Why do experts taunt beginners?

[NCV]

I actively walk toward them and try to position myself to help them set up their most damaging combos.

Once again, no one wants to shake a limp wristed hand.

Maybe fighting games just aren't for you if you aren't willing to critically think about your play. This is ok, but if you can't come to terms with being beat then there's not much else to say in this thread.

 

[DanTheMeek]

I even offered him a guide that could help him, but I'm not about to hold a bucket to collect his tears.

For the record, I've been reading the guide, pretty interesting stuff, so thanks for showing me that. I would like to note that one of my favorite games besides Chess, Go, is a game which almost never plays out to conclusion, at least among those who know what there doing. At some point one of the players determines his opponent's advantage is such that continuing to play would be meaningless and they concede. Conceding does tend to be seen less frequently in Chess, probably because of how many ways there are to force a stalemate even if you've no real shot at winning, but it does happen there too. I'm not trying to change you're mind, or maybe I should better state that I don't expect to change your mind, but just hoping you might note that its really not as uncommon as you make it for a player in games to acknowledge their defeat prior to it becoming official, and in games like Go or Starcraft its actually considered rude or poor sportsmanship to continue to play out a game which has become realistically un-winnable.

 

[Broseidon Rex]

At some point one of the players determines his opponent's advantage is such that continuing to play would be meaningless and they concede. Conceding does tend to be seen less frequently in Chess, probably because of how many ways there are to force a stalemate even if you've no real shot at winning, but it does happen there too. I'm not trying to change you're mind, or maybe I should better state that I don't expect to change your mind, but just hoping you might note that its really not as uncommon as you make it for a player in games to acknowledge their defeat prior to it becoming official, and in games like Go or Starcraft its actually considered rude or poor sportsmanship to continue to play out a game which has become realistically un-winnable.

You have a point in those games. Sure in chess, when you're down several pieces or SC2, when your small force is clearly (micro and macro be damned) defeated, then surrender is usually fine. But fighting games is a bit different, espcially SG. In SC2 and chess, your options (specific pieces/movements, access to minerals/units) are taken away. In SG, you can still use all your attacks. Heck, if you've been combo'd so much, you'll have more resources in the form of meter. Sure, less health is available to you after being combo'd but that doesn't mean you can't fight back. There's ALWAYS the chance for a comeback (Entire video series dedicated to it) So to just say "I'm getting murdered CURRENTLY, better give up" is not as justified here, even if you think you are not skilled enough to do so.

But your real issue seems to be finding equally-skilled players. Again, as others have, I suggest making beginner lobbies, kicking people when they clearly don't belong, and befriending those you meet there, so you always know and can play against equally-skilled players.

 

[DanTheMeek]

Once again, no one wants to shake a limp wristed hand.

Maybe fighting games just aren't for you if you aren't willing to critically think about your play. This is ok, but if you can't come to terms with being beat then there's not much else to say in this thread.

I understand that you might not enjoy killing some one whose actively throwing themselves on you're sword, it seems wrong to you on some level or whatever, that's fine, we can have different opinions and still get along. But you should be aware that, whether I'm trying to win or trying to help you win, the result for you is still going to be like you're fighting the computer on easy mode. No matter which choice I pick, you're probably not going to enjoy it if you wanted a challenge, and if I pick the former instead of the latter, its probably only going to drag things out longer, albeit ever so slightly. The best scenario as I see it, then, is for us to end things as quick as possible so we can both move onto opponents who can give us more of the sort of challenge we're looking for, which means my choosing the latter option. That's my own mind set here. It's not that I can't handle losing, its that I actually WANT to lose, I just want it to happen sooner so I can move on to fighting some one else for both of our sakes.

You have a point in those games. Sure in chess, when you're down several pieces or SC2, when your small force is clearly (micro and macro be damned) defeated, then surrender is usually fine. But fighting games is a bit different, espcially SG. In SC2 and chess, your options (specific pieces/movements, access to minerals/units) are taken away. In SG, you can still use all your attacks. Heck, if you've been combo'd so much, you'll have more resources in the form of meter. Sure, less health is available to you after being combo'd but that doesn't mean you can't fight back. There's ALWAYS the chance for a comeback (Entire video series dedicated to it) So to just say "I'm getting murdered CURRENTLY, better give up" is not as justified here, even if you think you are not skilled enough to do so.

But your real issue seems to be finding equally-skilled players. Again, as others have, I suggest making beginner lobbies, kicking people when they clearly don't belong, and befriending those you meet there, so you always know and can play against equally-skilled players.

