Oh my bad...

4,3 doesn't put opponent to FC. Tested a few times.

LOL. People simply refuse to believe that axe kick may end up crouching. That would be ridiculous.

Thoughts on best combo for :
d/f+2?
qcf+2?
for damage?
off axis to the right?
to the left?
wall carry for both launchers?

I ask so that the first post can be updated.
I'm using d/f+2, 4,1, 1, f+3~d/f, cc, 1,3,2 B!

and

qcf+2, f+2,4, ff, 1, f+3~d/f, cc, 1,3,2 B!

I'll type up something more extensive later on when I'm not on my phone, but I'd like to know your combos, and if you've found anything specific that does much damage. The combos I'm using pale in comparison to other characters. Though I'd assume that's because drag's damage feels less than what it used to for combo damage.

Try d/f+2, f+4,4,3 f+1, f+3~d/f~cc, f+1, f,f+2 B!

or

qcf+2, f+4,4,3, f+1, f+3~d/f~cc, 4,3 B!

And could you please test 4,1 on off-axis launches for us?

d/f+2, 4,1, f+1, f+3~d/f~cc, f+1, f+3~d/f~cc, 4,3 B! should work too.

If 4,1 doesn't work on off-axis we'll have to stick to 2,1 as a starting filler? I'd really like to test Off-axis launch into instant b+1+2_f,f+2 TA! *partners realignment filler* into as many f+3~f+1 as possible before f+3-d/f+1+2.

d/f+2, f+4,4,3, shouldn't connect, but I'll confirm that tonight.

qcf+2, f+2,4, f+3~d/f, cc, f+1... works on Marduk, Jack. not sure about AK, Feng, Pachi, etc.

off axis launch, 4,1, 1,3,2... works if you ssr only

qcf+2, f+4,4,3, f+1, f+3~d/f~cc, 4,3 B! works fine

f+3~d/f, cd+2 is best as TA! ender; as you can ~5 after to tag your other character in
similar to ewgf shenanigans

Anything else you'd like me to test?

Koreans use this juggle as a staple so I'd recommed practicing it more. Make sure to do something else off-axis.


And the damage is?


What's more damaging and reliable - f+3~cd 1+2 or f+3~cd 2? Sometimes you just need this tiny bit of damage.

Who is your tag partner?

d/f+2, f+4,4,3 always work been using that since the beginning of TTT2

If you want max damage you should really not use f+3~df ender or use f+3~df~u 3,1,2 and its not that stable

hey, guys. sorry for bumping the thread.
i just want to let you guys know that i'm gonna doing some interview with Nobi.
so, if any of you had anything you want to asked, please send it to me via private message

here is an example of the interview we made with Rain
http://lzntekken.blogspot.com/2011/...-feat-rain.html

Few fixes from my last post.

d/f+2, f+4,4,3, f+1, f,f+2 B! Works fine.

Qcf+2, f+4,4,3, f+1, f+3~d/f, cc, 4,3 B! ... Doesn't work. Must've been an angle thing when it did connect.

tested f+3~d/f, cd+2 and f+3~d/f, cd1+2
Damage looks almost identical in combos.
Tested by doing qcf+2, b+1+2 B! f+3~d/f, cd+2_1+2.
cd 2 has the tag option, and has more range.
cd1+2 has good wall push back, and also hits grounded at wall for extra damage. So I'd say that it's situation dependant p. which one is technically better.

Do 4,4 and b+4,3 have the same properties during TA? And which one does more damage? Thanks

I don't believe so, b+4,3 would be loft/carry and 4,4 will be most likely carry only. I'd imagine b+4,3 does more damage.

can someone tell me what are dragunov's tag assault filler?

i was kinda thinking lili/drag , with lili as a start up and dragunov as a bound filler ending with lili again

you have 4,1_b+4,3_ 3,1,2_ f+4,4,3 and the list continues on.

Apart from Dragunov's TA fillers. Does anyone reckon there's a TA move he can lift them up for a high wall splat with your point character doing the rest of the combo on the wall?

