Fighting Games Weekly | August 27 - September 2

Karsticles said:
It's weird that RTS games have a much bigger community, but there's nothing similar for that on here.
Click to expand...

"RTS" meaning primarily Starcraft and, if you want to stretch it, DOTA-like games. Neither of these communities has the variety or charisma of the collective FGC. They would just be OTv2.


Can someone link me to the best Chie tournament matches? Stuff I can learn from? I heard people got real excited about stuff happening on Big Two.
 
KingItachi said:
Don't forget that Yipes is right that MVC 3 is bs, it would be nice if Sanford and Desmond came back but they both hate the game.
Click to expand...
MvC2 was BS, too. In fact, in many ways it was more BS than 3. If you got hit in MvC2, you just lost your whole team if your opponent played it right, with no recourse at all. MvC3 at least gives you a way to survive past that first mistake. Plus team structure is far more interesting in 3 than in 2.
 
Karsticles said:
MvC2 was BS, too. In fact, in many ways it was more BS than 3. If you got hit in MvC2, you just lost your whole team if your opponent played it right, with no recourse at all. MvC3 at least gives you a way to survive past that first mistake. Plus team structure is far more interesting in 3 than in 2.
Click to expand...

No Mvc 2 took skill and had no rampant otg's and no comeback factor.
 
KingItachi said:
No Mvc 2 took skill and had no rampant otg's and no comeback factor.
Click to expand...
Are you saying MvC3 does not take skill?

What do OTGs matter?

No comeback factor is exactly why MvC2 was more BS than MvC3. It's borderline impossible to make a full-on comeback in MvC2; the borderline is for FG deities like Justin Wong. This is not Street Fighter. When you lose a teammate, you've lost more than 1/3 of your health.

Threi said:
And he doesn't like the differences in them. That seems fairly legit to me. People don't have to love every game out, people certainly don't have to love MvC3.
Click to expand...
Hey, and that's cool. If you want the first time you touch your opponent to determine the entire match, that's your game. You play it. I just don't want people to pretend that MvC3 offering a way to come back from that first touch somehow makes it more BS than MvC2.
 
KingItachi said:
No Mvc 2 took skill and had no rampant otg's and no comeback factor.
Click to expand...
But it had on point pseudo infinites, double snap backs, true invincible assists, guard breaks, broke flight/air mechanics and a roster balance that makes Mvc3 look like a perfectly balanced game from top to bottom.

Mvc3 at high level takes a lot of skill too. I don't know what otgs and comebacks have to do with it when the entire game is about getting hits or avoiding hits/bad situations in the first place.
 
Threi said:
And he doesn't like the differences in them. That seems fairly legit to me. People don't have to love every game out, people certainly don't have to love MvC3.
Click to expand...

That's fine though. But King is talking about the BS levels between the 2 games. Each one has its quirks that are appealing to whomever.

I believe you don't have to like everything either. I also believe something doesn't suck just because you dont like it.
 
Huh? MvC3 takes skill. And the comeback mechanic is needed whether people like it or not, due to how powerful incoming mix ups are. And a meaty set up usually nullifies it. So if you drop a combo or your opponent has better reads, then yes you should lose since he shown that he may be more skilled.

And how many XF comebacks do we really see nowadays? Barely any as long as you have good incoming mix ups.
 
Marvel would be better if you could tech out of OTGs at the cost of meter or something. One of my biggest problems with the game is the overindulgent combos. Adding a way to get out of that that isn't a flat-out burst would be interesting and would probably add some tactical depth to combos.
 
Riposte said:
Marvel would be better if you could tech out of OTGs at the cost of meter or something. One of my biggest problems with the game is the overindulgent combos. Adding a way to get out of that that isn't a flat-out burst would be interesting and would probably add some tactical depth to combos.
Click to expand...
If you nerfed OTGs, then characters who do long combos without OTGs would just be buffed (like Magneto, who totally needs buffs!). That would be the only difference in the game. Meanwhile, a huge number of characters wouldn't even be able to end their combos into hypers.
 
