Playing to Win - Sirlin.net Forums

main | features | forums | cranky | personal | links | contact

Thread Closed

Topic Closed

Sirlin.net Forums

Sirlin's Articles

Playing to Win (Page 6)

profile | register | preferences | faq | search

This topic is 11 pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Author	Topic: Playing to Win
You're full of crap Member	posted 12-18-2001 11:13 AM There's ALWAYS someone better. IP: Logged
margalis Member	posted 12-18-2001 02:24 PM Tragic: That is what I had heard, I guess I was misinformed. Dynamo: Bison does not own Wolvy. How in the world are you hitting with the Scissor Kick Nightmare? Characters that do well against Wolvy are Mega-Zangief, Zangief and Blackheart. As Spider-Dan as pointed out Cap+USAgent can also beat anyone a fair amount of the time, due in no small part to the crazy double team they have. IP: Logged
Viscant Junior Member	posted 12-18-2001 10:40 PM LOL, it doesn't take the internet to find out things about a game. This is one of the main points. It just takes COMPETITION. And come on. Like the infinites in MSF took a lot of thought to find anyways. For most of them it was like "well, let's try all the XSF stuff to see if they took it out. What, still works? HELLA dumb!" MSF had playable infinites within days/weeks in most areas. What's worse, people found out about Wolverine speedup low fierce within weeks. Game already was ruined. And let's look at MvC1. Wolverine crouch cancel infinite was the SAME ONE that he had in MSF, XSF and probably MSH and COTA too. You just never saw it in those ones because he had easier/more practical infinites before. War Machine air combo with repeat airdashes was found in a few months of play and became an infinite when people figured out how to fly cancel. Started out as "showoff combo" then everybody could do it and now if you CAN'T do it, you suck. Gambit infinite was found/complained about within days. Venom/Red Venom infinites took longer, but the ONLY reason Red Venom is a tournament character is because of the infinite. But look at what competition does to you. Competition FORCES people to use infinites and things like this. Say Wolverine hits somebody. What do you do? Well, if you just do simple air combo, you let them off lightly. That doesn't hurt very much...you probably won't keep hitting them before they hit you. And since I know their one hit will probably end my game, I have to maximize the damage I do before I get hit and die. So let's see. Do I do Fatal Claw? That's no good...they can roll and hit me for free after. Berserker Barrage X? Good safe bet. Free OTG afterwards that combos into the infinite, or sets up an option if I can't do it (most people can't). Or try direct combo into infinite? You really only have one real choice. You hit them, go for that infinite, or you lose. When you play good competition, this is how you have to play. If you don't, you will lose. When you played MvC2, yes, these things were there. BUT THEY ALWAYS WERE. Competition seems to have come found you. Or more likely, the people you played who sucked before went to sites like srk, upgraded their game and now are forcing you to upgrade or you'll lose. As you can see, these things were always there, but this is just the first time you've ever had to consider them. (That's actually not true since infinites don't really matter to MvC2. You aren't forced to hit someone once then kill their 1st character guard break and kill their 2nd. At least it takes a minimum of 4-5 hits to win in MvC2 and due to super meter conditions, helpers making it hard to get a clean hit, you have to fight for a lot longer in MvC2. MvC1 matches (since not everybody could do guard breaks every time) were usually 2 hits and a pile of chip damage after the 1st character died. MvC2 games are a lot different and more challenging.) Anyways, this is what Sirlin is talking about. You now have to consider a new world of possibilities, which is what the game is designed to do. You have to realize that everybody you play now has access to advanced tricks and will probably be very dangerous if you let them hit you even once. So you're forced to up your game. As you've demonstrated, you prefer to go back to the time when people around you didn't know what they were doing so you didn't have to consider these things. You liked it better when nobody knew long combos (infinites) or how to use helpers probably (MSF helpers are WAY harder to kill than MvC2 helpers). Oh well...I wish I could say your beef was uncommon, but lots of people seem to long for the days when everybody sucked and they only sort of sucked so they had advantage. My advice to you is to actually learn how to play the games, quit whining and upgrade yourself. I know for sure you have the time. You've spent about as long responding to this one post on the internet as I usually spend playing games per week (I only play once a week usually and only for a few hours). So now I guess the choice is yours. Stay a scrub, or move up in the world? On tournaments: Tournaments can't ALWAYS determine the