SC5 'Ivy' Story/Possibilities/Speculation

Status
Not open for further replies.
docvizzo said:
Sure i did not criticize the idea of the wishlist. But you dont see me in the Setsuka Arena begging for mindblowing buffs to a character which is already extremely strong. Some people want Setsukas Step to be a lot better and i stated multiple times that she will be way to strong in combination with her current whiff punishment. People whine about balance all day and then post stuff like that.

Some people are just absolutely unable to reflect their ideas and suggestions when it comes to their own character, so i hope Namco doesnt read too much of this stuff :) Seeing this is also common among players that are considered good and have some authority here just is really weird to me. Im not even sure if those people acutally do want a balanced game. Ivy is so extremely dominating, people train and train against her and then Eli has the guts to basically tell those people to GTFO because we dont know shit. Acting like Ivy players are all godtier players and the rest is just too dumb to win against her. Then calling me arrogant. Really dont know what to say there anymore.
Click to expand...

You do realize that Ivy is going to be more like SC1 Ivy in sc5, right? And you do know that as of now there is no soul gauge in that game, right? Ivy has traditionally had greater access to her command throws than she has in sc4. Of course this needed to be nerfed in sc4 because the game system itself (soul gauge, etc) gave a massive buff to her otherwise balanced keepout game.

So stop acting like we're asking to buff SC4 Ivy. We know she's already a good character.
 
Ring said:
With SG gone, Ivy's not gonna be as scary anymore. I really wonder how she turns out.
Click to expand...
You know I hadn't thought of that. I was just all caught up in the Ivy hate and the fact that most Ivy players whine about how bad she is and what she needs to "really" be good, but yeah Ivy without that SG game rally makes me wonder how she's gonna turn out. So I apologize to all Ivy players if this was your concern.
 
docvizzo said:
Im not even sure if those people acutally do want a balanced game. Ivy is so extremely dominating, people train and train against her and then Eli has the guts to basically tell those people to GTFO because we dont know shit. Acting like Ivy players are all godtier players and the rest is just too dumb to win against her. Then calling me arrogant. Really dont know what to say there anymore.
Click to expand...

Your very good at making stuff up, I applaud you. All you did was cherry pick and cried foul.

I want one Command throw for SW and one for WP simple. If she has stance like SP or SE I want her to have the throws come out of that stances. Chances are the stance will not be effective so have the ability to do throws would make it stronger. SE is a very weak stance, making it like SC3 can make the stance more useful.

Saying all I want is buffs!?What?
I want buff on move that were not used much in SC4. Most of my other suggest is just inclusion of moves Ivy had in previous SC games. As for nerfs I did address the main issue which I think are the big problem moves like WP 6B+K/CL 1B,B+K/9B/CL 214B/SW BB etc. I didn't feel the need to talk about 22K/2A+K because I felt the damage follow up was the problem. That why I want a damage reduction on 214K.

Maybe that the problem is you think nerfs should be making things more punishable, which is fine and one way to nerf moves, but my focused wasn't on if things are more punishable, my focuses was having more variety by having moves buff or nerf to make them more useable and less spamable.

And saying I am telling people who don't main Ivy to GTFO, again what!?.
You don't know me or what I do in the community so don't assume stuff like I think Ivy player are god tire and only their perspective matter. Within my own scene people like Partisan, Vince, Franman, have their own view points about Ivy, I respect and understand their respective and there are things that I agreed with. I look at their point of view and not from one side. So don't come here calling me arrogant.

You come here attacking me, I am just defending my point. If you disagree with my wishlist then post your point of view why that is wrong and what you think would be proper nerfs, instead of trying to slander as a way for you to justify your point.

Really don't know what to say there anymore...
 
greatone1939 said:
You know I hadn't thought of that. I was just all caught up in the Ivy hate and the fact that most Ivy players whine about how bad she is and what she needs to "really" be good, but yeah Ivy without that SG game rally makes me wonder how she's gonna turn out. So I apologize to all Ivy players if this was your concern.
Click to expand...
I don't think that Ivy players whined about how bad she is, it's more like whining about how many of her moves or stances (SE) are virtually useless, but this has little to do with Ivy's tier position. I hope the wishlist is gonna give Namco a few ideas on how to improve some of those moves and give them a purpose. This will result in even more fun character because we will have more useful moves to choose from. Right now some of them just "exist" in the movelist but have no meaning.
 
I can understand that. But looking at it from an outside perspective, and this is an extreme case mind you, if someone played a character that had two moves but they were both 7 frame UBs and took 100 damage each and all you heard was people complaining about how he has no lows it's kind of hard for people to relate and those comments could be construed as whining. As I said though, I meant no offense.
 
