Airk

_I_ am angry that they gave LITCHI a special anti air, basically saying "Oh, we're sorry Litchi players. We've recently been informed that there is something your character isn't good at. Here is a specific tool to remedy that situation. Oh, and to apologize for making you wait, we put in on 4B, so you don't even have to move the stick out of high block, just push the button to take care of your anti-air needs."

Because, you know, we had one tool that everyone legitimately felt was GOOD, so it needed to be nerfed, right? Why am I still in this hobby?

Don't really see how this would be the case with the system as described, since according to the descriptions folks have posted here, playing people who are ranked worse than you gets you nothing, and only by defeating players of your rank will you advance? (Does beating someone of higher rank count? If so, that kinda sucks for the higher ranked person).

Oh, that thing. I suppose that's...marginally better. Marginally. But she'd need to at least have her trailing 'blades' for any of her attacks to make sense.

And that's exactly why she's been low tier since she came out. A character with 400 options all of which are marginally useful is a bad character compared to a character with 10 options all of which are strong. You could REALLY see this in her CS1 design where ALL her different specials had different weird stuff going on, and they were all basically crap. Also, they've removed about 50% of those specials in CP.

No, 5BB is TERRIBLE CH -confirm-. It's possibly a good counter hit SETUP. Though why anyone would mash after 5B eludes me. , so you can charge cancel and become -2 (which is equivalent to them blocking a 5A) and continue pressure with 5A for example, or you can link a throw. Which I do often, since she pulls herself forward, Unless of course they barrier, in which case you actually go backwards. People have. I'm not sure I've ever see someone score a counterhit 5BB. I'm sure it happens, but I've watched a lot of videos...

Huh? You can charge crush triggers?

No it doesn't, because good players can not use that option. But it DOES make those moves DEADWEIGHT and therefore good candidates for improvement. These moves COULD have a point. Right now, they exist to punish people who are bad at hitconfirms. And yes, Surfeit, I already said that I have hard time judging the distance on 5BB. You don't have to come in and tell me how I should be able to do it, thanks.

She's not really a copy paste, but I agree with you that her design is really bad. (One might almost say "Her design is ass." :P) I definitely dislike the trend in designs we see with Makoto/Mu/Bullet. But you speak as if we've seen some sort of proto-Mu design that they decided not to use? I am curious.

I was pretty much going to say just this - if the purpose of her followups is to make her "newbie friendly" then 5BB and 2CC are even WORSE failures, because they are both practically deathtraps for mashing. In fact, one of my biggest failures in this game right now is that I have a hard time judging when I can hit with 5BB, so I ROUTINELY 5B (hit or blocked) > 5BB (WHIFFFO!) and get punished for it. I've mostly trained myself out of using 2CC outside of combos, but 5BB still gets me. As "newbie helpers" these moves are actually worse than nothing (and humorously, they seem to have made 5BB even worse in this regard in CP) because all they do is allow you to do things that fail more often than they work. So yeah. Tsubaki's followups need a reason to exist because they don't help newbies. Even if that was the intent at one point, they don't do it and should therefore be fixed in some way.

