Hey LP, would you mind indulging a couple questions? This is IdleMind btw, new username and all that.
1) To what degree do you think the players of the top-end characters on the tierlist color your perception of where they are?
2) What potential degree of player variance do you think exists within any given character (that is still considered playing them near optimally)?
As a collary to question two; at what level of play do you think a person needs to be at before "playing their own style" is an actual effective thing, and not just an excuse people use for losing? To clarify, what I mean is the common complaint from what I consider to be subpar players stating that "The game only allows you to play this character one way to succeed".
And now for a classic flippant comment to people to induce insecure responses:
As for the tierlist itself, I have no input as I don't feel qualified on inputting. I will however watch this thread for other unqualified people talking out their asses about a game they obviously know nothing about.
Hey! I just saw this! And some other stuff I'll reply to as I go along!
I really like those questions, actually. So:
1. I honestly think that, except with possibly Viola and ZWEI (both of which could be better than I'm giving them credit for), that the players don't effect how I feel about the characters. I guess it's a mix of theory fighter and how the games plays more than how players play the game at any given time (if you can understand that bit.
If you look at the list, not to insult anyone, but most of the characters of my A rank don't have top level players (character specialists) in the United States (at least ones that travel and perform well often). Even the best players internationally may have one or two very good reps of the best characters.
In my honest opinion, most of the best characters are barely played and, even less so, played at anywhere near their full potential (and I include myself in this as a Viola player, though it's more of my own personal code of honor, as stupid as that is). When you look at it, really, you have, as far as consistently placing in the States goes:
Link (Ivy)
Hawkeye (Natsu)
Keev (Nightmare)
SU (Pyrrha)
Ramon (Pyrrha)
Xeph (Uhh...Pyrrha/Pat/Ast sux/and I guess Natsu)
NFK (Ivy and Nightmare)
Lolo (Ast)
Omega (Nightmare)
Krayzie (Maxi)
RTD (Mitsurugi)
Woahhzz (Alpha Patroklos)
Kayane (Viola)
Lost Providence (Viola)
You can even add in players like ShenYuan (Sieg), ShenChan (Cervy), Kura (Patroklos), Ruka (Mitsurugi), Tokido (Viola), and Decopon (Tira) and, other than the fact that you realize a good lot of Japanese use some of the characters I consider the best, the list isn't dominated by the characters I consider the best. There isn't even an Algol among them.
On a more personal note, I don't feel that Keev, a person I've consistently lost to in tournaments, colors how I look at Nightmare even, despite the fact that I feel that I lose to the character/matchup and that I placed Viola higher than Nightmare.
2. That really depends on the character and the players. At the end of the day, the game is pretty much all about making reads and not making errors when two competent players are playing so you can play pretty much any way with any character and be effective so long as you're doing it the 'right' way. But, in that same grain, you're not going to see somebody play a rushdown Ast, Nightmare, or Siegfried and be unstoppable (or at least they can't play the same way completely in every matchup). So, at the end of the day, I think many of the characters can be played multiple ways but there's also going to be the character's comfort or most effective zone just as there is the player's.
Using my list as an example to contrasting styles just for fun, you have:
Woahhzz and LP as aP (He turtles and forces people into making mistakes while I go more for reads and big damage).
Keev and Omega as Nightmare (Keev play a spacing games, trying to force big damage through tech traps and mixing them up, wall combos, and ringouts; Omega plays fundamentally well, going more for reads)
SU/Xeph/Ramon/LP as Pyrrha (SU plays a super turtly game, relying on pokes and big whiff punishes; Xeph plays a well-rounded Pyrrha; Ramon plays an aggressive Pyrrha, forcing hesitation on his opponent through reverse mixups with Pyrrha's defensive tools; I play well-rounded, but try to force reads)
Xeph/Hawkeye as Natsu (Xeph plays a well-rounded and cautious Natsu; Hawkeye plays a super aggressive Natsu, uses all of her tools to keep up his offense).
Kayane/LP as Viola (Kayane plays by the books unless she gets more emotional about a game, where she plays based more on her reactions and yomi; I play based almost entirely based on reads and mixups).
I could do some more of those but you get the point about it. I don't think SC plays like SF where, pretty much, you have to play a character to his/her strengths but I don't think you can play every matchup the same way with every character.
The last question, even though I don't want to discourage people, I think a person needs a good amount of knowledge about the characters and a deep understanding of the systems, and, though it sounds corny, people in general before they can play how they want to. When the game becomes much less 'He did *X* so I will *Y*' and more 'He did this so I can do this in order to do this and get this effect so that later I can do this or something else entirely' then I think a person has a good enough knowledge to start being 'their own player'.
To put it the way Thugish put it, 'A really good player can play any character decently in Calibur just based on fundamentals alone'...some shit like that.
As the last comment...the thing that bothers me more than anything is, rather than taking a position of, "Well, what do I know?", lots of players who don't know anywhere near as much as they think they know about how Calibur players state their opinions with more certainty than a lot of the people who do...but...whatever, I guess...
I really enjoyed those questions, if you couldn't tell. <_<