Yeah, I know what you mean. Truth is, Ivy is a great character but, like Noface said, in SCIV it's game's system that made her so good. As a character she does lack a few things (lows being one thing), I think we did have a few discussions about that before.

@Noface, there will be no consensus on this matter because the pushback is also a factor, i.e another thing people bitch about. Some characters have trouble getting close, and even if there will be no SG damage it still can mean trouble because most of the time you cannot get close to Ivy without taking some damage in the process. But I guess this is more acceptable and balanced than SG itself.
 
Nofacekill3r said:
You do realize that Ivy is going to be more like SC1 Ivy in sc5, right? And you do know that as of now there is no soul gauge in that game, right? Ivy has traditionally had greater access to her command throws than she has in sc4. Of course this needed to be nerfed in sc4 because the game system itself (soul gauge, etc) gave a massive buff to her otherwise balanced keepout game.

So stop acting like we're asking to buff SC4 Ivy. We know she's already a good character.
Click to expand...

Lol yes yes and yes. Did you even read the posts? Did Eli write his wishlist in regards to SC4 Ivy or not? If yes than well there is a 90% Buff to 10% Nerf ratio. So how in gods sake can you tell me im acting? Im just pointing out what he wrote there in reference to SC4 Ivy. So yes he wants a major part of SC4 Ivy to be buffed. Go read the list.

@ Ring

So SE is virtually useless? Again thats the Ivy Mentality :) You know which stance is useless? Dread Charge of Cervantes. ONE SINGLE Move that is good out of that, which is like i300. Rest is SHIT and gets you heavily punished. 80% of the cast would be happy to have SE, Ivy players whine and want another great stance without nerfing ANY other aspect. SE is useless please give us 100 DMG Command throws out of it. And of course SS and CS, not just one. Thats the difference and i got the feeling from time to time somebody needs to tell you guys.

@ Eli

im gonna respond to you later, have to go to work.

EDIT: Ring in general i think i agree with most of what you said, dont get me wrong. I think if you take SG Gameplay away and keep her like that even with her stupid Stance Lock it would be so much better. Still extremely good character. But if you ask for 30 buffs while only taking SG Damage again, its something different :P
 
You must be kidding, Serpent's Embrace is shit. Why would any character want this? I don't see how this is any better than Cervy's DC.

SE is crap because the is no mixup whatsoever, every move is stepable to the same side, every move except one is punishable on block. Even Cervy's UB is better because it doesn't have the stupid shakable stun - it does a lot of damage and KNDs on hit.
 
docvizzo said:
Lol yes yes and yes. Did you even read the posts? Did Eli write his wishlist in regards to SC4 Ivy or not? If yes than well there is a 90% Buff to 10% Nerf ratio. So how in gods sake can you tell me im acting? Im just pointing out what he wrote there in reference to SC4 Ivy. So yes he wants a major part of SC4 Ivy to be buffed. Go read the list.

@ Ring

So SE is virtually useless? Again thats the Ivy Mentality :) You know which stance is useless? Dread Charge of Cervantes. ONE SINGLE Move that is good out of that, which is like i300. Rest is SHIT and gets you heavily punished. 80% of the cast would be happy to have SE, Ivy players whine and want another great stance without nerfing ANY other aspect. SE is useless please give us 100 DMG Command throws out of it. And of course SS and CS, not just one. Thats the difference and i got the feeling from time to time somebody needs to tell you guys.
Click to expand...

Again this is a fallacy, because you are not looking at the quality of the move.

Quanitly=/=Quantity

The way our arguing is essentilly saying all her moves are equal.

Yea so according to you a buff CL BB making it NC is an equal trade to nerf WP 6B+K ?

----

This is not about Cervantes, if his Dread Charge is bad why should that have anything to do with Ivy SE stance. Where do you come up with these estimates what give you the criteria to judge that 80% of the roster would be happy with SE. There is already risk using SE, Everything is punishable except 66K which goes in to SW. Even doing WP 3 SE and attacking is risky, it all step able to Ivy left.

The only one who is whining is you.
 
Nofacekill3r said:
the ivy hate has gotten so bad that now people are saying SE is good? wtf
Click to expand...

Again you are writing shit. Where did i say its good? can you please show me? There is a difference in completely useless and good. I never said its good. You guys just want every stance to be good without taking anything away.
 
docvizzo said:
Again you are writing shit. Where did i say its good? can you please show me? There is a difference in completely useless and good. I never said its good. You guys just want every stance to be good without taking anything away.
Click to expand...

u said 80% of the cast would be happy to have SE
 
docvizzo said:
You guys just want every stance to be good without taking anything away.
Click to expand...