Very very true on all accounts. This nature of fighting games is why, when faced against some one of similar skill, I don't give up till the end, cause there's always that chance of a good streak and a come back. But playing against some one well above you really is more like starting a game with all pawns/drones while your opponent starts with all Queens/Ultralisks, you don't know it until you start playing, but as soon as you see that his pieces can move as far as they want and whatever direction they want, while your pawns go 1 space and only in 1 direction (over simplification but you get my point) its pretty safe to say you're opponent could blunder away half his pieces and still beat you simply because of the gap in tools between you (in this case the tools being their lengthy combos and superior under standing of things like mix-ups and what not). So in that regard I still feel like there is some similar there.

Regardless you are correct, once again, that the real issue and resolution just comes down to finding similarly skilled opponents, if quick match was matching me with similar skilled people this would be a total non-issue. It just continues to seem backward to me to use lobbies to find equal skilled opponents, match making is supposed to match you with like skilled, lobbies are supposed to be so weak players can play against strong players they'd never get matched against, or so strong players can screw around with new test strategies with out hurting their ranking, but whatever, I'll work with the tools I have at my disposal. My focus is actually on improving with Dime_X anyway at the moment, which I've already put about 5 hours into the training room with and suspect will take hundreds more before I'm ever ready to go back into a lobbie or quick match.

 

[DARKNESSxEAGLE]

I have to agree with the others on this, when I'm against someone and I realise they aren't fighting back I'll move into a corner and wait for them to start attacking. I don't even care if it's that someone's controller has broken, if they aren't going to fight neither am I, if they really don't like getting beaten up then they can sit with me until the timer reaches 0 and then head into lobby play and enter or create something for their own level, don't enter a completely random matchmaking thing over an organised one if you're not prepared to fight against different skill levels.

Outside of quick match (which in case you didn't know, is ranked) if I'm against someone who clearly doesn't know what they're doing (despite them having to have entered what I now label as an expert lobby) I generally switch to a subteam and limit combo length and resets to give them a chance at victory and to avoid having them complain about 'infinites' which are just resets but, again, you should be using beginner lobbies if you want to stand a fighting chance at beginner level.

 

[DanTheMeek]

I have to agree with the others on this, when I'm against someone and I realise they aren't fighting back I'll move into a corner and wait for them to start attacking. I don't even care if it's that someone's controller has broken, if they aren't going to fight neither am I, if they really don't like getting beaten up then they can sit with me until the timer reaches 0 and then head into lobby play and enter or create something for their own level, don't enter a completely random matchmaking thing over an organised one if you're not prepared to fight against different skill levels.

Outside of quick match (which in case you didn't know, is ranked) if I'm against someone who clearly doesn't know what they're doing (despite them having to have entered what I now label as an expert lobby) I generally switch to a subteam and limit combo length and resets to give them a chance at victory and to avoid having them complain about 'infinites' which are just resets but, again, you should be using beginner lobbies if you want to stand a fighting chance at beginner level.

I'm actually kind of curious now, does this game not have skill based match making? Usually ranked mode is the skill based match making mode, the mode that tries to gate a gauge on every players skill, rank them, and match them up against equally skilled opponents using that ranking or skill level value. The ultimate goal of a good skill based match making system is that every player except the very worst and the very best in the world will win about 50% of their matches. Was I mistaken about quick match and it doesn't actually care about your ranking or skill but just find first available in the queue and pairs you up? Its been a while since I played the console versions of the game, but I could have sworn when the game first came out quick match would tell me I was in so and so tier out of like 5 or something along those lines to let me know I'd moved down into the lower bracket for other more casual players but it doesn't do that for me in the PC game. Was that removed, or am I just misremembering things?

 

[SanoBaron]

I'm actually kind of curious now, does this game not have skill based match making? Usually ranked mode is the skill based match making mode, the mode that tries to gate a gauge on every players skill, rank them, and match them up against equally skilled opponents using that ranking or skill level value. The ultimate goal of a good skill based match making system is that every player except the very worst and the very best in the world will win about 50% of their matches. Was I mistaken about quick match and it doesn't actually care about your ranking or skill but just find first available in the queue and pairs you up? Its been a while since I played the console versions of the game, but I could have sworn when the game first came out quick match would tell me I was in so and so tier out of like 5 or something along those lines to let me know I'd moved down into the lower bracket for other more casual players but it doesn't do that for me in the PC game. Was that removed, or am I just misremembering things?

it USED to have skill based matchmaking.... and it was AWFUL.