Then you just butchered a large portion of the cast. Why would Zero or Vergil just waste a meter to get out of an combo and punish the character in question since both can build ton of meter.
 
Hey. Hey, guys. Hey. Hey. Listen. Hey...

How about... How about... this?

You get better on the games you try to play at the moment instead of complaining about other games and their "bullshit"? :D

/runs away
 
Given how much meter flies around in the game it would make a lot of otg dependent characters really poor (Doom would be garbage) while making some like Magneto even better.

The main thing in Mvc3 that needs prompt attention is TAC.
 
Karsticles said:
If you nerfed OTGs, then characters who do long combos without OTGs would just be buffed (like Magneto, who totally needs buffs!). That would be the only difference in the game. Meanwhile, a huge number of characters wouldn't even be able to end their combos into hypers.
Click to expand...

If the opponent techs every time, then he'll never have meter. You could also plan in advance and just aim for mix-ups so he'll just burn through his meter and won't be able to tech. I didn't mention this, but I would have the tech animation be vulnerable to ground throws and super throws. EDIT: Also, when I say tech, I don't mean something that can generally be used to bait the opponent attacking. It would be vulnerable state which at best left you neutral to the attacker.

I realize it wouldn't be a flawless fix across the board (as I wouldn't want to add it to "balance" characters, but to improve the overall pace of the game), but in terms of giving a game a central concept I think it would be huge improvement.
 
No it wouldn't. Zero/Viper/Vergil build RETARDED amount of meter so they can just escape your combo and then you have to deal with there Bullshit again. And they hit you and build the meter they just build back.

That is not a fix. That HURTS the balance. Make the timing on the piss poor easy OTGS(Wesker) a little harder.

Decrease the input leniency, fix TACs, fix the scaling based on characters and such.
 
Riposte said:
If the opponent techs every time, then he'll never have meter. You could also plan in advance and just aim for mix-ups so he'll just burn through his meter and won't be able to tech. I didn't mention this, but I would have the tech animation be vulnerable to ground throws and super throws.

I realize it wouldn't be a flawless fix across the board (as I wouldn't want to add it to "balance" characters, but to improve the overall pace of the game), but in terms of giving a game a central concept I think it would be huge improvement.
Click to expand...
I would spend a bar with any character to escape the OTG. Again, it would completely destroy characters who rely on OTGs to deal damage. A character like Dr. Doom should not have to guess at every single relaunch he does as to whether his opponent is going to burst. That's just stupid. OTGs are just a way to add variety to combos. That's all. Magneto does his air-dash cancel loops, Doom does his OTG loops. There's no reason to pick one over the other.

I run Dark Harmonizer assist. Within 20 seconds I tend to have 4-5 bars stored already. I would tech every single OTG, and it wouldn't "cost" me anything because my team is built around having superfluous meter. I can just see Sentinel now: Rocket Punch, opponent techs forward, and - oh damn, he just went past Plasma Storm, and now Sentinel dies.
 
I'm not talking about adding a balance change, I'm talking about making a fundamental change to the game's system and then developing all the characters from that stand point. Combos and set-ups that are hot now don't matter if you talk about making a new game. If loops allow you to get around this fundamental aspect, then in developing the game, you'd nerf loops.

Change the cost to two or three bars of meter, if you'd like.
 
Riposte said:
I'm not talking about adding a balance change, I'm talking about making a fundamental change to the game's system and then developing all the characters from that stand point. Combos and set-ups that are hot now don't matter if you talk about making a new game. If loops allow you to get around this fundamental aspect, then in developing the game, you'd nerf loops.

Change the cost to two or three bars of meter, if you'd like.
Click to expand...
That's not how you suggested it.

If you want to completely remake the game, then just leave it at that unless you're going to list how you're going to change everything. Right now, your idea went from poor and amateurish to vague and amateurish. It can only be summarized as "change stuff".
 
