I throw the words "stable" and "unstable" out a lot during gameplay discussion. For someone who uses these words so often, I tend to hesitate when asked to define them; that's what this article is for. In this context, "stable" refers to being effective while minimizing risk.  This may refer to a specific tool, an entire gameplan, or even a character's overall playstyle. I will be referring to gameplans specifically in an offline or low ping tournament context.  This is an important distinction because bad connections skew what is stable in a competitive setting (this will be another writeup soon, don't worry). A stable gameplan is generally less reliant on hard reads, as it puts more stock in your  ability to execute it than the   opponent's inability to respond to it. (If you want another perspective on this, I strongly recommend reading Daigo's book , which has a whole section about it. I cannot recommend this book enough for anyone ...

I'm writing this post as a follow-up to a recent discussion about the reversal window added to TFH 2.0. I am of the opinion normal reversal windows out of block ("input buffer" from here on out) should be the standard in fighting games. It is very concerning (though also funny) that the Z engine did not come with one. The addition of an input buffer reduces inconsistency in play, which is generally a good thing. Anyway, I raised an eyebrow at people calling the addition of an input buffer a "balance change." I am viewing this through the lens of a relatively "seasoned" fighting game player. I do not claim that this is a perfect perspective- there are blind spots in my understanding of the game, but I believe I understand enough to know how it impacts high level play. "TFH 2.0 has a lower skill ceiling than 1.0" From a purely execution perspective, you aren't wrong. Input buffer means that players can land stricter punishes more consistent...