Meter: Yay or nay?

Do you like how it has been implemented in DOA6 so far?


  • Total voters
    86
About meter, i'm late to the discussion.

I understand how it can be seen as a negative thing on 3d fighters in specific (even Shimbori knows that). But i'm not against the implementation of it, the thing is, is how is implemented.

I don't think i ever played a 3d figter that had meter (besides tekken 7, but i didn't use the meter characters), but i think it can be implemented well.

So far what we know, the meter will only serve to give you break blows and break holds, so basically a super strike, and a super hold. Those two moves are dangerous, and i think so far they are a bigger worry than the meter itself.

Then we have the other thing, how meter management will work? will you carry meter between rounds? How do you get it? If it is only by hitting the oponent, or doing correct holds and throws, i'm happy, but if you get it by getting hit it gets problematic.

All those things could add layers to the gameplay, and that could be good, the only thing that makes me worried is how those mechanics tied to meter seem to be above the triangle system, an universal hold that gives you advantage is not that problematic, but i would be better if it was just a tool to get back to neutral. Break Blows should act like regular strikes as well, and i'm not sure if it is possible right now, but it shouldn't be possible to do them from a critical stun position.
The kinda strange thing is that it seems to fill at an almost identical rate for both fighters. Like you get 100% conversion to meter for attacking, and 90% conversion for getting hit. I havent seen a situation yet where one character doesn't get a full meter with just one attack after the opponent already has full meter.
There could very well be many circumstances where both fighters get full meter at the same time and unless a break blow beats everything even other break blows, i can also imagine many occurrences where someone uses their break blow and the other person immediately uses their own to counter it. The animation is flashy sure, but its really reducing the gameplay one-dimensionally. There are clearly obvious places to use the break blow in a similar way that a power move in DOA5 would be obvious after a critical stun. Its an added extra feature that ironically reduces variety in gameplay.
 
Last edited:

d3v

Well-Known Member
In contrast... SF IV's Ultras were Invincible 6 Frame Attacks... their only saving grace was the Freeze Frame gave you a second to think about how you could avoid getting murdered by one... usually by countering with an Ultra Of your Own.
This pretty much demonstrates the opinion of someone who doesn't understand how SFIV is played at a high level, and is approaching all of this discussion with a scrubby mindset.

Raw Ultra was pretty bad except for some specific situations (chipping someone to death when you had no EX). At high level play, this usually ended up just getting blocked and punished.

Which brings me to another point. These super type moves are usually highly unsafe on block, and I believe that that is the case here as well. I don't get why people are complaining about them being invulnerable to everything but low (especially when we've had examples in other games that were fully invincible, from full screen even). I guess people just want to press buttons, but sometimes, the correct button is block.

Then we have the other thing, how meter management will work? will you carry meter between rounds? How do you get it? If it is only by hitting the oponent, or doing correct holds and throws, i'm happy, but if you get it by getting hit it gets problematic.

Meter is SF style, carries over between rounds, which should lead to an additional level of decision making (i.e. should I spend meter now, or save it for the following round).

You can see it at 5:21 of the IGN Live video.

Also, the way you gain it is also like traditional meter, both by hitting and getting hit (though at different amounts).
 
Last edited:

Brute

Well-Known Member
Standard Donor
the way you gain it is also like traditional meter, both by hitting and getting hit (though at different amounts).
Fundamentally, rewarding players for failure is a bad idea.


These super type moves are usually highly unsafe on block, and I believe that that is the case here as well. I don't get why people are complaining about them being invulnerable to everything but low (especially when we've had examples in other games that were fully invincible, from full screen even). I guess people just want to press buttons, but sometimes, the correct button is block.
Block is still a button. I actually like that button quite a bit (more than most DOA players), but I also don't like the idea of the meta looking like For Honor. Furthermore, I'm not exactly psyched about the meta shifting to favor ankle-biters even more than it currently does.
 

Lulu

Well-Known Member
This pretty much demonstrates the opinion of someone who doesn't understand how SFIV is played at a high level, and is approaching all of this discussion with a scrubby mindset.

Not surprising considering the game doesn't have a proper tutorial...

Raw Ultra was pretty bad except for some specific situations (chipping someone to death when you had no EX). At high level play, this usually ended up j

Well obviously you wouldn't use Ultras on a someone whos currently in defensive mode... you wouldn't be taking advantage of the invincibility.

Meter is SF style, carries over between rounds, which should lead to an additional level of decision making (i.e. should I spend meter now, or save it for the following round).

