3-Point Hold v. 4-Point Hold

[Keylay]

The whole point of the counter system is that if you know what move you're opponent is going to do, you should be able to counter them. If that's the case, then it should be a 6-point counter system. I don't think the same hold should be able to a counter a kick and punch. I know shimbori wants to satisfy groups that want a 3-point and 4-point hold system but I think it would only work if they had a 3-point parry system that left both opponents at neutral and a 6-point advanced hold system. Or 3-point breakable holds and 6-point unbreakable holds.

Holding in critical stuns works fine, it just needs to be adjusted a little bit (more recovery for holds in critical stun and a 6-point system would help but I'll settle for 4-point). Critical stuns only exist because you can do holds during them. No other fighting game I know has any many stuns as DOA. If you put the DOA characters in Virtua Fighter, moves that cause stun would probably just leave you at a frame advantage. We shouldn't think of critical stuns as a way to get guaranteed damage but more of a riskier way to get damage. The problem with DOA is that you have to rely on critical stuns to get damage and that just puts both players at a 50/50. They need to change that. I like that they have moves that launch on normal hit but I think characters should have at least 1-2 moves that can launch, limbo stun, or cause that stun Ryu does where they can't hold for the first few frames.

 

[Berzerk!]

The game still needs to be accessible and do you think explaining and asking people to learn a 6 point system is going to attract newcomers?

It's also unnecessary, since the main concern in terms of mixups and using counter holds as a defence is whether the attacker and defender's options are both viable and the risk/reward is correct.

With 3D fighters the key thing to be aware of is that there are three heights for moves. When you include a counter system, those are the points to cover first. High, medium, and low.

Then you ensure the options contain the right balance of risk/reward. In the case of counter holds by tweaking down the active frames and tweaking up the recovery, holding is risky enough that a smart attacking opponent can train the defender to want to counter, and punish them.

The finer points of it that we are feeding back on - and I agree with the original poster here, they should be fed back WITHOUT the sense of entitlement (explaining credentials is fine) - is around whether there are enough options to beat counters or punish badly timed counters, and are they risky enough to make the defensive player carefully weigh up when to use that option?

That's where there are some key suggestions still on the table;

- to ensure there are some uncounterable moves; I can take or leave this if the other elements are solid, like having neutral launchers and risky counters. It's worth noting they have already addressed this to some degree with the new wall stuns.

- to remove the ability to counter from critical (very deep) stun. This would create reward for players who want to risk putting their opponent into an extended stun or use a slower move that may inflict that property. Just slowing the ability to counter in the early frames of a deep stun would be enough.

- Restore a 4-point hold system. This complicates the hold inputs in only a minor way, and for a special reason; Middle attacks are the most common, so it makes sense here to split punches and kicks; it raises the risk for the defender to pay better attention to the strings and gives the attacker more reliable options.

 

[Jefffcore]

I don't see any problem with 6 point.... How is that going to put off new players, you still have the ability to hold. You'd have to have mid holds advanced to make them more difficult, but holds are holds, people will get used to whatever they have. The discussion is about 3 or 4 though, and more is going to be the more sensible option no matter what.

 

[Keylay]

The game still needs to be accessible and do you think explaining and asking people to learn a 6 point system is going to attract newcomers?

It's also unnecessary, since the main concern in terms of mixups and using counter holds as a defence is whether the attacker and defender's options are both viable and the risk/reward is correct.

With 3D fighters the key thing to be aware of is that there are three heights for moves. When you include a counter system, those are the points to cover first. High, medium, and low.

Then you ensure the options contain the right balance of risk/reward. In the case of counter holds by tweaking down the active frames and tweaking up the recovery, holding is risky enough that a smart attacking opponent can train the defender to want to counter, and punish them.

The finer points of it that we are feeding back on - and I agree with the original poster here, they should be fed back WITHOUT the sense of entitlement (explaining credentials is fine) - is around whether there are enough options to beat counters or punish badly timed counters, and are they risky enough to make the defensive player carefully weigh up when to use that option?

That's where there are some key suggestions still on the table;

- to ensure there are some uncounterable moves; I can take or leave this if the other elements are solid, like having neutral launchers and risky counters. It's worth noting they have already addressed this to some degree with the new wall stuns.

- to remove the ability to counter from critical (very deep) stun. This would create reward for players who want to risk putting their opponent into an extended stun or use a slower move that may inflict that property. Just slowing the ability to counter in the early frames of a deep stun would be enough.

