adumbrodeus
Smash Legend
Mindgames Potential: Quantifying a character's effect on a player's Yomi ability
Players often complain about the difference between theory and practice, and not without merit. Between players of about even skill, matches too often don't seem to end like the theory suggests it should.
I have suggested on many occasions that the way to solve that gap is to theorize better, and this post is an attempt to do that, explain how to theorize better, because the gap seems to be an inability to account for a character's ability to influence player's predictive ability.
There enhancements are divided into two categories, ease of use, in other words attributes that improve a character's predictive and baiting ability, and effectiveness, attributes that enhance the influence that successful mindgames have on the opponent. Some of these attributes are very match-up dependent (like number of safe on shield options) while others are general character attributes (like killing power), though these attributes can be hurt or enhanced by a character's attributes. This means that this should not be used to create a general list of strengths, instead it is a framework for part of match-up discussions.
Furthermore, I recognize a lot of this is common sense ultimately, but after doing match-up discussions for a while I recognize that a framework is needed.
What this is not: Let's assume your MK gets mindgamed into an Ike f-smash, MINDGAMES!
[/background explanation]
First a few definitions.
Mindgames: A player's ability to predict what will give him her an advantage in a given situation based on what his/her opponent will do prior to the opponent actually revealing what they will do.
Mindgames Potential: A character's enhancements to a players mindgames in terms of ease mindgaming the opponent and making successful mindgames more successful. Measurable and match-up dependent.
Without further ado:
Ease of Use categories:
This covers attributes that make it easier to mindgame the opponent in practice. All of these are very match-up specific, so it's not uncommon to find these reversed from match-up to match-up
. Character that are fast, have lots of options from a relatively safe position, or can cancel their moves very well tend to do well in these.
1. Raw chance: The chance that one's character's option will beat another's using weighted randomly chosen options.
To illustrate this, let's assume we have two characters in the neutral state, we'll call them the attacker and the defender. They both have 4 options. Let's also assume that that the options are fast enough that the defender must execute his option before he/she knows what the attacker will do and that defender times his option perfectly (timing is covered later). Furthermore, each option of the attacker's is beaten by one and only one of the defender's options.
Assuming that an option is chosen randomly by both, what are the odds that the defender will pick the option that defeats the attacker's choice? 1/4 obviously.
Of course it's never going to be that easy in an actual match-up, multiple options can be covered by a single option and it's possible that some options are totally safe if perfectly timed. Most importantly options are weighted in real life, one option can beat 3 or 4 options of the opponent while others only beat one. For the purposes of this category, when discussing match-ups, weigh the chances of players choosing an option based on the number of options it beats and the margin of error (discussed later), the more options it beats the more it should appear. The lower the margin of error, the less it should appear.
Note: This probably the most important category because it defines how the others are used. Also for optimal accuracy it should be done for every situation, but the neutral position (aka, where people normally question which character is forced to approach) is usually the most important, though very common positions (aka sonic dashing at you) are also vitally important.
2. Margin of Error: The degree of mistake or level of prediction required to create the desired situation for a the player in question in the situation in question. This can refer to anything from precision required for spacing to timing required to do something (not tech skill obviously, "you have to predict your opponent correctly to x frames", timing).
To illustrate this, a couple of examples. In the Snake vs. MK match-up, MK's dtilt outranges every safe option snake has on the ground at the edge of MK's melee range. However, there's only a very tiny distance between the hitbox of a dropped snake grenade, and MK's hurtbox, therefore there's a very tiny margin of error for MK's spacing, making it easier for snake to mindgame mk into a less advantageous spacing.
On the other hand, take Falcon punch (done straight, not out of a combo), it has an enormous charge-up time so it's very easy for opponents to react and chose an option that works against that. This means that in order to mindgame an opponent into a falcon punch, they must make a very large mistake.
Keep in mind that the definition of a "mistake" varies from match-up to match-up. For example, against Marth, because of his superb punishing game, touching shield generally qualifies as a mistake. However in most match-ups with Falcon, touching shield is shield pressure, a success, albeit a small one.
Effectiveness categories:
This department deals with attributes that make a mindgame victory more effective when it is achieved. Most of these are more common-sense then the above, but included for completeness. Characters with powerful attacks, lots of advantageous positions, or that are good gimpers tend to do well here.
1. Damage Potential: How much damage a character achieves with a given attack or punisher when successful.
Pretty obvious, a guaranteed combination that deals 50% damage will do a lot better in this category then one that does 5%.
2. Killing Power: The ability of a given attack or punisher to result in a guaranteed kill.
Obviously stage dependent, but in general abilities and combinations that result in guaranteed KOs at lower percents on average tend to score highly in this category. Off-stage gimps are part of this when the situation in question is off-stage/edguarding.
3. Positional advantage created: The ability of a given attack or punisher to put the opponent in a position where your mindgames potential is superior.
An easy example is that the attack/punisher places your opponent off-stage when you're Mk (or any good edgeguarder) and your opponent is Ganondorf (or any character that's very easy to kill when off-stage).
MINDGAMES SON!
Credits:
Everyone who's ever told me "it's just theory"
The Sonic boards for prompting the initial thought.
K 2 for his suggestion.
Inui, M2K, and everyone else who participated in the MK vs. Snake debate on the "Ban MK" thread for improving my understanding of why there is a gap between theory and reality (or hopefully was).
