SCV Ivy FAQ & General Discussion

SachaSkye said:
Can someone shed some light for me on, 1B BE(block) > 6B8K being guaranteed(?)
Click to expand...
It doesn't work against all the characters, typically the shorter ones can block it, and the taller ones can't. If you want guaranteed damage go for 4B.
 
Evan said:
It doesn't work against all the characters, typically the shorter ones can block it, and the taller ones can't. If you want guaranteed damage go for 4B.
Click to expand...
When I tried 4B, they were still in forced crouch ;) So it just whiffed past their heads.
 
Anyone see the new Lost Sword trailers? Its all Ivy. Most of what they showed is very unconventional and unrelated to how we usually play SC but i did notice they gave her CS its old Wp animation back. I think i was just excited to see something with this generation of SC.


Edit: Here's the link
 
I've been experimenting with Ivy's guard break game because of Leixia's, certain moves give her 44B guaranteed.

Apparently Ivy can get 44B+K:B guaranteed after breaking with: 6B, WRB and 3kh.
Which is nice, 6B is a decent poke and getting 99 instead of 73 (Or 75 if you do the JF) is probably worth thinking about.
 
Hi, I've been experimenting with that for some time now (sadly I've only thought of posting about that on Soulcalibur.fr as I'm French), I think that something I read here led me to test 44B+K:B after breaking the guard.

It also works after breaking the guard with: 22_88A, 44B, 22B (chara specific though) and 6B+K.

Here's a very poor quality video I made back then :
 
Hi, something else I haven't seen written down here I think :

NH3B, 6B8 can be combo in several situations :

- On large hitbox characters
- When Ivy is facing a character's right side when she hits with 3B
- When 3B hits after a character's dash foward
- When 3B hits after a character's SSL
- When 3B hits after a character's QSL (works only against medium and large hitbox characters)

 
Iceweb38 said:
As an Ivy player, my feelings about her SCV version are kinda the opposite of SCIV.

On the aesthetic side, SCIV Ivy was quite the pinnacle of preposterous to me and I was very uneasy as to how she would look in SCV but the designers managed to surprise me in a pleasant way with what could possibly be her best design ever and Lani Minella is still delivering a work of great quality regarding Ivy's voice. So yeah, definitely satisfied on that point.

As to the technical side, her SCIV gameplay is easily the best she had in the series to me: most comprehensive moveset with a very intuitive way to switch stances, she was really interesting to play.
I feel they made a huge step back in SCV by reducing her whole moveset to one stance. I can understand that they did so because Ivy became more and more popular and not everyone could handle her style therefore they tried to make her more novice-friendly this time. But so far, I'm kinda sceptical.

In short:
aesthetically good, technically........mixed.
Click to expand...
Same here. It was surprising what they did to her. At first when I saw the demo game play(s) of her I was hyped for her original moves staying but... just one stance? The least they could've done is kept serpent's embrace somehow... As well as keeping her SCIV (during whip state) move of 1B. In 5 they could've easily just let you hold the B while you do the double 1 input... But Whatever, I have faith she will be fixed.
P.S. Sorry if this is super late, I just saw it here in the forum lol.
 
Kaz said:
Anyone see the new Lost Sword trailers? Its all Ivy. Most of what they showed is very unconventional and unrelated to how we usually play SC but i did notice they gave her CS its old Wp animation back. I think i was just excited to see something with this generation of SC.


Edit: Here's the link
Click to expand...
What is up with her right sleeve of her jacket... damn clothing smh...
 
So, in tune with the recent messages, I think Ivy could've been 200 times better if every move had a whip alternate instead of being forced into one state. I can't even WANT to play her anymore 'cause she's just so.... pokey. :/
 
Violent Vodka said:
So, in tune with the recent messages, I think Ivy could've been 200 times better if every move had a whip alternate instead of being forced into one state. I can't even WANT to play her anymore 'cause she's just so.... pokey. :/
Click to expand...
It's very strange for someone like her to be pokey, it's absurd and a disgrace to her fighting style. On the contrary, I still use her till this day because she is such a unique character with a complex style. She's simple now, that's why I have Tira to do some mix-ups for me.
 
Yeah. I was always attracted to the style but I didn't use her much until SC4 because she had SO much you could do. So many combos and possibilities, it was wonderful.

Now she's just one of the gang..
 
A question to fellow Ivy players.
Was Ivy ever considered well balanced in any SC game?
In 4 she's Over Powered,in 5 and 2 she's Under Powered.
 
Soul said:
A question to fellow Ivy players.
Was Ivy ever considered well balanced in any SC game?
In 4 she's Over Powered,in 5 and 2 she's Under Powered.
Click to expand...
She's balanced in SCV, considered mid tier by 80% of better to top players, some people may place her lower or higher though, but there is absolutely no general consensus that she's low tier. In SC2 she was strong as hell, In Sc3 she was broken, and in Sc4 she was cheap as fuck.
 
Last edited:
Xyerith said:
She's balanced in SCV, considered mid tier by 80% of better to top players, some people may place her lower or higher though, but there is absolutely no general consensus that she's low tier. In SC2 she was strong as hell, In Sc3 she was broken, and in Sc4 she was cheap as fuck.
Click to expand...
Really?

Didn't spent much time on her in SCIII so idk about her in that installment.
But in SCV she did seem toned down very much. Perhaps because i was used to her being OP in SCIV.

I hope they at least bring back some of her unique moves in SCVI.
And change stuff like Summon Suffering being a BE.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back