[CP] News & Gameplay Discussion

[Luminos564]

If he eats a projectile with Growler, then he gains a projectile to fire back. I think it maxes at 5? But he can absorb a bunch. Pretty sure he can absorb a whole Nu blade spam super.

Max is 3 stocked projectiles, but yes you were right to say that he can nullify the entire projectile move even if he reaches his maxed limit. Course, in that particular case, absorbing all of Nu-13's Legacy Edge isn't a very smart idea since she can still move while the DD is in effect and break Growler Field with a different move into a decent combo.

Best characters for top tier would be the ones that don't ignore everybody's game plan because of their mechanics. So not Valk, Tao, Hazama, etc.

Ragna and Jin would be good.

Can we have Bullet and/or Kagura in there?

Edited February 3, 2014 by Luminos564

[Dreize]

Yeah, might as well. Let's just make all the easy-to-use characters top tier.

My vote for top tier would go to Carl & Izayoi.

[TekkamanArk]

And the tager lasers

I haven't tested it on the full charge one. Does it absorb the full charge too? I would have imagined that lasted too long

Can we have Bullet and/or Kagura in there?

Full support this decision

[Stellarcircle5]

Yeah, might as well. Let's just make all the easy-to-use characters top tier.

My vote for top tier would go to Carl & Izayoi.

I can totally see Izayoi being ridiculous. She has the tools she needs, she was just executed poorly.

[Luminos564]

Yeah, might as well. Let's just make all the easy-to-use characters top tier.

Kagura is easy-to-use? I must have missed the memo where the learning curve of charge and stance characters has dropped where they're easier to handle than shoto-clones. Alright, my sarcasm aside, I think people are associating "simple" with "overpowered" should they become top tier. But that cannot really be the case in my opinion. See, if you have a simple character on top, that means you don't have to spend endless amount of hours learning how to counter their tricks. I figure people would much rather fight Ragna in a top tier incarnation than say someone like Litchi, Rachel, Arakune or Kokonoe...oh wait, my bad on that last one; we already have that.

[Errol]

I just want to see a DIFFERENT top tier, so maybe we can see SOME of the other characters being used at the highest level of tournaments in japan.

That means No;

Valkenhayn Hakumen Hazama Valkenhayn Taokaka Litchi Valkenhayn

and Yes to:

Izayoi, Carl, Bang, Tsubaki, Makoto, Platinum

[Dreize]

Who said anything about Kagura being easier to use than Jin/Ragna? Strawman argument. Being hard to use and being harder to use than Ragna/Jin are two very different things.

Anyways, I'm kinda getting off-topic now and drifting away from my original point.

Ideally if I were to choose the top tiers for CP I'd want them to be the hardest-to-use characters in the game. Carl, Izayoi, whoever, etc. Work for that greatness, that's the point that I was trying to make.

There's really no right or wrong answer here, just my thoughts/opinion and what I'd personally choose to do. Not that it really matters, though.

That means No;

Valkenhayn Hakumen Hazama Valkenhayn Taokaka Litchi Valkenhayn

I see you.

Edited February 3, 2014 by Dreize

[BlackYakuzu94]

The only way Carl would be top tier is if everything he does is overpowered, which I guess is a fair tradeoff for his learning curve.

If Tsubaki ever becomes top tier though, I might have to kill myself.

As for top tiers, no...Ragna & Jin should not be up there, last thing this game needs is to have the easy to use characters be the best ones; ideally they should be no better than A tier.

Edited February 3, 2014 by BlackYakuzu94

[Kyosuke Kagami]

>Yes to:

> Bang, Makoto

:|

Carl is already annoying the way he is. I say he should stay the way he is.

[Luminos564]

Who said anything about Kagura being easier to use than Jin/Ragna?

I thought you were pulling that mindset since I suggested Kagura as one of the options. If that wasn't the case then my mistake.

[Errol]

Makoto is the single most honest character in this game. Even top tier she wouldn't be as frustrating to play against as most of the cast let alone other 'traditional' top tiers.

[Starlight777]

Makoto is the single most honest character in this game. Even top tier she wouldn't be as frustrating to play against as most of the cast let alone other 'traditional' top tiers.

Yeah she makes me feel like I lost to 100% skill. Some characters make it feel like 80% skill, 20% bullshit.

[TD]

l don't recall there being a single top tier people liked since ct. there has always always always been hate on this forum for each and every character. rachel, ara, nu, bang, litchi, tao, valk, haz, mak, noel, haku, and especially kokonoe have received a sizable amount of disgust. perhaps it is the curse of top tierdom... or something else.

agreed though, of allllll these characters makoto was probably the most balanced. even then people were screaming for a nerf.

jin has always -just- missed all of the hate everytime he was/is good because there's just always someone more bs than he.

tsubaki, tager, platinum deserve spotlight. platinum could end up being really balanced due to inconsistency. tsubaki, tager... yeah good luck with that.

