Tari

Very late response, but you generally just have to respect their pressure and dash-block in between moves to get closer. In addition to that, you should also shield their blockstrings to gain GRD and take vorpal cycles, both to give yourself some more options and to deny them any easy confirms/mixups/safe blockstrings/etc. Outside of those two tidbits, there's not much else beyond making hard call-outs and jumping/dashing/etc. around or under what the other player is doing. This is obviously quite unsafe, since it's done based on a read.

If I make it in time, I'll try mashing it. Suguri is hype, even though I've never played her game. :P

See the Fuzzy Protection section. Very old information. Basically, air moves that cause characters to rise are treated as rising overheads by the fuzzy protection system. Rather wish people would read through that thread for information sometimes, but it is pretty much just a technical document.

Doing well in neutral is unfortunately Akatsuki's weakness, so I'd suggest against picking him if that's the only thing you're looking at. Most of the other characters have fairly stable neutral games, though. The most stable characters in neutral may be Gordeau and Merkava, in part due to long normals, good conversions off most hits, and strong pressure games. Hyde and Orie are also fairly stable, though I'd rate them below the likes of Eltnum and Linne in that regard. That said, the game is completely playable with pretty much any character you choose, so it really may be worth dabbling with everyone. If any character in particular catches your eye, feel free to ask about it and the fine folks around here (or I) can give you more details about their playstyle and whatnot.

It's not a glitch. The IW simply didn't combo because you'd already spent all your wall/ground bounces in the lead-up combo. In fact, you can see the beam and everything going off the corner of the screen for a few frames. To clarify, you can have a maximum of two wall or ground bounces in your combo. If you perform a third one, the opponent becomes invulnerable and can no longer be hit. You spent the first one after the CS, on j.214B. The second one is used up by the grounded 214B. The third one happens after the 236B right before the IW. That's two ground slams and one wall bounce, so there's no longer any combo to perform. It's not hard to keep track of your wall and ground bounces, but if you don't want to worry about it, just use a move that can't induce those effects before your IW. It's for that reason that you often see Orie players using 236A or 4C into IW instead.

Oho, do we finally get to meet? Too bad I don't really play BB anymore.

Interesting. No clue how it gets destroyed, then.

It's pretty hard to tell for sure, especially since the first example where Eltnum successfully escapes involves the use of an A dp, while later on both the A and B dps fail. The roll actually probably doesn't even trigger the webs until she gets hit, as it has invuln during the ducking portion. The only reason it seems likely that time is a factor is due to the final example, where he waits for a very long time, then does run-up B dp and beats the webs. I haven't looked into this very much because it generally doesn't change all that much about the amount of respect the setup demands, and it seems like one of those things FB is likely to patch out before/on console release.

You can just leave the unknown data values blank, or fill it with - or ? for the time being, and leave a note referring people to older frame data pages as reference. It's not uncommon for new games to have partially filled data, to be quite honest. It's just a little off-putting in this case because we filled the tables with dummy data and because the game has technically been out for a while.

While this is possible, unless there's a cleaner way to do it, the only method I know of right now is redirects, which I personally think tend to look pretty ugly.

Phew, thanks for double-checking that.

If it's feasible, the "one matchup thread for each two characters" (ie: Zato v Faust and Faust v Zato should be the same thread) seems like the most logical approach. Zissou's suggested presentation of that approach is also nice, though I have absolutely no idea how feasible it is to implement that type of table on a forum. While the UNI forums single thread per character approach is definitely better than what we have at the moment for the bigger games, it's still not very good for promoting discussion between players of both characters in a given matchup. It does sound much easier to implement, though? The anti-char tech suggestion sounds somewhat awkward. Not sure how that would play out without having a better idea of what that suggestion is actually aiming for.

I'm waiting to see what the final form of the forum will be. Trying not to invest too much energy into anything while the forum is in such a volatile state. Gamester has some backups of the threads as well (thank goodness), though the BB Code formatting is completely useless now and will have to be edited. Fortunately, most of the non-info dump threads made it through the upgrade without too much issue, aside from broken links.

I believe she does become invuln for the scant few frames when she's actually in the process of disappearing and reappearing, but not for any other parts of the move. I could be wrong, though, and I wouldn't be surprised if she just had absolutely no invuln at all. She's definitely not invuln from start to end, in any case. If you have Hilda in a corner, she pretty much has no easy answer to being pressured. It wouldn't be a long stretch for someone to argue that she has the worst defense in the game, especially once cornered. That's definitely the right time to start bullying her.

It's quite easy to get total duration, the only problem is figuring out the number of active frames. There are various, tedious ways to test active frames, but pretty much none of them are simple to do and they tend to require a lot of time. Finding active frames also requires reliable information about some sort of other mechanic/move that either provides invuln (relius dodge, for example) or is affected by blockstun (purple vs green throw). If I had a reliable way to do frame-perfect testing of a move against those sorts of mechanics/moves, I'd do it, but human error makes the trialing process really long and tedious. If there's a more efficient way to test for active frames, I'm all ears. @Polka: I'll guess I can append it after I double check some of the numbers, but that likely won't happen today. I can probably also get startup time for pumpkin (on wind), iris, and point-blank lobelias when I do that, though those are all something of a lower priority.

I thought 4B got faster, as well, but it doesn't appear to have actually changed in that regard. It's my favourite move, so I tested it a few times to be sure, too. :P It being -2 is pretty nice, though, if not all that amazingly useful. I didn't check to see if things like Tsubaki 5B would trade with 6A>4B, but I'd hardly be surprised if it did. All the testing was done with recordings and frame-by-frame counting. Hopefully someone else can compare or test these numbers, as well. I won't put them up on the wiki until I'm more certain of them. I'm not sure how her specials might have changed, but those are generally a lot weirder to test for her, since they're projectiles and summons, rather than straight-up hits. No promises on getting numbers for those.