I'm not offended, but I still disagree with your assessment. Allow me to explain why. We'll use 2CC hitting crouchers as an example. You vary your blockstrings. Therefore, you say that 2CC does not "need" to hit crouchers. And you are correct. My blockstrings are not as varied as they could be, and I know that. And in spite of this, I say that 2CC "should" hit crouchers. Now you could look at that as saying "Well, clearly you're playing sloppy and you're looking for a crutch so that when you mash 2CC, you don't get horribly killed for it." And that is a legitimate but uninformed perspective. But this is not about me or how I play. This is about having a character whose tools are useful, and have purposes. 2CC is a combo filler fluff move right now. It actually appears to exist to PUNISH people for mashing 2CC and using this move. Tsubaki has too many moves like this. In fact, you could argue that nearly all of her followup moves (except, perhaps, 3CC, which at least has a noticeably better/different hitbox from its precursor) are like this. I view that as bad design. I also sincerely believe this character should be stronger, and that an important part of making a character good is to make sure all their moves have a purpose, rather than "Well, this character has followup moves on her normals. Why? Because we thought it would be something new to do." What sort of purpose should these moves serve? Well, it seems like part of what is unique about Tsubaki's followups is that they can chain even on whiff - something few other moves in the game can do. Which is why I suggested giving 2CC legitimate anti-air properties in the same sentence where I suggested - as a lesser valued alternative - making it hit crouchers. Adding some frames of head invulnerability - nowhere near as good as the ones on 2C, I wouldn't think - would give the move and it's ability to cancel on whiff a legitimate purpose in being able to call out certain attempts to bait anti-airs. Making it hit crouchers would at least allow it to serve in some way in blockstrings, especially since it, like 2C, is jump and special cancellable on block. Thereby allowing a more versatile and varied pressure game on the ground - something that a better player than I am would be in a better position to utilize. So yes. Making 2CC hit crouchers would protect us losers who tend to mash too much. But it's possible that in spite of that, it might still be a good idea. Just because there is an "obvious" self-serving reason for a suggestion doesn't mean that it is the actual reason, nor does it mean the suggestion is invalid. tldr; Just because good players have learned to compensate for a weakness doesn't mean they wouldn't be getting better results/be playing a better character if that weakness were removed, even if that allows scrubby players to do things that aren't a good idea right now.

Yeah, but then you've sacrificed any advantage you had and now you're back at neutral, which isn't really where you want to be against most of the cast.

Makes a good quote, but it's completely false. Even poor players OCCASIONALLY make the right decisions. When those right decisions don't work ANYWAY, due to character issues, those character faults are brought to light. A good player will reveal character faults quicker and more definitively, but it's misleading to indicate that lower level players can't suffer from, and therefore reveal character issues. Additionally, there's more than enough reference material of good players to be able to draw intelligent conclusions at this point. Or, to put things another way, I don't use my play when I'm trying to draw conclusions, unless it's super basic stuff. I watch and I learn.

Er. Not midscreen, unless you're talking about CP? No, I'm just asking for it to have a bigger VERTICAL hitbox. Like, maybe covering the hurtbox on her leg. You have to admit though, that this move, as it stands, doesn't really have a point. Why have followups if they're just liabilities? I need to make a meme.jpg with Mori's face. "Buff Tsubaki. Nerf Tsubaki. Wonder why Tsubaki is still bad.".

I _AM_ complaining. :P But I think it's at least partially justified. I don't think Ark Sys actually DISLIKES Tsubaki, but I think she's pretty far down the list of characters they pay any serious attention to. All that said, I don't think there's any holy writ that says "characters shall have only one plus on block normal" nor do I think it is bad design for ONE character, especially one that is supposed to be close range pressure, to have more than one option here, so long as the move in question has the usual balancing drawbacks. (Which of course is not entirely true for Hazama, but whatever.); Hazama being stupid is due far, far more to his drives and his specials than it has to do with him happening to have frame advantage off a couple of normals. Edit: Anyway, still waiting for frame data on CP before passing further judgement, but...

Also, Hakumen. 5A, 2A, 2B. Plus he has tons of specials that are plus, because, you know, they cost meter that he gets for free, as opposed to our super negative advantage specials that cost meter that we have to give up pressure/put ourselves in a counterhit state to get. And you know, Hazama isn't really that different from Tsubaki in terms of how their normals are supposed to work, because they both have relatively short range normals and they're supposed to stay up in their opponent's face. CS2 Tsubaki (The best version of her yet) also had a +1 5B and a +2 2A. I'd also assert that Tsubaki isn't a "footsies character" like Ragna/Jin/Arguably Plat. You'll also observe that those characters are less negative on their normals overall, with none of this lolzy "-11 on block, or you can cancel it into sparkly lights so your opponent knows you've cancelled" stuff.

