Middle Tennessee Needs Gaming! Monthly Versus Tourneys - Antioch, TN

[Skeletal Minion]

GGs and shouts to everyone at the tourney. Godlike matches in BB and GG, though I too wish I could have played the latter more. I was really proud of the first set Phil and I had I the tourney--it was IMO the best GG set I've played. Even though I lost, I was damn happy I put up that much of a fight. I wish I could have played harder in finals, but by then the crash from the Monster Import I drank had sufficiently scrambled my brain, lol. Very good games; I look forward to more.

Also, I'd like to address a few things in this thread, but seeing as I've realized how my argumentative debate style doesn't translate that well (i.e., people think I'm actually trying to have an argument when I just see it as a simple conversation), I'm going to try a different approach by being more neutral and hopefully informative.

The reason why a 7-3 in SF feels much harder than a 7-3 in GG is because of options, and by that I mean system mechanics. In SF your options are limited, meaning that even though your char can still theoretically win 3/10 matches against an equally skilled opponent, you have far less tools to do so. Think of it this way: if a character with good pressure in RTSD'ing you, your only real defensive option if their strings are tight is a reversal, focus, backdash, fast move/jab, or maybe throw. In GG, you have all those except focus PLUS instant block, faultless, 1F jump, and slashback. You have more options at your disposal in GG, but since both players have those options, they don't affect the matchup statistics in the vacuum of that game.

This is also why P4A definitely has 7-3s and probably a couple 7.5-2.5s: system mechanics in P4A were not created equal. Guard cancels are simply not that good at high level play, and the gap between the best and worst reversals is vast--compare, say, Mitsuru's B+D to Labrys'. The former is almost a get out of jail free card unless completely called out and blocked, while the latter can be B+D'd/jumped/rolled through on reaction.

In the specific matchup of Chie vs. Labrys, Chie has:

- Better pokes

- Better frame data (general safeness and advantage)

- Better, easier, and more effective pressure (stagger 5A, when perfectly times, is unstoppable unless the Lab IBs and gets a throw in the one frame gap... But her throw range is poor enough that proper spacing on Chie's part can mitigate this)

- Better average damage

- Doesn't have to spend time/effort/meter/combo opportunities to build up her effectiveness (i.e., Axe Gauge)

- Has infinitely better/easier/more effective oki that resets into itself

- Better AOA (faster and airborne)

- Better Persona normals (Ariadne's 2C is a combo piece, 5C is a big but slow poke, 5D/5DD is worthless outside of one gimmicky setup, j.D is a mediocre zoning tool, j.C is another combo piece)

- MUCH better B+D (can use it to beat Lab's B+D on reaction... Lol)

- Better defensive options in general (Meteors, 5A, B+D, etc)

- Faster movement

- Better/cheaper mixup (Labrys has to burn 50 on any real high/lows while Chie gets them guaranteed for free from oki)

- Better air normals (Lab's j.B looks big and scary, but it's slow--20f startup. Chie can easily CH her air to air or just 2B).

- Does not get inherently worse by getting hit, blocking, or over time

Literally the only thing Labrys has over Chie is max damage, but that's max damage you won't see 99% of the time against a skilled Chie since you'll never get to Red Axe. If you even start getting close, Chie has several ways to neutralize it: Meteors, 5A pressure, and oki will all reset you from red to green or worse. Worst case scenario, you're both at neutral, Chie can stall Labrys long enough until her gauge fades over time or she lands a hit/blocked move and does one of the above.

IMO it's 8-2. I've had 8-2s before with characters I play (CT Haku vs. Arakune), and the feel is identical: you have to play neigh perfectly as even a slight mistake will undo every last bit of progress you've inched towards and put you in a situation where you are in imminent danger of losing the round. This is not even possible the other way around in either 8-2, since Halumen landing a fat starter is meaningless until he's built some meter just as Labrys doing likewise is irrelevant until she has Red Axe.

If Labrys lands a great starter--let's say a 5A or 2B as they're the most practical and best general use starters--she can't do squat and has to focus on building meter. Once she has 25%, then she can land another starter and go green to red instantly off many (but not all) hits. THEN she can finally attempt to steamroll her opponent.

