WANTED: Translators for BBCS2 Mook

[shtkn]

I would also like to get stuff edited. You can see more of the work i've been doing through the links in teh first post and try clicking around from there.

i also need to add in the revolver actions for everyone.

[shtkn]

okay, everyone's data should be up, but it's all unedited, so there will be typos, badly worded phrases, etc.

also, system notes and system data are not up yet either. Need to wait on the editor for that stuff.

if you guys see any typos in the notes or tables, please post up in here and i will correct it.

i'm going to start on gatlings for now but i'm not sure if i should use the format used in teh Mook or what we had before.

Here's a simple comparison (scroll to the bottom of each page):

before: http://dustloop.com/guides/bbcs/frameData/jin.html

mook: http://dustloop.com/guides/bbcs2/frameData/jin.html

which format do you guys want?

[Circuitous]

I like the mook format.

[zreb]

The mook format is much easier on the eyes than the old version in my opinion!

[Airk]

I like the Mook format also.

Also, I think there's an error/mistranslation in the Tsubaki data; Under "Macto Maledictis

(214214D)" the note says "cannot use any D moves while in Macto Maledictis"; Unless this move has COMPLETELY CHANGED from its CS1 incarnation, the whole point of this move is to be able to use D moves without using any charge gauge.

Can someone please verify the translation?

[pktazn]

Yea I agree with the others before me. The mook format is easier to read imo.

[Urichinan]

Agreed, it's also much easier to teach people using that format. I've already taught my friend how to read Ragna's frame-data using this. It's much sleeker and doesn't look as intimidating.

[KayEff]

Also, I think there's an error/mistranslation in the Tsubaki data; Under "Macto Maledictis

(214214D)" the note says "cannot use any D moves while in Macto Maledictis"; Unless this move has COMPLETELY CHANGED from its CS1 incarnation, the whole point of this move is to be able to use D moves without using any charge gauge.

Can someone please verify the translation?

Error on my part. The correct translation is that Macto Maledictis allows you to use D moves without using up install gauge.

[Rhiya]

Can you also verify that 214C is indeed -5 and not +5?

I'd be fucking pissed if a move with 40f startup was minus on block, especially since it used to be plus

[KayEff]

Confirmed that 214C is -5. :/

[Rhiya]

;_;

Sadness.

Also sad 214D is no longer plus as fuck, but eh, you win some, you lose some. The positive changes definitely overwhelm the negative ones.

Thanks for the TL, man.

[Manta]

Confirm that Tager's new Voltic charge input is in fact 214D and not 421B as listed?

[KayEff]

Can't really confirm that since it's not listed in the mook, but...

Gimme a few minutes and I can look up some japanese sites to find the input.

EDIT: Source indicates that Voltec Charge is indeed 214D.

Edited April 4, 2011 by KayEff

[Mumm-Ra]

I'd like to request that the pop ups for each item in the older version (example, damage: multiple hits are separated by commas) should be used in the mook version for easier reading.

Unless they're already there and don't work for me for some reason.

[shtkn]

i'll fix the tsubaki stuff tonight.

the popups are not working yet. You can go to valk's page for a preview. For the most part they're the same as the cs1 popups, but i plan to make them explain a bit more and include a link to hte relevant section in the system guide (once that's up).

and i'll go with teh mook format for gatlings from here on out.

[shtkn]

ok, i think ppl got confused:

i'm talking about the GATLING CHART ONLY, NOT TEH FRAME DATA

scroll to the bottom of each page:

before: http://dustloop.com/guides/bbcs/frameData/jin.html

mook: http://dustloop.com/guides/bbcs2/frameData/jin.html

LOOK AT THE GATLING CHART AT THE BOTTOM OF EACH PAGE, NOT THE FRAME DATA.

which format do you think is better?

[Urichinan]

Oh, definitely the new one. That's a lot easier on the eyes.

[Kurushii]

Few notes:

Makoto's 6B showing as HL on guard when should be H.

Jin's Rehhyou input is listed as 623D when should be 623C.