Ex: Jaycee's Pelvic thrust, Jack's u1+2 etc.

Honestly I don't think so. I tend to believe there might something undiscovered, but off the top of my head nothing is worth trying.

recent Japanese game play shows some Dragonov players using the following

f+3~df->cd1_cd1+2_(cancel)3,1,2

f+3~df->cd2 might a good idea but it might flip your opponent a lot further (though a bit higher)

Dragunov Unlimited changes:
http://web.tekken-net.jp/tag2/campa...Xg9MzI%3D516789

If anyone can read Japanese and provide proper translations, that would be great.

From the very poor translations:
b+1 - "Time has been increased rigidity of the technique. Was short, the timing of the attack roll." I have no clue what they're talking about. It all comes down to '硬' and its meaning in this context. The second sentence is in reference to the first (sentence), but "attack roll" really doesn't solve any of the problem. The timing was short, so they increased it, but exactly what did they increase?
Best case scenario: b+1,2 is now hit confirmable

1+2 - "Early decision was the timing of the attack. Attack power has been reduced." Obviously have to assume they mean the damage was nerfed. I have mixed feelings since 1+2 is such a niche move that it was fairly useless in vanilla TTT2, but the "Early decision was the timing of the attack" is cryptic. It might mean they were considering buffing its speed, but maybe it didn't go through, hopefully it did.
Best case scenario: 1+2 is faster at the cost of minimal damage.

qcb+2 - "We reduced the amount of movement of the guard." I have to assume this means less push back on block, most likely to fix the bug that I noticed early in TTT2 with qcb+2 having drastically different push back on different axes.
Best case scenario: None, seems to be a clear cut bug fix.

Edit: Doing some searching through other character change lists, "Time has been increased rigidity of the technique," seems to refer to frame data (specifically execution speed unless specified otherwise, e.g. any reference to "guard"). I can't say with any great confidence whether this is a nerf or buff without some examples from other characters.

I think 'increased rigidity of the technique' means one of two things:

- it is more negative frames on block OR the move has become slower, i.e. it's gone from say i15 to i16 for instance.

Both of these suggestions can imply to 'increased rigidity' part. Either way, bad news for Dragunov.

The second sentence I have no clue what means...

Watching some videos last night, I'm inclined to believe b+1 now has less +frames on hit. They seemed to recover faster and there was less of both characters doing nothing post hit. I'll eventually do the flv->gif conversion to find exactly what's changed, but I probably won't have time for it until tomorrow.

After checking out some other characters and translations, it looks like "Time has been increased rigidity of the technique," definitely refers to execution speed, in this case it's been slowed down. By how much is still to be determined. Still unsure what, "Was short, the timing of the attack roll," means as I've only seen it on Dragunov's page.

Similarly "Early decision was the timing of the attack," doesn't seem to appear on any other character's page (for the ones I've checked). I've looked at about 20 and all of them seem to be pretty clear what they mean, even with the poor auto-translations, but "Early decision was the timing of the attack" still evades me.

Edit: Finally found one in King's page. Went over to the King forums and they're discussing

But then later someone says "it is quicker execution of crouch throws, and TS damage isnt very noticeable~ probably +6 damage. ws+2,2 thought it was better on block, not it being faster?" and someone agrees with him, but from what I've seen the word "guard" has to be in the sentence (specifically "Increase the rigidity of the technique was time when it was guard") to refer to guard frames.

I am leaning toward "Early decision was the timing of the attack" meaning some type of execution speed though as throws have universal frame data and only differ on impact speed. So it would seem 1+2 is now faster but does less damage, a good change.

Explanation 2: Looking at more examples, it might mean "Time has been increased rigidity of the technique" means it's worse on block but safe and "Increase the rigidity of the technique was time when it was guard" means it's worse on block and not safe. Which is a really messed up way of describing things when the actual values aren't explicitly stated, instead is being hinted at. I personally hope that this isn't what it means, but who knows, this is just my second explanation/guess.

Last edited by tyler2k on Mar 30th, 2012 at 00:03