scrub

just a thought... maybe tiers apply better to people whose names you can't immediately identify, like the ~80% of the "unknown" people participating in ranbats. y'know, still at that high-level-competition area without taking the absolute best and using that to represent the larger majority. obviously, players good enough to break the mold and gain recognition are adding a great deal on top of their characters' base strengths

If i could figure it all out, I would, if anyone's ever did the work already, that's a lot of time saved. Arcade-only kinda limits how far you can experiment, I can't even get a match with most characters, between no one playing them or the continuing winner usually being the same 3-4 characters. Eehh, I wouldn't imagine that a chart of any kind had to be necessarily complex, not everyone has moves you cry 'broken...' over.

Is this a matter of labeling? I know that there would be no such thing as a priority ranking per se, I ask this only expecting something as concrete a comparison as, say, the tier list (meant as being equally situational). If people can come up with a ranking system for air-ground and ground-air like stated in the official tier thread, can't couldn't there also be something similar for whatever moves are considered high-priority? For instance, there's been some discussion over which 6Ps are 'good' for antiair (more or less a priority issue), and then there's the air moves that people would say always win (Jam aS?). So... what happens when you pit them up against each other? From what little I have seen, I would be saying something like: Slayer aHS hitbox seems to extend long enough to beat many 6Ps even despite their upper invincibility, and almost regardless of character. I know it isn't true all the time, I've also seen it lose out when thrown from too high up, too far out, or too late - but I would consider these abnormal circumstances. As a jump-in, it typically wins.

Mmm... I was under the impression that no games never specifically designed a priority mechanic, but that it was just a term players came up with to describe the likelihoods of moves to win against each other. In which case, it would of course assume that you'd be trying to optimize the advantages of whatever you'd be comparing, whether it be invincibility/active frames/hitboxes. I don't think it's entirely off-base - while I did note that many characters don't have too much info on how moves matched up, it's not entirely missing. Like from memory, somewhere in the Jam threads I remember someone posting that 5S will 90% of the time clash with Potemkin aD. I wouldn't believe anything to be foolproof, but isn't there some concept of 'normal use' wherein people wouldn't throw out moves in less-than-optimal situations? (Like... when people say Volcanic Viper wins against practically everything, it only implies the first few frames)

Is there any list/chart/anything in existence that compares some of the priorities on characters' moves (at least covering things like jumpins and antiairs/dps)? I know personal experience would probably be best, but playing in an arcade brings a number of problems, not the least being a lack of character representation ~too many slayers, half the cast has no one playing them~. Still trying to get past things like Slayers/OS/Baiken aHS, Chipp aD, and Sol 5K, Johnny/Ky 6P, etc. I play a number of characters and some of the forums for them don't cover much more than a general 'these are your options' blurb. I guess the biggest problem is that every so often I try something and it works, then have trouble beating the same moves a second time. At some point, I'd like the assurance that beating out whatever is either impossible or not worth the risk, since a lot of the time it ends up with me going