Compare that to Chie. If she touches you with most starters, you're eating a combo and waking up into the oki meat grinder. Congrats, you, the Lab player, are already in that "imminent danger" scenario of getting bodied. You have nothing to get her off you except Gears which you can't use until you're almost dead anyway, Bull which isn't invincible but has auto-guard and is far too risky to even use as a reversal nearly all the time, a guard cancel that's garbage, and her laughable B+D, which Chie can punish on reaction just for attempting. Did I mention all of those cost meter you likely don't have since Labrys eats meter like popcorn to fuel axe gauge building combos, vital SB attacks, and OMC pressure since her meterless pressure is so easily blocked and unsafe without it?

Again, IMO, it is definitely a 7-3 if not a 7.5-2.5 or 8-2. Saying P4A has no 7-3s is something I don't see at all since that would be implying it's as balanced as GGAC, which actually doesn't have any 7-3s (worst is Eddie vs. Pot at 6.5-3.5), when that is clearly not the case.

I mean this as flatly and inoffensively as possible: if someone thinks Chie vs. Labrys is NOT 7-3 or worse, they are not playing Chie to her fullest potential or they are letting the Labrys get away with far more than they should. The reason why I mean no offense with that statement is because 1) we're all friends here and I don't want that to be taken as an instigation and 2) I'm being real as fuck when I say the people making such claims about X game's matchups have not been playing fighters long enough to have the experience necessary to make such judgements. The inverse of the XBL messages I get after being rage quit on because Hakumen's counters are "cheap" is happening here. Where those rage mailers don't understand why counters are balanced (their risk/reward is actually skewed at a high enough level of play to make them only worth using very rarely against top players), newer players do not understand just how good/lopsided certain tools or matchups in some fighters are.

Real talk.

[ZomB]

I don't really know who you're talking to lol

I don't think a single person on the thread has tried to imply that chie vs labrys isn't god awful for labrys.

Opinions are shaped by experiences, you've played with (imo) 2 of the best Chies in the US, not everyone has done that.

[Tecta1Eastside]

I imagine Labrys vs Chie is hell on earth for Labrys like in her story mode lol.

I have a hard enough time playing ayashii

[Skeletal Minion]

I was addressing a few different things said by a few different people. Reading that P4A doesn't have 7-3s was drink-spitting enough for me to respond, but instead of saying "WHAT IN THE ACTUAL FUCK, THAT'S RETARDED" or something equally vitriolic, I opted to back up the counterpoint with evidence (which is why the post turned into the Great Wall of Mayonaka; sorry for that).

It just seems in the FGC in general lately there are some opinions and conclusions being thrown around that seem jumped to. Speaking only for myself, I believe one of those would be the idea of P4A being balanced or anywhere close. It's fun, sure--I even enjoy it although I think it's not up to snuff as a tourney worthy fighter, which is why I don't play it seriously anymore--but to me it is very clear that it's another BBCT. I really hope a new iteration gets made sooner than later since I think it will be very solid and I'll definitely try it, but I'm tired of seeing people defend it by making up stuff like saying "it's balanced/it has no 7-3s." I say "making stuff up" specifically referring to such exaggerated statements made in defensiveness, since if someone truly believes that (and isn't willingly turning a blind eye to it), again, they simply do not have the experience to make an informed opinion on high level balance.

I have no doubt you and Ivy are two of the best (if not THE two best) American Chies and I respect that... But judging from ApologyMan, I might be one of the best Labryses, lol. (Kidding)

Bleh, I hate typing posts like this; they feel so bland. Yet when I inject a little color into my reasoning, people get upset when I'm not intending for them to. I can't win

[ZomB]

I don't know about matchup numbers, but there are only 5 matchups in the whole game I'd tell someone "you should probably pick another character" -- that's not to say these are the only bad matchups, but outside of this I'd argue that the game is more on the balanced side than not.

Shadow Labrys/Aigis > Yukiko

Chie > Labrys

Mitsuru > Elizabeth

Teddie > Naoto

And again, people's opinions are generally formed around their own experiences. Having played and watched the game across the US, I do feel it is generally balanced.

