Apoc, in another thread, posed an intersting question. But it was off-topic from the thread’s original purpose. So I’ve started a new thread to respond to him:
Quite honestly, Apoc, I’ve come to hate the Ratio system, and here’s my reason why:
In all non-ratio games, close matches meant something. When one person eeked out a victory in a round, it was incredible. And the person who lost REALLY felt it. And then, next round, outside of Super Meters, everything is back to square one.
In Ratio System games, if this similar situation occurs, no one is disappointed. If your Ratio 1 lost to another Ratio 1, but did 90% damage, it’s all good. Your Ratio 1, though lost, did his/her job WITHOUT A DOUBT.
I would easily prefer the game on Single Match Mode these days. It’s because it kept the game more exciting. There wasn’t any of this “yourcharacter did their job” stuff. A round was a round, and winning it mattered.
However, I do believe that if we played tournaments on Single-Match Mode, variety in character usage will DROP. I mean, it happens in all games: In Alpha 3, we only saw V-Akumas, V-Sakuras, V-Zangiefs, V-Ryus, and A/V-Dhalsims. They were always the winners of Alpha 3 tournaments. Why? Because you can’t be top tier unless you can beat top tier. So if people were serious about winning, most of the time they’d play top tier. Sure, there were a few people squeaking in on their turf (Charlies and Sodoms come into mind), but most of the time, you’d see only the best characters.
CvS2, the reason why we see such oddballs as Maki and Geese and such are because as long as that character “does their job”, they are viable. I use Maki, she’s nowhere top tier. But she can do her job and I can easily do 80% to 120% damage off my enemy on average. So what if she isn’t top tier? Behind her, I have Chun Li and Cammy, who ARE top tier. The Ratio System allows for less-than-qualified characters to make an appearance because they can always be backed-up by top tier characters.
Without a doubt, if we played Single Match Mode, I would be using Cammy only or Chun Li only. And no doubt anyone who has an Oddball + Oddball + Sagat team or an Oddball + Oddball + Blanka team would pick Sagat or Blanka as their main character. In tournametns, we’d see mostly Sagats, Blankas, Cammys, and maybe Chun Lis. The dynamic of tournaments would change drastically, for sure, but the results would always be a Sagat winning, probably. Or a Blanka or an A-Bison.
HOWEVER, I think the main point you are trying to get at still stands. Another weakness of the Ratio system is that nothing is ever fleshed out in CvS2. Do we REALLY know the match up of Eagle versus Sagat THAT WELL? I don’t think anyone here can describe the scope of that match-up in as much detail as someone can describe Zangief versus Sakura in Alpha 3 or Vega versus O.Sagat in Super Turbo. Why? Because it’s lost it’s importance. As long as you know how to deal your damage with your character, it’s all good. So the depth of strategy of an Eagle versus Sagat match is gone, because there’s not as much at stake. If your team did well, and Eagle showed up last with your opponent’s Sagat already drained 40%, it’s not as important trying to kill your opponent. You’ve got such a head start. If it’s the oppostie, and you start at 60% and he’s at 100%, then it becomes a quest in landing a Super or something. It’s just not the same as in Alpha 3 or Super Turbo.
So if we played Single Match Mode, I guarantee you that characters will be BY FAR more fleshed out. Someone out there will pick Zangief and REALLY LEARN HIM. And we will really learn what he['s capable of. Nowadays, it’s just “Gief died! Argh. Oh well, I still have Yamazaki and Rolento, so I’ll be okay but man does Gief suck.” In Single Match Mode, that Gief player will WANT TO LEARN EVERTYTHING HE CAN to avoid getting whalloped by an opponent. So guaranteed Zangief versus Sagat, we’d learn every detail. Maybe Zangief really doesn’t suck against Sagat. But who wants to take the time to learn it? I mean, look how much O.Sagat’s Standing Strong changed Sagat versus Dhalsim in Super Turbo. Something THAT SMALL can affect a match-up that much. But with the Ratio System, no one takes the time to learn these things because no one is FORCED to. Are we REALLY worried that our Maki died after draining the enemy 80%? No. Because that’s still considered a success, not a total loss. If it were a total loss (single match mode), we would definitely take the effort to learn why our Maki died first, and make sure we defeated the opponent first next time. Because losing, in Single Match Mode, is just that: losing. Not a “my character did their job”.
So Single Match Mode would let us all lern our characters and the match up tenfold, IMO. But, in theend, we’d figure out which of the characters were the most viable, and at tourneys, we’ll see mostly top tier winning with the few people who dare to compete with Maki or Eagle or Zangief. But, sad to say, I’m almost positive those people will never win a major tournament and they will eventually be forced to move on the top tier as well (unless their character turns out to be top tier as well… ^_^).
So that’ my viewpoint on it. We’d learn our characters a LOT more, but I think we would end up seeing less variety at tourneys.