- Restore a 4-point hold system. This complicates the hold inputs in only a minor way, and for a special reason; Middle attacks are the most common, so it makes sense here to split punches and kicks; it raises the risk for the defender to pay better attention to the strings and gives the attacker more reliable options.

A 6-point system is not that much harder than a 4-point system. And they could still have a 3-point parry system. My only issue is that I'm not a fan of the double direction input because it takes a little longer to do but it would be something I would have to get use to. I like the 6-point system because it means you have to know what attack your opponent is going to do and not get a lucky guess which I get every now and then. There may be situations where you know the opponent is going to do an attack of a certain height level but you're not sure which one. In a 6-point system, guarding would be your best option but in a 3-point system, you might as well counter. Either way, I doubt Team Ninja will have more than a 4-point system.

I also thought about not being able to counter in deep stun. Would be a nice reward but I think you should get a little more than a few frames where they can't counter. Each time you extend the stun, you risk losing the juggle damaged you could do to the opponent and taking damage from a counter.

 

[Matt Ponton]

Personally would like to see a system similar to doa++ where only advanced holds can be performed in stun.

 

[EMPEROR_COW]

heres something that will shed light on things ...
try this out ...

play against someone with the rule that you cannot hold during stun ...
this will lead to the same damn combos every time ... every time you would go for critical threshold before the launcher .. cuz theres just no threat .. and when you do that every time you get max air juggle and the air juggle will be the same ... EVERY DAMN TIME ..

and you will be able to get it from a simple stupid stun like hayabusa's P+K ...

you get long ass boring combos ...

this is what you guys want ?

if thats the case then enjoy your shit repetitive brain dead version of the game ...

I will enjoy my version of the game where I can acctually punish something stupid like that ..

 

[grap3fruitman]

play against someone with the rule that you cannot hold during stun ...

Play DOA Dimensions as Alpha-152, her holds do no damage, and try and win and you'll see just how dependent you are on the entire hold system.

and you will be able to get it from a simple stupid stun like hayabusa's P+K ...

That's why we're saying the stun system needs adjustment too.

I will enjoy my version of the game where I can acctually punish something stupid like that ..

You would rather have a game where you have to be as random as possible? Well boy, do I have the game for you!

​

Personally would like to see a system similar to doa++ where only advanced holds can be performed in stun.

This would be an interesting compromise. Just remove the Izuna hold from highs and lows.

 

[Raansu]

Fighting games are not meant to be flashy emperor. At high level play competitors are going to use what works best for each situation and if you actually watch high level play in ANY fighter you will see that they use a very small amount of the actual moves in the game. I'm not going to waste my time nor risk using a useless move for "variety" or to be "flashy." I'm going to use what has the best tools for said situation. This is no different in DoA4 even with the flooded 50/50 situations. People use the same setups/juggles no matter what. The only difference is the game lets the defender have 5 million back doors to escape from everything.

Anyways, the current stun system is just as much of an issue as the holds are imo. Stuns need to be like DoA++ where very few attacks actually stun. DoA4 it was way too easy to get a stun. DoA5 demo isn't as bad but it's still too easy to get a stun. I agree with removing holds from stuns, what I don't agree with is the current stun system where you so much as sneeze and you get a stun.

 

[grap3fruitman]

I agree with removing holds from stuns, what I don't agree with is the current stun system where you so much as sneeze and you get a stun.

I laughed, I really did.

 

[Raansu]

Well its true...lol

 

[EMPEROR_COW]

i still feel that you guys just want a game that isnt DOA ...
DOA2 was a bit over kill on holds ... (THE DAMAGE .. OH GOD) .. still was great at the time
DOA3.1 was fine ... somehow they made it work ...
DOA4 ... lets just not go there ...

why dont they just do what they did in DOA3.1 ... make the system similar to that ?
I would much rather have that over eliminatiing stuns completely ...

the change you're asking for is as drastic as SC5 removing meterless GI .. and YES, i DO play that game competitively here in the UK and at very high level might I add .. and please dont start with the "just guard" being a better system .. I personally think its crap.. and YES i do use it.. the whole game was stripped from its personality ... they might as well have just called it .. sf4-3D with swords ... (no im not hating on SF4 .. there are other things that bother me in that game .. but I still think its very solid) ... as much as I take SC5 seriously .. i do not like it so much .. not only were GI's butchered .. the amount of unshakable stuns was rediculously increased ... its gotten to the point that even a shit player would be able to land a combo done by a pro ... just from a stupid hitconfirm ... then theres the whole bit with supers ... but we'll leave that for another day ... and slicing the move list in half did NOT make it better ...

the alpha demo was like a breath of fresh air for me ... and it plays great in my opinion ...
granted ... you guess .. but like I mentioned before .. the garanteed damage situations seem alot more ... and I'm ok with that acctually ... I just dont want them all the damn time ...

