Now THIS I can agree with. The more options there are, the more difficult it is to utilize all of those options. This leads to more deviation from the match-up list as the human factor is amplified. However, that doesn’t make the match-up any easier or harder. Thus, the numbers remain accurate.
Oh, and Jed, I do agree with you that the engine does factor in this debate greatly. If the engine itself provide multiple options for everyone, then balance is easier to achieve.
It’s essentially the same point shoultzula was trying to make. -__-
But still Jedah remained in the top 8 in tournaments for VS since 97.
7-3 matchup in VS
[media=youtube]y6jeBqrePp4[/media]
7.5-2.5 matchup in ST
[media=youtube]cKOqF79769w[/media]
in VS, the low tier character is controlling the matchup. pretty much all of blankas “tools” are fucked against ryu and since he doesn’t have anymore, the character is reduced to all fundamentals. Since VS has more options, liliths tools are still reduced but since she didn’t lose all of them, she still has a few to work with. The more tools you have in any fight, the better off you are if they will help you. If blanka had some better tools or more tools, perhaps he would do better in the fight. While the fight is still winnable for blanka, his tool set is nerfed heavily because he didn’t have many to begin with and when they got taken away because of a matchup, he had nothing but fundamentals left.
Well, if a tier isn’t taking into account the number of options that can be introduced into the match-up, isn’t that a flawed tier list? A tier list should take into account the effects the game mechanics have on the match-up. I agree more options = makes match-ups easier to deal with, but I think that regardless of that a 7-3 would still be a 7-3. If there’s any discrepancy in that, the match-up chart needs to be fixed.
Perhaps, but having good character balance doesn’t hurt and if its done in addition to a good system it only makes for yet a more exciting/superior product.
I wouldn’t put it over solid engine mechanics but I wouldn’t be as so foolish as to say its completely second fiddle or irrelevant.
Not exactly, since Shout was arguing that a 7-3 matchup in SF would be more imbalanced than a 7-3 matchup in Savior because Savior presents more options for every character than does any SF game.
I’m saying that there is no difference in terms of balance.
And about Jedah’s high placings? I dunno. Perhaps those people who place highly with him have significantly better knowledge of the system and the other characters than their opponents. The human factor is the only explanation here, as it’s clear that Jedah’s toolset against most characters is limited.
The short version for those who want to skip all that mess
What it amounts to is that VS is a hard game to play, so rarely is the matchup played optimally.
If a match is a 7-3 with two equally skilled players using 95% of their characters ability (since 100 brings up a number of theoretically retarded implications)
A character who can do 50 things at any given time (SFII, roughly) with a player who can utilize 30 of them is at 60%, so only 35% short.
A character who can do 100 things at any given time with a player who can utilize 30 of them is at 30%, so 65% short.
As we all know, matchup charts are increasingly irrelevant the less of a character’s ability a player utilizes. It’s also why a bad Guile will murder a bad Viper.
Not worse, just more frustrating and less fun. And it’s not the game, it’s just poor characters in general. Dan has some of the worst matchups in IV, but even in his bad matchups you can still do your specials etc. He’s got all his options available - he’s still Dan. But with Blanka, some of his bad matchups effectively remove his ability to do special moves (same as in SFII). So you’re basically playing a skeleton char. Now even though Dan’s matchups might be worse, I’m willing to bet they’re much more fun to play than one of Blanka’s bad matchups.
This isn’t a balance issue IMO. It’s just a case of poor character design.
I wouldn’t say it directly provides more balance… but it does allow technical skill and mind games to play a greater role in the game. You’re still going to get shat on in a 7-3 at high level play, but the more options there are, the more ways there are to fuck up that 7-3 with mistakes or good/bad reads, etc.
Basically by artificially raising the skill ceiling of a game ( I hate saying it that way, but I can’t think of a better word ) by requiring both players to deal with more options on both sides of the table, there’s more room for human error to change a 7-3 matchup around, because perfect play doesn’t really exist.
I think if you call a couple more people scrubs you will really start to be taken seriously mr I just joined the forums a couple months ago.
were you aware?? random select matches makes everyone equal
ggs on VS GGPO!
Imo higher skill ceiling is what ur talking about. Vampire Savior has a super high skill ceiling from what i’ve seen, so it’s easier to become significantly better than other players in certain matchups and in general compared to something like SSF4 where the skill ceiling is a lot lower it becomes harder to outplay the other person in a bad matchup.
This is and always has been pretty much my own way of thinking. all the boss characters(the 4 divas) plus akuma should always be at or near the top of the list. its retarded to sagat being manhandled by a schoolgirl. (btw I don’t even play him)
Ryu, as stated above, is the face of the game. He should also always be near the top, along w/ the original cast. beyond them characters start becoming hybrids and/or watered down versions of them.
Some tie in between the story and the character makes sense. Like someone said above…sagat is a 7ft monster. i’d rather get my ass kicked by him than rufus…thats just stupid.
I don’t understand. What’s the point of making the same characters top tier in every single iteration of the game? Why not just play the version where there characters that “should” be tops… are?
New members should really be required to take some preliminary classes in Domination 101.
Not really, more stupid to try and balance a game based on what a character looks like or how they fit into some power structure in the game’s storyline… Would you really prefer a game where there’s only two or three viable characters because “they’re the strongest in the story?”
Why not just try to design good characters and let things fall into place ? Instead of intentionally structuring the game over something that’s effectively meaningless to gameplay.
Hey guys I don’t really have time to read through this whole thread right now. which page was the truth on? tia.
Dude, you’re a fucking idiot.
How about you take these numbers seriously:
Logic vs. you is an 8-2 match-up.