 

[DanTheMeek]

it USED to have skill based matchmaking.... and it was AWFUL.

I know this is kind of getting off topic now, but how so? Did it just take really long to find opponents? Personally I think I'd rather wait a bit longer to find some one around my skill level then get into matches quickly but constantly beat up on people well below me or get beat up on people well above me, but I've played enough fighting games where the online play became ghost towns to know that it can definitely be frustrating to just sit there staring at a waiting to find opponent screen, especially when you're free time is very limited.

 

[DARKNESSxEAGLE]

I'm actually kind of curious now, does this game not have skill based match making? Usually ranked mode is the skill based match making mode, the mode that tries to gate a gauge on every players skill, rank them, and match them up against equally skilled opponents using that ranking or skill level value. The ultimate goal of a good skill based match making system is that every player except the very worst and the very best in the world will win about 50% of their matches. Was I mistaken about quick match and it doesn't actually care about your ranking or skill but just find first available in the queue and pairs you up? Its been a while since I played the console versions of the game, but I could have sworn when the game first came out quick match would tell me I was in so and so tier out of like 5 or something along those lines to let me know I'd moved down into the lower bracket for other more casual players but it doesn't do that for me in the PC game. Was that removed, or am I just misremembering things?

The issue is that it doesn't currently count losses, so your rank is based on your wins, meaning you don't have to be good at the game to be #1 on the leaderboards, just have to have played it for a while. As for counting losses, it's not really safe to do it right now because of how buggy the game is, and while we don't want rage quitters trying to get a perfect record we don't want people losing points for their game crashing or spontaneously disconnecting.

Also, as Sano said, the console versions did have it, but it split up the community so much that finding a game on it was pretty much impossible (bearing in mind the community was a 5th of the size it is now, and was split across 2 consoles too, as well as many people not playing online because they can't find matches leading more people to have this mentality) until the game came out in Japan, and connection with them wasn't great at all from (presumably most) western regions.

 

[SanoBaron]

TBH, I've always wished the game could search by win loss ratio.

 

[Horseman]

Nope, I didn't just tell him that. You completely overlooked the entirety of what I meant in that post. He has been portraying a victim mentality where he says 'I can't win so why even try' and then proceeds to give up and read a book rather than face his opponent (sounds to me like he'd rather read anyway). Then, completely baffled, he goes on to the forums and wonders why the more experienced players don't really want to face a lifeless training dummy online. It has nothing to do with being good or not.

He has said he wants videos to improve, he is looking forward to the coaching with Dime and he posts on these forums. I dunno, but that doesn't sound like he just wants to play casually. If he wants to have fun with the game, and purely that, then invite some friends over or play the computer. What would be the difference between easy computer and online if that is the case?

It goes beyond SG. Why bother doing anything in life without the intent to improve? Goals are made to help you succeed and you need to work in order to achieve them. I like to play chess casually, but I don't give up and say 'welp, fuck it' every time I go down in material and I certainly don't go around posting when all I want to do is play for fun.

I even offered him a guide that could help him, but I'm not about to hold a bucket to collect his tears.

I wasn't just talking about this guy. I was talking about something you said. I never even included danthemeek as a subject in that entire post.
And yes, you literally told them that. You said that players that aren't playing to learn shouldn't bother playing the game. You didn't suggest that they don't play quick match and instead stick to beginner lobbies, or only play with like minded friends. You said they shouldn't play the game. That mentality is just
You can admit that you didn't mean that, or that it was a mistake, or whatever, but don't pretend like that isn't exactly what you said.
Also if you think that everything that you do in life should be an effort to improve... I'm sorry, that's just flat-out wrong. Even without taking the obvious literal route (in which I say "I am sipping coffee, should I try to improve my coffee drinking technique if I want to bother drinking coffee?") it's just wrong. I played yugioh competitively for years and stopped because I learned this. Now I make decks that are gimmicky as hell and don't give a fuck about the metagame or theory-oh and I enjoy the game more than I ever did while I was trying to get better. Now, does that mean that I sit there and tell the competitive players that they're doing it wrong, and that they should stop caring so much or stop playing the game? No. It's a different mindset, but not an inherently better or worse one.
Not everyone has to approach things like you do to have a positive output.

