The Power of One.

[Spencer]

@Number 13

In some cases it is even the opposite. A pro community often has an interest in the status quo as that is the framework in which they are at the top. Obviously this isn't always (or even often) the case, but in a purely self-interested world... a pro should likely never want sweeping changes.

I also am willing to accept a solo's position as weaker than teams, but if they can be more balanced, shouldn't they? If, in pure fantasy land, we could move every MU to a 5-5, we should, right? But I feel like I'm first having to argue against the idea that solos should be balanced... which seems crazy to me.

I do agree though that direct strength (hp/damage) buffs are likely the wrong place to go. I like the idea of utility buffs like the vampire snap out.

 

[GirlyStyle]

@Number 13

I also am willing to accept a solo's position as weaker than teams, but if they can be more balanced, shouldn't they? If, in pure fantasy land, we could move every MU to a 5-5, we should, right?

I actually think having MUs be not all 5-5 or having some less balanced MUs is nice because it kind of lends an option to have a counter-picking style of play (a dirty word, I know). I kind of like it when games have an aspect of "the match starts at character select" and forces you to be creative with certain MUs. I don't think its an objectively bad thing to have not completely even balance and can lend itself out to interesting strategic development.

But I feel like I'm first having to argue against the idea that solos should be balanced... which seems crazy to me.

Well this is your opinion. As people have clearly laid out here, lots of people think that solos ARE balanced enough. The problem also may lie in the fact you are playing a character that, even on a team, is considered to not do well on point (poor neutral, predictable movement, etc).

 

[Zidiane]

Just want to point out that "Solo isn't completely fucked" isn't the same as "Solo is completely fair".

 

[View619]

Are solo characters completely fucked? I think that's the first question that needs to be answered. Honestly, I wonder if any of you try going 3 v 1 and see the health lost due to getting touched once by a solo character, or have to deal with the amount of damage you need to dish out on offense to feel like you're having an impact, while one good reversal can result in a dead character and an incoming mix-up. The health/damage buffs vs teams, plus the ability to lock out assists and force the point character into a 1 v 1 situation are huge. Not sure why it's always a case of "solos don't have anything to be competitive" when their main problem was eating endless pressure due to lock down assists imo (pbgc helps with this if you learn how to perform it consistently).

Either way, I can live with whatever happens to solo, whether they get buffed or not.

 

[blufang]

Experiment. Experiment. Experiment.

Understand anything that is actually approved would be put in the beta, and if the backlash is awful and people think it is horrible. Well it will never make the actual game. It won't ruin anything. So what is everyone afraid of?

That's my question.

 

[GirlyStyle]

Experiment. Experiment. Experiment.

Understand anything that is actually approved would be put in the beta, and if the backlash is awful and people think it is horrible. Well it will never make the actual game. It won't ruin anything. So what is everyone afraid of?

That's my question.

i don't see anyone afraid of anything :P everyone seemed onboard with the vampire life gain and most people seem to think that solos are already at a decent point of balance

 

[blufang]

i don't see anyone afraid of anything :P everyone seemed onboard with the vampire life gain and most people seem to think that solos are already at a decent point of balance

Really? A lot of posts seem to say solos are fine, and seem to imply they wouldn't be up for any buffs, including the vampire snapback option. If everyone is on board though, there is no need for argument. We'll see how the vampire works out.

 

[Spencer]

@GirlyStyle

I think I was unclear. I feel like I'm arguing that solos should be made to be balanced relative to teams which is a separate argument than solos being balanced. We should be discussing whether solos are balanced and if not, how can we make them so. Instead, I'm arguing that solos should be made to be balanced.

I do like counter picking as well. I come from LoL and Dota and more where I have put in literally probably about 1500+ combined hours and counter picking is a big part of that. It is bad enough that some games are quite seriously lost at the ban/select portion of the game. But in my view, FGs are more about merit and not about which character you select. And if we want to keep picking/counter-picking in the genre, then we should really implement a ban phase as well which could make for a super interesting fighting game, but in truth, I'm firmly on the side of balance FGs as closely as possible.

