Wai, wai, wai, wait. It was 66p with Akira, right? It's safe, isn't it? If you guard break someone and do that, at +12 you should continue to get CH; If they block it would be safe. Naturally I'd like to see more safe attacks or some frame advantage, but this situation is always going to work the same. The problem is that you chose to guess, which would have happened in any FG if you were wrong. Unless 66p doesn't offer a very good stun... then it's character specifics.
66P is not safe and does not stun on CH. 666P is safe and launches on CH, but I couldn't get it to execute fast enough in this specific situation. 6P is also safe, but doesn't reach in this situation unless the opponent is backed up to a wall.
With that said, then you'd want a safe attack that inflicts solid damage.
Safe does not always mean frame advantage. Akira's 6P is -5. That's safe, but I can't safely continue my offense if it's blocked. I'd like either an attack that gives me advantage or is safe and inflicts solid damage, but not give me frame advantage.
Are you referring to the actual damage numerical stat, or an arbitrary status in addition to damage? I.e. a deep stun, lift stun, sit-down stun.
If all I get is a stun the opponent can counter out of, I don't see that as a significant advantage for me because I'm just put right back into a guessing game. From +12, that shouldn't be my best option.
From what I'm getting through this discussion is that you want to have an attack, that has the range to reach the opponent after the +12 guard break, would beat a guarding opponent by being a safe attack on guard, would beat an attacking opponent by launching or guaranteeing a launch with 125% revision, and possibly beat a holding opponent either through the move making it unholdable or connecting with the holding opponent before they can hold? Oh, and of course being an attack, I'm sure it would also win against throws.
I don't really expect it to beat a holding opponent. That would be awesome, but I also understand this is DOA. Even if it were a real possibility to remove holds from stuns (very, very unlikely), you won't see them removed from neutral.
Not to go too off topic but, you think we would be able to get balance patches later on down the line?
Balance patches walk a very fine line when it comes to the competitive scene. Who is the developer listening to when it comes to a balance patch? Would we get something like SC5, where a vast majority of the 200+ changes in the first balance patch were unnecessary or would we get something like the AE 2012 "patch" in which a lot of issues were addressed and the game became an overall better.experience?
Even if we get an awesome game upon release, it's unlikely it will be perfectly balanced (that's just expecting too much). The question is will the game be balanced "enough" or would some changes be needed? At the very least, I'd like to see the low tier characters get some buffs, but I'm not a fan of toning down characters unless they're blatantly OP.
Actually, now that you mention it, how long would TN patch DOA5 with updates after the game is released? Even if DOA5 isn't perfect, there's always time to update, right? They could listen to payer feedback after the game comes out and update as appropriate.
Probably depends on initial sales. If the game performs well, it's possible we'll get multiple patches before the end of the year. No matter what, I think it's unlikely we'll see patches in 2013. Maybe one patch in January, but most games don't have significant budgets post-release.
And while they can change things post-release, it'll be limited as to how much can be changed. All of the big changes need to be made before release. Then smaller adjustments, primarily to balance, can be made post-release.