Now, to narrow the subject matter down to the OP again... am I condoning going into quick match and being surprised when you get bodied by somebody? No, not really. I consider myself at the "somewhat adequate" level of play and I still get curbstomped sometimes on quick match. A newbie should be prepared to get flat-out killed like 95% of the time in quick match. I can agree that sg's quick matches are more of a learning environment than a good competitive or playing environment for everyone involved. Lobbies should be a good place for those folks, but there are two big problems with them: Asshole labrats that start beginner lobbies to combo newbs to death without having to try, and people who have no idea what a beginner actually is. The latter, though, is in part because there is at least an entire step missing between beginner and intermediate play that's entirely missing from the lobby system. Beginners should really be people who did all the tutorials and then did all the story/arcade content up to nightmare difficulty. Then there should be the people who know some simple combos, probably know what a reset is but don't know how to counter or perform them, and are generally well acquainted with the controls of the game and their character. They are not yet intermediate, but they are well past beginner, which leaves them in a really awkward spot.

 

[DARKNESSxEAGLE]

To be honest, Skullgirls, or any fighter except stuff like Divekick, isn't exactly a game that someone who doesn't intend to learn and/or improve at should be playing. It's not got what it takes to be like that, it is a game that requires thought and also time into the multitude of things required to steadily improve and if you want to switch off it's not the best place to come to, especially if you don't like losing and are just going to give up within the first 5 seconds because you got stuck in someone's 30 hit combos (that's like, c.MK->s.HP-jump>j.MP->MK Airball->Gregor).

Also, talking about lobby ranks, if you feel you're better than beginner go into intermediate, even if you don't think you're at intermediate level. There is no middle ground, it's just grasping the fact that you've gone from the top of the beginner pile to the bottom of the intermediates and you're going to have to learn more if you want to start getting wins again. People could always take the easy option and stick to beginner lobbies, but then you end up facing people who just walk into your combos on purpose and no one makes any progress at all.

 

[DanTheMeek]

Its true Horseman, you are the #1 Horse of Skullheart, at least in my eyes. I also used to play yugioh competitively, I was one of the best in the west and for years my weekly yugioh tournament winnings funded all my other free-time activities which was pretty cool to turn something I loved into something that was actually making me money. But eventually I reached a point where I burned out, and I nearly left the game before a friend talked me into trying a really gimmicky deck that was far too inconsistent to ever be realistically tournament viable... yet I had a blast with it. I realized that some where along the way I'd become so obsessed with winning that I'd lost the fun and from that point on I continued to enter tournaments with gimmicky decks I knew weren't likely to win, and had way more fun then I'd had in years. Now, as one might expect, I stopped winning tournaments too, but I actually think that helped the health of the scene in my area as well as no one likes it when the same guy wins every week. Eventually I quit the scene entirely, but I still look back fondly on both portions of my yugioh career, a winner and a free win for my opponents.

Anyway the point is that neither way is right or wrong, I did enjoy myself when I was playing to win at first, and certainly enjoyed the self satisfaction (and monetary rewards) being the best in my area brought, but I enjoyed playing casually just as much, if not more. Those of you who don't enjoy playing fighting games casually, that's fine, just as I'm sure there's people who ONLY enjoy playing them casually (my wife immediately comes to mind, she's a firm believer that looking at command lists is akin to cheating, as is attacking some one in a corner, and other similar things you kind of need to do if you want to give yourself the best chance to win), me, I'm in the middle, I enjoy both and I don't see how there's anything wrong with that personally.

But just to one more time try to dispense this straw man that everyone keeps arguing against, I am not against losing, my argument was and continues to be that if I feel confident I'm going to lose, I'd like to be able to concede as is the norm in many other competitive games. Wanting to concede a loss is not the same thing as not wanting to ever lose. If I wanted to never lose then yes, I would agree, this, and all multiplayer pvp games in general are probably not for me.

 

[SanoBaron]

But just to one more time try to dispense this straw man that everyone keeps arguing against, I am not against losing, my argument was and continues to be that if I feel confident I'm going to lose, I'd like to be able to concede as is the norm in many other competitive games. Wanting to concede a loss is not the same thing as not wanting to ever lose. If I wanted to never lose then yes, I would agree, this, and all multiplayer pvp games in general are probably not for me.

the worst though that you can do for yourself is admit defeat before the match is over. Fighting games are no stranger to miracle comebacks and you cant just say you cant turn things around. Lots of players are at their best when their backs are against the wall. you don't need to concede.