[Appledash-]

New top tiers please

Well, valk can stay.

*impotent rage*

Tsubaki top tier would be one heck of a change.

[Luminos564]

*impotent rage*

Tsubaki top tier would be one heck of a change.

I forget; was Tsubaki EVER good? I seem to recall CSII being her best iteration but I doubt it was top of the Tier Pyramid (IIRC: that was Pharaoh Makoto, Princess Noel and Bullshit Hazama's era, with Jin just stradling behind them).

[Narroo]

Ideally if I were to choose the top tiers for CP I'd want them to be the hardest-to-use characters in the game.

That's a bad idea, it would kill the competitiveness of the game. If you felt like winning any tournies, or beating your friends, you'd just end up having to learn the harder characters like Carl and Arakune while the "simpler" characters would be unviable. It would cut the effective size of the cast by half. Now, if this were MvC2, that could work but this is BlazBlue.

BlazBlue's signature is that every character plays fairly uniquely in their own way. If purposefully unbalanced the game due to reflect "difficulty," you would be eliminating a large chunk of play styles that people may want to play. For instance, do you enjoy the straight forward Ragna? Nope- if you want to win, you got to play Ratchel. The game would be castrating itself by giving the player playstyles they might enjoy and then punishing them for picking it.

It doesn't help that the "difficulty" people tend talk about is execution/dexterity difficulty. If you play a character enough you eventually get a hang of them and the "difficulty" aspect of the character falls to wayside. It takes longer to learn the character, yes, but you would be giving them a permanent edge simply for "having to tough it out longer." Between that and the fact the important thing about a character is their playstyle, the argument that "difficult" characters should be better doesn't hold.

[Myoro]

That's a bad idea, it would kill the competitiveness of the game. If you felt like winning any tournies, or beating your friends, you'd just end up having to learn the harder characters like Carl and Arakune while the "simpler" characters would be unviable. It would cut the effective size of the cast by half. Now, if this were MvC2, that could work but this is BlazBlue.

BlazBlue's signature is that every character plays fairly uniquely in their own way. If purposefully unbalanced the game due to reflect "difficulty," you would be eliminating a large chunk of play styles that people may want to play. For instance, do you enjoy the straight forward Ragna? Nope- if you want to win, you got to play Ratchel. The game would be castrating itself by giving the player playstyles they might enjoy and then punishing them for picking it.

It doesn't help that the "difficulty" people tend talk about is execution/dexterity difficulty. If you play a character enough you eventually get a hang of them and the "difficulty" aspect of the character falls to wayside. It takes longer to learn the character, yes, but you would be giving them a permanent edge simply for "having to tough it out longer." Between that and the fact the important thing about a character is their playstyle, the argument that "difficult" characters should be better doesn't hold.

'Cept easy isn't a playstyle. If Jin it to win it weren't so easy a dead gerbil could main him, I'd be more okay with the stuff he gets away with.

The solution, or so I think, is to make every character's more powerful goodnesses very skill demanding to use. That way everyone would be difficult to play at a high level then people would stop feeling cheated. That solution prolly creates more problems than it solves though, and I have no desire or means to implement it, but I'm too lazy to address ether of those facts.

[TekkamanArk]

Top tier Tsubaki would be awesome. I like her a lot, but, i'm not sure how you'd be able to do it without totally changing her moves and studf, and giving her the Order Sol partial-install to normal Tsubaki. I'd also like Makoto to get a lot better, I feel like people cried for no reason with her.

As for why I hate Noel and Arakune, it has nothing to do with tiers. I hate Noel for having guns in a fighting game and her annoying personality. I hated Arakune a lot more before, I feel like BBCP Arakune is what he should have been always.

[Luminos564]

The solution, or so I think, is to make every character's more powerful goodnesses very skill demanding to use. That way everyone would be difficult to play at a high level then people would stop feeling cheated. That solution prolly creates more problems than it solves though, and I have no desire or means to implement it, but I'm too lazy to address ether of those facts.

Then you kinda run into the KoF Syndrome. Now I played XIII when I could and the learning curve to even do basic crap in training felt like trying to bring down a cement wall with a toothpick. Now I am not a good player by any means, but when even doing simple stuff on a stationary target feels that steep, something had to have gone wrong somewhere. And I'd think most devs would want more people playing their game, not dropping it for something easier on their fingers provided by a rival dev.

And without wishing to offend anyone, "feeling cheated" just sounds like an excuse to me. I could understand it if you were going up against someone using Kokonuts or even further back, pre-ACPR Justice, bring them down to a sliver only to lose to one of their overpowered shenanigans. But in an otherwise pretty-decently balanced match-up? I'm sorry, I just can't see it.