This sort of decision making is actually falsf because in order for it be interesting you have craft a hypothetical situation that would make it seem even more ideal to use Meter then instead of right now. This is something DoA definitely doesn't need and might actually become worse because of this.
 
This pretty much demonstrates the opinion of someone who doesn't understand how SFIV is played at a high level, and is approaching all of this discussion with a scrubby mindset.

Raw Ultra was pretty bad except for some specific situations (chipping someone to death when you had no EX). At high level play, this usually ended up just getting blocked and punished.

Which brings me to another point. These super type moves are usually highly unsafe on block, and I believe that that is the case here as well. I don't get why people are complaining about them being invulnerable to everything but low (especially when we've had examples in other games that were fully invincible, from full screen even). I guess people just want to press buttons, but sometimes, the correct button is block.



Meter is SF style, carries over between rounds, which should lead to an additional level of decision making (i.e. should I spend meter now, or save it for the following round).

Also, the way you gain it is also like traditional meter, both by hitting and getting hit (though at different amounts).
The invulnerability frames just feel cheap and look bad. Attacks that clearly look like they should connect and stuff the charging simply pass through and do nothing. From a mechanical perspective, the break blow functions as an attack combined with a hold thanks to these invulnerable frames, but its an easy cheesy hold that covers mid kicks, mid punches, and high attacks, on top of dealing loads more damage than a hold would. It'd make much more sense just to have super powered directional holds that still require you know how to actually perform holds correctly.

Around 5:40 in the video you posted, Helena uses her fatal rush and appears to combo directly into the break blow from it inside of an 11 hit combo.

It almost seems like this is the way it should be, that you shouldn't just be abled to do a break blow raw with invincibility, but rather its supposed to be part of the fatal rush combo. If that whole combo took meter to do, it would then make sense how Break Hold is meant to get you out of it.

Jesus. Is this literally all that has to change? Was Helena even supposed to be able to combo into it from fatal rush?
 
Last edited:

d3v

Well-Known Member
@Brute traditional meter systems still reward some meter for getting hit, because to not do otherwise would skew the gameplay the other way. So the solution is to give meter in both cases, but give more for hitting an opponent, than getting hit. This way, getting hit a few times doesn't snowball out of control into a situation where it's nigh impossible to make a comeback.

In other words, this wouldn't have been possible if you also didn't get some meter for getting hit.



Not surprising considering the game doesn't have a proper tutorial...



Well obviously you wouldn't use Ultras on a someone whos currently in defensive mode... you wouldn't be taking advantage of the invincibility.
You can't teach high level since that's something you learn from fighting, and losing to other players.

Besides, a lot about meter can be learned simply through experience and careful observation (the same way a Soul game isn't really hard, if you use careful observation). The most basic here being, "you know they have meter, why the hell are you changing the way you play up because they have meter?" Meter changes match ups, not just the move, but from the mere fact that it's charged alone.
This sort of decision making is actually falsf because in order for it be interesting you have craft a hypothetical situation that would make it seem even more ideal to use Meter then instead of right now. This is something DoA definitely doesn't need and might actually become worse because of this.

Except this isn't hypothetical and is something that happens in actual Street Fighter matches For example, going back to 3rd Strike, if a Chun is losing but has enough meter that they might get a hit in to confirm to super (but not another), they might still opt to save the meter for the next round simply because of the sheer advantage having that meter stocked gives. Aside from allowing for big (40%+) damage into a reset, it also nullifies all projectiles, and gives her numerous advantageous option selects on knockdown. It's an even more important choice when there's the chance that spending the meter now may not give the win, but will instead result in not having meter the next round against an opponent that's fully stocked.

The invulnerability frames just feel cheap and look bad. Attacks that clearly look like they should connect and stuff the charging simply pass through and do nothing. From a mechanical perspective, the break blow functions as an attack combined with a hold thanks to these invulnerable frames, but its an easy cheesy hold that covers mid kicks, mid punches, and high attacks, on top of dealing loads more damage than a hold would. It'd make much more sense just to have super powered directional holds that still require you know how to actually perform holds correctly.

Around 5:40 in the video you posted, Helena uses her fatal rush and appears to combo directly into the break blow from it inside of an 11 hit combo.

It almost seems like this is the way it should be, that you shouldn't just be abled to do a break blow raw with invincibility, but rather its supposed to be part of the fatal rush combo. If that whole combo took meter to do, it would then make sense how Break Hold is meant to get you out of it.
Except that actually makes it a terrible meter system.

Effective meter systems are one where a meter powered move is more than just a glorified combo extender. As I stated above meter changes match ups, however it would be more correct to say that meter should change match ups.

