KayEff

opponent is not high enough after the second CS for DID to work

EDIT: ragna forums have an official discord server now. access it through https://discord.gg/0fFxfPonksCUUeDP

> video removed by the user alright then

that's weird, that combo shouldn't do less damage...and here's why note: i'm using the proration values listed in this topic. if they're wrong, then so be it, but this is just to let everyone know that i'm not pulling these values out of thin air. 5C is 800 damage with P2 92. 5D is 500+780 damage with P2 84(once)...meaning 5D(1) will have P2 84 and 5D(2) will just tack on extra damage should 5D(1) hit. gauntlet hades is 800 damage with P2 92. spin kick/keri age is 1000 damage with P2 90. as you can see, if you replace 5C > 5D(1) with a simple gauntlet hades, then it should result in more damage, as spin kick/keri age is clearly superior to 5D(1). the only reason why my combo does less damage would be that the proration data is actually wrong. if that's actually the case, then someone should go experiment and find out what the actual proration values are.

on the topic of emoticon balls, i'll try and start on jack-o, jam, hibiki, and naoto when i have free time

DbD only does 1350 minimum damage now, so CS will do more with 1410 minimum damage EDIT: i just noticed, why no gauntlet hades? see if you can replace 5C > 5D dc > 5C > 5D(1) > CS with 5C > 5D > GH > (jc?) CS. seems to me that you're losing some damage potential with that 5D(1) there.

i've made it but i've yet to see someone add it EDIT: so it appears that i uploaded to puush under no account (even though i had one), so it's gone. i'll see if i can make it again from scratch when i can find time.

I hope there are signs showing how to get to jubilee tower cause I don't know bally's at all also don't forget that it'll most likely be open at 5 pm

well i'm up for casuals since i have no team for BB so send me a PM whenever

i've landed and am waiting for someone to hit me up

i dunno if this needed a separate topic but that's not my jurisdiction, so might as well follow the flow i'll be arriving in las vegas at around 9~10 am tomorrow (july 16th), and will be staying in the paris hotel (which is either where EVO is at or very close to where it's at). my room should be pretty open, as it's a two queen-bed room with just me and my friend. if you wanna play some BB casuals, hit me up via PM, but keep in mind that i'm not bringing my console so you'll have to bring your own.

i don't know if this would be the right place to post this, but i'll give it a shot. i'm moving over to san jose sometime between the 20th (after i come back from EVO) and 27th (when i have to start work) of this month. i'm currently looking for housing somewhere around san jose, preferably in northern region, as that's where i'll be working at (F5 networks, 90 rio robles). does anyone have or know of anyone that has rent space available around that region? or perhaps someone can give me some advice on where i can start looking or who i can start asking? if you have anything that could help me, lemme know through PM or through here. thanks for reading.

in my eyes, there has to be reason for why a matchup would be 7-3, regardless of how bad the options for either character are. if that same character only had one good matchup while the rest were balls, then that'd be a different case. remember, i'm arguing that the number of good matchups defines a character's effectiveness (and i guess also how "good" those good matchups are). and before we get too complicated into the notion of "what good means," keep in mind that matchups are also completely subjective. there's no concrete guidelines on how matchup judgement is supposed to go: it's entirely based on a player's instinct and opinion, nothing more. which would mean that the definition of "good" is also completely subjective. so let's not get too antsy about a notion that's going to be different between people.

in CS2, tager had a good matchup against noel (as well as some of the other lower tier characters, but i'm not counting those for the sake of the argument). by the logic that you stated, that should make tager a good character, since he has a good matchup against what was considered a top tier character. but he's wasn't. he had tons of bad matchups against the higher tier characters. most people would consider him pretty low in the scheme of all things. i'd argue that good matchups don't happen because they are good, it's all dependent on the context of a certain character's options against another. if a character is good, then they'd be able to win more easily than other characters. put more technically, they'd win a higher number of matches than lose in the long run. if you haven't noticed yet, i just defined what a matchup is supposed to be. also, wouldn't a more effective character end up being a better character? seems to me that it's pretty much one and the same. EDIT: and i guess to also add on an extra opinion on mine; regarding the comment that a character is good based on the player: i can understand the thought process behind that. surely, if the character is played in the right hands, then they can be "good." i have two things for why i don't agree with this statement though. one, this statement is more of a representation of how good the player is, not how good the character is. just because one person is able to do well with a character doesn't mean that the flaws and restrictions stop existing. it just means that the player knows how to circumvent around those issues and utilize the character to its fullest potential. two, i'm pretty sure this answer doesn't really help the original poster out. if OP truly decided to accept this answer, then he/she'd also find that if he were to play against some shitty azrael or hazama, then he/she'd consider either of them as bad characters on the premise that the player was bad.

a character's effectiveness is based on the number of good matchups they have. the more matchups they have in their favor, the higher they're generally considered. i'm not a nu or lambda main, so if someone can correct me on this statement, feel free. i suspect the reason why nu is considered better than lambda is because of her fundamental game. nu seems to be more focused on zoning, while lambda seems to be an all-around character (hybrid between rushdown/zoning). zoning in this game is very powerful, and many characters still struggle with projectiles, albeit with varying degrees of difficulty. with that said, the game works well in nu's favor since she's a very strong zoner. lambda's rushdown isn't particularly noteworthy, so she struggles trying to find a compromise for her playstyle. the thing about a character's effectiveness is that because it's heavily based on the matchups in this game, it's hard to consider who's stronger/weaker than who. the drive system really differentiates the matchups in this game a lot, so there's huge debate about the discrepancies between characters' strengths and weaknesses. now if you were to analyze a game like street fighter 4, then you'd probably have an easier time analyzing matchups since some characters share extreme similarities with others. in blazblue, it doesn't really work that way.