Am I Wrong? Need Insight!


So, let me preface this by saying I am a huge fan of CVS2. Unfortunately I never played it during its prime, was more stuck on ST. There is one issue I have with the game, looking for insight as to whether I’m right or wrong. It seems like, despite all the character variety, many of the matches look very similar to me. As in, all the matches I see end up with characters using normals at footsie range for a majority of their damage.

I see a lot of Sagat being played, for example. All the Sagats I see happen to use Sagat as more of a poking/cr. fierce character as opposed to the zoner he’s supposed to be. In fact, when I think about it I’ve never seen a Sagat engage in a fireball war in this game. What am I missing? Love the flow and feel of the game, just noticed that it doesn’t seem to encourage different game-plans except poking and counter-poking.

Anyway, looking for insight!


Fireballs aren’t as powerful as they were in ST. In ST the only way around fireballs were by jumping or doing an invincible special/super. In CvS2 there are several more ways to get around fireball. Roll/roll cancel, dodge, parry, just-defend. Stages were wider as well so fireballs weren’t as effective. Getting into a fireball/zoning gameplan offers too much risk/little reward in CvS2.

Sagat’s fireball recovery also isn’t as fast as it was in ST.

Sagat does some of the best normals and higher damage outputs in CvS2. Crouching fierce comboes into super. One of the better lowjump roundhouses in the game.

In terms of the different game plans you’ll see between sagats, simply watch a K-groove Sagat and then compare it to a C-groove one.


My response to this is really just one thing: play the game. Once you actually put some time into playing cvs2, you’ll realize that this is a very superficial criticism of the game. Pretty much like saying all ST matches are the same, just two characters throwing fireballs at each other the whole time.

I also have an axe to grind about this notion that characters are “supposed to be” zones or whatever one-dimensional archetype. That’s a very primitive view of character design, that they are supposed to have very obvious strengths and weaknesses, and that they need to be played “the right” way. One of my biggest beefs with SF4 is the entire cast is designed this way, as if there is such a thing as having too many options. CvS2 is great because it gives the player a lot of options to deal with situations, and leaves it up to the player to make the style they want to play work.


cvs2 is the ultimate footsies game. having great normals in this game is more important than anything else. for example, take a look at vega. that character has no combos, does no damage yet still one of the best character in the game.

zoners and grapplers exists in cvs2 but even they have to utilize their normals for a majority of their gameplan. you won’t be able to win off grabs or projectile alone in this game.


@Mr. Warzard

Fair point. I mean, I’ve played the game offline through emulation but I’ve never been able to play a match against competition. Still, I’m just basing my observations off of the matches I’ve watched (I always look for LionX’s uploads). Like I said, I think CVS2 is brilliant.


Love the truth of that last sentence, that’s some real talk. You can’t stick to the basic stuff of old and expect wins in CvS2.

Playing devil’s advocate, the best character in the game (A-Bison) has strictly average normals. >:) A lot of characters can overcome not having great normals if they have good RCs or you are really good at JDing.

But yeah, as a rule, you need to have a good understanding of footsies to be a decent cvs2 player. And most of the good characters have strong normals.


Dictator’s normals are better than average…


Sorta agree and disagree. Close range normals are definitely above average. (C.lps, but anything that has further reach is average at best. Jumping normals are really good but gets hampered by his super floaty jump.


I looked at the data if the sprites are the same as the ones in a3 majority of the hurt boxes are the same as well.

A little game.
Which one is CvS2?


first one.

a3 sagat’s c. fierce was much more buff, but it couldn’t be cancelled into super and all his other normals are inferior.


LMAO CvS2 fireball game? geez you gotta be kidding me


We were talking in the context of footsies, where close-range normals are irrelevant. No way anyone can say his pokes are better than average.

Cool trivia re:the hitboxes though. A3 normals were so crazy!


close range normals are always relevant in footsies. footsies is not limited to just 2 characters range apart.

also, bisons is a very important move, especially in the cammy match up.


Yes, Bison is pretty good, and his cr.lp is the best in the game, IMO (2 frame startup, chainable, leads to easy BnB that leads to CC ov death, etc).

I also agree that his jump normals are pretty good, and his floaty jump is sorta compensated in full meter while in a-groove.


For good or bad, no other sf series has ever matched the importance of projectiles since st. Cvs2 is no exception to that.

Guile is probably one of the few character in the game that can manuver people into favorable positions like st. Part of it is his crazy standing rh and great and the guard crush meter.


My question wasn’t even a critique, really, I just wanted to see if my assumptions were correct or premature. CVS2 is an awesome game, just wish I had a way to play it online!