What you don't want is for meter to be a single obvious choice for a single situation. In other words, you don't want it to just be something you should pop every time you get a combo or juggle. A meter powered move needs more uses, so that there's more decision making and nuance to its use, which also leads to more interactions around it.

Let's take another look at another well designed super from SF - Cammy's Cross Stinger Assault from SFV. Aside from being an obvious combo extender for big damage, it also serves a couple of other situations. First, it can work as an anti-air, second it can nullify fireballs. So then, the Cammy player has to juggle all these options, looking to the one which they think will give them more advantages in the long run. While at the same time, the opposing player now has to think of these options, and see if they can't use one or the other to try to bait it out and force her to spend meter.
Jesus. Is this literally all that has to change? Was Helena even supposed to be able to combo into it from fatal rush?
The last hit of Fatal Rush triggers Break Blow if meter is stocked.
 
Last edited:
@Brute traditional meter systems still reward some meter for getting hit, because to not do otherwise would skew the gameplay the other way. So the solution is to give meter in both cases, but give more for hitting an opponent, than getting hit. This way, getting hit a few times doesn't snowball out of control into a situation where it's nigh impossible to make a comeback.

In other words, this wouldn't have been possible if you also didn't get some meter for getting hit.




You can't teach high level since that's something you learn from fighting, and losing to other players.

Besides, a lot about meter can be learned simply through experience and careful observation (the same way a Soul game isn't really hard, if you use careful observation). The most basic here being, "you know they have meter, why the hell are you changing the way you play up because they have meter?" Meter changes match ups, not just the move, but from the mere fact that it's charged alone.


Except this isn't hypothetical and is something that happens in actual Street Fighter matches For example, going back to 3rd Strike, if a Chun is losing but has enough meter that they might get a hit in to confirm to super (but not another), they might still opt to save the meter for the next round simply because of the sheer advantage having that meter stocked gives. Aside from allowing for big (40%+) damage into a reset, it also nullifies all projectiles, and gives her numerous advantageous option selects on knockdown. It's an even more important choice when there's the chance that spending the meter now may not give the win, but will instead result in not having meter the next round against an opponent that's fully stocked.


Except that actually makes it a terrible meter system.

Effective meter systems are one where a meter powered move is more than just a glorified combo extender. As I stated above meter changes match ups, however it would be more correct to say that meter should change match ups.

What you don't want is for meter to be a single obvious choice for a single situation. In other words, you don't want it to just be something you should pop every time you get a combo or juggle. A meter powered move needs more uses, so that there's more decision making and nuance to its use, which also leads to more interactions around it.

Let's take another look at another well designed super from SF - Cammy's Cross Stinger Assault from SFV. Aside from being an obvious combo extender for big damage, it also serves a couple of other situations. First, it can work as an anti-air, second it can nullify fireballs. So then, the Cammy player has to juggle all these options, looking to the one which they think will give them more advantages in the long run. While at the same time, the opposing player now has to think of these options, and see if they can't use one or the other to try to bait it out and force her to spend meter.

The last hit of Fatal Rush triggers Break Blow if meter is stocked.

Actually, I think I was misunderstanding the mechanics earlier. I thought fatal stun occurred from the first hit of the fatal rush, but it occurs from the last hit and the fatal rush just arbitrarily can't be held after the first hit. I think the intent there is that fatal stun is like DOA5 critical stun, allowing you a free moment to use the Break Blow. This raises even more question as to why a raw break blow has invulnerability when performed if there already exists a free place after fatal stun to guarantee it... like, its clearly supposed to be unsafe to use outside of fatal stun.

Ok ok ok.. i see.. all they need to do is split the meter in half, make fatal rush cost half a meter, and make break hold/break blow also cost half a meter, on top of removing invulnerability from break blow, so you spend 1 bar to initiate a fatal rush, you get fatal stun and you can capitalize with a launch or a combo - or if you have another bar, you can use the break blow.

I think they'll also need to tinker with how the meter fills but i'm almost certain this is how it should be.

Considering how beefy the new sidestep attack is, I'd even suggest that cost some meter to perform too. Just everything on that S button should cost meter.

The game is going to be retarded if it ships with the features behaving exactly as we've seen them in footage so far.
 
Last edited:

MasterHavik

Well-Known Member
I don't think DOA needs meter. The same goes for Soul Calibur. I'm happy Tekken is jsut supers but people just want to do actual fighting. Why do we need to do all this flashy shit to bring in the 2D crowd? Someone like Daigo will play DOA because it is interesting not because we have characters doing backflips.
 