[shtkn]

makoto and jin changes noted

gatlings up for most charactesr. If you just seen numbers in a table cell, it means it has notes which i couldn't translate due to me being chinese and not able to guess the meaning of the notes with my kanji skills. This also means my translations of gatling notes might be wrong

if you have character knowledge that could potentially fill in missing info or if i just made a typo, please let me know.

[rtl42]

if you need assistance with any notes/comments, i would be glad to help. do you have scans available for those gatling tables?

edit: on a different note, the link on the Frame Data page to the BB frame data is still to the CS stuff. (in case you had forgotten to change the link; if not, then don't mind me.)

edit2: one question about the comments in the frame data. For example, in Hakumen's 5A, it says:

- standing hit has hitstun of 14F

- [not important for this question]

- bend back

whereas in the original, it says:

- nokezori 14F

- [not important]

Isn't equivalent to say "bend back for 14F"? or does the English term "bend back" not include/incorporate hitstun?

also there is a typo in the comment for Hakumen's 2B. it says "16F!" but it should say "16F~".

Edited April 6, 2011 by rtl42

[KayEff]

Technically, "nokezori 14F" would translate to in our terms "14F hitstun on ground" or "14F standing hitstun." Although nokezori literally translates to "bend back," in fighting game terminology it is usually used to refer to hitstun (in BB's case, on the ground since in the air that's covered by 受身不能時間 or untechable time).

As for gatling tables (or anything in the mook needing translation) I'm down to help.

Edited April 6, 2011 by KayEff

[A.X.I.S.]

CS2 Tager frame data:

In the gatlings section you have 2C listed twice at the top of the table and 2D isn't listed.

[KayEff]

Polka, Spark and I had a discussion for how the guard notations are made, and I thought it might be a good idea if we change the notation for it. The way it's listed now, it's a tad confusing since B notates that the move must be air barriered, although it wouldn't make much sense. The way the frame data's listed now, all aerial normals would require air barrier to block, and none of the ground normals would need it.

I propose a system like this:

H: block high (on the ground)

L: block low (on the ground)

A: block in the air

So if Rachel's 5B is HL, it means that it can be blocked high or low on the ground, but since it does not have an A, it cannot be blocked in the air (in other words, it's air unblockable). Rachel's j.A is HA, which means that it can be blocked high or in the air, but not low since it doesn't have an L.

Just a thought.

[Mightfo]

LOOK AT THE GATLING CHART AT THE BOTTOM OF EACH PAGE, NOT THE FRAME DATA.

which format do you think is better?

IMO the mook style gatling chart is a lot better.

[Airk]

Polka, Spark and I had a discussion for how the guard notations are made, and I thought it might be a good idea if we change the notation for it. The way it's listed now, it's a tad confusing since B notates that the move must be air barriered, although it wouldn't make much sense. The way the frame data's listed now, all aerial normals would require air barrier to block, and none of the ground normals would need it.

I propose a system like this:

H: block high (on the ground)

L: block low (on the ground)

A: block in the air

So if Rachel's 5B is HL, it means that it can be blocked high or low on the ground, but since it does not have an A, it cannot be blocked in the air (in other words, it's air unblockable). Rachel's j.A is HA, which means that it can be blocked high or in the air, but not low since it doesn't have an L.

Just a thought.

I agree that we need to be consistent - it's very strange that we don't have the "air blockable" notation on jumping attacks. However, another question I have is, is there such a thing as a move that is ACTUALLY air unblockable? As it, even if you barrier, it still hits you? Obviously moves that are unblockable period (Jin's 623D 2nd hit when held long enough, etc.) but otherwise?

Presuming that there aren't any moves that are air unblockable without being fully unblockable, what we really need is just a notation that tells us whether a move needs to be barrier blocked in the air or not. "A" seems to do well for that, as long as we provide tips that indicate that if a move DOESN'T have an "A" then it is still air blockable, but requires barrier.

Ugh. So messy. Brain hurts.