DOA5 E3 Version Q&A

[d3v]

-Safe in 3D fighters mean a move that you cannot be punished for after it is executed.

And for fighting games in general, being safe from being punished your opponent not being able to hit you when they block your move. The concept of being "safe on hit" is mostly limited to 3D fighters. More importantly, safe on block is more relevant to the topic at hand, which is frame traps and offense.

 

[virtuaPAI]

You're making too many assumptions, and they're incorrect assumptions at that.

I cannot use any attack up to i21. I already stated that there's enough push back on the attack that my options are limited. In addition, most of the attacks in the game are unsafe, which means I risk getting punished if I use just any random attack. What you're suggesting is that I play a potentially risky game. Why should I put myself at risk after being at +12? That's ridiculous.

-You made it very clear that your opponent is attacking out of disadvantage. Not once, not twice, but every single time he was put into the situation. There is an obvious pattern that you did recognize, however, you did not take advantage of. Instead of complaining about your opponent not falling for your mix up, you had the opportunity to not only punish once, not only twice, but every single time he attacked. You utilized akira's which is a move that closes space...which was understood. Akira has other moves that would have worked in this situation and would have allowed you to punish your opponent. With this said, you are not putting yourself in a risky situation when knowing your opponent is attacking out of disadvantage. You made it so clear that everyone was playing it like it was Doa4 that it made this situation a no brainier.

-A smarter way to play, would have been you punishing him every single time he attacked out of disadvantage. Once he stopped, that is when you start going for a mixup, because he is now conditioned not to attack out of disadvantage. This is something that a High level player would do.

And I don't see how it's an unholdable situation. Seems to me like you simply don't understand the situation, despite the fact that I've clearly explained it at this point.

-Are you reading everything that I write, cause it seems like you are not. here is what I said:

Your only other choice is not a holdable stun, in fact, you have enough frame advantage to use attacks that force an un-holdable situation.

-As in you following up with an attack that causes an un holdable stun, you know, sit down, trip etc.

And for fighting games in general, being safe from being punished your opponent not being able to hit you when they block your move. The concept of being "safe on hit" is mostly limited to 3D fighters. More importantly, safe on block is more relevant to the topic at hand, which is frame traps and offense.

-I concur

 

[DrDogg]

Instead of complaining about your opponent not falling for your mix up, you had the opportunity to not only punish once, not only twice, but every single time he attacked.

I wasn't complaining that the opponent didn't fall for the mix-up. I was complaining that the opponent did not fear attacking out of disadvantage.

You utilized akira's which is a move that closes space...which was understood. Akira has other moves that would have worked in this situation and would have allowed you to punish your opponent.

Like what?

With this said, you are not putting yourself in a risky situation when knowing your opponent is attacking out of disadvantage. You made it so clear that everyone was playing it like it was Doa4 that it made this situation a no brainier.

There was no way to "know" the opponent would keep attacking out of disadvantage. In fact, a smart opponent would stop attacking out of disadvantage after getting hit the first few times. You're asking me to guess, which should not be necessary at +12.

-A smarter way to play, would have been you punishing him every single time he attacked out of disadvantage. Once he stopped, that is when you start going for a mixup, because he is now conditioned not to attack out of disadvantage. This is something that a High level player would do.

I did punish him. He kept attacking... which was the entire point of me bringing it up. >_>

As in you following up with an attack that causes an un holdable stun, you know, sit down, trip etc.

So which one of Akira's attacks leads to an unholdable stun that will reach the opponent in this situation?

Also, you can hold out of a "trip" stun.

 

[Jefffcore]

Just keep throwing the move. Really you should want him to keep hitting a button so you get CH. If he blocks he blocks, assuming you're safe it doesn't really matter. No guess needed, unless you want the damage and throw him from block.

 

[virtuaPAI]

Like what?

-, , , , These are all attacks that should cover enough ground, unless they changed the commands from VF.

There was no way to "know" the opponent would keep attacking out of disadvantage. In fact, a smart opponent would stop attacking out of disadvantage after getting hit the first few times. You're asking me to guess, which should not be necessary at +12.

-You say that, but in your previous statement you said:

They weren't attacking with a quick poke in hopes of beating out my slower attack. Aside from Rikuto, they had no recollection of the fact that they were attacking from disadvantage. They attacked because that's how they play. They ignore frame data for the most part and just attack when they want to.