Last edited:

Brute

Well-Known Member
Standard Donor
@Brute traditional meter systems still reward some meter for getting hit,
There is zero part of me that finds validity in something for being "traditional."

because to not do otherwise would skew the gameplay the other way. So the solution is to give meter in both cases, but give more for hitting an opponent, than getting hit. This way, getting hit a few times doesn't snowball out of control into a situation where it's nigh impossible to make a comeback.
Well, yeah, but it's a shitty/lazy excuse. There are two (better) alternatives to that problem:

1) Balance each technique/scenario without meters thrown into the mix.
2) Give reasonable options to defend against meter-burning techniques that don't burn meter themselves.

Both are preferable to "let's just hand out meter builds because we forgot how to properly balance the game without them."

In other words, this wouldn't have been possible if you also didn't get some meter for getting hit.
Oh no. I care so much. It's a famous incident in a community, so I'm obliged to revere it.
 

Lulu

Well-Known Member
You can't teach high level since that's something you learn from fighting, and losing to other players.

What about Teaching Basic Level ? Apparently Capcom couldn't be bothered with that either. Tutorials Teach better than just throw yourself into matches and losing over and over again.

Besides, a lot about meter can be learned simply through experience and careful observation (the same way a Soul game isn't really hard, if you use careful observation)

I'm glad you brought up The Souls series because its utterly rubbish at teaching anything... its the samething in Street Fighter.... why do I need to repetitively test each move against every other move instead of the game just telling me what it does ?

Except this isn't hypothetical and is something that happens in actual Street Fighter matches For example, going back to 3rd Strike, if a Chun is losing but has enough meter that they might get a hit in to confirm to super (but not another), they might still opt to save the meter for the next round simply because of the sheer advantage having that meter stocked gives.

Thats a Text Book Hypothetical Situation... through and through...

Aside from allowing for big (40%+) damage into a reset, it also nullifies all projectiles, and gives her numerous advantageous option selects on knockdown. It's an even more important choice when there's the chance that spending the meter now may not give the win, but will instead result in not having meter the next round against an opponent that's fully stocked.

LoL... yeah I see this in Street Fighter alot... particularly when it comes to V-Triggers... and honestly if you make meter so powerful that said Hypothetical Situations are so likely that they are pretty much guaraneed.... then the game may have a local imbalance problem.

Infact the more I think about meter the more and more problematic it becomes.... and not just in Fighting Games. Resource tethered mechanics are always just going to come off as lazy design... like Dark Souls and its Stamina bar.
 

d3v

Well-Known Member
There is zero part of me that finds validity in something for being "traditional."


Well, yeah, but it's a shitty/lazy excuse. There are two (better) alternatives to that problem:

1) Balance each technique/scenario without meters thrown into the mix.
2) Give reasonable options to defend against meter-burning techniques that don't burn meter themselves.

Both are preferable to "let's just hand out meter builds because we forgot how to properly balance the game without them."


Oh no. I care so much. It's a famous incident in a community, so I'm obliged to revere it.
Because meter loses value if it doesn't cost a resource to fight against it. Meter only adds to the system if the meter itself has value. And meter gains value by powering strong options.

And it's not like how meter gain works was something arbitrarily decided on day. Tons of people, some smarter than us, have tackled this problem, and while we've come to numerous other solutions and permutations, the general consensus seems to be to reward different amounts of meter on offense and defense.

Actually, I think I was misunderstanding the mechanics earlier. I thought fatal stun occurred from the first hit of the fatal rush, but it occurs from the last hit and the fatal rush just arbitrarily can't be held after the first hit. I think the intent there is that fatal stun is like DOA5 critical stun, allowing you a free moment to use the Break Blow. This raises even more question as to why a raw break blow has invulnerability when performed if there already exists a free place after fatal stun to guarantee it... like, its clearly supposed to be unsafe to use outside of fatal stun.

Ok ok ok.. i see.. all they need to do is split the meter in half, make fatal rush cost half a meter, and make break hold/break blow also cost half a meter, on top of removing invulnerability from break blow, so you spend 1 bar to initiate a fatal rush, you get fatal stun and you can capitalize with a launch or a combo - or if you have another bar, you can use the break blow.

I think they'll also need to tinker with how the meter fills but i'm almost certain this is how it should be.

No, no, no! This makes it bad meter system because now, your "super" only serves as a glorified combo ender. We're back to the same problem with PBs in DOA5 (that no one noticed) -- they have almost zero value in neutral. In 5, this was tempered by the fact that PBs were tied to a comeback system. But in 6, this doesn't work when we have a proper meter.

