+- World Beyblade Organization by Fighting Spirits Inc. (https://worldbeyblade.org)
+-- Forum: Beyblade Discussion (https://worldbeyblade.org/Forum-Beyblade-Discussion)
+--- Forum: Beyblade General (https://worldbeyblade.org/Forum-Beyblade-General)
+--- Thread: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? (/Thread-The-ongoing-debate-Defensive-tracks-is-C145-still-top-tier)
The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Corey - Aug. 21, 2010
Thanks to McFrown going around saying C145 "sucks", I decided to post my testing that I've accumulated over the past couple weeks. When I got Rock Giraffe in, I decided to test the three most used defensive tracks against the best low-attacker I can make: Quetz 90RF.
The RF used is practically new. A little bit of wear, but just enough so it isn't fresh and uncontrollable. Earth is mold 2
MFB attack stadium used. Defensive combos launched first at ~80%
Quetz 90RF vs. MF Earth Bull R145WB
Spoiler (Click to View)
Quetz 90RF vs. MF Earth Bull GB145WB
Spoiler (Click to View)
Quetz 90RF vs. MF Earth Bull C145WB
Spoiler (Click to View)
Against a LOW ATTACKER, C145 still gives me the best results. I haven't extensively tested against a 125 height attacker, or a 145 height attacker, but I assume GB145 takes the cake there.
As many other posters have stated - the different defensive tracks are good in different situations. In my opinion - as the tests back it up - C145 gives the best results against a 90-attacker.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Moss-Da-Boss - Aug. 21, 2010
test ED145 and WD145 compared to C145
Because GB145 doesnt exactly block low attackers and R145 doesnt either
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Stratus G. - Aug. 21, 2010
(Aug. 21, 2010 2:21 AM)Moss Wrote: test ED145 and WD145 compared to C145
Because GB145 doesnt exactly block low attackers and R145 doesnt either
I thought thats what R145 was made for?
And i dont exactly get how C145 "sucks" It's useful to me whenever i use it against a Low-attacker
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Marco - Aug. 21, 2010
(Aug. 21, 2010 2:21 AM)Moss Wrote: test ED145 and WD145 compared to C145
Because GB145 doesnt exactly block low attackers and R145 doesnt either
This testing has already been taken care of, why do you think WD145 is not top tier? and ED is but just barely, it still really sucks.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Moss-Da-Boss - Aug. 21, 2010
R145 was made to reduce recoil when hit by low attackers and does a very poor job of It compared to
WD145 or ED145
marco can you show me these tests please
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Marco - Aug. 21, 2010
Actually it does a lot better than WD145 but ED145 is still a lot worse than C145.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Deadpool - Aug. 21, 2010
wasnt c145 ingeniously to like REALLY absorb hits with the free -spinning claws ? no track was built that good
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Corey - Aug. 21, 2010
(Aug. 21, 2010 2:29 AM)Moss Wrote: R145 was made to reduce recoil when hit by low attackersYea, I agree that's what they were going for when it was designed.
Personally, it creates a lot more recoil than anything else.
If you think about it -- even though the defensive bey is heavier, the attacker typically has a LOT more momentum. If the metal of the low attack hits square on the rubber of R145, the defensive blade will face a lot more of the recoil than the attacker due to the fact that the attacker was carrying so much more momentum.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Ozzy - Aug. 21, 2010
Again, thank you Corey for you contribution.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Corey - Aug. 21, 2010
(Aug. 21, 2010 2:42 AM)Ozzy Wrote: Again, thank you Corey for you contribution.
No problem, just trying to have a nice debate on something I believe strongly in.
Not to mention I have a stomach bug and have been stuck in my house the last 48 hours with nothing else to do besides testing combos >.<
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Ozzy - Aug. 21, 2010
Sounds fair enough. I will also do my own testing. It's a shame you can't speak your mind here anymore but your point is well taken in my eyes. I hope you feel better soon.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - xCiegex - Aug. 21, 2010
Corey maybe you could also test storm 100rf to see if its gets close to or the same results.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Moss-Da-Boss - Aug. 21, 2010
Yeah ozzy isnt it so unfair when you speak your mind ( just so happened to agree with some one)then your accused of jumping on a bandwagon
get better soon corey anyway
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Ozzy - Aug. 21, 2010
It sure is unfair. But it's worse when you feel like something is directed towards you and the remark was actually towards the person before you. Sucks doesn't it? My results will be up tomorrow morning. For the most part I'm getting Corey's results. Just what I expected.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Aqua - Aug. 21, 2010
I don't know why Mcfrown would think that C145 sucks. It has been proven a number times that C145 is quite successful against low attackers, while GB145 against higher/ heavy attackers...
