apprently i don’t know what it is.
What you have in your “unblockable” Mika video is a reset.
Don’t think of “unblockable” as a move that cannot be blocked. Throws cannot be blocked, but people don’t refer to a throw as an unblockable. An unblockable is more like a move or set up that cannot be avoided. In your Mika video, you can avoid the command grab by simply holding up.
so can a safe jump be a form of a unblockable if u use the right setup that can stop your opponent’s options
There’s a difference between “unblockable” and “inescapable”.
Unblockable generally means something is impossible to block eg. a throw, command grab, level 3 focus in SFIV (ignoring stuff like Rose Orb setups) etc. However, just because something is unblockable, it doesn’t necessarily mean you are forced to take damage. For example, to escape throws in SFIV and SFV and you can jump. backdash or use a move with throw invincibility.
On the other hand, if something is inescapable it means there’s no way to avoid getting hit/grabbed, or just taking damage in general. While I don’t know much about SFV R. Mika, she potentially has inescapable setups against some characters where, if they try to block Nadeshiko, they get grabbed by Mika. If they try to avoid the grab, they get hit by Nadeshiko.
thank god u posted u might be one of the few peopleposting with sense on here
to my understanding if u can’t block it u can’t block it unblockables in street fighter with moves has always been throws u can’t a block or block in the air technically speaking throw now apprently u have to have a unblockable that is unscapble well there is no such thing.
now can i ask u sense how do u accomplish inescapable situations
No. Everyone who answers you has sense, it’s just that you don’t understand anything.
In fact, he probably just confused you even more because now you probably think your youtube videos are labeled properly. Ilitirit knows a lot more than I do, but I strongly disagree with what he’s saying. Nobody would ever say “I have an unblockable Zangief set up. Just get a knockdown and do an SPD on their wake up”, which is basically what your videos are.
When people talk about unblockables they are talking about MVC2 nonsense, not throws in SF.
EDIT: Actually, I can clear everything up for you right here.
Ilitirit is talking about the adjective.
I am talking about the noun.
In your videos you are talking about the noun.
well his answer to me in my opinion makes the most sense.
Okay, but it’s wrong in the sense you’re talking about. See the part that I added when I edited my post about the adjective and the noun. There is a difference. None of your videos are unblockables. Don’t believe me? Go ahead and tag ilitirit and ask him about your videos.
Watch the first minute or two of this and really focus on the 46th and 47th second. These are unblockables (noun)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c0rc_Q0Cuyo
Just to echo/expand upon what Greenwood is saying here: I think this might be the first time being a grammar nazi has actually been useful for me to explain something on SRK.
Two concepts are being confused here.
Adjective example: “Throws are unblockable.” “Unblockable” here is being used as an adjective. Throws are indeed not something you can block.
Noun examples: “Cammy has a lot of unblockables in SFIV.” “Oro has an unblockable in 3S.” Here unblockable is being used as a noun. Those examples are not talking about throws; they’re talking about situations that occur in game–either intentionally through system mechanics or through bugs–that make it so something that could normally be blocked or avoided cannot be. For example, in some games it is impossible to block high and low at the same time. In others, hit boxes get whacky and hits that ought to be blockable are not.
The noun example is the most common use of the term unblockable, at least in North America. When people talk about unblockables, they’re not talking about throws, or at least not the throws themselves.
You cannot block a throw, but a throw is not called “an unblockable” in fighting game circles. “Unblockables” are somewhat different in every game because they take advantage of particular quirks in the game system.
However, the basic idea is that you are putting your opponent into a situation where they are forced to block (they have no other option), and yet blocking the setup is impossible. Oro’s unblockable loop in 3rd Strike is a perfect example.
mobbdeep is incapable of understanding anything posted in this thread, but I’m posting in case anyone of at least average intelligence is curious.
I didn’t see his videos, and yes it’s true that in terms of common usage noone talks about unblockable setups like that (except sometimes in the case of meaty fuzzy grabs). But it’s also not true that people only refer to setups when referring to “unblockables” (which are also just also just contracted forms of “unblockable move” ie. adjectives). eg. In Yatagarasu if someone says “he got hit by the unblockable”, they probably mean the C+D. KOF has the concept of proximity unblockables (certain types of throws). And depending on who you’re talking to Orochi Yashiro’s command grab setups may be referred to as an unblockables. Tekken unblockables are “simple” moves that generally don’t have particular setups. Bryan’s TJU is unblockable, but not because there’s a setup involved.
This is why is raised the distinction between “unblockable” and “inescapable”. People often (mis)use these terms interchangeably and while it’s probably true that OP is using the term incorrectly if I read your post, it’s not as clear-cut as people may think. Look at SFV Ryu’s V-Trigger DP into CA when the opponent is low on health. Denjin is more accurately known as a guard break. Is it inescapable? Depends on the context. If you’re in the corner with no V-Reversal, you will get hit if you block the DP. And yet, when you search for “ryu unblockable setups” you will find loads of videos detailing denjin setups.
It’s also not true that every setup referred to as “unblockable” is truly unblockable. AE2012 unblockable x-up oki could be blocked using a strict timing and input sequence. This is also true for some SFII setups (1f unblockables), and MvC3 high/low unblockables. The timing involved is so difficult and unpredictable that they are regarded as “practically unblockable”.
There are also unblockable setups that can be avoided completely by doing something non-obvious, like remaining in neutral. But these generally involve alternate routes the attacker can use to beat these (eg. by changing the timing slightly, or using a different attack). Some vanilla SFIV Ultra Unblockables could be escaped by backdashing. Here’s a vid that shows how one Ultra Unblockable can be avoided by blocking after the flash, or blocking low to take the hit so that you can avoid the Ultra:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1OISGTddWu4
Technically, that setup is neither unblockable nor inescapable.
tl;dr: Most of the time, when people say “unblockable”, they are often referring to a setup which cannot be blocked by “normal” means, and leaves most other obvious forms of defense punishable.
Depends on the game and the person’s definition of unblockable. Generally speaking, though, I mostly hear it used about set-ups that give you no choice but to take a hit whatever you do, which I guess isn’t technically unblockable as much as unavoidable. In SFV this usually either involves Mika V-Trigger set-ups where the opponent will either eat a command grab or jump into Nadeshiko and take damage, or Vega’s command throw after a hard knockdown since there’s no way to not take a hit when these are set up properly unless you happen to have a fully invincible super without start-up.
If you want to be even stricter in your definition, you could have it strictly refer to set-ups where you either would have to block both high and low or left and right simultaneously and exclude set-ups where damage is simply unavoidable rather than just unblockable. But that seems like pointless semantics since unavoidable damage can’t be blocked either.
I guess we’ll agree to disagree. I’m more of the side of the post below. Either way, we both know what we’re talking about. Unfortunately, I think the OP is still confused. I’ve been trying like hell to help him in various threads, but it’s difficult.