Considering how beefy the new sidestep attack is, I'd even suggest that cost some meter to perform too. Just everything on that S button should cost meter.
Oh lord no. One of the big, legitimate criticisms about DOA is how linear it can get due to sidesteps being not as good, combined with almost everything being able to retrack

Heck, while the new system seems a bit iffy, at least it seems that it's invulnerable against strings that re-track.

What about Teaching Basic Level ? Apparently Capcom couldn't be bothered with that either. Tutorials Teach better than just throw yourself into matches and losing over and over again.



I'm glad you brought up The Souls series because its utterly rubbish at teaching anything... its the samething in Street Fighter.... why do I need to repetitively test each move against every other move instead of the game just telling me what it does ?
Okay, now you just trippin'

These games work this way because they expect you to not just barrel head first into everything, but to stop, look, and observe, so you actually learn what you need to do that way. They're not there to hold your hand and spoonfeed you everything.
LoL... yeah I see this in Street Fighter alot... particularly when it comes to V-Triggers... and honestly if you make meter so powerful that said Hypothetical Situations are so likely that they are pretty much guaraneed.... then the game may have a local imbalance problem.
Because here's a mindblowing revelation - small imbalances aren't a problem. Because fighting games are at their most interesting when asymmetrical and at times imbalanced options clash. They're actually more fun and compelling when there are these uneven situations where a player has to overcome uneven odds. Because true balance in any game only comes from having totally equal sides - however this is, more often than not boring when both players can just use the same options to cancel each other out. It takes a highly complex system, more complex than any single fighting game character can provide to make this kind of system interesting.
 
Last edited:

Brute

Well-Known Member
Standard Donor
Because meter loses value if it doesn't cost a resource to fight against it. Meter only adds to the system if the meter itself has value. And meter gains value by powering strong options.
Well, yes. It should lose value. That's my point. It has too much value to the point that the game's mechanics begin to rely on its value. When you rely on meters, the rest of the game's features that don't involve meters won't be properly balanced because they are all tailored in consideration to the meter system. Your argument thus far has essentially been that meters justify themselves because they add complexity. My point is that complexity for complexity's sake is not inherently a good thing.

Tons of people, some smarter than us, have tackled this problem
Smarter than you, perhaps.
 
Because meter loses value if it doesn't cost a resource to fight against it. Meter only adds to the system if the meter itself has value. And meter gains value by powering strong options.

And it's not like how meter gain works was something arbitrarily decided on day. Tons of people, some smarter than us, have tackled this problem, and while we've come to numerous other solutions and permutations, the general consensus seems to be to reward different amounts of meter on offense and defense.



No, no, no! This makes it bad meter system because now, your "super" only serves as a glorified combo ender. We're back to the same problem with PBs in DOA5 (that no one noticed) -- they have almost zero value in neutral. In 5, this was tempered by the fact that PBs were tied to a comeback system. But in 6, this doesn't work when we have a proper meter.


Oh lord no. One of the big, legitimate criticisms about DOA is how linear it can get due to sidesteps being not as good, combined with almost everything being able to retrack

Heck, while the new system seems a bit iffy, at least it seems that it's invulnerable against strings that re-track.
No dude.
The shit parts about DOA5 can be fixed by locking them behind meter. Glorified combo ender or not, thats how supers work in every other game. Glorified combo ender or not, having an explicit cost to retrieve fatal stun rather than getting critical stun for free in DOA5 is a supremely better idea.

And sidesteps are broken as shit in DOA. No one complains about "linearity" in DOA; freestepping and positioning are more important in DOA than any other 3D fighter because of obstacles. Other games have sidestep dodging cause they don't have holds, but DOA has holds. Its much more clutch and hype to use holds properly than a near universal free dodge mechanic.
The sidestep attacks in DOA6 footage so far are way too good to be done for free, just like the Fatal Rush combo is. Just in the announcement trailer, Helena does a sidestep attack from stun and it blasts kasumi into a wall, getting to follow up with wallbounce combo and a wallsplat. This is tremendously more damage than would be possible if helena instead practically used and landed a hold, which would at most just nail a wall splat.

No no no no..
You don't know what you're talking about..
This game will be retarded if these things aren't changed.
 

Monkeygigabuster

Well-Known Member
When I heard of meter being appeared in DOA6 I was expected for powered up versions of regular attacks that can be used by burning meter in order to extend combo ( kinda like Rage Drive in TEkken 7)

Now I know that it was dedicated to break hold and break lows only,I was a little bit dissapointed.
 

