tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4363269567633016003.post7571548250398664318..comments2023-07-11T01:30:26.283-07:00Comments on Alex's Puff Stuff: Impulse and PvPAlexander Neslerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/10591350190200120473noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4363269567633016003.post-10761872114739567482016-05-25T04:53:17.733-07:002016-05-25T04:53:17.733-07:00(^_^*)
Yeah it gets pretty weird pretty quickly in...(^_^*)<br />Yeah it gets pretty weird pretty quickly in terms of yomi. Especially because you're rarely sure just how familiar your opponent is with the yomi you're trying to play.<br />My goal with this and a lot of what I put up is to create a cleaner but still comprehensive framework/vocabulary so that thinking about the next steps is easier and more effective.Alexander Neslerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10591350190200120473noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4363269567633016003.post-30203983029774205242016-05-24T20:49:09.008-07:002016-05-24T20:49:09.008-07:00If this analysis is true, which I believe it large...If this analysis is true, which I believe it largely is, it raises the question of how to use this information. In terms of predicting your opponents' tendencies, the application is pretty straightforward, but for improving your own habits, it's not quite clear. These tendencies may not have been thought out logically, but that doesn't necessarily mean they are bad frameworks to play within.<br /><br />The first two seem heavily situational. As with classic Yomi/RPS examples, doing certain options is good at certain levels of play. Teching in place a second time after getting punished for doing it once may suck vs. low level opponents who repeat punishes until their opponent demonstrates a willingness to adapt, but at high level, players often predict mix ups after punishing something because they give their opponent the benefit of the doubt due to their skill. In that case, teching in place a second time would clearly be the best decision. These impulses are messy because of how meta-dependent they are.<br /><br />The third and fourth are more complex. Do players tend to limit themselves to 3 options because of human limitations and natural tendencies? So much of fighting games tend to be simplified to RPS situations even when there are more than 3 options, so I wouldn't be surprised if this was a human element, but it seems equally likely that 3 just tends to be the appropriate number of options you should choose from. Adding a 4th option to your repertoire may make you less predictable, but at what cost? You are now subjecting yourself to the usage of worse options which may lead to significantly harder punishes when they occasionally do predict you. Are we better off sticking with 3 really good options that limit risk and maximize reward, or is this our evolutionary monkey brains failing to problem solve an unnatural interaction? If our opponent is USED to playing opponents with 3 main options, does adding a 4th option throw a wrench into their own strategy more than our own?<br /><br />There's also the issue of having to learn the depth of another option. It's hard enough trying to master mixing up the ins and outs of 3 options. Mastering 4 or 5, each with an entire branch of sub-options extending from it, is no small task. For every option you add in Melee, we could be talking about hundreds of extra hours you would need to dedicate specifically to those options in order to really understand and apply them efficiently. Imagine if Melee were patched with some sort of quick tech in place option that was half the length of a normal tech, but with no invul. This simple addition would have a drastic ripple effect through the rest of the game, and usage of the quick-tech would no doubt evolve over time just as much as the other tech options have.<br /><br />(I realize I'm asking a lot of hypotheticals that are nearly impossible to answer, but I figured I'd think out loud since this post got me brainstorming.)Boneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03173425755148790246noreply@blogger.com