Dead or Alive 5: Remaining Issues

[DrDogg]

I don't get the "Japanese players don't like Frame Advantage on Guard" thing when Tekken has been the most popular fighter in arcades for several years now.

It's worth noting that in the US, most people who play DOA do not play other fighting games and vice-versa. I don't think it's a long shot to assume the same about Japan.

Strings that are advantage on block??? Oh hell no!!! Now you get to mix me up and be safe for doing it??? AND KEEP PRESSURING ME WITH MORE STRINGS??????

However, I do agree that more moves need to be safe.

My ideal wish: less strings, more stand alone attacks. Then you can make many of these takes safe, some advantage on block to keep pressure up but not strings with advantage. That would just make things worse.

When you think of a string being safe, I don't think that means the entire string. I'd be fine if the first 2-3 hits in a string were safe, but the last two were not. Or perhaps only the 3rd or 4th attack in a string is safe, forcing you to continue the string until that point.

Honestly, I think it'd be interesting if only non-delayed string attacks were safe. If you delay at all, the attack is unsafe on block. That leaves string delay in the game, but high-level players won't use it, removing the flaws it presents.

Also, if DOA had more single-strike attacks, I think that would actually be something that removes the uniqueness of the game (unlike holds in stun and string delay). So I don't mind the strings as long as some adjustments are made to them.

At least 15% Poke Type Moves (-1 to -3.) spread among useful places for the characters. Speed may vary. Reward will be low.

So a poke move with minimal reward should be negative? Why? At the very least, those are the attacks that should be advantage on block.

Around 10% High Risk Manuevers. These moves would be powerful, like high launchers, bound setups, and moves that are very very powerful. Would also be Command Throw Punishable.

Just say throw punishable. At this point there aren't levels to punishment in DOA. If you make it so bad it's launch punishable, no one will ever use it. Not that they should use a throw punishable move either but... yeah.

There would also be some slightly more useful than poke moves, and these moves would be (-5 to -6). Right under throw punishable, but not quite.

Grapplers can punish -6, but I like the idea of attacks that are safe against everyone but grapplers.

 

[Matt Ponton]

It's worth noting that in the US, most people who play DOA do not play other fighting games and vice-versa. I don't think it's a long shot to assume the same about Japan.

Just wanted to comment that a majority of the DOA Japanese players are VF players with some SC players as well. Not so sure about TK or not though. Based on my experience that is.

 

[Shinigamimatt]

Do the Japanese hate DOA4 as much as we do? And for the same reasons?

 

[DrDogg]

Just wanted to comment that a majority of the DOA Japanese players are VF players with some SC players as well. Not so sure about TK or not though. Based on my experience that is.

Odd that VF players don't want advantage/safety on block... o_0

 

[Shinigamimatt]

Maybe they don't want advantage specifically with DOA's play style.

 

[Skilletor]

Don't shoot the messenger. I'm just sharing the information that came from the Japanese players of DOA. The same ones who complained that the game was nothing but throw punishing.

Shimbori even made a comment in an interview about it how the two regions differ where Americans want to continue offense after being guarded and Japanese want to punish for successfully guarding. Something to that effect.

No, I'm just commenting that I think that it's an odd opinion given the dominant fighting games in Japan.

 

[Matt Ponton]

Odd that VF players don't want advantage/safety on block... o_0

No, I'm just commenting that I think that it's an odd opinion given the dominant fighting games in Japan.

I concur.

 

[AKNova7]

When you think of a string being safe, I don't think that means the entire string. I'd be fine if the first 2-3 hits in a string were safe, but the last two were not. Or perhaps only the 3rd or 4th attack in a string is safe, forcing you to continue the string until that point.

Agreed.

So a poke move with minimal reward should be negative? Why? At the very least, those are the attacks that should be advantage on block.

Well, pokes are fast, dont't get easily dodged, and at certain situations, can even draw CH stuns. Why should you get rewarded for getting blocked on your attacks. I do not believe 15% of moves should be positive on block. I think these numbers are awfully strange. If you don't mind, could you explain your reasoning on some pokes having frame advantage?

 

[DrDogg]

Well, pokes are fast, dont't get easily dodged, and at certain situations, can even draw CH stuns. Why should you get rewarded for getting blocked on your attacks. I do not believe 15% of moves should be positive on block. I think these numbers are awfully strange. If you don't mind, could you explain your reasoning on some pokes having frame advantage?