XxSakuraLuvaxX

Active Member
I really don't like the concept of meter- I always felt like DOA stood out from other fighters by not having any 'specials' as they felt like gimmicks, (to me,) and because of that I was super opposed to CB, PB PL and such in DOA5.. but of course they happened, and the meter isn't going to leave any time soon, so i'll just have to deal with it.

something I just want to point out, auto-combo is the literal worst definition that SSSS thing could be called- it's a string like any other as H+P+K H+P+K H+P+K H+P+K except you need meter use it and meter to get out of it.

anyway ! if they're going to take tekken's power crush thing, they might as well go the whole way by adding a pause + special effect when it beats another move, because it just going straight through moves looks terrible.
Helena does a sidestep attack from stun and it blasts kasumi into a wall, getting to follow up with wallbounce combo and a wallsplat.
from the trailer? kasumi's 6K > 66P doesn't connect, the stun from 6K is too short- helena just sidestepped after the stun ended.
 

d3v

Well-Known Member
No dude.
The shit parts about DOA5 can be fixed by locking them behind meter. Glorified combo ender or not, thats how supers work in every other game. Glorified combo ender or not, having an explicit cost to retrieve fatal stun rather than getting critical stun for free in DOA5 is a supremely better idea.
Or, considering the amount of startup Fatal Rush has, you could just block it. Besides, Fatal Rush isn't a super, it's a slow string that leads to an unholdable combo (save for Break Hold).

Which leads me to the other, important part about Fatal Stun -- that of being a tool to bait out Break Hold. Break Hold loses value if you can do the same job with a bit more yomi with regular holds. If you've read your opponent and know the routes they use, why use Break Hold at all. Fatal Stun at least gives a place where you're forced to have to Break Hold.
And sidesteps are broken as shit in DOA. No one complains about "linearity" in DOA; freestepping and positioning are more important in DOA than any other 3D fighter because of obstacles. Other games have sidestep dodging cause they don't have holds, but DOA has holds. Its much more clutch and hype to use holds properly than a near universal free dodge mechanic.
The sidestep attacks in DOA6 footage so far are way too good to be done for free, just like the Fatal Rush combo is. Just in the announcement trailer, Helena does a sidestep attack from stun and it blasts kasumi into a wall, getting to follow up with wallbounce combo and a wallsplat. This is tremendously more damage than would be possible if helena instead practically used and landed a hold, which would at most just nail a wall splat.

No no no no..
You don't know what you're talking about..
This game will be retarded if these things aren't changed.
Now you're just trippin'.
Well, yes. It should lose value. That's my point. It has too much value to the point that the game's mechanics begin to rely on its value. When you rely on meters, the rest of the game's features that don't involve meters won't be properly balanced because they are all tailored in consideration to the meter system. Your argument thus far has essentially been that meters justify themselves because they add complexity. My point is that complexity for complexity's sake is not inherently a good thing.
Because historical data shows that meter systems have made games better, or at least more interesting. At the same time, do the original, non meter powered features really lose out as much? Any meter powered option shouldn't supersede its non-meter powered equivalent if the system is balanced enough. Historically, we've seen this to not happen, as when meter powered options are strong, it makes people try to keep those options and try to rely on non-meter powered equivalents. When meter powered options are weak however, that's when people start to favor one option more (e.g. 3S Alex, who has no good Super Arts, therefore players prefer just to use EXs more).

If anything, as demonstrated in my statement above, making stuff too weak in the face of what the game already has might make them pointless. Who's going to Break Hold once they've read their opponent and know their favored routes so that they can hold or even just slow escape out of their combos? Which is the reason why I believe Shimbori added Fatal Stun, so that there is a situation where someone is forced to Break Hold, even if it is hard to hit with that in the first place.
 
I really don't like the concept of meter- I always felt like DOA stood out from other fighters by not having any 'specials' as they felt like gimmicks, (to me,) and because of that I was super opposed to CB, PB PL and such in DOA5.. but of course they happened, and the meter isn't going to leave any time soon, so i'll just have to deal with it.

something I just want to point out, auto-combo is the literal worst definition that SSSS thing could be called- it's a string like any other as H+P+K H+P+K H+P+K H+P+K except you need meter use it and meter to get out of it.

anyway ! if they're going to take tekken's power crush thing, they might as well go the whole way by adding a pause + special effect when it beats another move, because it just going straight through moves looks terrible.

from the trailer? kasumi's 6K > 66P doesn't connect, the stun from 6K is too short- helena just sidestepped after the stun ended.
The SSSS combo doesn't take any meter unless you have it, at which point it automatically tacks on the Break Blow at the end for you. It should definitely take meter just to do SSSS without the finisher, but in the footage that isn't the case.
And regardless if theres a neutral frame of Helena recovering to idle in there or not (it really doesn't look too different than holding out of stun to me but whatever), she still gets to capitalize off it in a big way that being forced to hold out of stun wouldn't. Its really just skirting the hold mechanics outright. Sidestep stuff didn't belong in DOA5 and it still doesn't belong in DOA6, but if it absolutely had to stay I'd say definitely make it require meter to use so it at least has a cost to balance out how much better than Hold it is.

