When to Block

Alright, here's a situation:

You're opponent plays and checks a Chain Throw, a fairly common occurrence these days. At this exact moment in time, the only thing that's certain is that if you block, you prevent exactly 3 damage. If you don't block, you take 5. The question is: is 3 damage so much worse than 5? Now, suppose you only have 1 block in hand, it's a mid block, and this is your opponent's first attack (let's say it's his second turn). Do you block?

Admittedly, it's a tricky situation. Still, I would say no, in most cases (the exception would be if perhaps I was playing someone like Nakoruru), for several reasons. I tend to think of a block in terms of a specific value. When I consider playing a block against any attack, I value it according to how much damage it would prevent. Blocking a regular Chain Throw would be worth 2 life (prevented) at the cost of a card in hand and +1 difficulty for the rest of the turn. It's hard to see when that would be worth it. Now, suppose he follows up with a Clones. That same block is worth so much more now, because in addition to preventing 5 damage, it also denies your opponent 1 momentum, he might as well have simply discarded a card.

Now, let's take the same situation, and add some more variables. You now KNOW, that he has two attacks, a Chain Throw, and a Clones. He plays the Chain Throw, and then enhances it with Absurd Strength for +7. You now have a 12 damage Chain Throw on your hands, and a trickier decision to make. Do you block the Chain Throw?

Blocking Chain Throw will not deny him momentum, but prevents 6 damage. If you block the Chain Throw, and take the Clones, you take 11 damage, and your opponent gains 2 momentum. If you don't block the Chain Throw, and instead block the Clones, you take 12 damage, and your opponent only gets 1 momentum. What to do in this situation depends entirely on the style of deck you are playing. If you're playing aggro, the last thing you want is your opponent beating you to the punch by a turn because he had enough momentum to kill you, so you block the Clones. If you're playing control and you know he's not going to going to do a single thing with that momentum, then you block the throw and take 1 less damage.

Here's another one. It's an oldie, but a goodie. Say your opponent plays a Hiza Geri, his first attack of the game, and you have 3 blocks in hand, all mid blocks. To spice it up a bit, let's say he has 2 Merciless hanging out in his staging area. Do you block the Hiza Geri?

If you ever partially block to prevent 1 damage I would like to know why. I could understand if the 1 damage was fatal. In this case, however, a block is worth 3 damage, because you know the second you pass on blocks, your opponent will react with Merciless to give his attack +2 damage. If you don't block, you take 5 damage, but keep a block in hand for whatever comes next. Let's say it's a pair of Clones. With this new information, we know blocking Hiza Geri means your take a total of 14 damage once the Clones hit you, but letting Hiza Geri hit you and blocking a Clones means you take 10 and deny your opponent one momentum.

In the end, these little exercises are neat little tools to wrap your brain around, just to see if you're analyzing your defenses correctly. They also highlight that in UFS you don't always have perfect information. What if your opponent plays that Hiza Geri, knowing you might not block it because you're afraid of what follows, and he really has nothing else? Then he just bluffed you into taking 5 damage. Always consider your blocks carefully, and do the best with what you have. Some opponents fall into patterns, and some are blatant. It's obvious, for example, when someone is trying to 8^th Bill you, or to a lesser extent, play a  Kasumi Sazaku. That's when you adjust your play style accordingly. I once went as far as taking a +0 High block from my hand, revealing it to my opponent, and saying, "this has Suzaku's name on it," and as long as I didn't use that card to block something else, he didn't even try to ramp up to Suzaku. It all depends on what works for you, but there should definitely be some benchmark when you consider your blocks, in order to help you make better decisions. My old basketball coach used to tell me, "offense wins games, but defense wins championships." They seem like wise words to me.

When to run 2/4 checks

We all know what his section is referring to. They're everywhere. Concealed Shallow Swipe, Dirty Pool, Hell Slayer, Pieces of Eight, Red Gi. These are the cards that most frequently appear in sentences that start with "if only... etc." These are the cards that are slightly less than perfect, and yet they have abilities that are so attractive, that we can't help but want to risk using them. If we aren't careful, however, we end up with a deck smattered with 2s, 4s, and perhaps even 1s (gasp).

So, when DO we run these bad boys? And how can we tell if we have too many? One of my favorite ways to check is trial and error, as it can be a very rewarding experience, in terms of learning to grasp the nature of control checks, and getting a feel for just how often a certain card comes up. If you read the Cape Coral AoP report, you'll remember the deck that won it all had an assortment of cards with less than perfect stats. He made up for his Hell Slayers and the Art of Self Defense by only running 1 or 2 of these cards, and then stocking the deck with an extra card or two that DID have the desired stats. Adding cards to the deck increases the randomness of control checks, meaning you're less likely to flip a certain card, but adding in extra 5s and 6s is kinda of like stacking the deck in your favor, and it works, let me assure you.