@View619

No, the question isn't whether solo characters are completely fucked. Read Zidiane's post right above yours. No one here (well mostly no one) thinks that solos are completely boned. I think I can go into a game with someone of relatively similar skill and compete. That said, I damn sure think I'm going in there at a disadvantage (again assuming similar skill levels). So the question isn't whether solo is "completely fucked" but rather "can we minimize whatever disadvantage solo has"? The answer to that question might also be 'no', but why not try?

 

[GirlyStyle]

@GirlyStyle

I think I was unclear. I feel like I'm arguing that solos should be made to be balanced relative to teams which is a separate argument than solos being balanced. We should be discussing whether solos are balanced and if not, how can we make them so. Instead, I'm arguing that solos should be made to be balanced.

I do like counter picking as well. I come from LoL and Dota and more where I have put in literally probably about 1500+ combined hours and counter picking is a big part of that. It is bad enough that some games are quite seriously lost at the ban/select portion of the game.

But in my view, FGs are more about merit and not about which character you select.

And if we want to keep picking/counter-picking in the genre, then we should really implement a ban phase as well which could make for a super interesting fighting game, but in truth, I'm firmly on the side of balance FGs as closely as possible.

well part of the problem is that "solos" are being grouped together.

"solo" isn't a character; "solo PW", "solo fortune", "solo parasoul", etc are all different characters. you can't talk about balancing just solos when all the solos can be approached completely differently.

the issue with your perspective is that you play one of 8 possible solos, and of them, you play one of the worst. there isn't going to be pure thing that balances all solos because they are all COMPLETELY different characters.



i wasn't suggesting that SG SHOULD be counter pick heavy, just simply that its something some people like to incorporate.

But in my view, FGs are more about merit and not about which character you select.

well all the merit is still there ;p its not like you just win by selecting characters, you still have to USE them, so i 100% disagree with statements like this. lots of games have flourished with more counterpicky styles, like KOF and ST.

Its not those players have less merit, they just learn more characters.

in every game you play, game starts at the character select. Simple as that really.

SF4's balance in someways hits a really nice center where for outside of some extreme MUs (sagat/gief, guile/bison), the game is mainly 6-4/5-5, but there is still room for a counterpicking style of play.

 

[Spencer]

And I wouldn't be opposed to a SF IV balance if our if the roster wasn't going to end up at 15ish cast members.

And yes, you are right. Solos is a large umbrella (well... 10ish) and too strong of buffs could lead to some solos spiraling strongly out of control (MF...), but does MF represent the exception or the rule? I'd argue that she represents the exception. While some solos may be in a good place, I think the majority (... pretty much all but MF... maybe Bella too since she is scary, but I'd let Zidiane comment on that) pale reasonably strongly when compared to teams (like 4-6 at best and 3-7 at worst).

 

[ClarenceMage]

So what exactly is stopping disgruntled solo players from either picking a better solo, or just slapping updo behind their solo? Last time I checked, when people were fed up with bad match-ups people started either putting in Japanese levels of work in character dedication, or picked better characters.

 

[ashxu]

So what exactly is stopping disgruntled solo players from either picking a better solo, or just slapping updo behind their solo? Last time I checked, when people were fed up with bad match-ups people started either putting in Japanese levels of work in character dedication, or picked better characters.

Nothing, people are just lazy and don't want to pick up another character.

From my personal experience it's always beginners who refuse to pick up a new character for one reason or another. No reason other than laziness to not at least spend half an hour figuring out how to play Filia (or anyone else) at a basic level and use her as an Updo dispenser while you level up as normal.

 

[Dagwood]

So what exactly is stopping disgruntled solo players from either picking a better solo, or just slapping updo behind their solo? Last time I checked, when people were fed up with bad match-ups people started either putting in Japanese levels of work in character dedication, or picked better characters.

They want to have their cake and eat it too.

 

[Broseidon Rex]

As solo, I just want to feel I know a character inside and out before I pick another. At least that was my original intention.