Because they already have taken away a lot. Also what you said is not exactly true :) We had a lot of discussions on what to nerf and what not, like this one here

It's true that people are asking for buffs mostly but that because of two things:

1) Broken Destiny - Ivy was the most nerfed character of all. In addition to nerfing her damage (one of the lowest in the game) and moves that were OP in SCIV, they nerfed also moves that already were terrible, which is just ridiculous. I believe SC5 Ivy is most probably gonna be based on BD Ivy (I could already see resemblance, like WP 4A+B,B not being NC just like in BD) and that's not exactly a good thing.I think the wishlist is a good thing that could possibly prevent them from making another stupid decisions (I mean, nerfing anything they can just for the sake of nerfing)

2) No Soul Gauge in SC5

So basically, what we are looking at is SCV Ivy based on a MUCH weaker SCIV Ivy, w/o her biggest advantage (SG). I think we have the right to ask for "buffs" in this case :P
 
I don't wanna throw oil on the fire, but I can't say who is exaggerating more.
Docvizzo when he says directly what's too good about Ivy (or about proposed changes) in his opinion, even if it's quite provocative, or the Ivy players who, apparently, desperately try to make Ivy look sooooo bad.

Just look at SE, because it's on topic right now: Yes, everything is unsafe except 66K. But only in theory. Is there anyone beside Sophi and Setsuka who can punish BBB oder HS when you block all hits? I don't say that SE is good, of course it's not, but saying that it's soooo bad because everything is unsafe except 66K is a bigger exaggeration than everything that docvizzo has posted.

I am deeply against baseless nerfs only because she was top tier in SC4 (and she is not only top tier because the system favours her), but sometimes I think that some Ivy players hardly accept any nerf.

I have the feeling that no matter what nerf you propose as a non-Ivy-player, there are always 3 Ivy players who come up trying to lynch you because Ivy wouldn't be top tier with that nerf anymore.
 
I don't think this discussion was even about nerfing Ivy in SCV. It was more about Doc disagreeing on the CS/SS buff because he felt it was too much and he doesn't like the general idea of CTs in the game. But it's not true that Ivy players don't want any nerfs. Just because you can't find any nerf ideas in the wishlist doesn't mean we don't accept them. You can't disregard the PSP version of the game, though.
 
For the record, there is a guard gauge in SCV that functions similar to SCIV's SG (minus instant death when it depletes). So you could make the case that her keep out game (assuming it is viable/possible in V) would still be somewhat threatening. I'm also willing to bet it would be quite handy in building up meter.

(not complaining)
 
Kalas said:
I don't wanna throw oil on the fire, but I can't say who is exaggerating more.
Docvizzo when he says directly what's too good about Ivy (or about proposed changes) in his opinion, even if it's quite provocative, or the Ivy players who, apparently, desperately try to make Ivy look sooooo bad.

Just look at SE, because it's on topic right now: Yes, everything is unsafe except 66K. But only in theory. Is there anyone beside Sophi and Setsuka who can punish BBB oder HS when you block all hits? I don't say that SE is good, of course it's not, but saying that it's soooo bad because everything is unsafe except 66K is a bigger exaggeration than everything that docvizzo has posted.

I am deeply against baseless nerfs only because she was top tier in SC4 (and she is not only top tier because the system favours her), but sometimes I think that some Ivy players hardly accept any nerf.

I have the feeling that no matter what nerf you propose as a non-Ivy-player, there are always 3 Ivy players who come up trying to lynch you because Ivy wouldn't be top tier with that nerf anymore.
Click to expand...

.......

You just don't get it. We are not saying Ivy is weak. We all been saying she is strong and needs things to be toned down. But when we say SE is a weak stance suddenly were desperately trying to make Ivy look so bad?
It funny you accuse us of exaggerating, but yet your doing exactly it. Yes SE is unsafe, but that not really the problem, the problem is that SE is not a threatening tool, even if you character can not punish let say Ivy WP 3 SE 6K, the opponent can just sit there and hold guard and wait for an opening. So we want SE stronger, if they make SW or WP weaker that perfectly fine.

You non-Ivy just keep wanting Ivy to be more unsafe, deal less damage, less pressure, nerf command throws, want her risk to be higher and reward to be lower. And all these explanation you guys give are very vague. Provide a valid reason as to what should be nerf and what effect it would have on game play. Then we can actually discuss something.

Ivy player want Ivy to compete equally with other character, so where it become about the mind game and adaptation skills rather than character. Although Ivy will still be top, because let face it the rest of you are scrubs especially this doc fellow who ever he may be :)

Edit: Actually Partisan you should post your opinion, cause you have alot of anit-Ivy knowledge and your point would be substantive to the discussion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom