Should we create a "VF Theory" Thread?

I like the VF5 System Thread a lot and the participation being worked into that.

I was wondering if we should also create a second thread covering very basic "VF Theory." Again, it would be very basic and cover the general theory on VF's system (as opposed to character theory).

Granted, everyone has their own "theory." And people will likely debate on how it should be structured. If all else fails, we throw a lot of "principles" out there.

Some of this stuff is already written in the frames guide, though.

But this is generally how I've been thinking about "VF Theory" in the "Modern VF Era" (but it all goes back to basics with moral play first) :

-Initiative
--Success = Attack; Failure = Defend

-Moral Play
--Learning to fight up close (maybe it's debateable but I think it's best to learn VF up close first, spacing later)

-Offense
--Guaranteed Attacks (mC)
--50/50 (why mid/throw)
--P(G) and Low P (why people use these is not directly implied in initiative or 50/50)
----P(G) on block, the first exception to initiative (among other exceptions)
----Low P, a basic flowchart starter but it's special low

-Defense
--High and Low Block
--Defensive Move

-Movement
--Dash, don't walk
--Crouch Dash, not just a dash
--Spacing (I personally believe this can only be properly done after understanding the above, so I put it last for the basics--it's still in basic theory imo)
----Controlling range
----Zoning (setting opponent up for a whiff)
----Closing the gap
-------Moving forward with Defense (I stress this one in closing the gap)
-------Moving forward with Offense

-Okizeme basics
--Intro to getting up safely
----Quick Recoveries vs. Rolling vs. Standing
----To rise attack or not to rise attack
--Intro to Okizeme
----Passive Okizeme
----In and Out Okizeme (staying close, then dashing out of range)
----Intro to okizeme specific attacks (problem is that this gets too much into character specifics)

Stress that the above should be learned first. Then we go into (maybe in a second thread):

-Dealing with Low Punch (This shouldn't really have its own section, but its a question that comes up often when people are learning to play VF, even when they've played a long while).

-Transcending Options: Overriding the Initiative
--P(G) on block (this might be covered in the P(G) and Low P section)
--Sabaki Attacks
--Reversals
--Fuzzy Guard
--Basic Option Select (Double-Throw Escape Guard, built in Throw Escapes on reversals, basic throw escapes on big attacks)
--Advanced Option Select

-Cutting Down on Transcending Options
--Remembering Lows (and sweeps)
--Catch Throws
--Delayed Attacks

-Advanced Movement
--Advanced Stepping
--Character Specific Dancing

Anyways, just my thoughts on the subject. I would of course like to see a System's guide in place. But I think there is a unifying VF Theory out there that we can all eventually come to believe guides beginners to set themselves on the path to VF enlightenment (and a chance at good play).

Once some sort of basic theory is out there, we can then go back into the age old realms of articles that re-explain some of the advanced stuff. Heck, all of the stuff in the second section of my outline could easily be article material instead of part of the "unified VF theory."

-Chanchai

 

Sounds like a good idea. As someone who is trying to get back into VF a thread like this would help alot. I would like to see this happen.

 

I'd definitely read it. Doubt I could really contribute, though.

 

This would be awesome, but you could write entire books on the subject tbh.

To be fair nobody has even tried to write about all the psychological grey areas of a fighting game as deep as VF, at least not in depth to my mind, please prove me wrong and provide a definitive link to a paper!

Like a string that ends with either a mid or low, all the variables that dictate wether you are succesful or not exist only in the mind of those specific players at that specific time. I know that yomi basically describes these decisions, but i can't remember reading anything that tries to explain the methodology.

Would be absolutely groundbreaking.

 

stuff

 

That's nice and thanks for keeping the thread alive. But... hmm... You should create a thread about this in the General VF5 forum ^_^

 

Think most tournament players are going to have A locked down though. And as long as the more abstract factors can have a bearing on the outcome of a match they're worth exploring.

Also it would be impossible to isolate the three characteristics in a real player. Surely player A is what AI programmers have achieved already, but without the human ingenuity to be able to apply the technical skills the player becomes predictable.

 

Fair play, but theory is worthless if you don't base it on a potentialy real hypothetical situation.

Agree with your second point but it's also important to remember that some technical abilities were born out of creative thought, not logical deduction. Which is another reason why I think ideas like this have value.