 

[Spencer]

I only really like Painwheel. I've considered picking up Parasoul, but I really just don't love her. That said, do I really have to justify my character picking decision to you in order to get a game that's balanced?

But it is an asinine comment in any case. Let's pretend there is one character that is so brokenly OP she takes the top 8 in every tournament, there is no reason to play anyone else, and each match up is a whopping 9-1. Your argument leads to "who cares because everyone gets to play her" which is a completely idiotic way to balance.

Of course, it isn't mutually exclusive either. I could put in "japanese levels of work" and still want a balanced game. The question I've been asking I'll now pose to you, if the game is balanceable, why shouldn't we balance it?

Keep in mind that those of us who choose to play solo aren't hacking the game or otherwise choosing an option that isn't supported, this game bills itself as one in which you can play solo.

 

[Zidiane]

So what exactly is stopping disgruntled solo players from either picking a better solo, or just slapping updo behind their solo?

Nothing, people are just lazy and don't want to pick up another character.

Why can't someone just have one character that they really love and try to play that character by herself? The game is presented to you in a way that before you even get to the character select screen you're told that you can pick any size you want. This isn't a team game, it's a game of freedom. You have the freedom to pick one or two or three characters in any order, and as a team you have the freedom to pick (nearly) any normal or special as your assist instead of being restricted to predetermined choices. Even the combo system and movement seems much more open than many other games, and encourages you to do what you want to do and what feels right. It just sucks if you came into this game really believing that and then you get to a certain point and realize it wasn't as true for the aspect of the game you were most excited about.

 

[Spencer]

@Zidiane, you'd think we were asking for only solos to viable.

This is what I meant when I said that I feel like I'm arguing for the notion that solos should be allowed to be equal. I ask for a balanced game and get told that I'm spoiled (Dagwood), lazy (ClaranceMage), or whiny (most everyone else).

But do notice that no one is saying solos (as a rule) are on par with teams, and still no one is discussing balance...

 

[IsaVulpes]

Spencer: Do you think Mike should put in the work to make the following Team viable: Peacock(c.HP Assist) / Valentine (s.MP Assist) / Squigly (DP Assist)?

 

[Spencer]

I've no idea to be honest. I've thought almost nil about specific assists or teams in regards to their viability.

That said, we are talking about an entire segment of the game, not a few assists and characters that might not be optimal together. We aren't talking about should PW or Parasoul be viable, we are talking about should solos as a whole be viable.

A better question, I think, is do I think Mike should work to make 3s (also 2s) viable which is absolutely yes.

Flip the situation, were solos dominate in this game, should we work to make teams balanced?

 

[Red Savarin]

I've seen matches where Painwheel forces her way in with armor, Parasoul shuts down pressure with a good pillar, Fillia places players in reset hell, and Peacock zone like no tomorrow. I've seen people down to their last character make massive comebacks against a full team. Characters by themselves can handle almost any situation they come across, you've just got to be a little clever and know how all your tools work, general and character specific.

 

[IsaVulpes]

After L0 has finished BBand, Eliza, Beowulf and Robo-Fortune, there will be:
- 13 Solos
- 156 Duos (78 if you count Parasoul/Filia to be the same team as Filia/Parasoul (it isn't))
- 1716 Trios (286 if you think order doesn't matter (it does))
For a total of 1885 possible Teams (or 377 if you are very biased)
(This is even ignoring changes based on assist choices)
Most of those 1885 possible Teams will be suboptimal. Why .7% of those Teams (aka the 13 suboptimal Solos) would get preferential treatment in form of specific buffs.. I don't know?