I prefer the system where you have to do alot more to earn your hits than simply going auto pilot ...

 

[Allan Paris]

I prefer the system where you have to do alot more to earn your hits than simply going auto pilot ...

As the game is now, it's damn near all auto-pilot. You get hit, stunned, HOLD and then reset that scenario all over again. You remove the hold from stun and you learn not to go into auto pilot because it won't be there. You'll actually pay attention to what's being put on the screen, you won't have a choice but to. See how you earn your hits and not go into auto pilot all by removing stuns from holds.

 

[EMPEROR_COW]

As the game is now, it's damn near all auto-pilot. You get hit, stunned, HOLD and then reset that scenario all over again. You remove the hold from stun and you learn not to go into auto pilot because it won't be there. You'll actually pay attention to what's being put on the screen, you won't have a choice but to. See how you earn your hits and not go into auto pilot all by removing stuns from holds.

i disagree...
you have a choice of high/mid and low hold ..
you also have the option of slow escaping in many situations
plus you have the option of delaying that hold in case they try and bait out a throw or use a long startup norm that would stuff your instant hold ...

atleast theres a thought process involved ...

and just like you can reset the situation .. there are other UN-resetable situations ..

you guys keep talking about the game as if its just the one senario over and over ... it isnt ...

 

[Allan Paris]

i disagree...
you have a choice of high/mid and low hold ..
you also have the option of slow escaping in many situations
plus you have the option of delaying that hold in case they try and bait out a throw or use a long startup norm that would stuff your instant hold ...

atleast theres a thought process involved ...

and just like you can reset the situation .. there are other UN-resetable situations ..

you guys keep talking about the game as if its just the one senario over and over ... it isnt ...

How many good players have you watched play? It is the same scenario over and over, and what decides the winner is who woke up on the right side of the bed that day. What thought process is involved, please enlighten me, I swear I don't think when I play the game. At least not on the level that I have with other fighting games. What "UN-resetable" situations do you know in the game?

Slowing escaping is not a cure all, which is why the majority holds out of the stun, it's better. Nothing can stuff some thing that is INSTANT.

 

[SkatanMilla]

Removing holds from stuns is stupid, if you're going to do that then you would have to remove the stun system completely since it doesn't function without holds.
I actually don't understand why some of you want it gone, for some reason a lot of people seem to think that the person in stun has the advantage somehow, which is definitely not the case.

 

[Berzerk!]

6 point hold is an idea that doesn't add significantly to the value of the defensive options nor the attacker's options, mindgames and meta choices and increases the complexity of the inputs required. The reality is that fighting games are still way too complex and require a lot of learning to play competently, so they must ensure barriers to entry on key mechanics are very low, while the strategic value is high. DOA is on the right path with the accessibility it has.

I don't think it's an option TN will consider. Its worth noting that VF5FS took out a number of extra counter hold inputs on the characters that have them as you just don't need multiple variants of that same option - instead, characters were given more moves, so something good happens when you push those buttons. Accessibility is SO important.

Just make the system around the options robust and viable.

4 point is about as far as you'd want to go, only because of the viability of mid height choices being so key. You need mids to be harder to counter because mids also hit low countering opponents.

More important than that is the other systemic options being made high value; normal hit launchers, wall hits, punishable holds. That seems to be on track

As the game is now, it's damn near all auto-pilot. You get hit, stunned, HOLD and then reset that scenario all over again. You remove the hold from stun and you learn not to go into auto pilot because it won't be there. You'll actually pay attention to what's being put on the screen, you won't have a choice but to. See how you earn your hits and not go into auto pilot all by removing stuns from holds.

Are you talking about DOA4 in the first part of the quote?

Even so I think you're talking "high level theory fighter" a little far, high level tournament matches had more varied strategy than this and the top players played around that scenario, and were able to impose their own styles on the game through knowledge of the game, opponent, and correct application of pressure. Match conditions always change the paper theory people present.