Well, my point of view, which is more important than whatever fantasy I have in my head for a hypothetical new Marvel, is this: Super long combos are not good things, because they take an aspect of a game and overindulges on that to the point where it is essentially one person playing for several seconds. This means a pure execution test with virtually no strategic value. By adding complications to the combo process in a way that is more advanced than "Stop the combo" (i.e. burst, though Mortal Kombat's in particular would be the best comparison) I think you are adding depth to a game and ultimately making it more interesting (especially if it stops ToD combos).

Balance problems aside, what I see is "Oh, he is going to tech this, so instead I'm going to go for a throw when I knock him down." That is more interesting to me than another few seconds of combo.
 
Karsticles said:
Are you saying MvC3 does not take skill?

What do OTGs matter?

No comeback factor is exactly why MvC2 was more BS than MvC3. It's borderline impossible to make a full-on comeback in MvC2; the borderline is for FG deities like Justin Wong. This is not Street Fighter. When you lose a teammate, you've lost more than 1/3 of your health.
Click to expand...
This is somewhat true. The three gods(and Cable) are beast, but the match is nearly almost always over once your two characters are gone and you have to face a MagSenSto(or Cable) team. You are assed out whether your anchor is a top tier or the bottom 90%. X-factor is the great equalizer in a game that sometimes feels like a fighting game version of Russian roulette.
 
Riposte said:
Well, my point of view, which is more important than whatever fantasy I have in my head for a hypothetical new Marvel, is this: Super long combos are not good things, because they take an aspect of a game and overindulges on that to the point where it is essentially one person playing for several seconds. This means a pure execution test with virtually no strategic value. By adding complications to the combo process in a way that is more advanced than "Stop the combo" (i.e. burst, though Mortal Kombat's in particular would be the best comparison) I think you are adding depth to a game and ultimately making it more interesting (especially if it stops ToD combos).

Balance problems aside, what I see is "Oh, he is going to tech this, so instead I'm going to go for a throw when I knock him down." That is more interesting to me than another few seconds of combo.
Click to expand...
Mortal Kombat's breaker system is the absolute worst thing about that game.
 
Yeah that wasn't how it was suggested. Game has to be balanced first around all characters having respectable combos and damage without having a need for an otg then additional combos can be added with otg for more damage and that additional damage is what you can offset with a tech. Game in it's current state would be flipped upside down with such a mechanic change. Right now there is a huge disparity in how characters utilize otgs and that's how it was intended.
 
Burst in a game like Marvel would just have the metagame heavily favor zoning and heavy chip damage rather than rush down.
 
kirblar said:
Mortal Kombat's breaker system is the absolute worst thing about that game.
Click to expand...

I agree. I prefer combos be "broken" in method which is more like the defender desperately coming up for air. Ideally it would be predictable to some extent and harshly counterable if predicted.
 
Riposte said:
Well, my point of view, which is more important than whatever fantasy I have in my head for a hypothetical new Marvel, is this: Super long combos are not good things, because they take an aspect of a game and overindulges on that to the point where it is essentially one person playing for several seconds. This means a pure execution test with virtually no strategic value. By adding complications to the combo process in a way that is more advanced than "Stop the combo" (i.e. burst, though Mortal Kombat's in particular would be the best comparison) I think you are adding depth to a game and ultimately making it more interesting (especially if it stops ToD combos).

Balance problems aside, what I see is "Oh, he is going to tech this, so instead I'm going to go for a throw when I knock him down." That is more interesting to me than another few seconds of combo.
Click to expand...
Some games emphasize combos more, some less. Marvel has a history of being all about the combos, and I don't think that should change. I do think a few characters have combos that go on too long and are boring to watch, though, like Zero.

The big problem with making combos shorter, while still retaining the versatility and comboability of the game, is that someone will always find a way to break the system, and then that character is just too good. That's basically what happened in MvC2. It's designed as an ABC combo game, and then it turns out that a small portion of the cast has ways around it.

Then, if you make combos shorter, you have to deal with the lack of variance in combos. Part of the fun of the game is always exploring what new crazy stuff you can do. You don't want to be demoted to ABC stuff. So, in a sense, I feel where you are coming from - it's best for both players to be playing as much as possible. However, I wonder how you would actually make that happen without ruining what makes the game so great.