Still, not all 2s and 4s are gravy. Some are more trouble than they're worth. How do you know when you absolutely NEED to run that 2/4 check in order to stand a chance? The answer is when nothing else even comes close to the power of the 2/4 check in question. There isn't a single card in any of its symbols that does as much damage as Concealed Shallow Swipe without any assistance. There are plenty of powerful and multiple attacks that require momentum, and any number of things to go right in order for them to reach their damage potential. Shallow Swipe is ready to go right out of the box, with the only requirement being that you have been playing UFS for a turn or two. When you catch the opponent at a weak point with this card, you usually win. For attacks, that would be my criteria, the benchmark that would warrant inclusion. Ask yourself, "will this card win me the game?" If the answer is yes, then you have a winner. If the answer resembles anything remotely near, "Maybe... if only..." then you should probably move on.  As for foundations, let's face it, foundations are all about the abilities. If our deck absolutely NEEDS that ability then you may need to run at least 2 copies. My personal belief is that a deck only has room for so many 4 check foundations, and once that quota is full, if I want to add another, I need to take one out. Usually that number is set at 4, but sometimes I'll move it up to 6. If that foundation has a block on it, like Pieces of Eight does, then it's just another reason to include it. However, the foundation needs to provide an ability that is absolutely essential and synergistic. Also, there have to be no other substitutes with better stats. For example, I won't play the Art of Self Defense, if my deck already has Awakening, or Battle Disc System in it. The abilities are different, mind you, but the purpose is the same, and that is to reduce the amount of damage I take. In that regard, The Art of Self Defense has many suitable alternatives, except in, say Death, where you might be inclined to run 1 or 2.

Now that all that has been covered we still have one last demon to exorcise. The ugly 1 check. Good luck with these, my friends. Personally, I feel the only place for these things is either in a deck that can handle the drawbacks, such as Battlepack Akuma, or in the hands of a brave soul who really, really understands his control checks, and knows EXACTLY how many he can get away with.

When to take on the risk of Diversity

We should all be familiar with diversity by now. If two players top 8 with the same character, the lower-ranked player gets the boot, while the 9^th player gets a ticket into the top 8. All of the season 3 AoPs should be enforcing diversity this time around, so it's going to be something everyone will expect to deal with. Sometimes you get lucky, and no one else brings the character you're playing, but there are characters you KNOW someone else or many others will bring. Yun-Seong, for instance, or Tira. The question is, when exactly do you decide to risk getting cut because of diversity?

The answer is short and simple, but it isn't the easiest to bear. Simply put, you have to 100% know that you are better than everyone else at that tournament with that specific character. You have to know that you've put in the most time, have the most knowledge, and have the most refined decklist (also read as the most proven decklist). If you don't, someone else will, and you'll get booted out of the top 8, if you make it. It doesn't get more real than that. It should also be noted that you should never really try a "new" build of a really popular character, unless you have the same criteria already listed, that is, the new build has to be more powerful, more consistent, and more resilient than the old build in order for it to be worth taking on the risks of diversity. If it isn't, you're just opening yourself up to tripping at the finish line, something that will sting you really badly, take my word for it.

But is Diversity a good thing? Who knows? I'm actually split on this question. Yeah, it's cool because it ensures that tournaments I attend aren't overrun with Dhalsims, but at the same time, it wasn't so long ago that if Diversity never existed that tournaments WOULD have been overrun by Dhalsim if players had the choice. So, Diversity can also hide serious issues in power level balance among characters. Do I prefer it? Considering the alternative, sure. I don't want to see events ending up like that one where the top 8 only had 6 different characters in it. Because you know if we let diversity slide, then top 8s will consist of 3 Tiras, 4 Adons, and a Nakoruru for good measure. Let's face it, not every character has a power level over 9000.

When to build a new deck

We all build new decks, probably more often than we attend tournaments. That, however, is not what I am referring to. There are already a health amount of choices that exist if you want to attend a high-level tournament with a top-tier deck. So many, in fact, that it would be hard to find one that didn't suit your playstyle. Therefore, before you sit down to build a deck from scratch for your upcoming AoP, ask yourself: "Does this deck already exist?" Chances are it does, and someone already has documented performance records with it. These are a valuable tool when considering which deck to choose for an upcoming tournament. Why reinvent the wheel, when a page on the internet has all the plans you need to build a drag racer?