Let's make this more specific. Currently, we have 10 characters, which gives us 90 possible Duos (order DOES matter).
Out of those, I'd call the following bad (or "not exactly the best you could choose", bad is rather relative):
- The 9 Duos with Valentine 2nd
- The 9 Duos with Peacock 2nd
- The 9 Duos with Squigly 2nd
- The 4 Duos with MsF 2nd and Val/Pea/Squig/PW 1st
- The 3 Duos with PW 2nd and Val/Pea/Squig 1st
For 34 bad Duos - 38% (presuming you pick good assists. Peacock/Bella is pretty nice, but if you play your Bella with DDrop assist it's ugh). Are you going to try to make all these Duos good?
The "bad" Solos are Peacock, Painwheel, Valentine, Squigly - 4/10, 40%. How terrible is this in comparison, really?
If you add some Solo specific mechanism that makes Solo Painwheel good, what does this do to Solo Fortune who is already quite scary?
What if I only like Valentine and Peacock, am I going to be forced to drop a character, since Solo Val / Solo Peacock get some specialspecial that makes them better solo than in this team?

Balance in a team game means: All characters are viable.
Balance in a team game does NOT mean: All characters are viable in all teams, sizes, with every assist and on every position.

Does anchor Valentine suck? Yes. Does this mean anchor Valentine should get specific buffs? "If Valentine is in the anchor position, your point generates additional meter to balance out the fact you picked a shitty team"?
Or is it rather "If you pick Valentine, that's a good character if you toss her on point with assists she can abuse in the back. If you put her somewhere else or play her without proper assist backing, that's perfectly fine and perfectly possible - it's gonna be bad, but if you want to do so, go ahead. You'll have to work harder than your opponent, but if it's what you wanna do - good luck!"

Why have I not seen someone open a thread yet with the topic being something like "I want to play Anchor Valentine, but that's shit! Why is this even an option to pick, if it's bad and you don't plan to fix it being bad! Mike_Z, you should just lock out the possibility to play anchor Valentine at all since it's clearly not a good idea to do so!" or "Filia s.LP assist is a bad choice! Why can you even pick this in the custom assist window, that's silly! Should disable being able to pick Jabs as assist, or add some specific buff like 'If you pick Jab as your assist, your red life regens faster'!"?
Because it would be stupid?
Yet Solo players for some reason feel entitled to open 1:1 these threads asking for their bad team choice to become more viable and get specific buffs in nonsensical places.

I don't get it.

Flip the situation, were solos dominate in this game, should we work to make teams balanced?

Yes, because
1) This is a team game with the additional option to play Solo, not Street Fighter with the additional option to play as multiple characters
2) Solos are boring as teams have 50 extra interesting mechanisms + teambuilding + assist choices + tbc which would be wholly wasted if Solos were better

 

[Number 13]

Using the argument of "solo is boring" is nothing more then subjective nonsense. The game is also what the individual turns it into whether it's "VS with teams" or "Marvel with solo". Just meaningless label perceptions of what SG really is. Like when Smash is constantly debated whether it's a "party game" or a "platform fighter".

Mostly agree with everything else stated above to an extent. There are "bad" trio/duo combinations just like there are "bad" solo picks, but that doesn't mean the mechanic is inherently at fault.

Teams can remedy individual character weaknesses with teammate assists at the expense of decreased damage/health while solo is more prone to inherent weakness exploiting for the tradeoff of buffed health/damage. Like every other fighter, it all starts with what character/s you picked to determine overall effectiveness.

Also solo Fortune is a glorified built-in pseudo duo disguised as a solo

 

[Spencer]

But the problem with your argument is that this isn't just a team game. This is a solo, duo, and trio game. It is billed as such. It allows you to play as such. I'd agree 100% if I found a way to play solo that was contrary to game design, but just the opposite, I am playing exactly according to the game design.

Then given that solos are only .7% of all possibilities (wherein order doesn't matter), the per capita value of solos is astronomical. Blows trios out of the fucking water which is why solo balance does require consideration. A lot more people (a disgusting amount more) would be affected if you let solos go to the birds than if you let say Peacocks at 2nd stay weak. Then add to that the desire to play a character. If you want to play any character in this whole game duo or trio, there's a place for you. You might not be able to put it exactly where you want it for optimal results, but you get to play it. Now if you are solo, that isn't an option.

Finally, take the single worst team you can think of... Know that solo has an 11% health/life advantage which is minimized by red life... that's it. With no real way to quantify the benefit of assists/DHC, I can't give you any numbers, but there is real benefit in having access to the assist which cuts further into that 11% advantage that solos have. Meaning in some sense, that the absolutely worst teams, the vast majority of your 1872 duo/trio combinations are already better than or equal to solos... and that is going out of your way to pick the shittiest team possible.

And I'm going to address the "boring" shit one more time... you do not get to dictate what I or anyone else find fun. You know what I think is tedious and boring? Seeing a Val with an Updo assist... every other fucking match. I find watching play like Skyking infinitely more interesting than watching the updo-fest that this game can easily become. Your mileage may vary. I won't judge, but please... everyone... shut the fuck up about what is boring. It is 100% subjective.

Hell, I actually agree with Mike that if he has to choose where a weaker point in the game exists, it should be with solos. That doesn't mean we should intentionally weaken or keep weak (if they are indeed weaker) if it can be helped.

 

[IsaVulpes]

If you want to play Painwheel, and only Painwheel, pick Painwheel/Double and drop your stick after Painwheel is dead. What an easy solution to all your problems.

 

[Zidiane]

If solos get a mechanic that teams don't have, it should be a defensive mechanic (not a burst). I think a defensive mechanic would help the characters who are good and bad at soloing equally, whereas a mechanic like vampire snap (a mechanic I can dig, btw) would more greatly affect the better solos who can more easily apply pressure and get a hit.

 

[Zidiane]

If you want to play Painwheel, and only Painwheel, pick Painwheel/Double and drop your stick after Painwheel is dead. What an easy solution to all your problems.

I personally don't like using assists slightly more than I don't like playing multiple characters. I actually can't play P4A because I try and play the character (Chie) without using their persona (too much like an assist). It has to do with using a thing that shouldn't be on the field at that moment that my mind really doesn't like doing. Not sure how many people out there feel the same.

 

[Spencer]

I personally don't like using assists slightly more than I don't like playing multiple characters. I actually can't play P4A because I try and play the character (Chie) without using their persona (too much like an assist). It has to do with using a thing that shouldn't be on the field at that moment that my mind really doesn't like doing. Not sure how many people out there feel the same.

Yeah I don't love assists either. I Like the idea of knowing my character as well as I possibly can. I also get obsessed with usually one character and subconsciously exclude others. Same thing happens in all my games. I know a bunch of people are alt-o-holics in MMOs, but I usually have one, and very, very rarely two, mains.

Exclusive team play is one of the reasons I can't get too deep into KoF and why I'll never play capcom. Hell, it is part of the reason I'm hesitant to pick up VP even though it isn't officially "team" play.

 

[Number 13]

I personally don't like using assists slightly more than I don't like playing multiple characters. I actually can't play P4A because I try and play the character (Chie) without using their persona (too much like an assist). It has to do with using a thing that shouldn't be on the field at that moment that my mind really doesn't like doing. Not sure how many people out there feel the same.

Off topic, but Akihiko (the boxer who punches very hard) would be the ideal character if you don't want to utilize personas very much or even the upcoming character Sho (red head using two swords) who doesn't even use one at all.

I agree also that if you happen to choose solo it's not because you willingly want to handicap yourself, but simply because of playstyle preferences. Solo is a more simplistic (simple doesn't automatically mean bad) choice yet threatening in its own right.

 

[IsaVulpes]

Do you "know your character as well as you possibly can" if you have zero idea about its assist based mixups, resets, defence, neutral, synergies etc, though?
You lose out on a plethora of assist backed movement options, Slide+Assist resets, zoning capabilities open up with projectile assists, you have to decide whether your approach is going to be more successful as jump+assistcall or as superjump, etc etc etc

Someone who plays Solo misses out on half of their character, someone who plays a team is going to play solo a lot anyways (cus 2 other chars are dead / assists are locked out / etc)

 

[Spencer]

In that sense, you're right.

But I guess to expand, I want to know my character as well as possible independent of a team.