SolarPowered said:
This is somewhat true. The three gods(and Cable) are beast, but the match is nearly almost always over once your two characters are gone and you have to face a MagSenSto(or Cable) team. You are assed out whether your anchor is a top tier or the bottom 90%. X-factor is the great equalizer in a game that sometimes feels like a fighting game version of Russian roulette.
Click to expand...
And even then, you need to be damn good with your anchor to make the X-Factor comeback. The biggest problem with X-Factor is people still aren't performing snapbacks in response to guard cancels. It's criminal at this point.
 
Karsticles said:
Are you saying MvC3 does not take skill?

What do OTGs matter?

No comeback factor is exactly why MvC2 was more BS than MvC3. It's borderline impossible to make a full-on comeback in MvC2; the borderline is for FG deities like Justin Wong. This is not Street Fighter. When you lose a teammate, you've lost more than 1/3 of your health.


Hey, and that's cool. If you want the first time you touch your opponent to determine the entire match, that's your game. You play it. I just don't want people to pretend that MvC3 offering a way to come back from that first touch somehow makes it more BS than MvC2.
Click to expand...

kirblar said:
Mortal Kombat's breaker system is the absolute worst thing about that game.
Click to expand...

The breaker system is fine in mk.
 
X-factor is the great equalizer in a game that sometimes feels like a fighting game version of Russian roulette.
Click to expand...
And the trick is that anyone "feels" like they can win, but if the game is so random, why are the same players always on top?

:iiam
 
Vice said:
Nope to Viscant,just bad execution.

UltraDavid has a problem and Sanford too, I believe. I don't remember what Sanford has though.
Click to expand...

No, Viscant has serious hand problems from doing Judo or something. Thats why he flexes his hands a ton in between matches.
 
I wouldn't terribly mind a burst in Mvc3 provided the following things are applied:

1) Tied to the x factor system. Using x factor as a combo breaker nullifies it completely (its depleted completely on that usage)

2) Upon usage it has to have some active frames during which if you are hit it triggers the burst. The burst activation can be baited by delaying a combo string so you can block/avoid the trigger and punish its recovery.

3) Does not allow you to combo after the burst.

This would provide an interesting mechanic where you can save your character once from a combo at a hefty cost, most useful when you get tagged by a lvlxf character and you don't want to lose a character and have to deal with an incoming mix up.
 
biosnake20 said:
Marvel 3's only major problems are TACs and the speed boost you get in X-Factor. Oh and X-Factor guard cancel.
Click to expand...
TACs, sure. The speed boost is necessary, and XFC is not a problem at all. Technology to deal with XFCs has been around since Vanilla, but no one does it. It blows my mind that the scene has not evolved to handle this yet.

Dahbomb said:
I wouldn't terribly mind a burst in Mvc3 provided the following things are applied:

1) Tied to the x factor system. Using x factor as a combo breaker nullifies it completely (its depleted completely on that usage)

2) Upon usage it has to have some active frames during which if you are hit it triggers the burst. The burst activation can be baited by delaying a combo string so you can block/avoid the trigger and punish its recovery.

3) Does not allow you to combo after the burst.

This would provide an interesting mechanic where you can save your character once from a combo at a hefty cost, most useful when you get tagged by a lvlxf character and you don't want to lose a character and have to deal with an incoming mix up.
Click to expand...
I don't think this is bad, but I don't think it adds anything to the game either. The only characters that would use it are those with ToD point character combos like Zero...I think I'd rather not give Zero a survival option.
 
KingItachi said:
No Mvc 2 took skill and had no rampant otg's and no comeback factor.
Click to expand...
Regarding skill, lol. I like the fact that OTGs are a part of the game. Most games have very situational OTGs and that's fine, because those games weren't built around them. Comeback factor I agree but, almost every new fighting game that's released has some sort of comeback factor now.
Dahbomb said:
But it had on point pseudo infinites, double snap backs, true invincible assists, guard breaks, broke flight/air mechanics and a roster balance that makes Mvc3 look like a perfectly balanced game from top to bottom.

