Most technical character?

[Hudathan]

If technical means deep, then many characters in the game I would consider technical as long as the player choose to play that way. SC has always been a game that's as deep as you want to make it, outside of combos/guaranteed damage. I can only judge which characters are the 'least' technical by the ease of execution and limited effective movesets such as Astaroth. If technical means the amount of work needed in order to fight effectively enough to win, then so many characters fit that bill. I prefer this definition. Hard moves are still fine if they are effective in what they do and net good rewards and that doesn't make a character technical. Technical means a character has to be more precise than usual in a unique style in order to be effective, such as Tira/Taki/Raph/Maxi/Talim etc. Note I do not mean gimmicky, Lizardman is not technical because of crawl nor is Raph technical because of prep.

 

[Plume]

You want learning?

Go to a FUCKING TOURNEY ALREADY, JESUS!!!!!!!!!!!!

Heh I still have theory to learn, and as far as I know, these boards are here to learn stuff about the game.
I don't think I'm doing anything wrong by trying to start factual discussions.

It seems that most of this arguing is because everyone has different definitions of what defines a "technical" character.

It's possible...
Personally, I think that technical means that you either have some difficult input to use, which are actually useful. In this case, useful online. So that puts a lot of Setsuka's stuff out of the question...

If the character doesn't have any difficult and at the same time useful input, then the character should have to make important decisions that can make a big difference.
Zalamel should be like that, but I don't think he is. Against poor players, his mixup isn't a mixup. Against players who are playable by mind games, then his mixup is mostly about guessing right. And he can keep going indefinitely until he guesses wrong. It's 50/50.

Talim is input heavy, in the sense that you have to be pretty quick, and I believe that you have to make quick decisions as well.
With Taki, when you're in the air, you have to decide if you're close enough for the low sweep A, or if you have to use the longer range, mid B attack.
Taki is also input heavy. One reason among others is that you have to enter possession at a very precise time if you want the benefit of some moves' possession "bonus" execution speed.

 

[KingZeal]

I kind of agree with that definition. For example, Goh and Akira are considered to be "technical" characters in Virtua Fighter because they both lack the typical P,P,K-type of combo string that most of the cast has in that game. They don't lack "cheap", spammable moves, but you can't just pick up the character and know what those moves are. You at least need a moderate level of understanding the character before you can fight on the same level of someone like Jacky or Pai, whom you can just press buttons for and do exactly what you intend to do. If I press 2K+G with Pai or Jacky, I'm going to do a low sweep. If I press the same button with Akira or Kage, I'll do something totally offbeat.

With that being the case, I'd say Ivy may be a strong contender for the most technical character. Ivy cannot be played like the majority of the cast, depending on what stance she is in.

 

[Spuro]

I've always considered Seong Mina to be a bit technical in SCIV simply because she has to maintain a certain amount of space almost at all times to deal decent enough damage and win against a skilled opponent. It also has to be adjusted depending on the opponent that you face when using her....

For example against characters like Amy or Taki I usually fall into different patterns of attack simply because of how quickly Mina would get raped if she gets caught anywhere near close range, lol.

 

[Angrel-San]

Heh I still have theory to learn, and as far as I know, these boards are here to learn stuff about the game.
I don't think I'm doing anything wrong by trying to start factual discussions.

You're so full of shit!!!

You'll never have a chance to prove if the "theory" works if you don't use your knowledge when the pressure is on and the money is on the line. So your "theory" will reach a plateau that will not be overcome until you go to the line of fire.

Factual discussions? See, this is my beef with you here. You talk mighty MIGHTY BIG for someone that hasn't even gone to a single tourney yet but it's opinionated, stubborn and argues like if you were a seasoned veteran.

You said in your posts when I was newbie...guess what, you still are so stop acting and arguing like a goddamn pro. Until you go, most of your posts are useless and just irritating.

Nothing wrong with wanting to learn, that's great and I applaud you but stop pushing your worthless reasonings when you haven't tested them where it counts. On a tourney.

 

[Plume]

You'll never have a chance to prove if the "theory" works if you don't use your knowledge when the pressure is on and the money is on the line. So your "theory" will reach a plateau that will not be overcome until you go to the line of fire.

...First, theory is useful even in tourneys. For example, theory is knowing all of Sophitia's canned mixups, and having a good idea of what are Maxi's options after a move. Or what can be punished, and how.

Second, it's about online. That's why I take the freedom to talk the way I do in this thread. If it was offline, I wouldn't be so certain of myself.

Factual discussions? See, this is my beef with you here. You talk mighty MIGHTY BIG for someone that hasn't even gone to a single tourney yet but it's opinionated, stubborn and argues like if you were a seasoned veteran.

True, I do sound like that... And I don't like to put honey on my words. I write my thoughts as they are.
But how am I supposed to learn if I don't argue? Am I supposed to accept that Setsuka's 1B:B is awesome because the vets say so?