RDK, for the discussion that directly spawned this thread.
Players often complain about the difference between theory and practice, and not without merit. Between players of about even skill, matches too often don't seem to end like the theory suggests it should.
I have suggested on many occasions that the way to solve that gap is to theorize better, and this post is an attempt to do that, explain how to theorize better, because the gap seems to be an inability to account for a character's ability to influence player's predictive ability.
There enhancements are divided into two categories, ease of use, in other words attributes that improve a character's predictive and baiting ability, and effectiveness, attributes that enhance the influence that successful mindgames have on the opponent. Some of these attributes are very match-up dependent (like number of safe on shield options) while others are general character attributes (like killing power), though these attributes can be hurt or enhanced by a character's attributes. This means that this should not be used to create a general list of strengths, instead it is a framework for part of match-up discussions.
Furthermore, I recognize a lot of this is common sense ultimately, but after doing match-up discussions for a while I recognize that a framework is needed.
What this is not: Let's assume your MK gets mindgamed into an Ike f-smash, MINDGAMES!
[/background explanation]
First a few definitions.
Mindgames: A player's ability to predict what will give him her an advantage in a given situation based on what his/her opponent will do prior to the opponent actually revealing what they will do.
Mindgames Potential: A character's enhancements to a players mindgames in terms of ease mindgaming the opponent and making successful mindgames more successful. Measurable and match-up dependent.
Without further ado:
Ease of Use categories:
This covers attributes that make it easier to mindgame the opponent in practice. All of these are very match-up specific, so it's not uncommon to find these reversed from match-up to match-up
unless you're metaknight
1. Raw chance: The chance that one's character's option will beat another's using weighted randomly chosen options.
To illustrate this, let's assume we have two characters in the neutral state, we'll call them the attacker and the defender. They both have 4 options. Let's also assume that that the options are fast enough that the defender must execute his option before he/she knows what the attacker will do and that defender times his option perfectly (timing is covered later). Furthermore, each option of the attacker's is beaten by one and only one of the defender's options.
Assuming that an option is chosen randomly by both, what are the odds that the defender will pick the option that defeats the attacker's choice? 1/4 obviously.
Of course it's never going to be that easy in an actual match-up, multiple options can be covered by a single option and it's possible that some options are totally safe if perfectly timed. Most importantly options are weighted in real life, one option can beat 3 or 4 options of the opponent while others only beat one. For the purposes of this category, when discussing match-ups, weigh the chances of players choosing an option based on the number of options it beats and the margin of error (discussed later), the more options it beats the more it should appear. The lower the margin of error, the less it should appear.
Note: This probably the most important category because it defines how the others are used. Also for optimal accuracy it should be done for every situation, but the neutral position (aka, where people normally question which character is forced to approach) is usually the most important, though very common positions (aka sonic dashing at you) are also vitally important.
2. Margin of Error: The degree of mistake or level of prediction required to create the desired situation for a the player in question in the situation in question. This can refer to anything from precision required for spacing to timing required to do something (not tech skill obviously, "you have to predict your opponent correctly to x frames", timing).
To illustrate this, a couple of examples. In the Snake vs. MK match-up, MK's dtilt outranges every safe option snake has on the ground at the edge of MK's melee range. However, there's only a very tiny distance between the hitbox of a dropped snake grenade, and MK's hurtbox, therefore there's a very tiny margin of error for MK's spacing, making it easier for snake to mindgame mk into a less advantageous spacing.
On the other hand, take Falcon punch (done straight, not out of a combo), it has an enormous charge-up time so it's very easy for opponents to react and chose an option that works against that. This means that in order to mindgame an opponent into a falcon punch, they must make a very large mistake.
Keep in mind that the definition of a "mistake" varies from match-up to match-up. For example, against Marth, because of his superb punishing game, touching shield generally qualifies as a mistake. However in most match-ups with Falcon, touching shield is shield pressure, a success, albeit a small one.
Effectiveness categories:
This department deals with attributes that make a mindgame victory more effective when it is achieved. Most of these are more common-sense then the above, but included for completeness. Characters with powerful attacks, lots of advantageous positions, or that are good gimpers tend to do well here.
1. Damage Potential: How much damage a character achieves with a given attack or punisher when successful.
Pretty obvious, a guaranteed combination that deals 50% damage will do a lot better in this category then one that does 5%.
2. Killing Power: The ability of a given attack or punisher to result in a guaranteed kill.
Obviously stage dependent, but in general abilities and combinations that result in guaranteed KOs at lower percents on average tend to score highly in this category. Off-stage gimps are part of this when the situation in question is off-stage/edguarding.
3. Positional advantage created: The ability of a given attack or punisher to put the opponent in a position where your mindgames potential is superior.
An easy example is that the attack/punisher places your opponent off-stage when you're Mk (or any good edgeguarder) and your opponent is Ganondorf (or any character that's very easy to kill when off-stage).
MINDGAMES SON!
Credits:
Everyone who's ever told me "it's just theory"
The Sonic boards for prompting the initial thought.
K 2 for his suggestion.
Inui, M2K, and everyone else who participated in the MK vs. Snake debate on the "Ban MK" thread for improving my understanding of why there is a gap between theory and reality (or hopefully was).
RDK, for the discussion that directly spawned this thread.