best. There are always upsets, maybe the winner wouldn't have beaten one guy in the bracket but he never had to play them because that guy choked to some other guy who the winner could beat. Stuff like that. But look at tournaments in a macro sense. Justin Wong hasn't lost an MvC2 tournament in months. It might even be a solid year since he last lost a tournament. He's played the best from So Cal, Nor Cal, all up and down the east coast, from the midwest, from the pacific northwest and he's beat them all. Usually, he annihalated them. Why shouldn't he be considered the best. What more does he have to do? Before you go spouting off "well, he hasn't played me!" he doesn't have to. Kasparov (or whoever the world chess champ is now, I don't follow chess) has never played me at chess. Does that mean that he's not really the best? Of course not! Are the Rams the best team in football? (Probably, although the Raiders will still own them in the super bowl) But they haven't played me and my 10 friends from our beer leage. They can't be the best without playing US right? Come on. Tournaments and competitions are good for bringing out the best, identifying the top few people by consistency and if there's someone particularly dominant, good at identifying the best. There really is no better way. Oh yeah and on Wolverine v. Bison. Yes, Bison does a lot of damage. Scissor press nightmare has next to 0 chance of landing however. Wolverine will probably land 50 low shorts before he gets caught in one scissor press. FYI, any low short Wolverine lands will kill Bison. Scissor press barely does 50%. Risk/reward in action. Like margalis said, Blackheart and Iron Gief are the only characters who have a legit chance at stopping Wolverine and Blackheart fights that entire fight with full knowledge that any slipup is his ass (since Wolverine gets unlimited meter with no strings attached, he'll always be in berserker rage) without much in the way of an equalizer. Iron Gief tends to be the only one who genuinely "beats" Wolverine for the sole reason because he can't be infinited, can't be hit by a 100% combo and he generally does more damage than Wolverine. --Jay Snyder Viscant@aol.com IP: Logged
Mr Callahan Junior Member	posted 12-19-2001 11:10 AM Sirlin: I hate to draw attention from the MVC2 debate that rages unabated, but even though the game is but an arms length away as I write this, I haven't played it enough to enter the discussion. So, going back to the original topic, I have a question for you. I was flipping through the channels (I'm kinda stupid that way, always hoping that SOMETHING worth watching must be on) and I come across "The Weakest Link." I got to thinking about the last vote, when there are three people left. Let's say you are a contestant. There are two other contestants. One you are 99.9% sure you could beat; the guy is an idiot. The other sits at roughly your level, and you would have a 50/50 chance of winning if you voted off the idiot. Do you vote off the idiot, avoiding the "cheap" way out, or take a chance (and maybe win more money) on the real challenge? People with "honor" (relative, yes, but you know what I mean) would respect you more for this decision. Assuming that the money was the same either way, would you still vote the same way? I'm just kind of curious as to how public perception and the whole risk/reward factor come into play for you. It would be a whole different ballgame if I was actually making the decision on the show, but right now I think I'd take the challenge rather then trashing the idiot for a guaranteed win. This whole thing is just one of the many random thoughts that echoes off the walls of my skull during my less-than-intellectually-demanding job. Be careful how you answer (if you do); it might start me thinking. ------------------ "Evil will always triumph because Good is dumb" -Dark Helmet IP: Logged
You're full of crap Member	posted 12-19-2001 12:37 PM I play good players, I don't play newbies like you do. quote: Stay a scrub, or move up in the world? What's your definition of scrub? Sirlin's definition? Because he made that up. quote: He's played the best from So Cal, Nor Cal, all up and down the east coast, from the midwest, from the pacific northwest and he's beat them all. Usually, he annihalated them. Why shouldn't he be considered the best. What more does he have to do? He's not the best. There's always someone better. There's always someone who can beat the "best". Michael Johnson was supposedly the fastest human on earth for a long time until one guy decided to challenge him to a race and beat em. quote: Before you go spouting off "well, he hasn't played me!" he doesn't have to. He may be recognized as "THE BEST", seeing as though he can't play everyone on earth he just plays the one's who have him on radar... "He's coming this way, lets challenge him to a match!" quote: Does that mean that he's not really the best? Of course not! You might by some chance be better than him in chess. How do you just know he's better than you at chess? Because everyone says so? FYI