You said in your posts when I was newbie...guess what, you still are

By that I meant that it was my first week... (I didn't know anything about the game, I just studied my own character and nothing else.) Now it's been two months, I had time to learn a ton of things, especially since I put more "work" on it than most people.

so stop acting and arguing like a goddamn pro. Until you go, most of your posts are useless and just irritating.

Nothing wrong with wanting to learn, that's great and I applaud you but stop pushing your worthless reasonings when you haven't tested them where it counts. On a tourney.

It sounds contradictive to me. You applaud me for wanting to learn, but you also tell me to stop posting until I go to a tourney.

 

[KingAce]

Technical means technique, themost technical character in the game is the one that requires the most technique.
The one character that requires from the player the most skill, knowledge and application of the systems mechanics to win.

They're a lot of Zass players I have seen, and probably haven't seen. However, I am pretty damn sure none of them are going to win a tourney or get close without applying some damn innovation. Just about all of Zass tools can be punished, his BB, 3AB, WSB all his lows, and his lows give no advantage all. In high level play you have to eliminate a large number of Zass's moves to actually avoid getting killed from punishment.

Doesn't matter whether online or offline, or against the comp. Try one of Zass's Bad match-ups Raphael...if you get your ass kicked, you haven't mastered this character at all, you have overestimated you skill with him, and you will realize that you either need to think harder, or move on to something easier.

To me most technical means that even after you got all the moves down and the execution, you're still have a lot more work to do to win. So compare Setsuka to Zasalamel and ask you're self which player is required to do more thinking and pull shit out of his ass to win.

 

[KingZeal]

Again, I'm not sure that I agree with that, because it's basically saying that low-tier = technical. The terms are separate and not synonymous with one-another.

 

[Shenrei]

If technical meant difficulty of inputs and execution in general, then Setsuka, Hilde and Yoshi would probably win.

However, from my POV that's not what technical is.

Technical to me means the complexity of a character for proper execution combined with their options in any given situation. Don't really feel like going in depth, but the characters that come to mind are: Yoshi, Tira, Taki

 

[KingAce]

Again, I'm not sure that I agree with that, because it's basically saying that low-tier = technical. The terms are separate and not synonymous with one-another.

Tiers don't exist...not in High level play. This discussion has been analyzed again and again. If I lose against a character that has better tools, it's not because it has better tools, but because at that moment I sucked.

When you say the most technical don't you mean the hardest character to apply so that you can win?
Then in theory, yes low tier characters might seem to be my argument, but I wouldn't say Yun Seong is more technical than Setsuka because Yun Seong is low tier, and therefore more difficult to win with. I think just the opposite, despite Yun Seong being considered low tier, his actually easier to win with than Setsuka, because Yun is a very linear character. So No...I have analyzed Zass's potential, and seen that behind him, is something people are currently missing, the intent behind his design, the reason he pulls you close to him, how weak his throws are, and the difficulty in playing such an unsafe character with the hopes of winning in high level play. So based off these variables, and what I considered hidden potential that is reliant on the player's intuition and innovation, he is one of the more technical characters in this game.

Why...because he requires the most thought, during game play.

 

[Pazuzuxul]

My reasoning behind calling Voldo the most technical character in the game is the fact that's he's incredibly unorthodox, both to play, and to fight. I haven't seen many good Voldos, but as a former Voldo player in II, and after learning just a bit in IV, the possibilities are ridiculous.

 

[Pazuzuxul]

At this point, do we even know what the hell "technical" actually means anymore?

It seems that most of this arguing is because everyone has different definitions of what defines a "technical" character.

Agreed.

@Plume: going by technicality as far as button inputs, I would put Setsuka first, then Ivy and Hilde (her charge combos are a bitch).

 

[KingZeal]

Tiers don't exist...not in High level play. This discussion has been analyzed again and again. If I lose against a character that has better tools, it's not because it has better tools, but because at that moment I sucked.

That's completely besides the point. If a character has better tools, this is a fact. Whether you win or not doesn't change the fact that your opponent had 6 options in a particular situation while you only had 2. That's the entire basis that tiers are built from, and I don't see how high level play changes that.

When you say the most technical don't you mean the hardest character to apply so that you can win?

Not exactly. Again, Akira is considered to be the most "technical" character in Virtua Fighter, but not because of how many tools he has or the rewards of his move set. He's considered technical because everything you do with him has to be deliberate. His moveset is less than obvious; playing him requires that you go against your instinct in order to execute properly as 1K will not grant you the uber trip that it does for characters like Lau.

Then in theory, yes low tier characters might seem to be my argument, but I wouldn't say Yun Seong is more technical than Setsuka because Yun Seong is low tier, and therefore more difficult to win with. I think just the opposite, despite Yun Seong being considered low tier, his actually easier to win with than Setsuka, because Yun is a very linear character. So No...I have analyzed Zass's potential, and seen that behind him, is something people are currently missing, the intent behind his design, the reason he pulls you close to him, how weak his throws are, and the difficulty in playing such an unsafe character with the hopes of winning in high level play. So based off these variables, and what I considered hidden potential that is reliant on the player's intuition and innovation, he is one of the more technical characters in this game.

