hey verm, I'm curious if you've ever thought of picking up a secondary for your ganondorf's extremely difficult match ups, or why you haven't rather. Would love a reply as someone that's in a similar situation with a character that has a lot of bad match ups. Also this format is just as good as the ones with the editing, if it encourages you to upload more! Thanks for all the great thought provoking videos! :-)
Talking about a character that's seemingly always playing in "comeback mode".......maybe we should coin it as "the underdog factor". Not always consistent but always capable of an upset?
Thanks so much for sharing this perspective! I had actually been thinking about stuff along these lines recently; when I was making a Mewtwo matchup chart and thinking about various matchups, I realized that there are a lot of matchups never feel even when I'm playing them, but I felt that they could be even if they were played in a certain way. I had an idea that maybe a "difficult" matchup and a "losing" matchup aren't the same thing. I think you explained this idea really well in this video, great job!
@@swaggyswindler6243 I'm also a mewtwo main and as I've been getting into tournament sets I've begun to realize that most of the matches I play against players at my level are just like, they have a lead for the majority of the game, but then you hit them like twice and it goes back to even. He just has so many ways to completely rob a stock or lead that it's just never over until it's over. Camping while down becomes a legitimate strategy as long as they're still gonna try to approach me lol
I discovered the channel recently and immediately fell in love with the concept breakdowns. Lots of original thoughts instead of simply re-explaining classic ideas! (It's also why I mind very little about the visual format since it's more of an essay than a tutorial.) I like the idea of mapping volatility to margin of error, and how the outcome can be relatively equal but with radically different levels of tension. I tend to use volatility to qualify match-ups where both sides have to play under increased stress. (For example Kazuya vs little Mac is a MU where both side can get stomped and stocks are deleted very fast.) the 2D grid does explain why Kazuya is very hard to map on one dimensional MU charts--In theory he's broken but in practice every interaction feels like an up-hill battle. A bit like he's forced to outplay by a wider margin to get momentum going his way. Enough rambling, thanks for the Vids :)
Welcome back!! The new format definitely works (the replay footage in the background was often distracting more than anything), and I think getting a better camera would really make the difference. You could even set up a teleprompter, if you think that would work for you (see this video about them, but beware of bad jokes: ua-cam.com/video/YeRu4xYH_W0/v-deo.html). Now onto the video topic! I really like what you're putting forward here. I've never liked tierlists, and I think the mismatch between theory and practice is a huge reason why. For actual matches, that idea of each player being in a different mindset by necessity makes a lot of sense, and brings up an interesting question about a player's skill potential and how much of it is bound up in mindset and circumstance. You already touched on the fact that some kinds of effort are not sustainable yet are necessary for high performance, so how can we quantify this and incorporate that into our understanding of the game?
Thanks, Javi! I've looked into teleprompters, but as the vid mentions, I'd need some kind of camera that's not my webcam. If I ever have the disposable income to put towards a good camera, you can bet I'll implement this. To your question, I would say this knowledge isn't really practical so much as just interesting. Being aware of it could maybe help you better capitalize on the ebb and flow of mental dynamics in a match (e.g. be more aware of how being at a deficit actually might make your opponent nervous because they understand how you're now behaving differently or something) but beyond that I'm not sure there'd be much immediate application.
So yea what I got was someone can already be in comeback mode starting the matchup. But the degree and dexterity and flexibility needed to do that requires a lot of strain and stress. However we can look at the meaning of getting sweaty and bring a positive note to the comeback stress as almost enjoying the pain....idk I'm a new ganon main and saw ur channel ur so cool ily byeeeee♡♡♡♡
Always good to see more woke content! Glad to see you back Verm. I never had a good way of explaining why I felt match-up charts failed to capture things like Jiggly v. Ganon well. I think this does that feeling justice. It's also applicable knowledge for all fighting games, not smash exclusively.
WARNING: Redundant and pointless time waste of a ramble below. Proceed with caution. I'm kinda struggling to understand how this unsustainability of delicate and careful play you describe *doesn't* make the Ganon vs. Jiggs matchup a losing one for the former in the typical sense too. Like, I thought matchups were supposed to denote probability of winning for either side, given "even skill" between the two players. As fuzzy as that condition may be, I would at least expect the ability to consistently and reliably - instead of merely circumstantially, or (unless by dumb luck) not at all - pull off demanding play to count towards one's skill level. If you can win, but have to play "better" than the opponent to win, that's a losing matchup, no? And the better you need to be, the more losing the matchup is. No matchup is absolutely unwinnable after all. I don't know, maybe I'm missing something about the consensus conception of matchups. You said something about "degrees of counterplay" in the video, if I recall, and that's what you've dubbed the theoretical aspect, if I understand correctly. But I think most people consider the difficulty or risk-reward of counterplay too (the practical aspect). Considering only the former is indeed idealised, impoverished, and, I would imagine, uncommon too. ...I think I ended up arguing semantics here, but at least I also realised how there are two types of hard in writing this comment and letting your words sink in (having fewer options than your opponent, and having more demanding options than them). So, by extension, there are two types of the "playing better" I mentioned above (making up for your option deficit, and keeping up taxing albeit effective gameplay). Making this distinction was your point (or, well, part of it). So, uh, nothing new to contribute here, I guess. Just me sorting my thoughts out and digesting the video. Still leaving this comment for anyone who might appreciate walking through my train of thought (also, I wrote too much to delete - thanks if you read this far). Aaanyway, I might feel usage of all caps is too exaggerated to sound like it, but it's been hype to see you back, as always. Thank you for the food, Vermadaddy. (wait, was that weird? lemme do another tak-
Not contributing nothing, just asking a question that I cannot answer without a complete picture over how all of this works. The question is still necessary and I trust that someone wiser than I, or at least believes they have one, will be able to give you your answer.
Don't worry Ody, I appreciate that you're thinking about it. This is the kind of engagement I hope for! You could argue that people do usually account for practical considerations in assigning MU ratios, but the thrust of what I'm getting at is how some bad MUs can feel better than they actually are because of different senses of risk allowance leading to *short term* similar MU outcomes, i.e. Ganon not consciously "working harder" than Jiggs, but playing in a very risk-averse way by nature of the MU, while the Jiggs may play less so, leading to an otherwise bad MU feeling less bad because of different mental dynamics closing the gap (in the same way comebacks happen), which may not be possible in other bad MUs (like Snake), in spite of them being statistically nearly equally bad.
the mugging analogy got a sensible chuckle out of me
Professor verma lectures his smash class about psychology, matchups and comebacks
hey verm, I'm curious if you've ever thought of picking up a secondary for your ganondorf's extremely difficult match ups, or why you haven't rather. Would love a reply as someone that's in a similar situation with a character that has a lot of bad match ups.
Also this format is just as good as the ones with the editing, if it encourages you to upload more! Thanks for all the great thought provoking videos! :-)
it's good to see you again, Verm
Talking about a character that's seemingly always playing in "comeback mode".......maybe we should coin it as "the underdog factor". Not always consistent but always capable of an upset?
Love your videos, been watching them for a while. Hope you grow love video editing lol
Thanks so much for sharing this perspective! I had actually been thinking about stuff along these lines recently; when I was making a Mewtwo matchup chart and thinking about various matchups, I realized that there are a lot of matchups never feel even when I'm playing them, but I felt that they could be even if they were played in a certain way. I had an idea that maybe a "difficult" matchup and a "losing" matchup aren't the same thing. I think you explained this idea really well in this video, great job!
mewtwo main here. every matchup feels bad for the most even if it looks like it shouldn’t be
@@swaggyswindler6243 I'm also a mewtwo main and as I've been getting into tournament sets I've begun to realize that most of the matches I play against players at my level are just like, they have a lead for the majority of the game, but then you hit them like twice and it goes back to even. He just has so many ways to completely rob a stock or lead that it's just never over until it's over. Camping while down becomes a legitimate strategy as long as they're still gonna try to approach me lol
Wish I could like all your videos all over again, love watching them from time to time lol😅
Not many channels I automatically watch on thumbnail notifications
I discovered the channel recently and immediately fell in love with the concept breakdowns. Lots of original thoughts instead of simply re-explaining classic ideas!
(It's also why I mind very little about the visual format since it's more of an essay than a tutorial.)
I like the idea of mapping volatility to margin of error, and how the outcome can be relatively equal but with radically different levels of tension.
I tend to use volatility to qualify match-ups where both sides have to play under increased stress. (For example Kazuya vs little Mac is a MU where both side can get stomped and stocks are deleted very fast.)
the 2D grid does explain why Kazuya is very hard to map on one dimensional MU charts--In theory he's broken but in practice every interaction feels like an up-hill battle. A bit like he's forced to outplay by a wider margin to get momentum going his way.
Enough rambling, thanks for the Vids :)
I see Vermanubis upload, I click. Much appreciate your content man 🙏🏼
Ah yes, a fellow luddite
Welcome back!! The new format definitely works (the replay footage in the background was often distracting more than anything), and I think getting a better camera would really make the difference. You could even set up a teleprompter, if you think that would work for you (see this video about them, but beware of bad jokes: ua-cam.com/video/YeRu4xYH_W0/v-deo.html).
Now onto the video topic! I really like what you're putting forward here. I've never liked tierlists, and I think the mismatch between theory and practice is a huge reason why. For actual matches, that idea of each player being in a different mindset by necessity makes a lot of sense, and brings up an interesting question about a player's skill potential and how much of it is bound up in mindset and circumstance. You already touched on the fact that some kinds of effort are not sustainable yet are necessary for high performance, so how can we quantify this and incorporate that into our understanding of the game?
Thanks, Javi!
I've looked into teleprompters, but as the vid mentions, I'd need some kind of camera that's not my webcam. If I ever have the disposable income to put towards a good camera, you can bet I'll implement this.
To your question, I would say this knowledge isn't really practical so much as just interesting. Being aware of it could maybe help you better capitalize on the ebb and flow of mental dynamics in a match (e.g. be more aware of how being at a deficit actually might make your opponent nervous because they understand how you're now behaving differently or something) but beyond that I'm not sure there'd be much immediate application.
So yea what I got was someone can already be in comeback mode starting the matchup. But the degree and dexterity and flexibility needed to do that requires a lot of strain and stress. However we can look at the meaning of getting sweaty and bring a positive note to the comeback stress as almost enjoying the pain....idk I'm a new ganon main and saw ur channel ur so cool ily byeeeee♡♡♡♡
Great video Verm! So good to have you back. Thank you for these
I like this style of video as I van listen to it as I paint.
A new Verm video?? Yessss
oh OH OOOOHHHHH!!!!! (Sound I made when I saw this thumbnail)
HES BACK!!! let's go.
Love the new perspectives you introduce me to in each video, Verm. Glad you're back on UA-cam!
I actually find it considerably easier to follow you when I see your face/see you talk.
excellent video and welcome back!
LETS GOOOOOOO VERM IS BACK
Always good to see more woke content! Glad to see you back Verm.
I never had a good way of explaining why I felt match-up charts failed to capture things like Jiggly v. Ganon well. I think this does that feeling justice. It's also applicable knowledge for all fighting games, not smash exclusively.
WELCOME BACK VERM
Yo, Verm upload? Yes please
ay hes back
Bruh it's February put that Christmas tree away
Please make posting on UA-cam a regular thing, things videos are gold.
AYE LETS GOOOOO
Verms back bb!!
HI VERM
yoooo
WARNING: Redundant and pointless time waste of a ramble below. Proceed with caution.
I'm kinda struggling to understand how this unsustainability of delicate and careful play you describe *doesn't* make the Ganon vs. Jiggs matchup a losing one for the former in the typical sense too.
Like, I thought matchups were supposed to denote probability of winning for either side, given "even skill" between the two players. As fuzzy as that condition may be, I would at least expect the ability to consistently and reliably - instead of merely circumstantially, or (unless by dumb luck) not at all - pull off demanding play to count towards one's skill level. If you can win, but have to play "better" than the opponent to win, that's a losing matchup, no? And the better you need to be, the more losing the matchup is. No matchup is absolutely unwinnable after all.
I don't know, maybe I'm missing something about the consensus conception of matchups. You said something about "degrees of counterplay" in the video, if I recall, and that's what you've dubbed the theoretical aspect, if I understand correctly. But I think most people consider the difficulty or risk-reward of counterplay too (the practical aspect). Considering only the former is indeed idealised, impoverished, and, I would imagine, uncommon too.
...I think I ended up arguing semantics here, but at least I also realised how there are two types of hard in writing this comment and letting your words sink in (having fewer options than your opponent, and having more demanding options than them). So, by extension, there are two types of the "playing better" I mentioned above (making up for your option deficit, and keeping up taxing albeit effective gameplay). Making this distinction was your point (or, well, part of it).
So, uh, nothing new to contribute here, I guess. Just me sorting my thoughts out and digesting the video. Still leaving this comment for anyone who might appreciate walking through my train of thought (also, I wrote too much to delete - thanks if you read this far). Aaanyway, I might feel usage of all caps is too exaggerated to sound like it, but it's been hype to see you back, as always. Thank you for the food, Vermadaddy. (wait, was that weird? lemme do another tak-
Not contributing nothing, just asking a question that I cannot answer without a complete picture over how all of this works. The question is still necessary and I trust that someone wiser than I, or at least believes they have one, will be able to give you your answer.
Don't worry Ody, I appreciate that you're thinking about it. This is the kind of engagement I hope for!
You could argue that people do usually account for practical considerations in assigning MU ratios, but the thrust of what I'm getting at is how some bad MUs can feel better than they actually are because of different senses of risk allowance leading to *short term* similar MU outcomes, i.e. Ganon not consciously "working harder" than Jiggs, but playing in a very risk-averse way by nature of the MU, while the Jiggs may play less so, leading to an otherwise bad MU feeling less bad because of different mental dynamics closing the gap (in the same way comebacks happen), which may not be possible in other bad MUs (like Snake), in spite of them being statistically nearly equally bad.