The best chess player is a computer. quote: Tournaments and competitions are good for bringing out the best, identifying the top few people by consistency and if there's someone particularly dominant, good at identifying the best. There really is no better way That's just not true. That may be the only way they can tag the one who they want to be known as "the best", but they can't possibly say beyond a shadow of a doubt, that because this individual beat a very very small percentage of mvc2 players in that peticular city where the tournament was held that means he can beat any carbon based lifeform that has the ability to play a video game. That just doesn't make any sense to say. And automaticly saying that I suck, and that my OPINIONS are totally wrong, just because it's not what you believe, is just absolutely ignorant. I have my opinions, and you have yours, but you're just saying that my opinions are just wrong, and if anyones opinions are different from yours, they're worthless trash. quote: You've spent about as long responding to this one post on the internet as I usually spend playing games per week (I only play once a week usually and only for a few hours). I read fast and I type fast. It took me about 2 or 3 minutes to read the comments and type this. And you may not play that much NOW, because you might not have any "tournaments". Don't try to make yourself look like a naturally good MARVEL VS CAPCOM 2 player. quote: It would be a whole different ballgame if I was actually making the decision on the show, but right now I think I'd take the challenge rather then trashing the idiot for a guaranteed win. If you were making the decision on the show, you'd probably go for the guaranteed win. When money's involved, no one cares about honor. [This message has been edited by You're full of crap (edited 12-19-2001).] IP: Logged
margalis Member	posted 12-19-2001 01:03 PM Look guys, crapguy is clearly the best, no need to argue...let him think what he wants. BTW I am both the best chess player on earth and the fastest man. IP: Logged
Sirlin Administrator	posted 12-19-2001 01:21 PM Callahan, The "Weakest Link" gameshow should be called "The Strongest Link," since that's who should usually be voted off. "Fred!...you ARE the strongest link! Goodbye!" The craziest thing about that show is that the super tiny text they flash during the end credits says that contestants ARE allowed to talk beforehand and plan a strategy. This is very rarely done, though. I believe the best strategy is to create an alliance of 4 (or possibly 3 if you're feeling risky) before the show. Explain to the people who would be in your alliance "Always vote off the left-most person not in our alliance until we are the final 4, then anything goes." If they agree and follow through (as they have incentive to do) then you WILL be final 4, since the remaining 4 people will never have it together enough to form their own alliance. You'd also do well to have an alliance of 3, and 2 planned also, under the table. That way you could get into the final 2 without even really playing the game. Alliances aside, I would ALWAYS vote off the strongest link. Even first round. Anyone that has a chance of beating you...get them out while you can. You might want to keep them around to earn money, but you earn $0 when you get second, so don't fool around. Get the threats off the board immediately and be happy with whatever money you can put together. The only other factor is how you should try to appear to the others. Should you be the smart one or the dumb one? You should be the dumb one all the way through if you face opponents who all practice my strategy. In reality, though, smart people are rarely voted off in the beginning. Even when there are only like 3 people left and one is obviously the smartest, he often doesn't get voted off. Occasionally you get to see the flash of insight--the moment--that one of those scrubs realizes "hey! I should vote off the smart guy!" So most people will vote off the dumb people. You should probably avoid looking dumb and actually try to get the questions right. But towards the end, you probably shouldn't look too dumb or too smart. Try to be in the middle, I guess so you won't fall prey to dumb voters voting off the dumb people or the smart voters voting off the smart people. And remember: there is no second place, so don't mess around. Get the threats out of the game immediately and be thankful for winning anything at all when you get 1st. --Sirlin IP: Logged
You're full of crap Member	posted 12-19-2001 03:07 PM They vote off the weakest because they're the one's getting the questions wrong, and they prevent you from getting any money. So usually it's not the strongest link that gets voted off, it's the weakest. Except near the end. And since you don't know if they're gonna vote off the strongest or the weakest, just be nice, maybe they won't vote you off because they like you. And that lady's mean... "You're the weakest link, GET THE F** OUTTA MY SIGHT*." [This message has been edited by You're full of crap (edited 12-19-2001).] IP: Logged