If I do a jab and I'm left at +1, I can't do much but I can still continue my pressure game. If the jab is CH, that's your fault and I get rewarded. At +1 all I can really do is another jab, which can be crushed or potentially interrupted depending on the character and the match-up.

However, if a jab is -1, that means I cannot continue my pressure without risking a CH. I performed one jab, but now I have to be defensive because you blocked it? That doesn't make much sense to me.

The problem with adding frame advantage is mainly that pretty much everything stuns on CH and it's easy to get a CH. That makes it hard to say an attack should be +2 on block, when on CH it's going to stun. Then again, frame advantage only gets you so far in DOA because counters are instant. I can be at +8, but you can still counter my next attack.

 

[Berzerk!]

Yes but if they counter and miss, they are at -17 with hi counter damage on the next hit or throw.

I agree with the suggestions to ensure characters have certain moves and strings that grant advantage, tighten some delay moves (not all, it's a positive element of the game, just balance it as it doesn't need to be as long a window), but most importantly, ensure characters have uncounterable stuns.

Everyone is agreed on the need for these changes, so its worth feeding back. The level of change is more nuanced and something we'll only know how well its worked out when we both see the data and get hands on to understand the feel of the game.

Also, I don't think ensuring characters getting a set number of safe strings (a set percentage or whatever) takes away character uniqueness, since each characters moves and strings are different and you don't have to grant advantage to the exact same stuff. That said, it's a good idea to grant it universally to certain things, like standing jab, for example, as that gives you a solid, consistent baseline where players know what to do at the basic level and build on their skills with the more unique moves.

Some of which have special properties like causing sit down stun, limbo stun, minor advantage on block, CB, Power Blow, and so on - but the moves they are attached to tend to be different - so, unique.

Well, pokes are fast, dont't get easily dodged, and at certain situations, can even draw CH stuns. Why should you get rewarded for getting blocked on your attacks. I do not believe 15% of moves should be positive on block. I think these numbers are awfully strange. If you don't mind, could you explain your reasoning on some pokes having frame advantage?

DrDogg already explained this fairly well, I thought, that small jabs and such should give you the opportunity to do the next jab or part of string so you can keep the pressure up.

For moves like the universal elbow, , you would make it safe, not necessarily advantage (and if its a part of a character's string, in which case the next part is unsafe) - so you can do a mid poke looking for a counter hit but be able to block if they block it.

The basic "taking turns" principle established by VF. Thing is, there need to be a few ways to take your turn back, so that's why SOME frame advantage is worth advocating, so that players who know their character and situation can play the poking game and get advantage.

 

[DrDogg]

Yes but if they counter and miss, they are at -17 with hi counter damage on the next hit or throw.

-17 on a counter is not the same as -17 on a blocked attack. When I block an attack, I have plenty of time to react and can even buffer my follow-up attack while I'm still in block stun. In essence, I have way more than 17 frames to react.

When my opponent whiffs a counter, if I'm in the middle of an attack (let's say I use a jab and they low counter), I can't do anything until the recovery of my whiffed jab finishes, and even then I probably had something else in mind after that jab, which would slow my reactions even more. Even if I'm at neutral when the counter is whiffed, I'm not going to react to it as quickly as I'd react to a blocked attack.

I'm not saying whiffed counters can't or won't be punished, but it's not as easy to react to them as it is to react to a blocked attack.

 

[AKNova7]

If I do a jab and I'm left at +1, I can't do much but I can still continue my pressure game. If the jab is CH, that's your fault and I get rewarded. At +1 all I can really do is another jab, which can be crushed or potentially interrupted depending on the character and the match-up.

However, if a jab is -1, that means I cannot continue my pressure without risking a CH. I performed one jab, but now I have to be defensive because you blocked it? That doesn't make much sense to me.

The problem with adding frame advantage is mainly that pretty much everything stuns on CH and it's easy to get a CH. That makes it hard to say an attack should be +2 on block, when on CH it's going to stun. Then again, frame advantage only gets you so far in DOA because counters are instant. I can be at +8, but you can still counter my next attack.

I see what you're saying. However, I think I'd like to make a compromise with you. In VF, nearly everything is safe. Somewhere along the lines of -4 to -8 on many many things. Personally, I think that game is too safe. So, here's my vote. I vote to have advantage on a percentage of moves for the character, but not all the pokes in general. 3+ hit strings would not be included in this number. For example, every character would have at least 5 moves with advantage on block, not including universal stuff like PB. This way, it shows specific things to watch out for.