There are better PWs out there for damn sure that put PW on a team, but given a relative skill level I don't think there are many teamed PWs who know her as well as I do based solely on the fact that I only play her... not 1/3 of the time but 100% of the time.

 

[Zidiane]

Someone who plays Solo misses out on half of their character, someone who plays a team is going to play solo a lot anyways (cus 2 other chars are dead / assists are locked out / etc)

Would playing Cerebella on a team and fully understanding that at all help you out playing Cerebella as a solo? I would disagree. It's true that "how Cerebella acts on a team" is something you miss while playing solo, but it's not something that'll ever be important. Knowing when to call assist and how to dhc and where to alpha counter does nothing for you when playing solo.

And "sometimes your assists are dead or locked, so it's basically playing solo for that moment" is not really the point. Someone who wants to exclusively play a character wants to exclusively play that character, it doesn't matter if for a select few moments during the match you're a ghetto solo.

 

[IsaVulpes]

I think a defensive mechanic would help the characters who are good and bad at soloing equally, whereas a mechanic like vampire snap (a mechanic I can dig, btw) would more greatly affect the better solos who can more easily apply pressure and get a hit.

Uh, a defensive mechanic would help the characters who are already good at soloing not-very-much (eg fortune already has fiber+headroll+headdp+airsuper+gdlk lvl3, she doesn't need a whole lot of defence assistance) while tremendously buffing some of the chars who are bad at soloing (as most 'bad solos' are just that as they have no way out of an opponents pressure - eg Val can land hits just fine solo; she just melts if someone hits her)

The main problem with adding bonus mechanics to solos is that Solos are supposed to be a stepping stone for beginners.
A big problem with team games is that there's an overwhelming amount of work you have to put in from the get-go - learn the game, learn 3 characters, learn when and how to call assists, etc.
Thanks to being able to pick a single character, a beginner can say "Okay, I play Solo Filia for now" - which is suboptimal, but good enough to get wins anyways (and actually probably not even suboptimal at the level he's at) and then, when he feels confident in Filia and about how the game works, he can learn how to play a basic Solo Double. This should be significantly faster than learning Filia took him, so after a short while he's ready to play Filia/Double - momentarily weakening himself by adding a char he can't do as well with to his team, but in the long run learning how assists function, how to improve his Filia with the Butt in mind, how to play a 2nd character, etc.
If you add a solo specific mechanic, WHATEVERTHATIS, said beginner will play solo Filia for say 3 months, then learn Solo Double for say 2 weeks, then play Filia/Double and will have said specific mechanic in his head from 3.5 months of practice - he may actually have based his entire Filia neutral around specificmechanicthatmakessolosapproacheasier or relies on specificmechanicthatmakessolosdefencebetter for his Double. He will be frustrated that he is now sitting on a decision of whether to toss 3.5months of muscle memory, learning how to handle certain situations etc out of the window, or has to kick his Double -which he has grown to like- out again and go back to Solo Filia. And if he does, it will get WORSE and he will never start playing a team.

You toss the pain of "I have to unlearn what I learned", which is annoying even for people who spent hundreds of hours in training mode anyways (and eg have to do so as they switch out Updo for Hairball assist, forcing them to change up their combo paths, resets, incoming setups etc) on a beginner who is not ready for that one bit; turning Solos from "An easy beginning step so you don't get buried under the game's complexity" into a frustrating mess which you can't recommend to people who are starting the game out fresh anymore.

Would playing Cerebella on a team and fully understanding that at all help you out playing Cerebella as a solo?

Yes, because

"sometimes your assists are dead or locked, so it's basically playing solo for that moment"

Someone who plays a Peacock/Bella Duo sure as fucking hell is going to be capable of playing Solo Bella, as he practices that in pretty much every match.

A lot more people (a disgusting amount more) would be affected if you let solos go to the birds than if you let say Peacocks at 2nd stay weak.

Is that so? You noted yourself that there are barely any competitive solo players. There are more casuals playing Solo yeah, but Tier lists don't matter for those, so .. they don't matter.
You're free to check the Top16 of every SG tournament with more than 16 entrants and see for yourself how many people are actually affected by Solos being weak.

