IMPRESSIONS

[Hollaa Itz Mike]

i have hit several return winners against the computer but have not really got to play against humans much

[Hawkeye Miihawk]

@djarvik
I know how good tapped shots can be. The same can be said about precision flat shots, but like sherlock said:

One thing you need to consider Djarvik, is that on tour players will find the most effective way to play defensive (i.e., footwork, movement, shot selection), and usually this means that a defensive player ends up with little to no advantage over a somewhat offensive player with a few defensive stats.

Offensive baseliners/s&ver/big servers/all-rounders aren't just going expend energy mindlessly trying to blast through a defensive baseliner, no. They too can also play defense, and just like a defensive baseliner they can use good defense to their advantage. The main thing a defensive baseliner has over the others is his speed, and slower depletion of stamina. He can get more balls back and extend rallies. Since he's faster he doesn't need to use as much stamina to get to balls as well. So his stamina depletes slower. Over time he can use this to his advantage, but that doesn't mean that he can't be pushed around enough to where he gets tired, no, or that his defense will be so good that no one will be able to hit through him with smart offense or wrong foot him. The good thing is rafa can't really muscle you off like serena or fed can, so it evens out.

Also, don't forget rafa has the most points out of any pro at 566. Assuming all created players max out at 545, then a created def basliner would be 21 pts below. That's a huge deficit, and his weaknesses would be more apparent.

[djarvik]

You making it seem like I am saying that Defensive Basleiner is WAAAYYY better. But that is not what I said or what am I saying now.

Once again, all things considered, stamina considered, tactics considered, human VS human considered, blah VS blah considered -

- Defensive basleiner is an easier setup to win with, therefore the better setup, therefore the stronger setup.

Now, could a all-arounder come along with more talent than a baseliner and win him? HELL YES.

But all things being equal - Defensive baseliner is a stronger choice.

[Hawkeye Miihawk]

You making it seem like I am saying that Defensive Basleiner is WAAAYYY better. But that is not what I said or what am I saying now.

Once again, all things considered, stamina considered, tactics considered, human VS human considered, blah VS blah considered -

- Defensive basleiner is an easier setup to win with, therefore the better setup, therefore the stronger setup.

Now, could a all-arounder come along with more talent than a baseliner and win him? HELL YES.

But all things being equal - Defensive baseliner is a stronger choice.

I'm not saying that you think def baseline is miles ahead of the others, but I think you're the confusing the bolded part with being the stronger choice. It will be easier to win with nadal than serena and fed, yes, even I noticed that in the demo, but that doesn't mean he was the stronger choice. It just means it's easier to play his game than others.
If 2 styles, evenly matched, worked in TS3, s&v and off baseline, you would still see a plethora of offensive baseliners cause it's so easy to camp at and win from the baseline. That doesn't mean that s&v is weak, no. They're evenly matched, but one style is harder to execute than the other. Nadal's ease of use is making people think he's the best. Federer needing the player to mix up their game is making people think he's okay. Imo, fed and nadal are equal, you just have to play better with federer to win.

[djarvik]

You making it seem like I am saying that Defensive Basleiner is WAAAYYY better. But that is not what I said or what am I saying now.

Once again, all things considered, stamina considered, tactics considered, human VS human considered, blah VS blah considered -

- Defensive basleiner is an easier setup to win with, therefore the better setup, therefore the stronger setup.

Now, could a all-arounder come along with more talent than a baseliner and win him? HELL YES.

But all things being equal - Defensive baseliner is a stronger choice.

I'm not saying that you think def baseline is miles ahead of the others, but I think you're the confusing the bolded part with being the stronger choice. It will be easier to win with nadal than serena and fed, yes, even I noticed that in the demo, but that doesn't mean he was the stronger choice. It just means it's easier to play his game than others.
If 2 styles, evenly matched, worked in TS3, s&v and off baseline, you would still see a plethora of offensive baseliners cause it's so easy to camp at and win from the baseline. That doesn't mean that s&v is weak, no. They're evenly matched, but one style is harder to execute than the other. Nadal's ease of use is making people think he's the best. Federer needing the player to mix up their game is making people think he's okay. Imo, fed and nadal are equal, you just have to play better with federer to win.

Really?

So easy means harder to execute?

[Hawkeye Miihawk]

What are you talking about? I'm saying if 2 styles are evenly matched, you'll see people use the easier of the two because it requires less effort to execute their most effective gameplan.
It's the same with fighting games. The harder to use character are least used, even if they might be good. The most common characters are the easy to use effective characters that don't require too much work to win with.
That's why nadal looks so good, cause it's so easy to bring out his potential. You have to switch up your style with federer so often, requiring the player to no be 1-dimensional like rafa, hence why most people will probably think he isn't good.

[djarvik]

The stronger setup is the one that is the easiest to win with. You don't agree?

I think you talking about potential, not actual.

...and even then I disagree with you. Just because Fed can do a little bit of everything doesn't mean he has more potential then Rafa. Potential to do what? ...win matches?

Yes, some people are more adapt at certain styles blah, blah -IN REAL LIFE! ...this is a game, we are all sitting on the couch and press buttons same way.