Itsatrap Member	posted 12-19-2001 05:35 PM Mmmmmmm, metagame strategy; gotta love it. Viscant, great post as usual. Crap guy, playing for fun and playing to win aren't necessarily the same. Also, on the subject of tourneys, it's true that sometimes you can't arrange the match-ups you want. That's a big part of why ratings were established. Chess has a rating. Sprints aren't rated, but they are timed. - Alan IP: Logged
margalis Member	posted 12-19-2001 06:31 PM Say everyone uses the Sirlin start and votes off the strongest link. Knowing that, nobody wants to appear as the strongest link, they all tank. So you don't make any money. And if everyone is tanking your chance of getting voted off is not any better or worse than anyone elses....nor are you actually getting rid of the greatest threat... IMO it totally depends on what the other people are doing. IP: Logged
You're full of crap Member	posted 12-19-2001 06:45 PM quote: Viscant, great post as usual. Mine was better, as usual. At least I don't say moronic things like "HELLA dumb!" Tryin to be like Cartmen. quote: Crap guy, playing for fun and playing to win aren't necessarily the same. Also, on the subject of tourneys, it's true that sometimes you can't arrange the match-ups you want. That's a big part of why ratings were established. Chess has a rating. Sprints aren't rated, but they are timed. The only reason that got started was the attitude of... "I'm third place, that means if you're not the two people who were 1st and 2nd, I'm better than you" That's ignint. [This message has been edited by You're full of crap (edited 12-19-2001).] IP: Logged
Dynamo Junior Member	posted 12-19-2001 09:02 PM quote: Dynamo: Bison does not own Wolvy. How in the world are you hitting with the Scissor Kick Nightmare? Characters that do well against Wolvy are Mega-Zangief, Zangief and Blackheart. As Spider-Dan as pointed out Cap+USAgent can also beat anyone a fair amount of the time, due in no small part to the crazy double team they have. That was just a small example. Wolverine has adv. in quickness and height, thats all. Bison can easily beat Wolverine(any character can). Have a team-up hit Wolverine and watch his energy drop like nothing. Its rather funny. I used CA and USA all the time as a team. It was fun. They are hard to beat though if used well. quote: FYI, any low short Wolverine lands will kill Bison. Soooo it will KILL Bison? That doesnt sound right.... I didnt think the game had 1 hit kills. Of course this is assuming that Wolverine can actually GET the low hit on Bison. quote: Blackheart and Iron Gief are the only characters who have a legit chance at stopping Wolverine and Blackheart fights that entire fight with full knowledge that any slipup is his ass Ok Mech Zangief I understand of course since ive beat up a Wolverine with em countless times, but Blackheart!? Come on. Blackheart is NOT that great. I dont see why everyone makes him out to be so great. Sure he IS a good character, but with someone like Wolverine on you 22/7 there's nothing Blackheart can exactly do.... quote: Michael Johnson was supposedly the fastest human on earth for a long time until one guy decided to challenge him to a race and beat em. Thats the fastest guy in the world???? I didnt know... quote: He may be recognized as "THE BEST", seeing as though he can't play everyone on earth he just plays the one's who have him on radar... Sorta like me! I'm the DragonBall GT Final Bout master of the world! quote: FYI The best chess player is a computer Coulda swore i remember reading about this... I remember it said they reached a tie! quote: Don't try to make yourself look like a naturally good MARVEL VS CAPCOM 2 player. IS that even possible???? I mean "naturally" good? Its no like its encoded in DNA. quote: If you were making the decision on the show, you'd probably go for the guaranteed win. When money's involved, no one cares about honor. True in some ppl's cases. But then there are some who wouldnt go for the win, and then they lose and they wonder why! quote: Crap guy, playing for fun and playing to win aren't necessarily the same. That was obvious for awhile now. When it comes to DragonBall GT Final Bout I play for fun since I KNOW i'm the best! IP: Logged
Dynamo Junior Member	posted 12-19-2001 09:02 PM extra..... [This message has been edited by Dynamo (edited 12-19-2001).] IP: Logged
Dynamo Junior Member	posted 12-19-2001 09:03 PM Also, lets get offa the subject of MvC2. As always it gets rather dull. ------------------ I'm the DragonBall GT Final Bout Master! IP: Logged
Robyrt Junior Member	posted 01-07-2002 12:56 AM This is MvC1... in 2, Bison is completely unworthy of notice, and the only reason to use Wolverine is his low-hitting assist. IP: Logged

This topic is 11 pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 All times are PST (US)	next newest topic \| next oldest topic
Administrative Options: Open Topic \| Archive/Move \| Delete Topic
	Hop to:

Contact Us | www.sirlin.net

Powered by Infopop www.infopop.com © 2000
Ultimate Bulletin Board 5.47a