Let's Talk About Parry and OS

I still see comments here and there about 3S and parry.
Most often that OS + parry destroys the guessing game and commitment in Third.
That parry is too ‘easy’ for too little risk (the vulnerable period after a missed parry is too small).

So I want to talk about this with everyone. We have a lot of LEGIT people in this community still. Ideally this thread would hang around and people who go poking around SRK might end up here, see something about Parry and OS and learn something they didn’t know or understand.

My take from my experience. Parry is not really part of an OS. Why? Because it does not itself do anything for you. If you parry successfully you get more meter than blocking and avoid possible chip. That’s it though. It does not answer anything. It creates another guess situation with different rules.

Not to mention the initial guess, the specific range and specific move (can it be cancelled?) which is being parried. SGGK simplifies some situations for some characters. It isn’t a silver bullet though, which I think is a huge misconception.

Parry itself creates a whole different kind of dynamic within attack selection that no other SF has. I would bet 3S players use a much much wider range of normals and specials than other SF players. The value of our available choices is in constant flux depending on our opponents ability to discern our methods. There is never a simple ‘This normal is for this situation’.

I have nothing more to add other than that I agree. So here’s a real life Parry in action:


Just look in other threads for vague responses to this because that’s all you’re gonna get.

installs dota2

also, not a single person will disagree but watch them play and it’s like there really is no zero risk to parry because all day every day wake up parry wake up parry

Well I’d like it if they did disagree and explain why in their experience this is not true.

I’ll disagree! But only on one thing. I agree with the thrust of your argument at the end.
You say: “Parry is not really part of an OS”. If we consider SGGK, for example, the parry is an important part of making it work. An OS is a series of inputs that cover multiple (not necessarily all) situations. The parry “answers” high/low parryable attacks. Yes, this means that SGGK can be countered by using the opposite type of move - but just because an OS isn’t a silver bullet, doesn’t stop it from being an OS.
Not that an OS is bad by nature of course - just another thing you have to be aware about when playing.

Your last paragraph, by the way, perfectly encapsulates why I really think parry enriches the game’s footsies. I’ve heard people complain that parry makes footsies in 3S worse, for some reason. I wish I had those sentences in hand to make them understand.

I’ll also mention buffered parry’s as an option select by nature. It does change footsies a little bit because it allows you to offensively progress with less risk.

It’s an OS mechanically but not functionally I guess is how I might phrase it. SGGK for example is first a guess forward or down, then (if they did a cancellable normal) another guess if they’re going to cancel or not. So for me that seems like too much guessing for an OS when you compare it to say…crouchtech in 4. I think I agree it’s maybe just a difference in mental organization/wording.

As for buffered parries I don’t even register that as an OS. I don’t see what it answers and how it isn’t just a guess. It may be that I am so used to them and conditioned to expect them happening that I don’t even recognize it.

So it might be really just a difference in perception of what an OS is. I think in third strike the definition is a little different because of how parry is used. Definitely parry changes the whole neutral game (for the better imo).

Not sure I understand how it ‘allows you to offensively progress with less risk’ though. Maybe explain what you mean by less risk? And how does it not also help defensively to stop someone from progressing?

For example I want to pressure within the footsie range, so I do something like walk up buffer parry crouch forward on ken, if you don’t have a normal that hits ken standing but you try to do your own low forward I’ll parry it and punish you. That’s what I meant by reducing risk. Although it’s not 100% fool proof.

I’d like to mention buffered parries are less of a guess and more of an insurance policy.

What’s stopping the opponent from doing the same though? I don’t understand how this helps offense but not defense.

Let’s take your example. Two situations, either your character has a move which can hit ken if he goes for low forward and simultaneously dodge the low forward (all the characters I am familiar with, this is their standing forward), or they don’t in which case what is to stop me from also tapping down and then low forward to parry punish you?

You don’t have any kind of advantage to pressure with that can’t be used against you.
This all depends of course on specific timing, a moot point in this case.

I can understand the idea that it’s sort of insurance. I think it’s so intrinsically tied into everything that separating it is kind of hard. When we just look at third strike, it doesn’t simplify anything by being any sort of OS. I think that’s my point ultimately. OS in other games simplify the situation, in 3S they really… don’t. Parry as a part of attack and defense is such an assumption that the entire method of playing 3S has naturally developed around it, to use it best and to beat it best.