Hilda's teleport is pretty slow to start up. I'm not an Akatsuki player, but I'd imagine it's not very different for him and most other characters when pressuring Hilda in the corner. If she's teleporting out of the corner, it probably means you're giving her too much breathing room. As a Yuzu player, I also use her teleport to escape from the corner versus certain characters, but only as a hard read on my opponent backing off and giving me room to hang myself with. If I don't think they're going to back off to try to bait something, I will pretty much never try teleporting out, because it's an almost guaranteed way to get counterhit into a massive corner combo. Could you give an example of when a Hilda might be teleporting out?

I'm a bit behind on doing a bunch of things I said I'd do, but here's the tested CPE frame data that I'd said I'd record. Couldn't find any previous set of numbers for this, but if it exists, I'd like to check these against them: - first number is startup, second number is frame advantage - startup counted from button press to first frame of hit effect (using counterhit on, that's the frame where the opponent flashes red) - frame adv calculated by diff between first frame of jump startup, or between jump startup animation and crouch startup (for jump-cancellable moves) ====== 5A - 6 (second hit 13f), -2 5B - 8, -11 (!) 5C - 13, -23 (!) 5CC - 5 (!?, from button push to 5CC hit, after a delay after 5C), -11 2A - 7, +/-0 2B - 10, -10 2C - 23, -34 (!) 6A - 13, -9 6B - 13, -1 6C - 13, +4 (if last/lowest hit is blocked) (!) 4B - 26, -2 (!) 3C - 11, -2 (!) 3[C] - 11, -2 j.A - 8 j.B - 9 j.C - 8 j.2C - 13 CA: 13, -17 (!) CT: 30-60, -4 (when barriered) ====== I bolded and exclamation-marked any moves with changes. I obviously couldn't effectively or efficiently test for active frames or guard point frames and the like, so I left them out.

While this isn't directly relevant to the initial topic of this thread, I just want to point out that actually asking questions to the player you're playing against can help, especially a case where you are getting beaten repeatedly by someone better and you aren't understanding what's happening. While not all stronger players are necessarily very kind or helpful, I'd like to believe that enough of them are that you'll find people willing to explain gaps in pressure, what gimmicks they used, and so-on to you once they know you're actively trying to improve. Unfortunately, for various reasons, this is often not something that happens until they are asked about improvement, so players may come across as more cold-hearted than they really are. This is something of a flipside (or parallel?) to the point that Icekin made about playing to teach, and how many people don't practice it. When playing online, this may not really be much of an option, though, which is pretty unfortunate. I'm not sure if that sort of mentality or approach to playing will help with negativity, but I thought I'd just toss it out there.

Yeah, sorry, I meant to italicize the 'supposed', because professionalism generally isn't well represented here at the moment anyway. In any case, it looks like you guys have discussed the ideas behind the whole problem with well-known people vs nobodies, and there's not much more to say on that topic.

This is also something professionalism is supposed to curb before it becomes an issue on the front page, so hopefully we can avoid any real issues with cliques and whatnot. I do think that technical and in-depth articles on game mechanics and whatnot should be left to people who clearly know what they're talking about, though. It's hard to deal with any backlash from letting an unproven person write that type of article when or if any details are proven incorrect. It's not impossible, but it is a bit more difficult to prepare for when composing an article, and it's difficult to justify making that into an article in the first place unless the article is filled with hard proof/research.

To clarify, I didn't mean that those were things that only well-known, good, etc. players could write. I meant that they weren't things that the news team specifically wrote. I guess my point was that guest writers are a thing. :P

On the idea of a series of articles about something, I believe those typically don't actually need to be written by a news writer. I think those are rather often guest series where someone well known/respected covers information that they are knowledgeable about. Putting that aside for a moment, on the topic of professionalism, we could just assign someone to be an editor for articles and have them QC anything before it goes live. If they see problems, they can delay an article and suggest changes for the writer to implement (or outright reject, haha, though hopefully with reason). That's how I've experienced it on other news/blog sites before, and it works rather well if you either have enough people to do QC or the people doing QC are efficient. It can occasionally delay an article by up to a day or so, but that may not be the worst trade-off for quality. Whether that would work for Dustloop, though, is pretty questionable.

The webs would normally dissipate when hit by a move, but her moves are hitting the webs and then she's getting counterhit by those same webs. Notably, it appears that if you wait for a few seconds after he sets the webs, they become destroyable as usual (as demonstrated by Eltnum successfully destroying the webs with her dp after a short delay, while earlier her dp lost to the webs).

I'd love to have a forum post-styled link to the Wiki, but I'm not sure that's possible within my power. The best we could probably do is create a resources link thread and have the wiki linked in there (still better than not having a link!). Gimmicks are a good idea, as are adding some videos. If possible, I'll probably try to see if I can add video links for combos, though I don't know if I'll do it for this game or the next one, especially seeing as how we haven't filled that section out yet and how I'm personally not up-to-date with combo theory for Rachel. I'm pretty sad about the gameplay guide finally getting hit with a somewhat big change. I was enjoying its undying status as a great guide, but I suppose at least only one section is going to die. :P I actually hadn't realized the CPEX wiki pages were so sparse. I'd assumed move descriptions were migrated from previous versions' wiki pages, but it appears not to be the case.