 

[St. Dorothy Kitty]

I get my ass handed to me on a regular basis ( I play Shin ATProof and Wingzero a lot). Know what though? I never give up. Even if they are just destroying me, I'm going to try my damned hardest to pull out any stop I can just to get any sort of hit in. I do stop fighting when someone stops moving/trying because I want someone who actually wants to try to hit me, who's looking to play with other people. If you're not going to try and hit the opponent, why are you playing a fighting game?

I didn't play online for the longest time because of this. I spent a good 100+ hours running through arcade mode. I've never been to the training room. I don't know combos. Everything I learned I learned from doing the arcade and then once I finally started going online, I tried remembering what other people did with the characters I use. I get my fair share of ass beatings, but I also do some ass beating myself.

If you don't like the constant beating up in quick matches, make a lobby yourself or join someone else's. Yes, there is a problem of fucking dicks joining beginner lobbies and stomping all over them, but you can kick them if you make the lobby or you can leave and try finding another one or make another one.

When it comes down to it, giving up is never an option. And getting wrecked by an opponent is sometimes funny to me because of how over-the-top-insanely badly I lose.

 

[destruction_adv]

But just to one more time try to dispense this straw man that everyone keeps arguing against, I am not against losing, my argument was and continues to be that if I feel confident I'm going to lose, I'd like to be able to concede as is the norm in many other competitive games. Wanting to concede a loss is not the same thing as not wanting to ever lose. If I wanted to never lose then yes, I would agree, this, and all multiplayer pvp games in general are probably not for me.

The thing is conceding ISN'T the norm in fighting games. I know a lot of people bring up games like SC2 or DOTA, but there is a HUGE difference in culture between RTS games and fighting games, and a difference obvious difference in mechanics. Unlike a strategy game, you will rarely find yourself in a situation where a comeback is realistically impossible. While this is a team game, and you actually do lose options as you lose characters, a single character can still make a big comeback.

 

[Horseman]

To be honest, Skullgirls, or any fighter except stuff like Divekick, isn't exactly a game that someone who doesn't intend to learn and/or improve at should be playing. It's not got what it takes to be like that, it is a game that requires thought and also time into the multitude of things required to steadily improve...

Of course it can be, it's just never going to be if you're playing against someone with a competitive mindset. When your opponent is comboing you to death they are forcing a different game than two people who just picked up the game would be playing.

The thing is conceding ISN'T the norm in fighting games. I know a lot of people bring up games like SC2 or DOTA, but there is a HUGE difference in culture between RTS games and fighting games, and a difference obvious difference in mechanics. Unlike a strategy game, you will rarely find yourself in a situation where a comeback is realistically impossible. While this is a team game, and you actually do lose options as you lose characters, a single character can still make a big comeback.

In addition to this, arguably the biggest difference is the pace of fighting games. Letting your opponent win doesn't save you 10 minutes or more like it does in some other games. It saves you, like, 10 seconds tops. It won't kill you to just fight it out.

 

[MysteriousJ]

I just want to chime in and offer my one piece of advice: If you know you can't win, view it as blocking practice.

If they start grabbing you... then you can give up.

 

[Baiko]

a yugioh champion...but has trouble with skullgirls?compared to that game(i tried it) skullgirls was essentially tictactoe in comparison.

Just like that card game there is a strategy for everything.Even though this is a combo oriented game you dont have to know any(like most games)to beat some ass.For instance hypothetically(using sf4 as example) pick makoto and play against a turtling guile.get beat 4 times,start to notice his patterns and punish those patterns etc.after a while the opponent gets predictable depending on who you up against and some characters outmatch other characters.

i suck balls at fighting games but skullgirls is definately one of the easy ones i've found.the final boss is a pushover and the easier settings are perfect to practice with.

 

[El Cat]

You can admit that you didn't mean that, or that it was a mistake, or whatever, but don't pretend like that isn't exactly what you said.

I knew you would try to play semantics with me. You're taking one piece of info out of context from the rest of the post. It seems everyone else can read between the lines.

And the coffee example? Now you're just trying to argue for the sake of arguing. I'm sure you are fully aware of the point I'm making. And if you happen to take a gulp of coffee, well, you're gonna burn the shit out of your mouth. So yeah, I suppose you do have to improve on coffee sipping. You aren't a masterful drinker the second you are born and if you ever want to drink coffee, you have to get better at taking smaller sips.