Or, considering the amount of startup Fatal Rush has, you could just block it. Besides, Fatal Rush isn't a super, it's a slow string that leads to an unholdable combo (save for Break Hold).

Which leads me to the other, important part about Fatal Stun -- that of being a tool to bait out Break Hold. Break Hold loses value if you can do the same job with a bit more yomi with regular holds. If you've read your opponent and know the routes they use, why use Break Hold at all. Fatal Stun at least gives a place where you're forced to have to Break Hold.

Now you're just trippin'.

Because historical data shows that meter systems have made games better, or at least more interesting. At the same time, do the original, non meter powered features really lose out as much? Any meter powered option shouldn't supersede its non-meter powered equivalent if the system is balanced enough. Historically, we've seen this to not happen, as when meter powered options are strong, it makes people try to keep those options and try to rely on non-meter powered equivalents. When meter powered options are weak however, that's when people start to favor one option more (e.g. 3S Alex, who has no good Super Arts, therefore players prefer just to use EXs more).

If anything, as demonstrated in my statement above, making stuff too weak in the face of what the game already has might make them pointless. Who's going to Break Hold once they've read their opponent and know their favored routes so that they can hold or even just slow escape out of their combos? Which is the reason why I believe Shimbori added Fatal Stun, so that there is a situation where someone is forced to Break Hold, even if it is hard to hit with that in the first place.
If we go back to 5:36 from the gameplay interview footage, Helena knocks jannlee into a dangerzone and Jann comes out of it with "Critical Stun" on his side of the screen. So first off, the fatal rush isn't really THAT slow, so if Helena wanted, i do not doubt she could have connected her fatal rush high kick as the first move in JannLee's recovery. Instead she does a normal highkick as the first move, followed by the fatal rush. It seems very likely there will be critical stun situations that would allow a Fatal Rush to connect for free.

I feel it makes way more sense to have the super meter be cut in half and all S button moves use 1 bar, or have one half of the bar cut into 4 parts where each part will be consumed for each S in the fatal rush.
Can you not admit something about these new mechanics ought to change? Come on.

In that situation with Jann Lee and Helena, Jann had full bar where he could have broken out of helena's fatal rush if he wanted. If he had though, he'd have lost his full bar and Helena would still have full bar to try again, and if all of this had happened then Jann wouldn't be able to escape the second fatal rush attempt. If we just implemented this idea of 2-part meter, jann would be knocked down to 1/2 bar after escaping the initial fatal rush, and Helena would have 1/2 + 1/4 bar, so if she tried fatal rush again and jann decided to not spend the meter, she would get fatal stun but not be granted the free Break Blow add-on since jann played his cards right and should be rewarded for spending his meter in a larger way than just getting to live a little longer which is all break holds from fatal rush seem to do as-is.

If you and your opponent have meter in the DOA6 demo footage and your opponent connects their first S in fatal rush, sure you can burn your whole meter to escape the full rush, but the break hold only does something like 15pts of damage in this situation and seems to reset you and your opponent at a neutral distance with neutral frames; and then its just you with no bar versus an opponent with full bar giving them a situational-advantage even at neutral. You ultimately end up damned if you use break hold and damned if you don't, the real reward for burning the whole meter to escape fatal rush doesn't actually exist in the game under these rules because it costs nothing to initiate a fatal rush to guarantee a break blow, but it costs everything to escape the fatal rush.
 
Last edited:

Lulu

Well-Known Member
Because meter loses value if it doesn't cost a resource to fight against it. Meter only adds to the system if the meter itself has value. And meter gains value by powering strong options.

So just so we're clear...
Meter needs to be strong enough that it needs meter to counter it ? Otherwise whats the point of implementing Meter in the first place ?

This reminds me of RPG Style Progression Systems... Levelling would be pointless if it didn't make it easier to kill enemies but enemies not putting up a fight made the game too easy so they could scale the enemies to your level but then theres no point in using that Progression System in the first place...