I believe you are overthinking the term option select. All an option select does, is give you two outputs for one input basically. It doesn’t even have to have a purpose game-play wise. Just so we are clear on the definition.

And I do understand that it could be used defensively. I was just providing you with one example.

It is definitely an option select though, and it does have a wide array of uses.

For example.
Akuma does buffer parry~ stand fierce as an anti-air. depending on distance of course.
If they empty jump you get stand fierce into shoryu xx super or whatever.
If they attack you’ll get parry, shoryu xx super, if they parry that you get a mixup.

Wow, what a condescending copy paste of what has been written in other threads.

You have an iron consitution, Tebbo, my friend.

Wasn’t trying to be a dick or anything. I was just trying to have a discussion with him.

Also how is it copy paste, it should be common sense.

Honestly, I think it’s up to tebbo to decide if you came off like a dick. To me, you come off as someone that doesn’t read every post. I applaud you for that. I should have stopped reading every post years ago.

I definitely don’t read every post. And thanks for the applause I appreciate it.

Also before this goes on any further. It may be up to him to decide if I sound like a dick but I know my intention wasn’t to be a dick. So, possibly, instead of jumping in to defend his honor or something maybe you should let him ask me if I was being a dick or defend himself next time. Show a little respect.

Thanks again.

It’s cool. I think Dander means your examples are pedantic. I’m not missing what an OS is, I said mechanically I understand why people feel it is.

You do an input and can get multiple different outcomes depending on situation.

As for how it actually does that, I think that’s where it’s a bit different and when someone says parry is an OS, I think that’s sometimes misleading or a really limited way of describing it.

Just a difference in perspective.
Parry’s flexibility and use in nearly every situation combined with it’s lack of guaranteed outcome to me feels like it shouldn’t be viewed the same way as something like crouchtech in SF4. It may be an OS technically, but it seems like a pretty shitty one.

I was trying to say that you may have too narrow a scope when it comes to option selects.

But, I do agree with you though. Thinking about option selects involving parry isn’t really all that productive because it relies entirely on your opponent doing something offensively which can sometimes be a bit of hard read. (Although the sggk is a bit different in that regard.) Where as in other games and special situations, option selects usually require your opponent to guess out or do something defensively to be effected. It may well indeed be too broad of a concept simply because it is involved with so much of the game.

On the subject of the original post though:

OS parry definitely shouldn’t even be on a new player’s radar or used as some sort of criticism against the game.

I’d be willing to wager that most of the criticism 3s gets is from people who haven’t escaped the I HAVE TO PARRY EVERYTHING phase of their game or haven’t played the game at all, regurgitating tired old anti-3s memes they learned when they joined in 2009.

Also. I’ve been known rub people the wrong way on multiple occasions, almost always when I don’t mean to. I apologize.

Right on! Dander is only saying that because he’s familiar with me so he can see through my words and knows what i’m getting at easier.

I assume from the beginning usually that any differences in opinion are mostly down to specific interpretations and word choice and not a difference in fundamental understanding.

My angle is coming from all the criticism I see. Even criticism by people I mostly respect for their experience, knowledge and contributions to the genre. It’s just disheartening sometimes when you feel something you love is misrepresented and not given a fair shake and ‘parry OS’ is one of the most common reasons. When I see those comments I kind of cringe and think back to Viscant’s rants from many years ago now and how many people blindly agreed.

I wish some of the other still active people (cough @IglooBob cough) would just throw in how they conceptualize that part of the game. I appreciate TiredOcean and you KOH adding to the discussion already. You’re both right and I was being a little too philosophical and not pragmatic enough about it.

To non-3S players, parry is some magical thing that defeats all footsies, creates magical win situations, as well as cures all disease and holds the key to world peace… I mean, I just recently heard a guy complain that Ryu was going to be broken in SFV because he has parry.

I apologize in advance for this rant.

I think one of the reasons people criticism parries in general is because they feel like they can’t do anything and the game is out of their control. It’s a hurdle that really impacts their perception of the game. Option select parries really drive this nail in the coffin for a lot of people. People tend to think parries literally win you the game and that’s all you need to be good at it.

I’m paraphrasing someone that I can’t remember but I try to tell people this when they first start playing, “You might think you’re good at the game but you haven’t really played third strike until you fight someone who makes you feel like you’ve never played a day in your life”. Or something along those lines.

The potential skill ceiling in this game is so insane to me sometimes. Alas, people tend to hate what they don’t understand.