You like to play yugioh. That's fine with me. You're goal is to make gimmicky decks. That's cool too. Yet you still do have a plan to make some kind of cohesive deck. I doubt you have ever went to a tournament with a deck that had no mana and was all different colors (or whatever the yugioh equivalent is) and then proceeded to walk away the second your opponent dropped a creature. You'd be entering the tournament with the mindset that you are going to lose before you ever gave yourself a chance. The victim mentality produces no positive outcomes.

I'm sorry if my post was misconstrued, but don't get mad at me when I am puzzled that someone would enjoy playing tournament yugioh or online skullgirls without ever learning how to play a creature or learning how to block properly.

I'm done with this stupid shit. Have fun with the last word. Make it count.

 

[DanTheMeek]

My strengths are generally in strategy, reading bluffs, and bluffing myself. My weaknesses are a lack of hand eye coordination, a lack of control of my left hand thats well below that of most right handed individuals resulting in struggles consistently doing anything so much as a QCF motion despite numerous multi-hour sessions practicing nothing but that motion I've spent through out the course of my life, and a slow reaction speed.

In yugioh, and most card games, there either isn't a timer, or if there is, its very loose, and you're not in any way penalized if when you set the card you're playing on the table its not where you actually intended to set it. The skill is in the deciding what cards to play, preventing you're opponent from knowing which cards you have, and discovering tells as to which card you're does have. I can't tell you how many games I won because I had a bluff card set and my opponent didn't attack for game winning damage after spending 5 minutes of staring me in the eye and deciding if he attacked I'd "activate my trap card".

For reference, I could often beat diamonds and a few master league players in starcraft 2 back in the day, despite the fact that my APM was around 20 and no one in those leagues ever seemed to have less then 100. They were literally taking 5 times as many "moves" per minute as me but my 1 move was better then there 5 (well 50% of the time it was, obviously I didn't get higher cause the other 50% there 5 were better then my 1), but despite people telling me APM came with practice, over 4000 hours worth of starcraft never saw my APM rise a bit so I had to find other ways to win to make up for my physical limitations. And don't even get me started on all the misclicking when I did click.

By the way though, I like your suggestion MysteriousJ, that actually sounds like it could be reasonable, try to focus on blocking and if they start grabbing only quit then, it seems counter intuitive as blocking will extend the length of the game, but if it encourages them to keep attacking it will speed it up in the long run and maybe I'll make a game out of it in trying to block their high low mix ups and all that.

In other news, at Dime_X's advisement, I'm not going to be playing real people online anymore. He's advised me based on my current skill level I'd be better suited to just play comp AIs when I want a break from the training room so this whole thing should be a non-issue till Dime_X thinks I'm up to playing real people (if I ever get there).

 

[Verdant Brave]

This needs to be posted.

 

[Verstande]

what the fuck since when can you taunt in skullgirls?

 

[DanTheMeek]

what the fuck since when can you taunt in skullgirls?

I'm not entirely sure if this is a serious question, but in case it is, the taunting I was referring to was when an expert level player who got matched up with a beginner level player by quick match and has them near death, instead of finishing them, proceeds to run away from them or jump back and forth over there head, or pretty much does anything but just finish them off once it becomes clear that they actually desire death and have ceased blocking.

 

[Verstande]

Oh never mind that cleared my perplexity.

 

[Stuff]

Peacock and Big Band have taunts so yes there are taunts just not everyone has them.

 

[Horseman]

I knew you would try to play semantics with me. You're taking one piece of info out of context from the rest of the post. It seems everyone else can read between the lines.

And the coffee example? Now you're just trying to argue for the sake of arguing. I'm sure you are fully aware of the point I'm making. And if you happen to take a gulp of coffee, well, you're gonna burn the shit out of your mouth. So yeah, I suppose you do have to improve on coffee sipping. You aren't a masterful drinker the second you are born and if you ever want to drink coffee, you have to get better at taking smaller sips.

That wasn't meant to be a real argument, hence the parenthesis, but you can go ahead and argue with it anyway... but seriously I have no idea what your point is with this bit, so I'm going to ignore it. Thanks for the random ad hominem in the middle though, I really want to have a discussion with someone who would add in a sentence about me having shit in my mouth right in the middle of their argument.

You like to play yugioh. That's fine with me. You're goal is to make gimmicky decks. That's cool too. Yet you still do have a plan to make some kind of cohesive deck. I doubt you have ever went to a tournament with a deck that had no mana and was all different colors (or whatever the yugioh equivalent is) and then proceeded to walk away the second your opponent dropped a creature. You'd be entering the tournament with the mindset that you are going to lose before you ever gave yourself a chance. The victim mentality produces no positive outcomes.