 

[Zidiane]

Uh, a defensive mechanic would help the characters who are already good at soloing not-very-much while tremendously buffing some of the chars who are bad at soloing.

I think adding a defensive mechanic would more evenly help all solos than an offensive one would. That's how I should have phrased it. Of course there are going to be some characters that desperately need a defensive boost as opposed to others, but offensive one only helps those who can get a hit.

The main problem with adding bonus mechanics to solos is that Solos are supposed to be a stepping stone for beginners. [...] If you add a solo specific mechanic, WHATEVERTHATIS [...]

This is assuming the mechanic is such a mechanic that it's possible/easy to preform at beginner level. How many beginners (or everyone else, for that matter...) know how to and can preform PBGC? Or even alpha counter? If they are capable of incorporating a technique as advanced as Alpha Countering into their game after 3 months (which would mostly be them figuring out how the character moves and how to do combos), then they'll probably be able to look past the "I'm not good right away trying to learn this team" to learn the team. Especially if both/all three characters are ones they want to play and they aren't just trying to pick the best assist/team in the game.

You toss the pain of "I have to unlearn what I learned",

That already exists when picking up a team. As a solo you do everything yourself. As a team you have to know when to step back and not do something yourself. That's changing the entire way you play the game. I don't think adding a defensive mechanic (which would probably go missed by beginners) would be on the same level of "forcing you to relearn your combo cause you changed to a different assist".

Yes, because someone who plays a Peacock/Bella Duo sure as fucking hell is going to be capable of playing Solo Bella, as he practices that in pretty much every match.

But how is playing peacock/cerebella making you better at playing solo bella (or capable of understanding bella better)? You have to be good with bella for that team to survive, but how is it going to increase your understanding of bella as a character moreso than playing bella by herself?

 

[ClarenceMage]

I've no idea to be honest. I've thought almost nil about specific assists or teams in regards to their viability.

Perhaps you should try out playing a team for the sake of understanding how teams work, given that it's an astronomically larger part of the game than solos, and it might give you some insight and ideas in how to fight against teams.

The problem with picking low tier options in many games is that when you refuse to play better options, you fundamentally do not understand why those top tier options are good at a hands-on level, leaving your understanding of how to fight against a team without any empathy.

Why can't someone just have one character that they really love and try to play that character by herself?

I did mention

Japanese levels of work in character dedication.

Or Korean level. There are some scary Korean players and the majority of them play solo as far as I can tell.

Solos as a low tier option aren't completely gimped, and it's very possible to win with them, but as IsaVulpes mentioned picking a sub-optimal solo and then complaining about it asking for buffs is equivalent to picking a suboptimal team and complaining about it asking for buffs. It's certainly possible to play and win with Squiggly(Backdash)/Parasoul(Egret Cancel)/Valentine(Backdash), but to ask for buffs to backdash assist and egret cancel to make them viable assists....... Mate just pick some real assists already.

 

[Zidiane]

I did mention

Oh yeah, you did mention that. lol. It was mostly to other dude though, using your question as a premise.

It's certainly possible to play and win with Squiggly(Backdash)/Parasoul(Egret Cancel)/Valentine(Backdash), but to ask for buffs to backdash assist and egret cancel to make them viable assists....... Mate just pick some real assists already.

I don't agree with this analogy, btw. Picking bad assists with characters you enjoy playing is easily remedied. Wanting to only play characters you like, then having there be only one character in the game you like (it is a 10 character game after all), and being forced to switch to a character you don't like to play solo or picking up a character or two you don't like to play in order to have an effective team isn't quite on the same level. It's almost like if someone is using a bad poke, it's easy to just switch to a better one, but kinda ridiculous if they have to switch to another character to be able to play with a decent poke.

 

[IsaVulpes]

I don't think you can turn Valentine/Peacock/Squigly into a good team, no matter what assists you pick.
That doesn't mean any of those characters needs to get changed.

 

[ClarenceMage]

Picking bad assists with characters you enjoy playing is easily remedied.