If the answer to the first question is "no," however, then you need to move on to the second question: "Is this deck idea better than all the rest?" Chances are the answer to that question is already no. I mean, it's not every day that you have a Hugo and a Fortune and Glory sitting in your trade binder side by side and the light bulb turns on. Not all interactions are Dark/Empire. Then again, some are, and then you have a winner on your hands. Far be it from me to discourage creativity. However, you need to know what a top-tier deck feels like before you set about trying to build your own. Otherwise, the start of your career is going to be fraught with discouraging losses that could have been avoided if you used your head instead of your heart when selecting a deck. Yes, I know each of you love your own creations, I'm no different, but the difference between a casual player and a real tournament player is the ability to analyze his deck objectively, without biases, and realize when he needs something more powerful, or realize when he has something that's a real competitor.

Often times, it's possible to take an existing deck with a proven strategy and add your own personal touches. For example, you know that Fire Adon has been tearing people to shreds all over the world, so you take the deck, and slip in Promo Alex to the starting character slot, and switch out one of its throws for the amazing Hyper Bomb, and add some Deadly Grapples for good measure. Voila! You have your very own Alex deck with an impressive resume before you ever even shuffle it up. Try it out sometime; you'd be surprised at how satisfying the results can be when all the usual winners are suddenly nothing but stepping stones on your way to choice promos.

When to take advice

If you're even the least bit familiar with CCGs, you'll know that every one and their mother has a certain value assigned to cards and play styles. Just this weekend I was playing a deck at the local shop and my opponent, a relative stranger, said to me, "you know that deck would be better off of Earth." I respectfully disagreed, and went on to win the match 2-0, after which, he still wasn't convinced. "To each his own," he said and continued on. First of all, that's a pretty cool mentality. I really like it when players really latch on to their beliefs, but have enough respect and understanding to realize that not everyone shares them. "To each his own" is a mentality we would all do very well to embrace in cases of disagreement. However, being the results-driven, evidence-oriented person that I am, I cannot simply just take some one's word for anything, until they prove to me that I should.

A while ago, I announced my belief that Tristen was the best player in our Lakeland store, citing the fact that he had better finishes in major tournaments than any of us. The response I received fell just short of outrage. Many were very quick to point out how often they have defeated him, and how much better than him they are, but none of them had anything more to back their claims than word of mouth, where as my claim had plenty of irrefutable evidence. The man just won an AoP and that wasn't enough for them. I know it's hard to admit when someone is better than you, which leads me to my point. Someone is always better than you, I don't care if your name is Andrew Olexa. Someone is always better than you are, and someone is always just as good as you are, and you, as a reader, and as a player should accept that fact and actively search for these specific players, because it is these players that have something to teach you. Something substantial, that is more than just a bunch of huffy backtalk. Yes, sometimes these players have an ego you can park your car in, but the best lessons are often learned in action. You don't actually have to talk to these players to learn something from them. You can watch them play, take notice of the decisions they make, and work out a method to bring the same skill and power to your own game.

If you're lucky, then these great players are actually very down-to-earth, and approachable, and take great efforts not to seem conceited and actually contribute to their community and help it grow. It is with these special people that you can actually engage in dialogue with about your game, and the game in general, and really take your game to the next level, but you have to be willing to listen. You have to be able to take a hit and roll with the punches.

Take a look at your own playgroup. If all you guys talk about is how your card X and your character Y and your deck Z is sooo good, but none of you ever really takes it to heart and each of you simply continue doing things the way you've always done, then there is no learning and no growing going on. All you guys are doing is venting your opinions on deaf ears, because the only thing the other player is thinking about is telling you about this other card in his deck that is even better than the last card he just told you about. Take notice of how many questions are being asked. How many are actually trying to learn something, and how many are actually just trying to preach the greatness of their deck? You can't get very good advice from those who can't take it. Learning is best achieved in dialogue, not in monologue, and many monologues occurring at once does not count.

Parting Thoughts

I hope you found this article to be of some use to you. As a writer, I feel compelled to provide my readers with a service I think the community needs. The truth is, I think we need more writers, if only to keep players thinking about UFS and advancing competitive technology and theory to a purely scientific art form, where form, function, technique and fun collide to give us the most we can possibly get out of this game. So, if you have something to say, chances are, there are those who are willing to hear it, and actively engage in dialogue with you about it. Whatever the case, we have an interesting month ahead of us, as January is poised to break set 7 into the metagame in a big way with so many tournaments scheduled. After that, we have rotation, and generally new, uncharted waters to explore. With so much excitement on the horizon, it's hard for me not to smile in anticipation. Like those STG guys like to say, see you in the arena and all that jazz.