If anything, giving equal button-pressing-skill, the simpler game plan will be the stronger, no?

When both of us have similar timing, and both play at similar level, and you chose all around while I will chose baseliner - I win.

So it all really comes down to choice. ...and knowing ITST, I guarantee that majority will go for the winning setup, setup that is easier to use, no matter the top spin, 4, 5, 6.

So am not really sure where you heading at? ...that somehow on some deeper level Roger is a better player then Rafa?

Xavi? are you seeing this?

[jayl0ve]

I'm starting to slowly see (like, apparently, quite a few other people) that Federer's a pretty good character. I'm now beating Rafa 7-0, 7-1 every time playing strictly from the baseline (not cuz that's how I really play but as a test). I think it's better to charge up more shots with Federer, especially on his backhand, and save the control shots for defensive situations and slices...and of course run around the backhand whenever you can.

Of course he's also much easier to win points at the net with, so...he's more of a complete player and if you play to maximize his strengths he should be just as good or better than Rafa. Maybe Rafa has a higher score because all the 'extra' points went to one or two stats, like Speed and/or Stamina.

I just realized I haven't tried a Control shot drop shot Off to the demo once again to try something new..

[djarvik]

I just played Fed vs Fed It f**** hilarious to see two Feds in the pre match! Lol

[jayl0ve]

Haha yeah...it's gonna be funny to play Sampras vs. Sampras and watch them walk past that poster of Sampras at Arthur Ashe hahaha

edit: I just beat Nadal with Ivanovic 7-1

[Hollaa Itz Mike]

i would be upset that i lost a point. lol

[jayl0ve]

OH I am. Devastated

[Hawkeye Miihawk]

The stronger setup is the one that is the easiest to win with. You don't agree?

I think you talking about potential, not actual.

...and even then I disagree with you. Just because Fed can do a little bit of everything doesn't mean he has more potential then Rafa. Potential to do what? ...win matches?

Yes, some people are more adapt at certain styles blah, blah -IN REAL LIFE! ...this is a game, we are all sitting on the couch and press buttons same way.

If anything, giving equal button-pressing-skill, the simpler game plan will be the stronger, no?

When both of us have similar timing, and both play at similar level, and you chose all around while I will chose baseliner - I win.

So it all really comes down to choice. ...and knowing ITST, I guarantee that majority will go for the winning setup, setup that is easier to use, no matter the top spin, 4, 5, 6.

So am not really sure where you heading at? ...that somehow on some deeper level Roger is a better player then Rafa?

Xavi? are you seeing this?

You always look at how good something is when it is at it's highest, theoretical/actual, potential. Which one you can determine is based on what variables you need to calculate it's potential, and how hard it will be to attain those variable. I'll explain.

2+2=4. It will always equal 4. There is nothing else you have to consider but 2+2. Same as if I asked whether a rock dropped from x height will crush a small toy below, assuming there is no vertical/horizontal wind resistance. You figure how much force is needed to crush the toy, and keep that to the side. Then you take the weight of the rock, the distance it will travel, gravity, and plug it all into an equation. If the force the rock will have by the time it hits the toy exceeds the force required to crush it, then it will crush it. All you have to consider is if the force excerted by the rock, when it makes impact, will be enough. Nothing else.

Now I ask you to calculate the exact trajectory of a tennis ball hit from the baseline and graph it in a 3D plane. You won't calculate the actual trajectory, but rather the theoretical trajectory. The reason for this is because there are other factors that you have to consider, (such as wind resistance/friction[in all directions acting on the ball] which chages as the ball travels through the air, where the ball hit on the racquet and exactly how much force the ball exerted on the racquet which also exerted force on the ball, at what angle the ball was hit after it made contact with the racquet, how much spin was put on the ball which creates an area of high/low pressure above and below the ball thus affecting it's trajectory, the direction of the spin put on the ball, etc), and trying to calculate exactly how these other factors will react when they make contact with the ball is practically impossible. So you calculate the theoretical, aka a much easier version.

In this case we calculate how good nadal and fed are when played at the highest, theoretical, level. Since you cannot determine how the player will play (mindgames, what shots he goes for, how much pressure he puts on his opponent, choking during critical points, how his opponent will play, etc), it has to be theoretical. So it's not whether nadal is easier to play, but rather how effective both of them are at the highest level.

I'm not saying 1 is better than the other, but at their highest level, fed is just as good as nadal imo. The only difference is it's easier to bring out nadal's theoretical best, than it is for federer.

Btw if you don't mind me asking, who is Xavi?

[djarvik]

..... I'll explain....

OMFG. Please don't don't don't! Dude I am really lost why you post all these what Exactly you trying to prove or disprove or whatever?

You said you disagreed that Defensive baseliner will be the most effective and hence the most used setup on the tour, that is what I said, then you start proving me about potential of Fed, the math, then physics

...just stop. I'll stop too. It is near impossible to change my mind once I made it up, you wasting your time


In any case I should have the game soon and then I'll let you know (if you still interested) how it plays in the final version.

[djarvik]

Btw if you don't mind me asking, who is Xavi?

Xavi? ...he is Rafa Nadal. He is currently has a position of Senior Host with ITST. We are really lucky to have him.