-So you are going to tell me that there was no way for you to know, yet your combined experience with the E3 group made it clear that they did not care and attacked anyway. I'm sorry, but this do not add up at all. You would clearly not be guessing if "they attacked because that's how they play". That is the perfect reason to go for big punishment.

I did punish him. He kept attacking... which was the entire point of me bringing it up. >_>

-Your previous statements were:

What made it even worse is that they would beat me out to my next attack because I was trying to play smart and use frame traps while they were "just mashing".

They were playing DOA4, while I was using normal fighting game logic. I lost. Use that same scenario in Tekken, VF or SC and I win every single time.

-You lost and was beat out, how is that the same as you winning? It's not and it's a pure contradiction. If the problem was someone is attacking out of disadvantage, you solve it by using normal fighting game logic by punishing the opponent as you would in Tekken, VF or SC. If your opponent still do not learn, you punish him till the end of time.

So which one of Akira's attacks leads to an unholdable stun that will reach the opponent in this situation?

Also, you can hold out of a "trip" stun.

-You got me on that one , give me the game and i will have every single aspect of it broken down.

No need to guess, just keep throwing the move. Really you should want him to keep hitting a button so you get CH. If he blocks he blocks, assuming if you're safe it doesn't really matter. No guess needed, unless you want the damage and throw him from block.

-Exactly!

 

[Sagittarius]

With the amount of back and forth arguing going on, it's hard to tell that this is actually a Q&A thread.. But I digress.

Anyway, since Bayman is at advantage if his chain throws are broken, does this apply to every character with chain throws (Leifang, Tina, Kokoro, etc.) or just him?

 

[virtuaPAI]

With the amount of back and forth arguing going on, it's hard to tell that this is actually a Q&A thread.. But I digress.

Anyway, since Bayman is at advantage if his chain throws are broken, does this apply to every character with chain throws (Leifang, Tina, Kokoro, etc.) or just him?

-From my understanding its just for the grapplers. But things could have changed since than.

 

[Rikuto]

With the amount of back and forth arguing going on, it's hard to tell that this is actually a Q&A thread.. But I digress.

Anyway, since Bayman is at advantage if his chain throws are broken, does this apply to every character with chain throws (Leifang, Tina, Kokoro, etc.) or just him?

We argue because we care.

But I digress. The throw break advantage is going to grappler status characters at the moment, so that's Tina and Bayman as far as I'm aware. This could always change, of course, but it's supposed to be an incentive to play under that style.

 

[Sagittarius]

We argue because we care.

But I digress. The throw break advantage is going to grappler status characters at the moment, so that's Tina and Bayman as far as I'm aware. This could always change, of course, but it's supposed to be an incentive to play under that style.

Good. I hope it stays that way, I like that grapplers have a unique perk to help them with pressure game.
Thanks for the answer.

 

[Allan Paris]

Enough that even kasumi wouldn't try fucking with him.

That's some good advantage you got there.

 

[Matt Ponton]

I heard it was around +5 or something on the grappler break

 

[Rikuto]

That's some good advantage you got there.

I agree. Timing the actual break is more difficult as well for some reason. I'm not sure the exact nature of the advantage given to the attacker here, but it's pretty dominant.

 

[DrDogg]

-, , , , These are all attacks that should cover enough ground, unless they changed the commands from VF.

Every single one of those attacks is either unsafe, or doesn't cover enough distance.

-So you are going to tell me that there was no way for you to know, yet your combined experience with the E3 group made it clear that they did not care and attacked anyway. I'm sorry, but this do not add up at all. You would clearly not be guessing if "they attacked because that's how they play". That is the perfect reason to go for big punishment.

I'm going by what they should've done if they were playing smart. They were not, but that doesn't mean I know what they're going to do next. In fact, since they were not playing smart, it's even harder to determine what they're going to do next. Either way, I'm still forced to guess if I want any kind of real benefit from the situation.

The main point was that a similar frame trap in other fighting games never puts me at risk, I rarely have to guess unless I need some really big damage, and I can either get solid damage or maintain frame advantage by forcing my opponent to play smart and make the choices I set for them. In DOA that is not the case and that gives the defender no reason to stop attacking out of frame advantage.