At least 5 poke style moves + on block.
At least 15% (-1 to -4) pokes with decent damage.

These numbers would depend on the character to balance put the game.

Fair?

My only concern with poke move advantage on block is untechable throws. That's a crazy mindgame no other character has.

 

[Matt Ponton]

I'm not saying whiffed counters can't or won't be punished, but it's not as easy to react to them as it is to react to a blocked attack.

It really depends on the situation of course. For example, in DOA3 I would do a natural combo that due to the buffering system you could look for and react to a hold coming out after it for someone who was spamming the hold. Of course this only is for spamming reasons, however it can be merged with the idea that you put the opponent in a stun with forced delay of holding in then you can legitimately react in the same realm. Many times in DOA3 I would stun to see if they hold mid or low and then punish accordingly by either doing a natural combo that hits on high or mid or a throw giving me guaranteed hi-counter damage.

 

[DrDogg]

I'd rather not put a number or percentage on it because it depends on the character and the attacks that are safe/advantage. A character's only safe attack could be a launcher and that character might be better than a character with 50 safe pokes that lead to nothing.

Also, untechable throws are a problem whether you're at advantage or not. Punch, Punch, Throw and Punch, Throw are viable tactics in DOA, and in most cases you're at disadvantage when using this strategy.

 

[AKNova7]

I'd rather not put a number or percentage on it because it depends on the character and the attacks that are safe/advantage. A character's only safe attack could be a launcher and that character might be better than a character with 50 safe pokes that lead to nothing.

Also, untechable throws are a problem whether you're at advantage or not. Punch, Punch, Throw and Punch, Throw are viable tactics in DOA, and in most cases you're at disadvantage when using this strategy.

How do you suggest we do it then? Would numbers be better?

 

[DrDogg]

How do you suggest we do it then? Would numbers be better?

A general statement is all that's needed. After that it becomes a balancing subject.

 

[AKNova7]

A general statement is all that's needed. After that it becomes a balancing subject.

Fair enough. My only concern with that is that TN teems to interpret statements with a little too much bias for my taste. So, we might want to watch how we record these things.

 

[Doug Nguyen]

It's worth noting that in the US, most people who play DOA do not play other fighting games and vice-versa. I don't think it's a long shot to assume the same about Japan.

When you think of a string being safe, I don't think that means the entire string. I'd be fine if the first 2-3 hits in a string were safe, but the last two were not. Or perhaps only the 3rd or 4th attack in a string is safe, forcing you to continue the string until that point.

Honestly, I think it'd be interesting if only non-delayed string attacks were safe. If you delay at all, the attack is unsafe on block. That leaves string delay in the game, but high-level players won't use it, removing the flaws it presents.

I agree with this. This sounds like a nice way to help with continuing a combo without the fear of it being countered.

 

[OSTCarmine]

I agree with this. This sounds like a nice way to help with continuing a combo without the fear of it being countered.

to some extent yes, but its much more than that.
- it forces a player to choose between free-canceling and delay exclusively. the current system allows a fair amount of randomness
- it makes it easier for the defender to react well, reduces the need to hold as well since your best options out of this situation are to keep blocking or interrupt the attacker
- the attacker STILL gets most of the legit perks that string delay grants.
overall DrDogg's suggestion will make this particular aspect of the combo system a whole lot fairer for both parties

 

[AKNova7]

to some extent yes, but its much more than that.
- it forces a player to choose between free-canceling and delay exclusively. the current system allows a fair amount of randomness
- it makes it easier for the defender to react well, reduces the need to hold as well since your best options out of this situation are to keep blocking or interrupt the attacker
- the attacker STILL gets most of the legit perks that string delay grants.
overall DrDogg's suggestion will make this particular aspect of the combo system a whole lot fairer for both parties

Agree. This sounds like a great way to at least aid the string delay problem. So far we have:

- Increase Number of Safe Moves overall.
- Increase Number of moves with Advantage on Block Overall (Less than Safe Moves).
- Modify system so if strings are delayed AT ALL, they are unsafe on block.

Did I leave anything out, or can we move on to further issues to keep on schedule and stuff?

CP1​

 

[RhythmikDesigns]

Also, untechable throws are a problem whether you're at advantage or not. Punch, Punch, Throw and Punch, Throw are viable tactics in DOA, and in most cases you're at disadvantage when using this strategy.

I thought throw teching was in the game now.