So imagine someone who for some reason REALLY likes backdash and egret cancel as assists. They do not feel comfortable picking other assists, because those are the only ones they like to use. Picking other assists just plain feels wrong, and backdash & egret cancel really speaks to their innermost soul and inspires them to play the game to their best. Should those assists be buffed?

 

[ashxu]

Why can't someone just have one character that they really love and try to play that character by herself? The game is presented to you in a way that before you even get to the character select screen you're told that you can pick any size you want. This isn't a team game, it's a game of freedom. You have the freedom to pick one or two or three characters in any order, and as a team you have the freedom to pick (nearly) any normal or special as your assist instead of being restricted to predetermined choices. Even the combo system and movement seems much more open than many other games, and encourages you to do what you want to do and what feels right. It just sucks if you came into this game really believing that and then you get to a certain point and realize it wasn't as true for the aspect of the game you were most excited about.

Well there's nothing stopping you from maining solo Valentine but if you want to win then it's advised to take the most optimal strategy which would be to pick a team. It's no different from picking your favorite character despite him being utterly terrible. No one's stopping you, you'll just have to work harder.

 

[Spencer]

Ah if we're only considering tournament players, you're right... since solo isn't viable at tournament level. Exactly my point, the problem, and reason for this thread (among others). But if you want to limit the set of skullgirl players to match your needs, then why not just limit it to Duck. Only teams of 3. Only Val point, etc... Or to be less heavy handed, let's just add up which characters are represented in the top 16 of tournaments and eliminate those that aren't... since clearly only top 16 at tournaments matter.

Now, if you are talking about the skullgirl community at large, yes there are a lot of solos which does make it worth the time to balance them... especially if it can be done without affect high level tournament play which is what most of us are asking for. Remember, you were arguing that solos shouldn't be balanced since they make up a tiny subset of the population. I'm arguing that per capita they are probably one of the most popular portions of the game, and absolutely should receive consideration.

As to solo being a "stepping stone", show me the official literature. I didn't buy this game on the pretense that I'd be starting at solo, moving to duo, and ending up at trio. That's an assumption you are approaching this argument with and not necessarily an accurate one. If that becomes the "party line", your case could certainly be strengthened (though not necessarily), but as for now... mum.

And like I said above, you may not see Val/Pea/Squig being a decent team, but they are still... at worst as good as a solo (in general).

@ClarenceMage
You are setting up a strawman. No one is saying don't play Squigs since you can't make DP work as an assist. You are effectively telling me that I need to quit playing PW to make it work as a solo (or quit my job, drop out of college, and put in thousands of hours to bring myself up to a level that might... might... be top tier. Is that what you meant by "korean/japanese" level?).

If you think that egret charge is equal to Parasoul then you are insane. I'm not arguing for the ability to win using almost nothing but Death Lotus and asking for specific buffs. We are asking for the ability to play all characters with some relative equality.

You can keep harping on the assist vs character train all you want, but it is so far afield, I won't address it again.

@ashxu

In most games if there is enough of a disparity, they would be buffed. Voila.

 

[Zidiane]

No one's stopping you, you'll just have to work harder.

You suggested that the only reason to pick solo was if you were too lazy to pick a second character. Now you're saying solos have to work harder?

So imagine someone who for some reason REALLY likes backdash and egret cancel as assists. They do not feel comfortable picking other assists, because those are the only ones they like to use. Picking other assists just plain feels wrong, and backdash & egret cancel really speaks to their innermost soul and inspires them to play the game to their best. Should those assists be buffed?

When there are other options within a character for you to use, there's no need to buff the weaker options. There is no reason as Cerebella to use lp lnl as a combo ender rather than cerecopter. If you are using lp lnl, go ahead, but the character can be used competently. Meaning, there is only so well a character or characters can work. It is up to the player, within those characters, to make them work as well as possible. Picking backdash assist or egret cancel is no one's preference. Picking those assists is only for the lulz. The characters have better assist options, just like carebella has better combo options. Having better options within a character to use is different from a character having insufficient options.