Mystery behind the using OM against small char-ers

What the nature of this situation?
In dojo tune AI: strike him in guard by P(+2), then AI trying to punish me by 2P-at this moment(buffer after P) I perform OM,P(provoke heavy crouch stagger)...So:

-Against, for example, Wolf, Kage, Aoi-success; to both side(OM to back or to front).

-Against, for example, Lau-success; only to back (If to front-100% hit me by his 2P).

-Against, for example, SMALL characters Eileen, El Blaze-NOT SUCCESS; to any side.

All characters have the same frame properties of 2P!
What do you think about this situation? Possibly it's influence of characters's HEIGHT...

 

OM is hit-box based, not frame timing based, is basically what we determined. Whether OM will evade any given move is basically determine only by character matchup, not frames of the move.

Also note, the OM animations themselves are character-based, so if you did this same test while playing as different characters, you would find different results.

And last, but most important... OM is meant to be used at advantage, which is why it doesn't allow for consistent evading. If you're really in this situation in a match, you should just use a DM, and that will always allow you to avoid the 2P.

 

Re: Mystery behind the using OM against small char

One of my flowcharts has a branch were I'm +1 and use OMP to crouch stagger 2P when I expect it. I too noticed that for a decent amount of the cast I need to OM to their back or I get hit so I just made that a habit since if they're 2Ping I don't really see a reason to be switching up the direction unless I'm trying to counter a HC at this point in my flowchart and 2P's.

I have not however noticed it NOT working on either side against eileen/el blaze, then again I didn't do those tests in dojo those are battle tested methods and when I get my crouch stagger from OMP they're not always 2Ping sometimes they're just crouching so it still could be very true that if they were 2Ping I would get hit.

Were you actually using eileen and el blaze specifically when you were doing the samll character test? I really hope it's just that you were late in buffering OMP in these situations because I'd hate for this to be true (even though I use eileen)

this would explain why I get different results with eileen because OM to the back seems to work for me at +1 to someone's back on 2P everytime unless I screw up my buffering.

don't mean to nit pick but I'm pretty sure he said he was at +2 so at advantage.

 

Re: Mystery behind the using OM against small char

Oops, you're right... I just skimmed the OP since there's a bunch of OM threads already that cover all this stuff.

 

Re: Mystery behind the using OM against small char

if you have +2, why not just elbow the 2P?

i wouldnt use DM here if i were you as you would most probably be at disadvantage. i think in this situation, you can OMP to the opponent's stomache and avoid the 2p, but it isnt prone to an alternate reaction. so..

just elbow.

if they start using high P here, then use a high crush mixup.

 

Re: Mystery behind the using OM against small char

The legitimate answer is that OM P is supposed to beat all opponent linear options such as high punching back, but in practise it doesnt do so. Because of its inconsistency its really a bad option imo.

 

Re: Mystery behind the using OM against small char

I usually use OM,P at small adv.(+2)because:
-it gives very good dividents(+5-+8, and heavy stagger at crouch opponent, ->follow-up by combo starter)
-and gives good evasive(defensive) options(against linear attacks and(very strangely-why?)against throws!

 

Re: Mystery behind the using OM against small char

It isn't any more or less evasive against throws than e.g. ARM movement in VF5. VF5 throws seem to actually have detailed hit detection, so if OM moves you to the side of and behind the grabbing hands of the throw, it will avoid them. Frames dont have much to do with this, e.g. if you try to OM after jeffs 66K is blocked, you will get thrown, even though you have small advantage, because the opponent is far enough away that the OM moves back into the throw.

As for it being "consistent", anything that's highly dependent on spacing and input timing is going to feel much less consistent than something that's entirely based on frames and buffered inputs.