Cervy match vids Comment & Critique

bA will Counter hit 214B all day franman. Just thought Id let you know :). Also listen to Ring, he Knows what hes talking about.
 
^ Ring likes this =P
franman said:
So I did a bit of testing. What I did is force Ivy to block Cervy's bK leaving us both @ 0. So here's the catch... if we're both face-close to each other, Ivy's 214B beats Cervy's 2A+B. So it seems that Cervy has to be @ a fair distance to counteract Ivy's step move and I've tested that part already.
Click to expand...
Yes, this seems to happen sometimes at closest range possible, but it's extremely rare. CL 214B can sometimes beat moves that seem to be unstepable like Lizardman's 66A or Hilde's C3A. But it's rare and range dependant.
 
Nofacekill3r said:
Yeah man they're real useful. I'm trying to make some for more situations but I haven't had time to play lately.
Click to expand...
On a side note. Though you can use any number of lines and columns I suggest you keep it to 3x3 matrixes or just any square(4x4,5x5 etc). Otherwise the options tend to pile up a bit giving you wrong impression on initial risk rewards. I recommend 3x3 since you can hardly find anybody mixing more than 3-4 options at a time and even if they do, usually they still use 2-3 options as a core. So your goal should be getting around this.

Eventually ability to break an opponents flow (make his best tools unusable/weak) which those matrixes are supposed to achieve, is such a huge psychological adv. you wont need to bother with too much math after this point.
 
Belial said:
On a side note. Though you can use any number of lines and columns I suggest you keep it to 3x3 matrixes or just any square(4x4,5x5 etc). Otherwise the options tend to pile up a bit giving you wrong impression on initial risk rewards. I recommend 3x3 since you can hardly find anybody mixing more than 3-4 options at a time and even if they do, usually they still use 2-3 options as a core. So your goal should be getting around this.

Eventually ability to break an opponents flow (make his best tools unusable/weak) which those matrixes are supposed to achieve, is such a huge psychological adv. you wont need to bother with too much math after this point.
Click to expand...

Why would adding more options give you the wrong impression? You still average them out so it's all clear in the end, right?
 
Nofacekill3r said:
Why would adding more options give you the wrong impression? You still average them out so it's all clear in the end, right?
Click to expand...
b/c like I said nobody uses more than 3-4 options.
If you do matrix as I suggested (i.e. summing up the numbers)
If you do it the pro way (i.e. equations and stuff - see the link I gave you before) , it should work.

In the former, you always sort of suggest opponent mix stuff in equal proportion. which is wrong. So you MUST use percentages then (i.e he ducks 15% of the time, GI 20% of the time, steps 10% of the time etc). Generally, people tend to substitute one option for another subconsciosly - if GI didnt work they start to step. So if you assume they use 30% step and 30% GI will give you the wrong impression.

I havent done math since school so I'm just using the easy way. If you're ok with doing all the equations or adding percentages of use per option it should work, but again I dont think overcomplicating things is a good idea.

PS: A very good book to understanding fighting games (and everything else) is "On Intelligence" by Jeff Hawkings. To me it was a real breakthrough in understanding Soul Calibur.

 
Belial said:
b/c like I said nobody uses more than 3-4 options.
If you do matrix as I suggested (i.e. summing up the numbers)
If you do it the pro way (i.e. equations and stuff - see the link I gave you before) , it should work.

In the former, you always sort of suggest opponent mix stuff in equal proportion. which is wrong. So you MUST use percentages then (i.e he ducks 15% of the time, GI 20% of the time, steps 10% of the time etc). Generally, people tend to substitute one option for another subconsciosly - if GI didnt work they start to step. So if you assume they use 30% step and 30% GI will give you the wrong impression.

I havent done math since school so I'm just using the easy way. If you're ok with doing all the equations or adding percentages of use per option it should work, but again I dont think overcomplicating things is a good idea.

PS: A very good book to understanding fighting games (and everything else) is "On Intelligence" by Jeff Hawkings. To me it was a real breakthrough in understanding Soul Calibur.
Click to expand...

Well, you're preaching to the choir because I've never made a matrix where the opponent does more than 4 options - 99% of the time there isn't any reason to. I know most opponents use 3-4 options to have the best multicoverage possible. I meant to ask why the matrix needs to be square - thats what I mean by adding more options. I should have said "why is it bad to add more options to one side of the matrix?"

I basically stated the other point you made already, though not directly:

Step/Guard/9B =he doesnt feel comfortable with 214B so he substitutes step for it

Mids in general will be less useful here. You need to discourage 9B use by stepping into a full 3B iGDR delay 28B into BT mixup. The goal is to make crouch guard part of his defense. You will primarily be using grabs instead of 1K, unless you figure out that Eli has problems stepping 1K or that a majority of his defense consists of standing guard. If your option select in this scenario becomes grab or step (which it should be), a smart opponent will realize that you are being somewhat passive and that he can attack out of disadvantage with something like SW 22K.
Click to expand...

The point here is that you need to adapt to which option your opponent uses the most. The option select I stated may or may not be wrong since I didn't test it, but hopefully everyone got the point. Thank you for stating it more clearly though.

Also, I don't see how it would be practical to assign percentages to your opponents option select because it would require many, many games to be recorded the exact number of times they do each option select to mean anything. It's probably not going to be practical to mentally record the exact % while playing against them, either. I think the best use of matrices is just to figure out what the best risk/reward options are to your opponents most used options, and then just let Yomi do the work from there.
 
Noface: As for adding options to the side, b/c if you're using 2 moves there are usually little point for opponent in using 5 or 6. So risk reward can be drastically different if he doesnt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back