As for... "Guilty gear is way more balanced it only has 6.5:3.5 matchups not 7:3's like that persona game!" -- I just want to say that the difference between "6.5:3.5" and "7:3" is some relatively esoteric half a point of "matchup" that doesn't really make any sense.

[Tecta1Eastside]

I think the game has a decent balance going for it but it could be better.

I'm a Labrys main but even I would like one more patch.

I'm not a tourney player so my thoughts probably wont have any weight or matter to most ppl.

I can feel Skeleton Minion's pain though and I understand how he feels.

Edited February 20, 2013 by Tecta1Eastside

[Volpe-de-Glacio]

I'm beginning to look at match ups in a very different light after all of this. I no longer believe in assigning a number value to a MU unless you're discussing it in Japan (and even then I'd err on the side of caution) Match ups can be bad, and match ups can be good. Assigning an arbitrary value is pointless due to the transient nature of the meta-game.

That being said, aren't you doing the same thing you're speaking against when you jump to the conclusion that P4A isn't tournament worthy? You can hardly claim that you have intimate knowledge of the meta, considering you admitted yourself that you don't play it seriously anymore. There are bad match-ups in Persona, yes, but I don't see the top players struggling with them nearly as much as they do in Gear. I watch the best Johnny players put in WORK, make godlike reads, and still get bodied by their opponents. Nothing against Gear. I fucking love that game and have mad respect for it and those who play it. But from what I've seen and heard of certain match ups, I don't think it's as balanced as Persona at all. If a Liz makes the right reads and exploits the holes in her pressure, she's going to set play the fuck out of Mitsuru and likely grab a perfect. Same thing with Yukiko. If you play weaker characters in Gear, that seems more like a fucking fairy tale, no offense.

This brings me to another point. You say inexperienced players can't really assess match-ups because they can't experience the match ups at high level play(or at least that's how I'm interpreting it), but that isn't entirely true. There's a wealth of information on the net showcasing just how those match ups play out when two top players duke it out. If you don't understand why those players made the decisions they did, you can take their vids to a forum to discuss with people more experienced than yourself, and then develop your own opinion on the match up from there.

I also don't know why you think the effectiveness of counters magically evaporates at high level play, considering you can use them to REACT to an opponent's mix-up and punish them for simply pressuring Haku-men. Not to claim that I'm a high level player, but the simple ability to react to overheads and the like with counters is probably the only reason I did as well as I did in our BB tournaments. High level play doesn't suddenly mean players are able to cancel moves that haven't even touched the opponent yet. Unless I'm remembering how it went down all wrong, and I was yomi'ing before I even knew what yomi was.

Edited February 20, 2013 by Volpe-de-Glacio

[Klein]

Personally, I feel like GG is balanced just because of the tools everyone in the game gets, like 1f grabs, instant blocks, etc. Similar to how Street Fighter tends to give decent basic tools to the entire cast, but that's just me. It also helps that I see a LOT of Johnny doing good work in tournaments :P

My problem with Persona is mainly in how MY character Labrys doesn't have defensive options, unlike any character I can think of in GG who doesn't have something to compensate, like the best offense in the game.

[Eshi]

As for... "Guilty gear is way more balanced it only has 6.5:3.5 matchups not 7:3's like that persona game!" -- I just want to say that the difference between "6.5:3.5" and "7:3" is some relatively esoteric half a point of "matchup" that doesn't really make any sense.

I completely agree with this. It's either 6 - 4 or 7 - 3, hairsplitting doesn't prove a point since no one can win half of a match.

Also: a 7-3 in one game is more or less equivalent to a 7-3 in another. Having more system mechanics just means that the advantageous character has more of a gross advantage going for them to even out the difference. "feeling harder" is entirely subjective.

Edited February 20, 2013 by Eshi

[Volpe-de-Glacio]

True, I don't fully understand Gear. I'm just pointing out how easy it is to form an opinion from a standpoint of ignorance, with the little bit I -have- seen.