See, you assumed something when you said that I "went to a tournament."
I didn't go to a tournament with a gimmicky deck. I've entered a yugioh tournament with a gimmicky deck like maybe once or twice in my entire life, but I've been playing yugioh off and on for about 5 years. Because tournaments are for people who care about winning. When I don't care about winning, they don't want me to enter their tournament, and frankly I don't want to enter it either because unless I get ridiculously lucky, they'll have a nearly impossible to defeat field withing 3-4 turns max.
I played with people from my forum. We would play with custom rules where you can't play using tier 1 cards, weird alternative rules, etc. Basically, if I wanted to play in a competitive environment I would bring competitive cards and play seriously, and vice versa for a casual environment. I didn't run into nationals with an objectively bad deck, because that's stupid.
Anyway, aside from the tournament bit... yes, my goal is to make a deck that is optimal for the strategy it's attempting. But that's the same for literally everything. I'm not going to actively try to make something worse for what it is. When casual players play skullgirls, do they say "okay, my strategy is to only use the kick buttons!" no, they actually try. Does that mean that they're playing it to get better? No, they're just playing it to have fun. And that's no less valid than someone spending hours in training mode perfecting combos, or someone who just plays through the story because they enjoy the lore, etc.
Basically, though, read this: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/PlayerArchetypes
Look at all those mind sets you can come into the game with that aren't about getting better at the game. And yes, all of them apply to SG:
Timmy is the elusive "casual player" I've been talking about.
Johnny is the lab rat.
Spike is obvious.
Vorthos is obvious.
Melvin isn't really his own archetype, but he's the person who's more interested in seeing how big band will play than his story mode/finished art/voice acting.

But the point is, 2/4 of the archetypes actually care about getting better.

I'm sorry if my post was misconstrued, but don't get mad at me when I am puzzled that someone would enjoy playing tournament yugioh or online skullgirls without ever learning how to play a creature or learning how to block properly.

Did you even read the second half of my last post?

I'm done with this stupid shit. Have fun with the last word. Make it count.

How very generous of you.

 

[Hilary]

Skullgirls is not like most fighting games in that it really can turn into a one-player bloodbath if there's a discrepancy in skills between two players. Some would even argue that among two equal players, momentum is really really hard to stop given the value of combos, resets, and reversals. With that in mind, you will see/have games where one player completely steamrolls the other, and there's not many back and forth momentum changes.

In a game like Tekken or Third Strike where the scale of combos and pokes lends itself to longer rounds/matches, it's a given that in a single set you'll see what both players are capable of, how they think and move, or what they can/can't do well in any aspect of the game.

In a game like Marvel, Guilty Gear, or Skullgirls, one player isolating the weaknesses of another means that the second player doesn't really get to play, and you don't see what they're capable of, only what they're incapable of. It's more common for someone to be stuck in rushdown/vortexes if there's a missing element in their play, despite other parts of their overall game being really good.

If I feel I've already isolated a weakness that I could consistently press as an advantage to a win, but I haven't even had a chance to see what they're like on offense, I'll back off and give them breathing room. Defense/Neutral are really important concepts to me, and it's possible that they could have something really awesome to show me once they're on offense and that I'll never see it if I just club them to death over something relatively small.

Sometimes they don't have anything special. Sometimes it costs me matches. Sometimes it's really enlightening to see where and when people transition from bad to good or vice versa. I would hope that if someone I was playing recognized it, they wouldn't see it as an insult, but rather an invitation to play their game so we can both walk away from it as better players.

 

[Voidstar]

To be honest, Skullgirls, or any fighter except stuff like Divekick, isn't exactly a game that someone who doesn't intend to learn and/or improve at should be playing.

I always thought Skullgirls had an abnormally large non-competetive fanbase. Hell, Skullheart's Art & Lore forum section has around 2300 posts, that's more than the tournaments and matchmaking section and a third of the gameplay section. Maybe quick match wasn't the right option here, but there's nothing wrong with playing a fighting game casually.

DanTheMeek: Since you say you don't have very good control of your left hand, have you ever tried playing cross-handed?? You could be the next Seth Killian ;P

 

[Eric Chen Erect]

Well Dan, I only started playing the game during the free weekend. I'm pretty new so feel free to add me and play me anytime! I'll gladly point out what you need to improve on.