I have. Most of the time, if you air charge without getting hit and don't use either an air option or a dive to change your position before landing, it's because your opponent is ignorant. They can basically run the hell up to you and punch you in the face in almost any circumstance while you are air charging. And yeah. Blocking is hard. Almost EVERYTHING about Tsubaki makes me wonder 'why'; I swear, it's NOT hard here, Arc Sys. You've got a character framework here that is every bit as potentially solid as all the characters that people are constantly accusing of being "always good" but you keep ignoring the strengths of the design, applying unnecessary nerfs, and just generally going "Well, maybe if we twist this backwards and apply some putty, it'll magically be good." How about you look at the character, what she's supposed to do, what tools she has, and then make those tools useful for what she's supposed to do? Rocket science, this is not. Here are some super secret tips: #1) Make her followup normals good. You gave them to her, now stop making them suck. 5BB should 'step' her forward so she's in range for it to hit (the animation even HAS her stepping forward). 2BB should be good for something. 2CC should have anti air properties OR not whiff on crouching opponents. Gatlings should be tight but delayable (okay, they mostly got this last subpoint right finally). #2) Make her D specials good. I'm actually quietly wondering if 623D is actually WORSE than 623C in CP, because I totally wouldn't put it past them to change 623C and say "Okay, okay, we gave her a good DP are you happy now?" and then not even look at 623D. It should be possible to spend charge for frame advantage in some way - probably 22D seems the logical choice. #3) Examine her normals in detail. Now fix them so that they're good for applying pressure. 2B should not be that slow. Neither should 6A. She should have some way to get frame advantage somewhere other than 6B. This character's offense centers around getting up in your opponent's face and making them nervous so they get hit, and her normals should reflect that. Erg. Rant mode off, sorry.

This. There's no reason for this to have S+ or C. x.x

Are people seriously still thinking that characters are ordered within tiers in these lists? :P Looks moderately accurate. I could nitpick a few placements, but frankly, I think it's divided into too many tiers. Also "Hakumen is always high tier"? Wut?

Boy do I, and I don't know. Would love to get some practice vs. a Lambda that doesn't just mash 5C and hope I run into it.

Because we feel bad for her. Also, I appear to be magically drawn to low tier characters, since I played Guy in SSF4, and eventually settled on Akihiko in P4A (after discarding Naoto as too much work. :P ). But yes, 9/15 frames of landing recovery is ridiculously punishing. Jin players talk about how "super risky" j.D is when it has _5_ frames of landing recovery. Someone once told me that if you do another move after doing a move with landing recovery (i.e. doing j.B after j.D) that your landing recovery becomes special cancellable. I have no idea where they got this info or whether it is correct or not. x.x

There are two uses I see for air charge cancels in CP: #1: The "Triple overhead" j.C > j.CC > cc > j.C on a grounded target. This will require either a cornered opponent and 1 charge for j.214D or two charges, for j.214D > 236D. A bit of a gimmick, probably, but something you can pull out occasionally. #2: Changing/stopping air momentum. I've seen a few players do 6C > forward jc > cc > j.C (or stuff) so it looks like you're going to jump over them and then you don't. Alternatively, it might be possible to cross up, charge cancel to halt momentum, and then do an attack? All of these have the rotten issue of landing recovery damaging combo options though. Maybe if they're really nice they'll make jumping charge cancels not give landing recovery. /pipedream.

Errol is correct as far as all the information we have goes. The only difference between charge cancel 5D/2D and normal 5D/2D is that you get a bit more charge for the "charge cancel tap" than you would if you just tapped the button at neutral. Since both 5D and 2D have the same 18frame minimum duration, that means they give exactly the same frame advantage, but 5D gives more charge. Another dubiously designed system. You'd think they could've gone for "5D gives more charge, but 2D gives better frame advantage" or something, but then I suppose they'd do that by making the frame advantage on 5D worse and leaving 2D the same. :P

Hey now, head/foot/body properties are important! I don't like it when people spread misinformation.

A) I responded to stuff before I'd read the whole thread B) Your explanation of why was, in fact, completely wrong. It has nothing to do with "Well, 22D hits you even if you're on the ground."