[Klein]

I completely agree with this. It's either 6 - 4 or 7 - 3, hairsplitting doesn't prove a point since no one can win half of a match.

I'm not a big fan of .5s, but while you can't win half a match, you can win 65 rather than 70, 60, etc.

[Eshi]

I'm not a big fan of .5s, but while you can't win half a match, you can win 65 rather than 70, 60, etc.

the entire idea behind the system is that it's a first to 10 set, not a first to 100 or 10^google. Adding fractions is a slippery slope to adding smaller fractions ad nauseum which makes it lose its meaning.

[Klein]

the entire idea behind the system is that it's a first to 10 set, not a first to 100 or 10^google. Adding fractions is a slippery slope to adding smaller fractions ad nauseum.

I think that's stretching it just a bit, fractions have been around longer than I think any of us have, and I don't see 6.7 matchups, juuussayin'

[Milln]

Jackie, who's coming with you to Final Round in your vehicle?

[Ctrlaltwtf]

Isn't winning half a match technically going 1-2 instead of 0-2?

[tret_tree]

I'm beginning to look at match ups in a very different light after all of this. I no longer believe in assigning a number value to a MU unless you're discussing it in Japan (and even then I'd err on the side of caution) Match ups can be bad, and match ups can be good. Assigning an arbitrary value is pointless due to the transient nature of the meta-game.

The only thing you'll find in Japan is a bunch of people with opinions, skilled or not. Their number values aren't exactly consensual.

I don't really understand the stigma with MU numbers, hair-splitting and treating them as law aside. They're useful for communicating an opinion on something with a lot of gray area. Matchups being a binary 1 or 0 doesn't really say anything as to the why, a useful thing to players trying to maximize their chances or discuss balance.

[Jackie Chandler]

Jackie, who's coming with you to Final Round in your vehicle?

I'm not 100% on that yet. I'm pretty sure everyone who'd be coming up with me is waiting to make sure they'll have enough money to go.

Although if those people want to elaborate on their situation(s) in the thread, that'd be cool, too.

[Skeletal Minion]

I don't understand why people say "meh, matchup charts are meaningless." Yes, they are just data, but that's just it--they're data. They're reflective of the game, and ignoring them or not making/having them isn't going to make, say, Vanilla SF4 Sagat any less dumb. You can look at tier lists instead but they don't reflect relative strength as well and the same chars that are dumb as fuck on matchup charts are still going to be dumb as fuck in the top tier.

I no longer play P4A seriously and have never considered myself a top player at that game, but this is exactly what I mean when I talk about experience mattering when judging balance. Example: back when I was recently showing someone the ropes on GG, they commented at one point that he thought bursts were total shit on that game. I explained that IMO it's the other way around; bursts in P4A are way too good. Comparison:

GG Blue Bursts - Slowish speed, very punishable on block, vulnerable to air throws for entire duration, doesn't knock down (opponent can tech and airdash back in before landing)

P4A Blue Bursts - Very fast, punishable but recovers instantly upon landing, cannot be thrown, guaranteed knockdown

It's not elitism; with experience comes perspective. Newer players don't see the problem with having moves that are +80 on block. They don't realize just how insanely broken Yosuke's counter is. They look at being able to literally mash a reversal WHILE holding downback is just a system mechanic. They have not been playing fighting games long enough to know just how problematic these flaws in design are since they don't have experience in prior games to compare to.

One thing I want to make clear: I'm not claiming to be the best at P4A or even good. But to make such observations, one doesn't have to be, just as movie critic doesn't have to have actually made a movie if he's seen enough examples of good and bad filmmaking to be able to distinguish. That, and I tend to be EXTREMELY observant of system mechanics--if you poke around on DL you'll probably find posts where I've dissected certain subsystems or came up with ideas for new ones just because I think the concepts and reasons behind them and their implementations are one of the more interesting aspects of FG design. I always will gladly explain or back up my arguments; I'm not some baseless Internet troll.

