What do you not get?
So it starts with
3 …
5 …
7 …
then follows like this (repeating the pattern) as long as you’re still mashing it
… 4 4 4 4 4 4 …
… 2 2 2 2 2 2 …
… 1 1 1 1 1 1 …
and then ends like this when you stop mashing.
… 6 4 1 11
… 4 4 1 11
… 4 4 2 4 1 11
Is that right?
(EDIT: colour coded like Akiba’s page so red is active and default text colour is inactive)
That looks right. for jab it’s 4 non hits then 4 hits, then etc… mp and hp… same pattern.
Thx for the link.
On ST speed at diffeent stages
From the discussion that started in the HDR Ryu thread, I ended up following the link VF4 posted about the differences from the original ST versions and their several ports. Particularly, this called my attention:
I am not sure what exactly this means, and it’s been some time I don’t play at a cab with the proper (CPS-2) setup. Anyway, I recall and I know that in MAME, Nebula and FBA a number of stages are known to run faster, and some are known to run slower. Particularly, Gief and Chun’s stages are fast. This may also mean the stage length data from T.Akiba contains inherent inaccuracies due to speed differences among different stages, i.e., stages with faster gameplay would appear to be shorter.
Thoughts?
For CCC2, folks have reported that stages like Mexico and USSR have brief but sudden slowdown issues over the course of a round. Meanwhile, arcade ST stages have constant speed through a round, meaning the speed between 99 and 89 timer ticks in certain stage is equivalent to the speed between 19 and 9 timer ticks in that stage). This isn’t related to the difference in speed between stages, which is normal in arcade ST (Spain is certainly faster than Jamaica for instance).
As for T.Akiba’s comparison, there is an inherent issue about its usefulness but I think there’s been a general misunderstanding by just about everyone regarding the point of that test (including myself for many years). I’m not sure if NKI mistranslated or if T.Akiba revised but the original page clearly says the test is meant to show the stage speed. He’s only testing the time needed to push a character across the screen, which really factors in 2 separate variables: stage speed and stage length. His test is a measure of the length of stages in real time, which, unless I’m mistaken, doesn’t tell us much about the stage distance by itself or the stage time elapsed (compared to real time) by itself. It’s clearly not an accurate measurement of stage length because for example, it has Brazil 15th fastest and Thailand 2nd fastest. If we hold time to be constant, Brazil should be longer than Thailand. But as we can see from an actual mapped-out art asset (http://www.slateman.net/images/gaming/backgrounds/sf/) left in native 224 pixel height, Thailand is actually longer. But because it’s so much faster, it takes less time to go from 1 end to another.
In order to get the absolute stage length, the simplest way is to manually map out the backgrounds. The longest one is naturally the longest. Alternately, you could simply time a length of a round for each stage until time over (I started this in my HDR comparison topic at http://www.shoryuken.com/showthread.php?t=208872 but some stages had insane differences, like USSR being slower than in HDR, so I stopped). I’m still not sure whether region or anything else with the CPS2 B board influences the speed or if it’s consistent amongst all ST boards everywhere. To calculate only the stage length, you can find the absolute time of a round in that stage and divide by the time to cross the stage, which yields proper distance measurement. The resultant calculation itself is useless as an absolute number (it means the number of times you can push someone across the stage in a round) but can be used to determine the relative value of the stage distance. The lowest numbers will mean the longest stages.
For example, Stage A takes 100s for the round to finish. You can cross it in 50s, which means you can only cross it 2 times a round if you do nothing else. Stage B takes 100s to finish and takes 20s to cross, which means you can cross it 5 times a round. This means it’s less than the distance compared to Stage A. Stage C takes 80ms to finish and takes 20s to finish, which means you can cross it 4 times a round. This means the stage is double the distance of Stage B and slightly shorter than Stage A. However, because the stage itself is faster, the distance may not seem as long. Right now, T.Akiba only has the 2nd value (50,20,20 in my example). We need the first value (100,100,80), which is the stage speed in reverse (lowest number is fastest), to calculate the actual distance. That’s why USSR as the 4th fastest stage doesn’t make sense when everything moves so slow; it’s because the stage distance is so short. If this sounds confusing, just keep reading it and do some basic math until it starts making sense.
Hi guys just a heads up, Im having to sell off a big bit of my SF2 collection. I have a mint condition Yoga Book Hyper with DVD, two copies of the GamePro HF Guide (the one with the Tomo Ohira interview), All About Capcom Fighters, Dungeon & Dragons Gamest Mook and lots of other old school street fighter stuff. Check the sale here:
http://www.shoryuken.com/showthread.php?t=229454&p=8571345#post8571345
*If you have any questions, please ask them in the linked thread or PM me.
Still my favorite SF
So a thought occurred to me just now
How come Super Turbo stood the test of time as a widely recognized competitive tournament game and Hyper Fighting did not? I know many argue that HF is the most balanced version of Street Fighter mainly because of the absence of supers. So how come ST was always a main game at EVO and HF wasn’t?
I was thinking that due to supers, ST is more forgiving and friendly towards new players whereas HF seems more like all-or-nothing, do-or-die. So maybe ST is more popular over HF even though HF is more balanced. What does that say about the community that’s been playing a more popular game over the more balanced one all this time?
I know a whole lot of players quit SF by the time ST came out, but maybe we never would’ve lost them if we kept playing HF.
Don’t get me wrong, I love ST as much as the next guy and definitely have respect for SF2 as a whole. I’m just curious.
I think it says about our community that we are excited for new games, because it always seems like “Maybe in THIS one I will start winning tourneys” or something. Also exploring a new game, even if it is bad, is a lot of fun.