 

[El Cat]

I always thought Skullgirls had an abnormally large non-competetive fanbase. Hell, Skullheart's Art & Lore forum section has around 2300 posts, that's more than the tournaments and matchmaking section and a third of the gameplay section. Maybe quick match wasn't the right option here, but there's nothing wrong with playing a fighting game casually.

.

I don't think any of us disagree with you.
However, it has nothing to do with being a competitive or casual player. Being a casual player is fine, but at the end of the day, you are going to have to learn about high/low blocking or you will spend 95% of your time stuck in hit stun.

All I think DE is trying to say is that FGs have a steep learning curve and if you don't plan on spending any time climbing it, you will probably lose interest quickly. With that said, if all you want to do is mash buttons, that's great. More power to ya. Just be prepared to lose a lot of your matches.

 

[DDB]

 

[MajoraZ]

I have to agree with everybody else here. You getting your behind caved in by 25+ hit combo-ers? Try your best to pull out and just land a single smack on em.

Who knows, maybe after a while you'll be able to figure out to anticipate things or when to start to do certain stuff. But sitting around like a fish in a barrel won't get you anywhere.

And I'm sure I suck more than you do, OP!

 

[IsaVulpes]

In other news, at Dime_X's advisement, I'm not going to be playing real people online anymore. He's advised me based on my current skill level I'd be better suited to just play comp AIs when I want a break from the training room so this whole thing should be a non-issue till Dime_X thinks I'm up to playing real people (if I ever get there).

I dunno if he really advised that
But it's terrible advice

If you feel like playing, go play.

 

[Dagwood]

I dunno if he really advised that
But it's terrible advice

If you feel like playing, go play.

It is horrible advice

If you want to get better, the #1 thing ANYONE can do to improve is: Get your ass kicked by someone better than you.
Go play someone really good and lose 100-0 it will help you IMMENSELY, some noobs tend to get discouraged from losing, but really, losing is the best way to learn. So go online, find someone good and play them as much as possible.

 

[DDB]

Not JUST losing, but trying to understand why you lost instead of getting angry or discouraged. Pass the salt away.

 

[Kawalorn]

I don't let other players slip away that easily because I know that if I acted like that I wouldn't be where I am right now. Heck I even won already a couple of matches from exactly same position. And if you are actually giving up like that I'm afraid you don't have half as much fun playing this game as you think you are.

 

[Dime]

I dunno if he really advised that
But it's terrible advice

If you feel like playing, go play.

I got top 32 at evo with dropped combos galore on unfamiliar setups... And the computer was my biggest training partner... So not so bad advice because i got that far In a combo based game while having shitty combos and the computer to be my biggest partner.
The reason why I told him to do what I did was because he was having a hard time of it against real people/dropping controllers and not playing, so I wanted him to gain some confidence against a set opponent (like I do) that isn't to far above his skill level (like I do) Get him used to being something besides a punching bag (like I do), get him used to being able to pull off his combos (like I do) Get him some confidence (like I get) It isn't there to be used to as an end all be all, human opponents are what he is going to GRADUATE TO, it's just training wheels for now... You know, those things that are used to train people?

But yeah it's bad advice/rolleyes

Not everyone is a tournament player or even wants to be, and not everyone uses the same style of training to get better so what may be good for you may not be good for him and vice versa...

 

[destruction_adv]

I got top 32 at evo with dropped combos galore on unfamiliar setups... And the computer was my biggest training partner... So not so bad advice because i got that far In a combo based game while having shitty combos and the computer to be my biggest partner.
The reason why I told him to do what I did was because he was having a hard time of it against real people/dropping controllers and not playing, so I wanted him to gain some confidence against a set opponent (like I do) that isn't to far above his skill level (like I do) Get him used to being something besides a punching bag (like I do), get him used to being able to pull off his combos (like I do) Get him some confidence (like I get) It isn't there to be used to as an end all be all, human opponents are what he is going to GRADUATE TO, it's just training wheels for now... You know, those things that are used to train people?

But yeah it's bad advice/rolleyes

Not everyone is a tournament player or even wants to be, and not everyone uses the same style of training to get better so what may be good for you may not be good for him and vice versa...

I can actually see where this comes from. The first thing I tend to do upon getting a new game is play the computer for a while until I'm comfortable with it. I always felt that you should move on to playing real people as soon as you can though.

 

[Verstande]

I've never played the computer in any fighting game lol, now that I think about it.