For example, the problem with B+D: they can be mashed WHILE BLOCKING. For traditional dragon punches, there is a reason why they used 623 motions; because if you wanted to attempt a reversal out of pressure, you had to place a risk on yourself by ending your block. Games didn't have auto guard (where successive hits in a string/multihit move are automatically guarded if the first hit is), so if you took your joystick off 1 or 4 you were risking being opened up. In P4A, however, this type of risk is completely removed since B+Ds require no motion. You can hold downback and mash B+D until even a tiny gap appears and unless your opponent read your mash and completely stopped their offense to bait, you break out of pressure and get to start your own. "But wait, you just said you can bait their mash! That's fair!" Is it? Do you realize what happened here? The risk was placed on the AGGRESSOR, not the defender. The offensive player had to question on every gap in his string, "Will this be the one I need to bait? Do I stop here at the risk of throwing away my pressure for nothing?" Meanwhile, the defender held one joystick direction and hit two buttons at any point he thought the attacker was going to keep doing what he was supposed to be doing: attacking. Tiny oversights like this kill me because it could have been easily fixed by removing auto guard from the game and changing B+D to 6+B+D. (Before someone mentions, no, the attacker doesn't need to "tighten his strings." There is no infinite airtight pressure string in any half-decent fighter; otherwise the game would be broken as shit. See: Ivan Ooze fireball lockdown. Yes, I know there are a handful of exceptions in some anime games, but infinite pressure prevention being the reason why Guard Bonus exists makes that a moot point).

Regarding "weaker characters" in Gear: respectfully, this is evidence that you do not know what you are talking about. Look up videos of BLEED or Satou (Johnny), Limekey (Anji), or Ruu (Bridget). They have won tournaments using the three worst characters in the game. There's a really amazing set where Ruu easily goes toe to toe with his good friend Shounen, by far the best Testament player (the second best character in the game and the only other S-tier besides Eddie). This simply does not happen in P4A. Labrys was so bad there was discussion at one time on jBBS about whether she is even worth playing competitively. Labrys has never won a tournament and never will. The most trumpeted set of a Labrys player is the recent one with Bobu vs. that Yu, and the reason why Bobu is hype isn't because he's destroying the Yu, it's because he's not getting completely shit on quite as badly as is expected of his character.

The reason why counters are bad at high level play is because their risk/reward ratio becomes unfavorable against skilled players.

Favorable outcomes for Hakumen's drives in CSE:

- You break out of pressure and net ~2k and one magatama for your troubles.

Unfavorable outcomes:

- They hit you low when you countered high or vice versa and get a CH combo that nets anywhere from BnB damage (~3.5k) to big damage (~6k) depending on the opponent and their starter

- They throw you at any point during the counter for a free combo into average damage

- They bait it by doing nothing and CH your recovery with their best starter for huge damage (4k-8k depending on char)

At lower levels it's not a huge deal since they will likely get hit by the counter or be unlikely to optimally punish if it whiffs, but at high level that shit can cost you an entire round.

This is also why as a Hakumen main, Yosuke's counter seems extremely busted. Those drawbacks on his counter are minimized or non-existent:

Catches highs, lows, throws, projectiles, unblockables, IKs

LONG active catch frames

Tiny recovery on whiff

Microscopic recovery on activated whiff

Removes all cancel options from an opponent upon catch--they can't OMC, can't chain into a normal or B+D that might help them bait it, can't special cancel into a reversal to make it whiff, can't super cancel, can't jump cancel, NOTHING. It is guaranteed if you are its range (huge hitbox extending from his leg) and activate it unless the thing you triggered it with leaves you entirely invincible through it's long, long active frames on catch.

While the "trade-off" is that he can't get damage from it, he still gets to completely reverse the offensive momentum, which, considering how limited the options are for reading/punishing his counter and how it can more or less counter everything in the game, is way too good. Plus, he can mash it during a blockstring like all B+Ds, and with no high/low/throw guessing, the risk is nearly erased entirely.

Actually I think that's why debates like this are existing: the risk/reward ratios in P4A are fucked. Like, bad. You've got +80 on block shit on one hand and moves with triple digit startup on the other. Properly understanding the concept of risk/reward is something that normally can take years to accomplish, and P4A is probably the worst teacher of that concept since its risk/reward is all over the place.

