Thanks retards. Obviously in my 16 years of reading tierlists/matchups I had no idea about the literal definition of a 6-4 matchup.
Too bad such a definition is basically pointless.
Let me ask you this: who do you think actually assigns these numbers? Is there an Academy of Yomi and Street Fighter somewhere that precisely and scientifically determines that a particular matchup will have the advantaged character win 60% of the time, absolutely and without question?
But this is hardly ever really the case. As others mentioned, and why I responded the way I did, is because companies in fact do tend to make certain characters better than others. NO way capcom will release a SF title with Ryu being low tier. Generally speaking what I am talking about is the case most of the time.
It’s only when tons of people complain and whine that we see Sagat get nerfed and Guile get buffed to such a degree. Honestly game companies would be better off not listing to fans for the most part.
They gotta give their flagship characters the juice. Flagship characters may not be the best overall in their respective games, but they are always in the winning percentile.
A 6-4 match up compared between two different games can yield significantly different “real world” results. In general, the more difficult it is to play at a theoretically optimal level, the more variance you will get from the established match up rankings.
Also, it is fair to say that an increased number of general game mechanics and character options, or a higher level of inherent difficulty required in executing those mechanics/options, will lead to more variance because it is more difficult to reach the theoretically optimal level of play that is the basis for tier rankings.
As I’ve said multiple times, the community assigns these values after analyzing the characters’ various options and tournament data. For a game like SSFIV, I’ll admit that the match-up list is heavily in flux as the game’s only been out for about three and a half months. But, for a game like Savior with 14 years of tournament data behind it, we can assume that the match-ups have been assigned accurately. It’s not a completely arbitrary art.
And you still haven’t managed to provide any evidence as to why 6:4 is different between VS and SF. Yes, yes, you’ve got more options in VS than in SF, but, so does the opponent. And, the ratio between the number of options you have and the number of options the opponent has is going to be preserved if the match-up charts are accurate. Now, if you’re claiming that the ratio is NOT going to be the same, then I can be persuaded if you can show some evidence for that.
And why exactly are you so hostile?
It’s important that we recognize, however, that match-up lists are based on what should occur at the optimal level of play. The reason we’re seeing more variation from the VS match-up chart than the SFIV match-up chart is because there are more SF4 players playing near the optimal level than VS players.
Yes, definitely. I thought I communicated that effectively in my post, but maybe you were just re-stressing that point for emphasis, much like I did with Katriana’s original post.
I think it is safe to say that the amount of variance from tier rankings correlates with the difficulty in playing at the theoretically optimal level that the rankings are based on.
I haven’t given it much thought, but I think that premise may effectively argue for the idea of giving low tier characters more options rather than nerfing high tier characters.
I ignored the other posts, don’t feel like reading at 1:50AM.
What I think he means by 6-4 in VS is different from 6-4 in SF4 is the match itself can be harder or easier to play. This can be due to the engine, the characters themselves, the way you’re “supposed” to play, anything really.
Playing a 6-4 match up in SF4 is a lot easier than playing a 6-4 matchup in VS if only for the fact that VS is way faster and there’s a shit ton more things to do during a match in VS than SF4.
i think that is the other way around, a 6:4 in sf4 is harder for the char with the odds against him, cuz his options are limmited, compared to games were the char has more options like VS, GG or AH, just look a fight of johnny vs zappa, even when its suposed to be 7:3, or even considered to be possible 8:2, when you see the fight, you dont feel that johnny was helpless against zappa, even where the odds where against him, you have the feeling that the johnny player was outplayed rather that he lost just for the difficulty of the matchup
Er, I see a couple possible interpretations of what you’ve just said.
The match ISNT actually 6-4. I don’t think that’s what you meant, but, I’m just throwing everything down here.
It requires considerably more skill to get to the point in VS where the matchup actually is 6-4 than in SF. I’ll agree to that.
A 6-4 in VS can be equivalent in difficulty to, say, a 5-5 or 7-3 in SF due to engine differences. Er, no. According to the actual definition of 6-4, that’s just not possible.
However, I have a feeling, that none of these are what you actually meant. If that’s the case, well, you’re going to need a bit more specific. Your statement was incredibly vague.
EDIT: Oh, and Shiki, you might be surprised to learn this, but, had you bothered to check my account you’d notice it was made in 2007. Also, this is my second account. My first account was made back in 2004 but was purged due to inactivity. If you want, I can probably find an archived post or something verifying it. So, I’m not some 'tard who only showed up on the site because of SFIV, kay?
My thinking was because there’s so much to the game itself, it’d be harder to play where SF4 limits those options because the game doesn’t have as much. I guess the more universal tools characters have, the easier it should be to play and SF4 lacks this when compared to most other games, especially like VS.
I guess what I mean is it’s harder to play the 6-4 match up as a 6-4 match up in a game like VS because you have to understand a lot of mechanics of the game compared to SF4 where it doesn’t take as much to understand the mechanics since there’s less, but it may be harder because the mechanics themselves limit the options.
My understanding of match-up lists were that they only applied at the skillcap. A player who has reached the skillcap, which is impossible mind you, has a perfect understanding of the game’s mechanics, of how his character operates, and of how his opponent’s character operates. Thus, the sheer number of options you have in VS as compared to SF doesn’t matter with regards to the match-up list. 6-4 is 6-4 once you’ve reached that level.
What I haven’t seen mentioned is just the different tournament setup for Japan vs. the US. Considering that over there, most tourneys are single elimination with no character switching, if you’re playing a low-tier character, you gotta learn every little nuance with every matchup they have so you can try and get the momentum in your favor. As such, there’s an opportunity for even a crappy character to make it to the top, since again, single elim with a good enough character specialist.
As far as I figure it, a 6-4 is going to be a 6-4 regardless of engine differences, based solely on the fact that those should be taken into account in the first place for the tier listing. It’s not like we’re basing every tier list off of how SF2’s engine worked.
On an aside, I think VS’s tech hit sound effect may well be the most goddamn annoying thing I’ve ever heard in a fighting game when it consists of like every other sound in the match. And I’ve played Arcsys fighters! It’s more annoying than the endless “Counter, Counter, Counter!” you get out of those!
That’s the most interesting discussion of 6-4 vs 6-4 that I’ve seen.
If it’s 6-4 assuming these 500 variables vs 6-4 assuming these 50 variables, there’s more potential for variance in the former, and more opportunities for the low tier expert to exploit against possibly ignorant higher tier players when that 6-4 is applied to the real world.
I think what Shiki means is that when someone puts down 6-4, they might not mean that it’s literally 6-4 but rather “this character has a slight advantage” or “this match up isn’t quite 5-5”. Like 6-4 is more of a grade like A/B/C tier etc. And like the letter grades, they can “scale” in how big a gap is between them.
People might not like decimals. Besides, who wants to claim they can determine a matchup to a decimal accuracy.