Kage's Version C Command List Errata

Re: More corrections

d+K: VFDC -- Grd: -14, Hit: -6; VP -- Grd: -16, Hit: -14

I believe VFDC is correct here. d+K can only be low thrown if blocked, not when it hits.


f+K+G (second hit): VFDC -- Hit: +4, MC: +6; VP is blank for these.

VP is probably correct here, since f+K+G now floats in ver.C (at least, when it's used up close) even on normal hit.


Not sure about the rest, gotta go back and check my book.

 

Re: More corrections

b+P (entering Jumonji Stance from Closed Stance): VFDC -- Hit: -2, MC: +5; VP -- Hit: +2, MC: +9

VFDC is correct here. For reference, the frame stats appear in the footer note in the Blue/White Book.

b+P (JM) ... -2/-2/+5 ??? Are you sure? I know this appears in the blue/white books, but it could still be a typo in the blue book that the softbank editors didn't correct and just copied blindly (Kage's dodge attack comes to mind... it's listed as -14 blocked even though Daily VF4 had already made the correction to -13 in the blue book errata section).

Here's my reasoning:

PPb+P is +1/+1/+8 (+2 in open stance)
b+P is +1/+1/+8 (+2 in open stance)
Elbow is -4/0/+5

PPb+P (JM) is -2/+2/+9
Elbow (JM) is -2/+2/+9
f,f+P+K is -2/+4/+7

Then out of nowhere, b+P (JM) is -2/-2/+5? b+P is functionally equivalent to the third hit of PPb+P; I have a hard time believing that the frame stats for this move are different from PPb+P's...

Here's a test: Kage vs Lau.
Kage does b+P (JM) which hits Lau (normal hit). Immediately, Kage does (JM) PKK (effective execution is either 11f or 15f depending on whether the move is +2 or -2 on normal hit), Lau does Elbow (14f). If PKK beats elbow, then b+P (JM) gives +2 on normal hit. If elbow beats PKK, then -2...

 

Re: More corrections

The following Kage low attacks recover high: Running Slide; Backheel Sweep; "Circular Kick, Sweep"; Sliding Tackle; Catapult Kick; (rolling) Catapult Kick; [Jumonji Stance] Frontal Sweep; Landing Sweep; Hopping Punch; Shinsodan Forward Roll [which actually hits L*].

The "Dragon Punch, Landing Heel Kick" and the (rolling) "Dragon Punch, Landing Heel Kick" are two high attacks which recover low.

The Body Blow and the (back turned) Vertical Chop are midlevel attacks that recover low.

 

Re: More corrections

Okay, I spent some time testing this out...

PPb+P is +1/+1/+8
b+P is +1/+1/+8

Sometimes the helix is +2/+2/+8, and it is stance dependent, but it isn't always close=+1 and open=+2. It depends on the move that the opponent uses...

(a) PPP from Sarah/Aoi/Pai will beat out a PPb+P (close stance) f+P sequence but will lose to a PPb+P (open stance) f+P sequence
(b) d+P from Sarah/Aoi/Pai will lose to a PPb+P (close stance) f+P sequence but will beat out a PPb+P (open stance) f+P sequence

(A little weird that way, and is position dependent I guess.)

Also tested out the JM versions...

PPb+P (JM) is -2/-2/+5
b+P (JM) is -2/-2/+5
f+P (JM) is -2/+2/+9

This is *really* unfortunate (I need to tweak my flowcharts because of this... I always thought it was +2 on hit entering JM using PPb+P), and now I understand why Yoro Kage in the Daioh movies tends to enter JM from f+P instead of PPb+P.

 

Re: More corrections

FeixaQ: Can you explain how you are able to determine frame advantage numbers so precisely? I would like to be able to do this, but don't see how to.

 

Re: More corrections

Myke: You've now made Kage's P+K+G Jumonji Stance reversal into two moves, one for MK reversals, and one for SK reversals. But aren't these just the same exact move? In Pai's case, for instance, the animation is at least different for MK and SK reversals, but in Kage's case, the "two" moves look identical to me. Is this the way the white, etc., books list them?

 

Re: More corrections

Firstly, the VF publications have a separate entry for each unique reversal animation.