But mainly it says that we are competitors, so we play games that other people play, because that’s where the comp is. I love Fatal Fury Special and SFA3 till I’m blue in the face, but there is nobody to play in them.
SFIV isn’t popular because it’s good, it’s popular because it’s new and it’s popular (yeah, I did say it’s popular because it’s popular on purpose). Maybe a lot of new people who only started playing SF because of SFIV think it’s GOOD, but that’s not all that common amongst older players who play SFIV…they play cus that’s the new game.
about Elec and it’s hitboxes. If you turn on hitboxes in HDR classic mode it has a continuous red hitbox without interuptions. It also seems that way when playing.
No matter how much you lean on the competitive virtues of a game, that game still needs to be fun in order to draw a crowd. Now, don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to quantify fun; I’m not saying that ST is more fun than HF at some objective level. What I am saying though, is that a wider audience of players seemed to find ST fun than HF in the years after their release. Supers offer dramatic comeback potential, which leads to more exciting matches from the spectator side, and that’s a big factor too (just look at the famous Daigo vs. Wong 3S video as an example of how a single dramatic spectator moment can generate enthusiasm for a game).
HF still has its followers, and it is well-deserving of them. It’s a fantastic game. If I had to pick the “better” between it and ST, I’d have a hard time. I prefer ST, but having played it for many years certainly lends itself to some bias on my part.
Nice answer, no I’m not being sarcastic either.
I can only speak for myself, so here’s my 2 cents…
First I want to clarify that it is primarily newb vs newb that I am talking about here. Newbie vs average or good and both games will provide a constant and endless massacre. When I talk about good players vs good players, I will mention. Fine, so allow me to go on.
I see two reasons why nowadays HF seems not so interesting to a number of people. One is the difference between online and offline play. The other is the natural appeal ST has to the newer generations.
I ain’t very good and I can’t play HF online. It is too strict to the mess latency does to games. It messes up with recognizing projectile speeds, it screws certain counters like tatsu to escape projectiles and it cuts frames from normal attacks, making certain moves hard to punish, and you would need to punish them. Because the game has projectiles with better recovery or equivalent recovery (with the exception of sonic boom), it is harder to punish them with jump ins. But characters have ways around them, which are often hard to employ. In ST, tatsu does not work against most projectiles, in HF it does. A Ryu vs Ryu in online HF is just a completely different game to me. I know I should do something but it does not work, then I gotta find another strategy that I shouldn’t even need in the first place. It is weird. If I was really good, then it would be much more different. If I knew I could sweep every Guile’s cr.fw done out of range and then I see it vanishing before I can react, shit, I would be pissed off. Also, people have two options nowadays, on PC: GGPO and Supercade. GGPO desyncs a lot, Supercade has less latency compensation and more frames cut. Those are better than non existent arcade HF competition, but not much else can be said about them.
ST is to HF what Marvel is to SF in general, just on a less intense way. A way less intense way, whatever. New players like more colors, ST has them. They find supers and explosions great, ST has them. They love combos, ST has characters that not only can perform them, but have moves which make it easier (Fei Long rekkas, shotos overheads, etc) and after you do them, you get a message saying how many hits you got with them. Of couse, it does not feature super jumps, easy target combos and air blocking, like Marvel Super Heroes or Marvel vs Capcom, but it seems better to them than staying on the ground so as not to get DPed, flash kicked or punched out of the air. At least, Ryu and Ken may use air tatsu to evade projectiles if they screw up, and Honda and Boxer have floating fierces. Not everyone sees value in staying on the ground and using normals.
If HF was to be revived, it would demand a lot of effort from local communities. Players from newer games would have to try it out, search for hard to obtain quality footage, get some boards and gather around some cab or at someone’s house and start training. I don’t see it happening, I don’t see that many people willing to try older games (it is either “HF and ST are too fast, I played CE” or “CE is too fucking slow, at best I will play ST”) and I don’t expect to see more quality sources being released. There is not “SF community” the community is split, there the CE people, the HF people, the ST people, and the masses who thing game whatever is good because it is newer and there are cool combos and bullshit.
From what I can see, the Koreans still love CE, the US had a small scene going during the HF XBL years, and everyone else loves ST/AE/HDR as far as the “Street Fighter 2 Community” goes. The only significant split IMO is the one between HDR and ST.
Also, after spending significant time with both HF and ST, I really fail to see how HF can say it is more “balanced”. The shotos and Guile are virtually unbeatable in the right hands and everyone else is on the bottom.
You’re doing it wrong.
What’s the take, tournament-wise, in relation to O.Gief? Is the full and mid screen reversal suplex bug acceptable? That thing is annoying as hell.
Yeah it’s fine, just stay off the ground on his wake up.
capcom released HF to address balance issues with CE, but primarily to combat the sales of various chinese cps1 bootlegs that had sped up gameplay. and the japanese never took to HF because even though it is an official SF2, it felt like a bootleg version
i can understand that from a competitive point of view, people might prefer the more “balanced” game as you will probably get a more diverse set of opponents and not get bogged down by having to face the same 3-4 top tiers 90% of the time.
but while capcom have always tried to remove game-breaking glitches or bugs, actual character balance has never really been a priority. in japan it’s something of a non-issue and players like aniken have been quoted as saying they prefer using weaker characters purposefully because it makes victories more satisfying when the odds are against you. but then their country doesn’t have the same blind Playing to Win attitude of the US, so there is always a pretty good variety of the different characters irrespective of tiers
i haven’t played much of HF at all, but i remember seeing those jeff schaeffer videos where he talks about how HF requires far more skill and strategy than ST. and then he says he went on massive win streaks by picking blanka, getting them in the corner, then jumping & down and press the roundhouse button