OokumSpookum (talk | contribs) (Created page with "I wish to discuss the EWGF combo listed on line 8: ; [23] EWGF : [+73] EWGF H.2+3 dash EWGF df+1 2,2,2,1 T! d+3 H.UNS.4,F OTG.d+4:1 I have been testing this and haven't gotten the combo to connect after the df+1. I have tested on Kazuya. I know it is probably possible to link the 2 string with proper timing, but I would like to consider this combo instead. : [+72] EWGF H.2+3 dash EWGF 1 2,2,2,1 T! d+3 H.UNS.4,F OTG.d+4:1 Subbing a jab in for the df+1 makes this ve...") |
mNo edit summary |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
Subbing a jab in for the df+1 makes this very consistent at the cost of 1 damage. | Subbing a jab in for the df+1 makes this very consistent at the cost of 1 damage. | ||
That combo seems to no longer be listed on the page. --[[User:Kalki|winn0w]] ([[User talk:Kalki|talk]]) 05:12, 18 July 2024 (UTC) | |||
Latest revision as of 05:12, 18 July 2024
I wish to discuss the EWGF combo listed on line 8:
- [23] EWGF
- [+73] EWGF H.2+3 dash EWGF df+1 2,2,2,1 T! d+3 H.UNS.4,F OTG.d+4:1
I have been testing this and haven't gotten the combo to connect after the df+1. I have tested on Kazuya. I know it is probably possible to link the 2 string with proper timing, but I would like to consider this combo instead.
- [+72] EWGF H.2+3 dash EWGF 1 2,2,2,1 T! d+3 H.UNS.4,F OTG.d+4:1
Subbing a jab in for the df+1 makes this very consistent at the cost of 1 damage.
That combo seems to no longer be listed on the page. --winn0w (talk) 05:12, 18 July 2024 (UTC)