And it's not like how meter gain works was something arbitrarily decided on day. Tons of people, some smarter than us, have tackled this problem,

The best solution is not to use it... and just focus on making a game that isn't an Elaborate, High Speed War of Attrition. I mean if I wanted to see/play That then I'd just watch/play Star Craft or Dota.

No, no, no! This makes it bad meter system because now, your "super" only serves as a glorified combo ender. We're back to the same problem with PBs in DOA5 (that no one noticed) -- they have almost zero value in neutral. In 5, this was tempered by the fact that PBs were tied to a comeback system. But in 6, this doesn't work when we have a proper meter.

This actually is a Valid Point... relatively to how much effort went into them... Power Blows had little Strategic Depth compared to the other system in the game...

Ofcourse I don't think Meter is the way to go for Reason's that have already been mentioned.

Oh lord no. One of the big, legitimate criticisms about DOA is how linear it can get due to sidesteps being not as good, combined with almost everything being able to retrack

Heck, while the new system seems a bit iffy, at least it seems that it's invulnerable against strings that re-track.

Why didn't anybody just Side Step more than once ?

Don't get me wrong I didn't do it either but String Retracking is only an issue if you don't know what it is you're side stepping... I wouldn't even say that was a problem despite other game's having Stronger Sidesteps.

Okay, now you just trippin'

These games work this way because they expect you to not just barrel head first into everything, but to stop, look, and observe, so you actually learn what you need to do that way. They're not there to hold your hand and spoonfeed you everything.

You could but I don't buy games to learn to play them... I buy games to Actually play them... The learning process is a necessary process but also a tedious one so I take absolutely no issue with being spoon fed or having everything handed to me before hand without having bang my head against losing to players who have already learned the game.

Besides... games that make you learn everything through trial and error probably do it like that because they're don't have either the Depth or the content to sustain interest beyond the learning phase.... and thats fine... but it would be nice to know that before I waste my time on such a game.

Because here's a mindblowing revelation - small imbalances aren't a problem. Because fighting games are at their most interesting when asymmetrical and at times imbalanced options clash. They're actually more fun and compelling when there are these uneven situations where a player has to overcome uneven odds. Because true balance in any game only comes from having totally equal sides - however this is, more often than not boring when both players can just use the same options to cancel each other out. It takes a highly complex system, more complex than any single fighting game character can provide to make this kind of system interesting.

I Totally Agree... 100%.

The question then is... when does this go too far ? Well I would say that if Meter is the only thing that can get you out of a situation then That is anything but small.... infact its rather Large... so large in SFV that players go throught the trouble of whiffing special moves to add a couple pixels to the super bar whenever they dizzy an opponent (another dumb Relic Capcom should remove).

Because historical data shows that meter systems have made games better, or at least more interesting.

I've seen no such Data... I've seen plenty of instances when a game would be worse without it but I can't recall one where it would be better.

Who's going to Break Hold once they've read their opponent and know their favored routes so that they can hold or even just slow escape out of their combos? Which is the reason why I believe Shimbori added Fatal Stun, so that there is a situation where someone is forced to Break Hold, even if it is hard to hit with that in the first place.

So they introduced something useless that wound up being a problem then they had to include a made up problem to justify the changes they made...

The word, "Forced", Comes to mind...
 
@Rojikku posted another analysis of some new gameplay footage, original footage is here

Lots of scummy stuff imo. There are clear situations where someone can nail the fatal rush for free as the first hit against an opponent recovering from the rumble dangerzone. Jann lee even pulls a combo of fatal rush into break blow, kasumi goes flying into the crowd and gets pushed back, and Jann immediately does another fatal rush for free and gets a wallsplat. Kasumi had the opportunity to use break hold but again, damned if she does damned if she doesn't. Theres also more usage of raw break blow as a sabaki and you know what, it really does come out quick. It comes out like it really does function as a hold, like you punch just once into that then you're caught, theres no room to go to a low attack or free cancel to guard. It really is just a powerful hold that covers 3 of the 4 directions and has a gorillion active frames.

So far as I can tell, theres not much reason to spend the meter to escape from a fatal rush unless you know the following breakblow combo will K.O. you, cause you stand far more to gain in dealing damage either by raw sabaki or guaranteed BB after landing your own fatal rush. I guess its about having the decision whether you want your opponent to have full meter but potentially escape a death combo, or you let your opponent burn their meter on the full combo you know you can survive so then you're the one with situational-advantage of still having meter.

Pressing only one button for free mindgames though...:confused:
This really can't be what DOA6 is going to be...
 
Last edited:
ALL DOA6 DOA5 DOA4 DOA3 DOA2U DOAD
Top