(Mar. 19, 2022 4:47 PM)Shindog Wrote: I think one thing to consider is that there are lots of high LAD drivers. Lots and lots of top tier LAD options now. Because of that,
1) the variant driver rule hurts KO attackers more because they have less top tier options
2) since there are lots and lots of top tier LAD drivers, LAD drivers are not safe from each other in LAD matches. I have recorded this following video in the follow ways:
-not much skill involved. I tilt or not tilt and launch light or moderate to high moderate depending on the situation.
-I tried my best to launch pretty much the same way each round most of the time
-I am not trying to show what I can do or anyone else can do. I am only hoping to see if the tools are there for someone skilled to do it.
-no cuts, no edits, straight through.
UπR.Lg.X’-9 (low mode) vs VLn.Ov.HXt+’-0 (low mode)
https://youtu.be/Fmqn1GU_wZI
Is the above really less safe against LAD than LAD vs LAD?
Also, I am one of the few who prefer savior over ultimate. I think I am bad with Ultimate. Push comes to shove, I personally don’t like either tbh and would only use them reluctantly. I would use them because of odds tho. The tools seem to be there to me.
Just to piggyback off of what Shindog said here, there
are a lot of LAD Drivers now, all with their own different kinds of interactions with each other that can be more or less favorable in same or opposite spin. As the number of viable LAD options increases, their individual viability decreases as they become less safe against each other.
People will test Attack against one LAD combo, and another LAD combo against that LAD combo, and get 50% winrates for each (or worse for Attack, depending on skill level) and, seeing as the LAD combo is easier to use than the attacker, come to the totally reasonable conclusion that the LAD combo as the better option, but what they aren't looking at is the overall composite score of the combo.
Sure, the attacker will only get 50% against that one LAD combo... but it also gets 50% against the other LAD combo, and 50% against yet another, since they're all just on plastic tips anyways. In that sense, it becomes a coin toss against the entire LAD meta rather than just a specific subset of the LAD meta. On top of that, Attack is a practiceable skill, so with enough of that, you have a combo that doesn't really care about what spin direction, or how much LAD the opponent has, since it's going to KO them anyways.
This was, at least, the thought process I had hoped most players would arrive at when confronted with P3C1. Without any one dominant LAD combo, they wouldn't risk picking the wrong driver or spin direction between LAD combos and instead go the route of player agency and choose an attacker with a good chance against all of them. This would eventually necessitate the need for defense, giving representation to the three supposed primary types of Beyblade, and from there players would develop all sorts of weird balancey combos in an attempt to get the edge over multiple types of opponent, or something.
(Mar. 23, 2022 4:46 PM)th!nk Wrote: (Mar. 23, 2022 4:16 PM)CrisisCrusher07 Wrote: Agreed. We tested out P3C1 for the first time in our area and there were so many opposite spin match ups it was terrible.
Yeah I honestly feel like p3c1 might be directly worse than single bey? As much as 3v3 has some significant accessibility issues, it is probably my favourite for burst.
So I'm a little disappointed and confused to hear that this was the case, especially coming off a tournament where the final match featued a triple Xtreme deck? Were people not picking Attack during P3C1 or were they just not even putting it in their deck and it was just "garbage in, garbage out" for lack of a better term? Since I'm the one that came up with the format, I'm interested in feedback - do you think the P3C1 format is just in the early stages of the process, or does the process not actually exist?
As for incentivizing Attack with 2 point KOs (and 1 point self-KOs), since that was brought up recently as well, I definitely support it and quite frankly disagree with the reasons why it isn't the standard in WBO Deck. Supposedly, making contact KOs worth 2 points actually
punishes Attack usage because supposedly, attackers will self-KO after grazing an opponent more often than they KO the opponent. Imo, this can be chalked up to poor launching and negativity bias, because with how much people complain about how hard it is to KO in the Burst Stadium in the first place, it wouldn't make any sense for KOing something
unintentionally to be easier than KOing something intentionally.
![[Image: UwZsp7A.png]](https://i.imgur.com/UwZsp7A.png)
![[Image: 4iz876.gif]](https://i.imgflip.com/4iz876.gif)
![[Image: Flag_of_Canada.svg]](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/cf/Flag_of_Canada.svg){kind=small}
![[Image: uKF94LK.gif]](https://i.imgur.com/uKF94LK.gif)
![[Image: izt9hKq.png]](https://i.imgur.com/izt9hKq.png)