-You lost and was beat out, how is that the same as you winning? It's not and it's a pure contradiction. If the problem was someone is attacking out of disadvantage, you solve it by using normal fighting game logic by punishing the opponent as you would in Tekken, VF or SC. If your opponent still do not learn, you punish him till the end of time.

You lost me with the whole winning thing. I win in Tekken, SC and VF with logical frame traps. I said I did not win in DOA5 because proper logic doesn't apply. I have no idea what you're referring to by bolding the part where I said I lost, then saying I didn't win. /confused

In Tekken, VF and SC, I can go for either a safe attack that will punish the opponent well, or maintain frame advantage. I can't do either in DOA5 using Akira in the example stated.

-You got me on that one , give me the game and i will have every single aspect of it broken down.

That's nice, so will I. My point was that you're theory fighting and I'm going off of how it actually works.

 

[PhoenixVFIRE]

Just out of curiosity, when should we expect that Lei Fang Exhibition Trailer? I'm pretty eagerly awaiting that

 

[DrDogg]

Just out of curiosity, when should we expect that Lei Fang Exhibition Trailer? I'm pretty eagerly awaiting that

Probably not coming at this point. I may do one before the next event, but due to circumstances out of my control, there won't be anymore exhibitions in the near future. I also will not be posting the E3 build frame data, although that's not really a big loss since in a few months it will be nothing more than a reference of how things used to be.

 

[PhoenixVFIRE]

Probably not coming at this point. I may do one before the next event, but due to circumstances out of my control, there won't be anymore exhibitions in the near future. I also will not be posting the E3 build frame data, although that's not really a big loss since in a few months it will be nothing more than a reference of how things used to be.

Ok, and yup that's true.

 

[AKNova7]

You do realize that you just contradicted yourself there because the most basic definition of safe is a move that gives + frames on block.

Also, you've got it wrong. Safe moves (+ frames on block) promote attacking (and offense in general) because they mean that there's less risk involved when you do attack.

Safe on block in games like SC, for instance, definitely mean that you're safe from being punished after your attack. I'm not sure if it means something completely different for other fighters, but that's what it means. Moves that give + frames on block would be considered a Guard Break I believe in DOA, even though that term is weird. Using a Guard Break to force your opponent on the defense would be considered a frame trap.

At least, that's how it works in the SC community. Is the terminology different? Because the stuff I was referring to is the same.

The game should have more safe moves in terms of moves that are -1, -2, -3 on block, I believe (allowing movement instead of just blocking), but not string enders. String enders should still be pretty unsafe, IMO, because that still, along with the hold system, promotes people NOT finishing their strings. VF is a game where most moves in the game by far majority are safe on block, but if you're only using a couple moves out of your strings, in DOA, you should definitely be allowed to move after playing footsies. If you're finishing your strings, or getting to the launchers of your strings, you should probably be unsafe.

Personally, I don't believe in completely safe launchers/safe combo starters. In my opinion, you should at least be jab punishable, assuming you don't finish your string. Of course, in DOA, that means you're throw punishable, but maybe the push back can be changed.

 

[Allan Paris]

Moves that give + frames on block would be considered a Guard Break I believe in DOA, even though that term is weird.

This is false, Guard Breaking someone is a way to get frame advantage in DOA. It is not the only way to be at a + in frames, attack-wise.

 

[AKNova7]

This is false, Guard Breaking someone is a way to get frame advantage in DOA. It is not the only way to be at a + in frames, attack-wise.

Maybe we should just refer to it as "Frame Advantage" and leave it at that, because, it seems as if we don't have a way to describe attacks that are not guard breaks that give frame advantage on block. In SC, it's the same thing, Guard Breaks and Frame Advantage. Problem is that we just refer to positive moves as "Frame Traps", even though that also means the act of using the move with frame advantage to trap someone with your follow-up. This just won't do.

I knew it wasn't the only way to be positive in frames, but there's not really any specific way to refer to moves that have frame advantage on block in this scenario, it seems. Because I'm pretty sure that safe in this game and in Soul Calibur is not the term to refer to it either.

 

[Allan Paris]

There isn't a 'scenario'. How about you ask what the terms are for DOA and stop trying to transfer over terminology from a different game. As I said before, you can get frame advantage from different moves in DOA and not just guard breaks.