I think I'm going to let this die for now in light of that revelation. To those who enjoy P4A, play P4A. Kick ass at it. I hope you do well. But remember this post a few years from now, when other fighters have come and gone and you have a strengthened grasp of the concepts mentioned here, and perhaps you will view P4A as I do.

[mAc Chaos]

Man I love it when Skeletal goes on these huge expositions.

I was actually going to bring up Haku's counter as I was reading your point about B+D during block being way too good, but then you got right to it.

A matchup chart represents the tools the characters have. A lot of people think it means "someone using this character will beat someone else" but that's not really true which is why people say matchup charts "don't matter." It tells you what resources are at your disposal. If it's 5-5 then that means pretty much everything you can do, the opposing character has an answer to it. When you start using moves or tactics that the opponent has no answer to, that's when it starts ticking up, and more for the amount of unanswerables.

Edited February 20, 2013 by mAc Chaos

[Klein]

Even though I'm pretty sure I knew all this, seeing it all written out so eloquently is nice. Also, I appreciated the horror stuff, and already knew the strange deaths wiki page lol.

[Anne]

I will say that I love P4A to death and think it's a great game, but the balance is questionable at best, and the risk vs reward is busted as fuck. There's a lot of redeeming factors to me personally (mostly Persona characters and the fast pace) but it'd be silly for me to say there aren't glaring problems staring me down in it. With how some of the other community at large is (#RIP #DEADGAME #BEADICKABOUTFIGHTINGGAMES) it's easy to try to defend your game a bit too much.

On GG, I recognize it's a more balanced and well put together game in a lot of aspects and I enjoy it quite a bit. Some other games I just like better at a different level.

[Klein]

Yeah, nobody wants you to quit playing whatever you want to play, we all love eachother and our different opinions n' shit.

Edit: Also, as far as I know, every good fighter series started out pretty shitty. Don't take it as a personal insult when we consider the first round in a series pretty shitty compared to something that also started out shitty but blossomed into a great game. Not meaning anyone specifically, just a note for everyone in the future.

Edited February 20, 2013 by Klein

[Anne]

I'm not saying anybody is particularly dogging anybody about a game ore anything, I just think it's a silly mindset. The more you love a game/genre the more critical you should be about the games you play to help better how you play it. I do wish the airdasher community didn't cannibalize and rag on itself all the time (I think this is part of the problem of our growth along with the split in games), because that almost encourages people to take up arms defending things that are clearly problems.

[Fluck]

Here's why your analysis of Haku and Yosuke's counters is flawed - they are on different characters.

If you get countered by Hakumen, you take a combo, Hakumen builds stars, and you get stuck blocking Hakumen, a character with quick/instant overheads on most of the cast with Tsubaki and j.B fuzzy guards, as well as strong frame-traps and throw/throw whiff/throw reject mixups. If you get hit, Hakumen has some of the highest rewards in the game off his combos due to good meter gain, insane corner carry, and high damage.

If you get countered by Yosuke, you take 500 damage (99% of the time), and then you have to block Yosuke, a character with bad mixup (27 frame overhead, 30 frame unblockable, throw game is not strong because throw does pitiful damage, there is no throw reject, and there is no safe way to bait throw whiffs with that character) and awful combo rewards. Even if you get hit by Yosuke, his combo does bad damage and resets the opponent back to neutral.

If you get countered by Hakumen, combo into knockdown, eat a throw mixup, if you get it wrong, corner carry combo into knockdown, eat a Tsubaki, that's game. And those are STRONG mixups that even experienced players have problems defending against.

If you get countered by Yosuke...You block? And then even if Yosuke hits you with some kind of frame trap like 5B -> dash 5A -> air combo against chicken blocking, you only take like 2k damage and get reset to neutral.

It's not even comparable.

Edited February 20, 2013 by Fluck

[Klein]

I agree, there's a lot of stupid mentalities going around in probably every gaming community, but I try to be logical in mine. And I definitely don't think Gear is perfect by any means, LOL. I just defend what I feel is fine about it.