So do they distinguish between Inashis/reversals that are limb (right/left) specific?

For example the same High Punch reversal animation can be seen on both high and mid punches, depending on the attack being reversed, but the reversal will only be listed once.

Even though the commands are different (b+P+K vs. db+P+K)? That just seems plain wrong to me...

I made a decision to list reversals by function, rather than animation.

I take it you still do not consider a limb-specific distinction in attacks to be a functional difference, right?

So, this is why Kage has two reversal entries, even though they look identical.

I thought it would be better to do things this way so I could capture the attack class for the reversal nicely. If I were to do it the way it's done in the books, then the attack class information would either prefix the reversal command in parentheses, or appear in the Notes column.

Thanks for taking time to explain. Actually, I personally believe it is better, more consistent and flexible, and less confusing to list the reversal classes in the Notes column. It's interesting though, to see you buck the books. In the past, you argued for doing certain things that appeared otherwise illogical simply because that's the way the books did them. /versus/images/icons/smile.gif

BTW, why are so many not "able" to spell "reversible" correctly. /versus/images/icons/tongue.gif

Myke, this also is as good a place as any to make some comments on the new command list legend. In explaining Dmg, it says:

"The base Damage value of the move. For mult-hitting attacks, only the Damage for the first part is shown here, and all parts shown in the Notes column.

Unless you are planning a change, this is NOT the way damage for multi-hitting attacks is listed normally. I only recall you doing it this way for Pai's Trip. With most [all?] other multi-hitting attacks, you list the total cumulative damage in the Dmg column.

Also, for the parenthetical term "(near)" it says:

(near) requires you to be as close to the opponent as possible.

I would suggest the slight change to something like: (near) requires your character to be as close to the opponent as can be while still allowing the move to appear. This comes from a strange observation I made while testing the damage for Pai's Punch Sweep Combo and her Punch Crescent Combo, and Lau's Punch Sweep Combo and his Punch Roundhouse Combo. For some bizarre reason, if Pai/Lau is as close as possible to the opponent when the last punch connects, then pressing (d+)K+G does not give you the combo move! The normal non-combo (d+)K+G move comes out instead. Heh, not likely anyone else has ever noticed this, or cares about it, so it won't likely appear in any Pai/Lau FAQs; thus this post is also an excuse/opportunity to document this unusual little piece of trivia...

 

Re: More corrections

1. Go to free training mode.
2. Make the CPU character the character whose frame numbers you wish to test.
3. Use a different (or same) character for yourself, but you should know the frame stats for your character.
4. Assume that certain basic frame stats are correct (yes, a little circular reasoning, but you have to start somewhere). e.g. P is 12f for all characters except Wolf/Jeff/Van/Aoi/Pai/Sarah, elbow is 14f, etc.
5. Set up a hypothesis: e.g. Kage's f+P into JM is -2/+2/+5 on block
6. Have the CPU Kage record a sequence of moves like f+P (hold) ~ JM PKK
7. Note that JM PKK's execution is 13f. If the hypothesis is true, JM PKK is effectively 15f ex if elbow into JM is blocked
8. Playback the sequence in a loop.
9. Get your character to block the f+P (hold). Retaliate with 14f, 15f, 16f moves (for Kage: elbow, DPK and d+K+G respectively). The elbow should beat PKK, the d+K+G should lose to PKK. The DPK may or may not beat PKK, or both moves may MC each other at the same time (depends on hit detection). For confirmation, try CPU Kage vs a different human character, and repeat with 14f, 15f, 16f moves.
10. Next, get your character to get hit by f+P (hold). If hypothesis is true, JM PKK is effectively 11f. In this case, you should get interrupted when you try to retaliate with a 12f punch, but a 10f move will interrupt PKK (use Vanessa's DS df+P to confirm).
11. To test MC frame advantage, try pressing P+G at the same time Kage's elbow comes out, so you get MC'ed. (In this case, you cannot use JM PKK to test because there is *nothing* you can test against an 8f effective execution move. So use a different Kage JM move to test.)

NOTE: Some moves will have weird hit detection so you need to take this into account, e.g. Kage's db+P is 12f ex but will beat any 12f punch given neutral initiative (but will still lose to an 11f punch).