Why...because he requires the most thought, during game play.

If that's the case, most Hilde users will tell you that she requires almost constant planning before you ever even press a button. Hell, to do her strongest combos and mixups, you need to have planned out your method of attack 5 or more seconds ahead of time.

But that aside, I'm looking forward to seeing this untapped potential with Zasalamel being brought out in a tournament at some point.

 

[Plume]

Agreed.

@Plume: going by technicality as far as button inputs, I would put Setsuka first, then Ivy and Hilde (her charge combos are a bitch).

Online, Setsuka's button inputs are not a factor.

This discussion is about online, the first post is about online, why are you all talking about offline?

 

[Pazuzuxul]

Technical means technique, themost technical character in the game is the one that requires the most technique.
The one character that requires from the player the most skill, knowledge and application of the systems mechanics to win.

They're a lot of Zass players I have seen, and probably haven't seen. However, I am pretty damn sure none of them are going to win a tourney or get close without applying some damn innovation. Just about all of Zass tools can be punished, his BB, 3AB, WSB all his lows, and his lows give no advantage all. In high level play you have to eliminate a large number of Zass's moves to actually avoid getting killed from punishment.

Doesn't matter whether online or offline, or against the comp. Try one of Zass's Bad match-ups Raphael...if you get your ass kicked, you haven't mastered this character at all, you have overestimated you skill with him, and you will realize that you either need to think harder, or move on to something easier.

To me most technical means that even after you got all the moves down and the execution, you're still have a lot more work to do to win. So compare Setsuka to Zasalamel and ask you're self which player is required to do more thinking and pull shit out of his ass to win.

Setsuka is infinitely more technical than Zasalamel. End of story.

Every Zas player I've seen online plays him the exact same way. Drawing their opponents in with his various lows (going fishing!), and then doing his ridiculous trap/air combos. Not only that, but he's not hard to use, at all. I don't remember how to do all of his combos, as I don't care, but I have taken him into practice. Don't get me wrong, I've seen some decent Zas players out there, he's just not that impressive of a character in my opinion.

As far as the whole Zas Vs. Raph thing... Every character has bad match ups, isn't that the point of practicing?

 

[Pazuzuxul]

Online, Setsuka's button inputs are not a factor.

This discussion is about online, the first post is about online, why are you all talking about offline?

I read nothing in the first post stating that this discussion is exclusive to online play.

 

[Promiethius]

If technical meant difficulty of inputs and execution in general, then Setsuka, Hilde and Yoshi would probably win.

However, from my POV that's not what technical is.

Technical to me means the complexity of a character for proper execution combined with their options in any given situation. Don't really feel like going in depth, but the characters that come to mind are: Yoshi, Tira, Taki

lol That makes alot of sense. Thats what I said.. earlier. There is a difference in difficulty and technical.
Technical means something being complex, right? If id have to say technical, wouldn't the characters with the most options, or having to worry about options the most be the most technical? So wouldn't that be Voldo, considering the mixups and stances. He has alot of options...he seems pretty damn technical to me.

Difficulty includes some technical bullshit and alot of other stuff....because last time i looked, difficulty ment how hard it was to do something, lol. Its pretty damn hard to use Talim, Zass, Nightmare, Tira, Taki, Setsuka, Yoshi, and Hilde. Now, input problems shouldn't count because if anyone spends but so many hours in training they will get the JF's down, even with enough practice in tournament play, they will learn to hit the Jf's reliably. This kinda gets rid of Hilde, and Yoshi. Setsuka in my opinion is still hard to play, even without input problems...but i wouldn't dare put her up there with Talim, Zass, Nightmare, Tira, and Taki.

Given matchups and all the problems that can go wrong in a fight, wouldn't Talim, Zass, Nightmare, Tira, and Taki be the most difficult to play? If you had to pick just two....

I'd give it to Taki and Zass. lol..... When it comes to difficulty man, they are some hard ass characters to use in tournaments.

Anyone agree to what im saying..? o.o;

 

[Plume]

I read nothing in the first post stating that this discussion is exclusive to online play.

Tiers this, tiers that... I main Sieg and get called left and right for being cheap and all that crap. I know, I know, scrubtalk.

I play both online and offline, but moreso online because of the limited amount of competition I can find here offline.

But it wasn't directed only at you... a lot of people are talking about offline, and it seems that some of the things I'm saying are taken out of context because everyone talks about offline.

 

[Promiethius]

I was talking about offline the entire time.
If were talking about online man. I say setsuka all the way, in both difficulty and being the most technical. That shit is retarded. You have to hit moves before they even come out for them to work, thats bullshit. You have to guess before you do your attack will it hit them or not, lol.

It truly is the dummest shit. I'm sure every Setsuka player feels me on that.

 

[KingZeal]

Yep. I feel you.

...In a way that's totally not homo, of course.