Mvc3 at high level takes a lot of skill too. I don't know what otgs and comebacks have to do with it when the entire game is about getting hits or avoiding hits/bad situations in the first place.
Click to expand...

TBH I think double snap backs in MvC2 are fair since assists don't take as much damage as their MvC3 counterparts, and they were gamechangers especially since there was said invincible assists. Snapbacks are still valuable in MvC3 but not nearly as prominent.
 
Sanford ‏@SanfordKelly
Didn't do well in Ae but still got 2nd in teams blah going to take a break and start playing UMVC3 more IFCYIPES has motivated me!!!
 
Karsticles said:
I don't think this is bad, but I don't think it adds anything to the game either. The only characters that would use it are those with ToD point character combos like Zero...I think I'd rather not give Zero a survival option.
Click to expand...
To be honest I would rather not have combo breakers at all. And the mechanic hurts Zero more because being able to survive a Zero combo could mean the difference between a win and a loss. Also if Zero uses x factor (which he isn't supposed to do because that's the reason he is the best) then that significantly weakens the entire team especially the anchors who are found on a Zero team like Vergil, Phoenix or Strider.
 
I think speed boost to a certain extent on certain characters is fine like on Hulk or Sentinel but its out of control for already fast characters with speed boosts like Vergil, wesker and wolverine.
 
1) Tied to the x factor system. Using x factor as a combo breaker nullifies it completely (its depleted completely on that usage)
Click to expand...
This is what BB:CP is doing (You get one Burst or X-Factor per round, w/ Factor length scaling with HP %) and it definitely seems like a great way to balance it out.


Didn't do well in Ae but still got 2nd in teams blah going to take a break and start playing UMVC3 more IFCYIPES has motivated me!!!
Click to expand...
Incoming Vergil?
 
Dahbomb said:
To be honest I would rather not have combo breakers at all. And the mechanic hurts Zero more because being able to survive a Zero combo could mean the difference between a win and a loss. Also if Zero uses x factor (which he isn't supposed to do because that's the reason he is the best) then that significantly weakens the entire team especially the anchors who are found on a Zero team like Vergil, Phoenix or Strider.
Click to expand...
The person facing Zero just blew XF3 for another shot at Zero, though. The thing is, there are very few situations where it's more worthwhile to combo break instead of going for XF3. You're losing a ton of offensive capacity there. It's the same reason it's almost always a mistake to blow X-Factor to save a character from chip damage.

biosnake20 said:
How is the speed boost necessary?
Click to expand...
How do you expect characters like Sentinel to touch teams without X-Factor? Have you ever played Sentinel on point? Against a good player, it's suicide. A character like Wesker might not need it, but characters like Dr. Doom and Sentinel sure as heck do. Or imagine you're facing Morrigan + Doom. Your first two characters couldn't get in, why would your third be able to with just a speed boost?

The speed boost is there to make up for the lack of screen control you normally have via assists. If you get rid of it, X-Factor will primarily become something people use mid-combo to ensure characters die.

Dahbomb said:
I think speed boost to a certain extent on certain characters is fine like on Hulk or Sentinel but its out of control for already fast characters with speed boosts like Vergil, wesker and wolverine.
Click to expand...
Hulk gets no speed boost, which is why he's terrible on anchor. I'm glad you brought him up because it proves my point, though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Capcom Fighting Collection 2 - Reviews Thread
2
85
2K
cireza replied
The House of the Dead 2: Remake releasing August 7
11
108
GateofD replied
Switch 2 fans are fighting the scalpers.
2
96
5K
Gamer79 replied
  • Locked
Marathon Delayed to September 23
News 
14
117
Kotaro replied
Status of compatibility tests for Nintendo Switch games on Nintendo Switch 2 (Updated May 27, based on testing data from April 24, 2025)
27
713
kevboard replied
Top Bottom