 

Re: More corrections

For example the same High Punch reversal animation can be seen on both high and mid punches, depending on the attack being reversed, but the reversal will only be listed once.

Even though the commands are different (b+P+K vs. db+P+K)? That just seems plain wrong to me...

The reason this is done in JP books is because followups (esp. Pai/Aoi/Akira) to reversals or inashis are dependent on the reversal/inashi animation, not so much whether it is b+P+K or db+P+K.


I made a decision to list reversals by function, rather than animation.

I take it you still do not consider a limb-specific distinction in attacks to be a functional difference, right?

There is a functional difference in that some limb reversals allow you to enter a ground throw or down attack followup, some limb reversals don't... even if both are reversed via db+P+K.

 

Re: More corrections

Great looking flowchart explanation for frame rates FeixaQ. Thanks for posting it. I will begin trying to use it tonight. Can you think of a similarly formatted flowchart approach for testing if a move is H*? Or any general method at all? I am looking for one despairingly...

 

Re: More corrections

There is a functional difference in that some limb reversals allow you to enter a ground throw or down attack followup, some limb reversals don't... even if both are reversed via db+P+K.

Aha! I thought this might be so, and was going to do some testing at a future time. With this info, I then strongly advocate separate listings for limb specific Inashis (and reversals if there are any). Of course, despite my saying this, as always I will support whatever Myke decides...

 

Re: More corrections

Here's a sample:

1. Hypothesis: Vanessa's f+P+K is H* (14f ex)
2. Control: Akira's PK is -2f if blocked
3. Set CPU=Akira, Human=Van
4. Record Akira sequence: PK ~ d+P
5. The above will make d+P effectively 14f when PK is blocked
6. Have Van block PK, then f+P+K while Akira is doing d+P
7. If f+P+K beats out d+P, it's H*

Confirmation A:
1. Have CPU crouch guard.
2. f+P+K should whiff.

Confirmation B:
1. Have CPU do a low move that recovers -14f or worse. (e.g. Lau's d+K+G is -17f blocked)
2. Record CPU Lau sequence: d+K+G --> Standing Guard
3. Have Van block d+K+G, then counter with f+P+K.
4. f+P+K should hit d+K+G in recovery phase.

If all three of the above are true, move is H*.

 

Re: More corrections

Hmmm... That seems like a partial solution for testing some high attacks. It doesn't seem workable for extended combo moves like Jacky's PPf+PP (which is supposed to be an H* move) where the execution/recovery times of previous moves in the combo must be factored in; or for moves that involve an evade component, as in Lion's (u|d) P+K+G -- somehow the evade execution time would need to be factored in as well...

 

Re: More corrections

The rest, really, you need to just play the game with friends and it'll be obvious after awhile.

 

Re: More corrections

LOL! Now what kind of valid test procedure is that? I do play the game with friends/family, and none of this H* business seems obvious. /versus/images/icons/smile.gif Besides, anything is obvious AFTER you know it. I find people tend to use the phrase when they can't explain something. Reminds me of the story of the math professor who gets stuck in the middle of a proof during a lecture. She leaves the room for a few minutes, then comes back to complete the proof, saying: "As I thought; that step is obvious."

 

Re: More corrections

Seriously. I take most of the White/Blue books at face value. There are some errors here and there, but by and large the information is 95% correct. If there is something incorrect (e.g. Kage's knee cannot counter a blocked low kick from Wolf), we figure out the rest as a matter of experience.

You can test all the moves for the H* property all day, you can know exactly what each sabaki move will parry in theory, but it's not going to do you any good at all when you're playing with people who know how to play the game. And ultimately, things like H* and frame rates matter to me (and to other hardcore players) not because it's theoretically intriguing (which it is), but because it matters from a flowcharting/initiative/strategy perspective.

I have already been kind enough to spoonfeed you with examples of how to set up a testing procedure for frame rates, H*, etc. Yet you use the analogy of the math professor. Well, I hope you have *some* kind of ability to exercise critical thought, as opposed to conducting your tests by rote. The two situations you mentioned can indeed be tested conclusively, both in gameplay and in a controlled experiment, but I have little desire to spoonfeed you any further.