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Marco - Aug. 21, 2010
(Aug. 21, 2010 2:29 AM)Moss Wrote: R145 was made to reduce recoil when hit by low attackers and does a very poor job of It compared to
WD145 or ED145
marco can you show me these tests please
I don't even need tests LOL Here's a quote directly from the man himself.
(Jul. 13, 2009 12:35 AM)Bey Brad Wrote: I don't think anyone has found a use for this, have they? Mostly the wings on WD145 just decrease Stamina ... and for Defense, C145 and even CH120 is better.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Ozzy - Aug. 21, 2010
(Aug. 21, 2010 3:15 AM)Aqua Wrote: I don't know why Mcfrown would think that C145 sucks. It has been proven a number times that C145 is quite successful against low attackers, while GB145 against higher/ heavy attackers...I'm glad someone sees this as well. But for the obvious reasons of bandwagonning this tends to happen and baseless conjectures are made. As I'm testing now, I'm noticing that c145 had this sort of grab and go effect that almost pulls the opponents blade into it when it hits the claws then moves away after enough stamina for that hit is depleted.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Kai-V - Aug. 21, 2010
The problem with this community is a lot of talking, but little testing. Test results are the best arguements to prove a point. And ideally they would be confirmed or infirmed by two or more other people.
I personally think C145 is indeed good, and as has to be understood, it is better at some things than it is at others.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Marco - Aug. 21, 2010
Also Moss I already proved why WD isn't good now on to ED "The wings are similar to that of WD145. Because of their free-spinning nature, they can be used in Defense customisations, such as MF Libra ED145WB; however, the defensive capabilities of this part are not as effective as C145, as it does not absorb hits as successfully." Straight from beywiki, you can figure the rest out on your own.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Mc Frown - Aug. 21, 2010
I think overall GB145 is a much safer choice then C145, as it preforms far better in a multitude of situations.
vs. almost any attacker, stamina type, or another defense type, GB145 shows it's superiority.
Cpt. Squirell's results:
Spoiler (Click to View)
If C145 only really shines against Quetz 90RF, that isn't enough reason to ever pick C145 over GB145, unless your opponent walks up to you and says: "Hi. I'm using Quetzalcoatl 90RF".
Kei you have your destabilizer (MF L Drago 90WF), and realize that it preforms much better against C145 than GB145, and that's low (Half of the time the claws do nothing to help avert an impact). GB145 obviously has higher stamina then C145, as it has the ability to precess, heck, I've had attack types outspin defense beys with C145 because they give them a big hit and knock them onto the claws. GB145 also is heavier and obviously preforms better against high attackers (no one disagrees with this).
So, in conclusion, there is almost 0 reason to EVER choose C145.
I could be wrong here, but this is my stance.
EDIT:
Spoiler (Click to View)
(Aug. 21, 2010 3:27 AM)Kai-V Wrote: The problem with this community is a lot of talking, but little testing. Test results are the best arguements to prove a point. And ideally they would be confirmed or infirmed by two or more other people.
Which is exactly what I said, and what Ozzy refuted (among the posts you deleted in the other thread).
Don't be so fickle Ozzy, hah.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Quetzel - Aug. 21, 2010
If C145 is making contact with low attackers test Quetz CH120RF against MF Earth Bull C145WB. I would like to see the results.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Pimpju - Aug. 21, 2010
How is CH120 low in any way? It's already been established that GB145 is better in this case.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Quetzel - Aug. 21, 2010
I never said ch120 was low. Please read my previous comment again.
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Cpt. Squirrel - Aug. 21, 2010
I don't get what you mean...
RE: The ongoing debate: Defensive tracks -- is C145 still top tier? - Diamond - Aug. 21, 2010
(Aug. 21, 2010 1:10 PM)Quetzel Wrote: If C145 is making contact with low attackers test Quetz CH120RF against MF Earth Bull C145WB. I would like to see the results.CH120 is too tall to make any contact with C145.
Only Beys that use Tracks of a height below 100 or 90 can make any contact with C145.
Also, Quetzalcoatl CH120RF is not an example of a low attacker, Quetzalcoatl 90RF is.