[Dreize]

That's a bad idea, it would kill the competitiveness of the game. If you felt like winning any tournies, or beating your friends, you'd just end up having to learn the harder characters like Carl and Arakune while the "simpler" characters would be unviable. It would cut the effective size of the cast by half. Now, if this were MvC2, that could work but this is BlazBlue.

...

If the game is balanced well every character should be viable to a certain extent, including the "simpler" characters. Top tier characters being more complex has absolutely nothing to do with certain characters being unviable.

Even now if you want to win tournies you're better off picking someone like Valk, Jin, Hakumen, etc over say Makoto, Platinum, Bullet, etc.

There will always be top tier characters.

BlazBlue's signature is that every character plays fairly uniquely in their own way. If purposefully unbalanced the game due to reflect "difficulty," you would be eliminating a large chunk of play styles that people may want to play. .

This has nothing to do with playstyles, as long as the game is fairly balanced there will still be a variety of viable playstyles. You're not "unbalancing" the game, you're just making the more complex characters slightly better.

Even in really balanced fighting games certain characters are always going to be better than others. That's just the way it goes, not every character is equal, it's not a perfect world.

For instance, do you enjoy the straight forward Ragna? Nope- if you want to win, you got to play Ratchel. The game would be castrating itself by giving the player playstyles they might enjoy and then punishing them for picking it.

And again, that same logic can still be applied to the current version of CP. It's not exclusive to a game wherein the top tiers are all complex characters.

Do you enjoy the complex Izayoi? Nope- if you want to win, you have to play the easy Jin.

[Myoro]

And without wishing to offend anyone, "feeling cheated" just sounds like an excuse to me. I could understand it if you were going up against someone using Kokonuts or even further back, pre-ACPR Justice, bring them down to a sliver only to lose to one of their overpowered shenanigans. But in an otherwise pretty-decently balanced match-up? I'm sorry, I just can't see it.

I mean, you don't have to have a base in logic to feel cheated, and I personally make a point never end a match this way (plus I play Relius for god sakes, I have no soap box to stand on.) The problem here is that characters that (in general) take a lot of time and effort are getting dunked on by characters that are easy and take much less time. I could understand why someone might feel that way, so there's a possible solution to that dilemma.

But, yeah, all I meant is that advanced gameplay of any character should have some kind of daunting skill requirement, no matter how beginner friendly the character is at first, not that playing the game should feel like doing a sudoku loose leaf paper while skydiving (my analogy for KoF.)

Edited February 3, 2014 by Myoro

[Errol]

I agree with one concept, that just execution shouldn't be a reason to make characters better. Because that is something you can handle with practice. I do think, on the other hand, that if a character has a lot of difficulty in other ways, it'd be fair to make them better.

For example, it's not just an 'execution' thing that some characters have autopilot confirms they can easily go into whether on ground hit, crouch hit, block, air hit, counter hit, etc, and other characters have harder confirms, where if you autopilot you'll drop (or even get punished) because it was an air hit (aka backdash, kokonoe mashing 5b), etc...

No characters named to prevent anyone in particular being offended

[mAc Chaos]

By suggesting "easy" characters I was really getting at those with a basic playstyle: that way, at least the top tier characters will be fighting on turf that everybody can compete on. Fighting Ragna is just a contest of footsies, something even Tager can do. Compare that to Tao, Hazama, and Valk, who have special playstyles that let them just fly around him.

The other way to go would be characters that by definition have a weak spot, like zoners.

[NecroTheReaper]

I dont necessarily think it should follow the concept of "more complicated needs to be better" as "my reward for complicated shit better be worth it". It's one thing for somethin complicated to be good, one thing to be shit, and one thing to be absurdly OP (Koko black hole corners xD)

[Luminos564]

The problem here is that characters that (in general) take a lot of time and effort are getting dunked on by characters that are easy and take much less time. I could understand why someone might feel that way, so there's a possible solution to that dilemma.

Wait, are you referring to the general standing between characters themselves or the players using them? If it is the player being pissy over a loss with their "hard-to-use" character losing to an "easy-to-use" one, then we can just write that off as "player skill" because at high-level execution has already been beaten into your muscle memory and you've been through enough matches. But if it's a case of "harder-to-use" characters being overshadowed by the "easy-to-use" ones overall, then I can kinda agree as I am in the same situation with Lizzie for P4U2. I mean, being hard-to-use/learn/win with shouldn't be grounds for giving you a more "legit" victory or outright better moves, but there should be at least 1 thing that the character you stuck with, despite the learning curve, excels at. Something which only they are able to offer to the player that no other character can grant.