can and what you cant do, you are only saying the same thing that i said.
and i agree, but only partially, as the games evolves and new stuff is found you see that the need of good execution can become a factor on who wins and who doesn’t, take mvc2 for example, the game was played for so many year that in its later part of the life span the staple strategies required good dextrecity to be done.
that its good until you realize that you arent capable to maximize the damage or oportunities due the lack of execution
**this thread also needs the option of both are equally important **
So, you don’t see how execution hurts strategy but you agree about arbitrarily small input windows and links. I’m confuddled. Yes I get that execution is part of strategy, but Sirlin’s argument is that, when tuning for execution at the design level, turn the dial up as much as it needs to go… but no more.
Giant ass strawman. You actually want to address what he said, instead of what you wish he said?
I agree his example is flawed, but he never said his example was not pressing buttons.
Well, everyone in RPG’s always starts out with a very small amount of points in even something he is terrible at, so that’s what I did for Mr.Strategy and Mr.Execution.
If you want to REALLY use the argument to the highest point of the words, than Mr.Strategy would never hit a button that wasn’t a movement, and Mr.Execution would sit there and hit buttons without moving. Unless Mr.Strategy came within range of one of the moves, or if Mr.Execution used a move that hurt himself, the game would be a draw every time.
It’s obvious that if you have high execution you most likely know the game and can form strategy in your head, and if you know enough about the game to have high strategy than you probably can execute a Shoryuken without having an aneurysm. Say what you will, but the argument can never truly be put to rest because Mr.Strategy and Mr.Execution can’t really fight because they can never exist.
And you expected any better from someone who was scrubquoted for wanting a fighting game that didn’t have footsies and was named the “worst poster on Dustloop” on the BBVlog?
The world has changed a lot since this last came up
Execution should be exactly tight/hard enough to allow for differentation of moves, and no harder. If 2 moves have overlapping inputs that you can reasonably get the wrong one to come out, that’s a problem. Otherwise the center of the games should be about decision making and judgement.
**It’s worth noting however, hard execution techniques will inevitably be developed anyways. MvC2 has very easy execution in it’s base, but the way high level has developed, it’s become super-hard.
So I guess the answer is to not design in execution barriers, they’re not a virtue in and of themselves.
Edit: protip: going directly to personal attacks on a guy who said something you don’t like probably won’t help the discussion much