That said, I agree with the rest of your quote and would add that while removing holds from stuns (only criticals) would be very interesting, it's not the only way to achieve the desired scenario; if the holds are slow to recovery and therefore punishable, players will kill themselves by holding too much.

Additionally guard break, wall hit, normal launchers all play around the hold. It would be nice to see more viable sidestep to add to the scenario. It doesn't have to be one solution, and it certainly should not be by complicating the moveset. Give the existing move types clear functions and useful properties to generate alternative strategies and players will understand it intuitively.

 

[PhoenixVFIRE]

If you did remove holds from stun, as others have said you would have to rework the stun system. The amount of damage you do to a person who is in a stun would probably also have to be adjusted considering the person in the stun would have nothing they can do other than slow escape, how long you could extend the stun, and the amount of moves that stun reduced. I'm sure this was done right it could work. Grabs should be unbreakable on high counter throw too. Who knows though maybe this individuality thing on each character may be interesting.

 

[DrDogg]

i still feel that you guys just want a game that isnt DOA ...
DOA2 was a bit over kill on holds ... (THE DAMAGE .. OH GOD) .. still was great at the time
DOA3.1 was fine ... somehow they made it work ...
DOA4 ... lets just not go there ...

why dont they just do what they did in DOA3.1 ... make the system similar to that ?
I would much rather have that over eliminatiing stuns completely ...

the change you're asking for is as drastic as SC5 removing meterless GI .. and YES, i DO play that game competitively here in the UK and at very high level might I add .. and please dont start with the "just guard" being a better system .. I personally think its crap.. and YES i do use it.. the whole game was stripped from its personality ... they might as well have just called it .. sf4-3D with swords ... (no im not hating on SF4 .. there are other things that bother me in that game .. but I still think its very solid) ... as much as I take SC5 seriously .. i do not like it so much .. not only were GI's butchered .. the amount of unshakable stuns was rediculously increased ... its gotten to the point that even a shit player would be able to land a combo done by a pro ... just from a stupid hitconfirm ... then theres the whole bit with supers ... but we'll leave that for another day ... and slicing the move list in half did NOT make it better ...

the alpha demo was like a breath of fresh air for me ... and it plays great in my opinion ...
granted ... you guess .. but like I mentioned before .. the garanteed damage situations seem alot more ... and I'm ok with that acctually ... I just dont want them all the damn time ...

I prefer the system where you have to do alot more to earn your hits than simply going auto pilot ...

Translation: I like games that force me to guess over and over again.

Your take on SC5 is just wrong. SC5 is the best SC since SC2. It absolutely feels like a SC game. The fact that you think it feels like SF either means you aren't playing it right, or you don't understand how SF works... or both. Is it different? Yes. Is it still VERY much SC? Absolutely.

Let me break this down for you:

- If DOA5 ends up being the game that YOU want. You'll have a competitive scene that consists of very few tournaments, featuring about 15 players each (after the first month or so).

- If you end up disliking DOA5 like you dislike SC5, it probably means that the rest of us got the game we want, and it will actually have a decent competitive scene. The great news is that you'll still play it just like you play SC5, even though you hate it.

I'm seriously on the verge of putting you on ignore. I get the fact that you want DOA4 with slight improvements that don't really make it a better game. I get the fact that you enjoy guessing and think it's the best thing to happen to fighting games since Ken met Ryu. The endgame here is that your opinion would be better received on one of the more casual DOA boards. You won't make any headway here with that kind of thought process, so it will just continue going back and forth.

 

[Awesmic]

Emperor Cow...

As much as it sounds like he's telling you that you don't belong here, don't sweat DrDogg. Hopefully, that's not what he's implying.

 

[DrDogg]

Emperor Cow...

As much as it sounds like he's telling you that you don't belong here, don't sweat DrDogg. Hopefully, that's not what he's implying.

He likes the guessing factor in DOA. He dislikes seeing the same combos/setups over and over again. To me, that's the definition of a casual player... or at least someone with the ideals of a casual player.

It's a simple fact that an opinion like that will cause conflict on this site. Almost every single one of his posts over the last few days have essentially been about how he really likes guessing and dislikes seeing high-level play (minimal attack variety combined with repeated setups and combos).

He can post here all he wants. But if he continues this trend, it will only result in more arguments, and I will end up ignoring him as I did Julius Rage. His opinions would be much better accepted on a casual site.