About morons online

[HiguraShiki]

I opt for mid launchers with Ayane myself at this point. However, if I "see" you low holding before I actually press a button. I'm going to low throw you for doing that. And I'll keep doing it when I see it until you realize it's not working against me. Once you stop throwing out low holds, I'm going to start throwing you with 64H+P to keep things further in my favor.

Until someone actually stops pre-emptively mashing things out just for the sake of mashing things out. I'm not going to stop punishing it until they decide to stop giving me free damage.

Well yea I would too, if I have a pretty good idea someone is gonna low hold, I would go for a low throw. I mean the people that dont keep low holding all the time, I'm talking about people who low hold after you are using highs or think you are going to throw.

 

[Raansu]

Just low throw someone who uses low holds to escape stun. If they don't adjust to not doing it, then it's free damage for you anyway.

You're still making a guess since holds come out in 1 frame. Kinda hard to "see" one when they do it mid string.

 

[Sam Sultan]

High holds will stop high kicks and high punches

Mid punch hold will stop mid punch

Mid kick hold stops mid kick

Low hold stops all highs and all lows.

Your probability of guessing out of stun with a low hold is the highest, and your probability of guessing mids is the smallest. Smart players are going to do mids until you hold one, then switch to the other mid or throw. Essentially it's a 50/50. You can stray from that, but then you skew your odds.

It's a tighter than it was in DOA4 because holds have a little more recovery, but it still applies in most (too many) situations.

Why is this a reply to my post it has nothing to do with what i was saying.

 

[iHajinShinobi]

I should obviously be more clear about this...You're probably not going to see it the first time, I don't. However, if it's being done again then you know your opponent has the tendency to do it. So when I "see" you low holding, I'm going to throw it.

Wasn't trying to say "Oh snap, he low held, throw dat shit!" on the first go, lol.

 

[Jefffcore]

Why is this a reply to my post it has nothing to do with what i was saying.

It has everything to do with it. You were wrong, I told you why. Rikuto's math was fine.

The defender can hold mid, hold low, struggle, or do nothing.

The attacker should do mid punches, mid kicks, and throw.

In a situation where the stun is short enough, the attacker can even struggle into an attack before you throw.

 

[Sam Sultan]

It has everything to do with it; Rikuto's math was fine.

No it wasn't. You are saying in order to get out of a stun you are better off countering low. Yes that is true if you would counter low the odds for you to escape the stun are higher than by doing any other holds. If you would counter high or mid the odds for you to escape the stun are:
Since attacker has 6 options(high,low,mid-p,mid-k,grab,low grab)
If defender decides to counter high he/she would avoid high attacks and low grab and thus leaving the attacker with 4 options which would definitely hit, which are mid-p,mid-k,lows and grabs. Thus the odds to escape the stun would be 1/4(25%) while the attacker has 75% chance to continue his combo(these odds do change as the number of successful landed hits in a string increase like i showed you in my previous post).
If the defender decides to counter low he/she would avoid highs, grabs, and lows and thus leaving the attacker with 3 options which would definitely hit and which are mid-p, mid-k and low grabs. Thus the odds for the defender to escape the stun by countering low would be 1/3(33.33%) which would leave the attacker with 66.66% odds to continue his/her combo.
So no it is not 50/50 like you say, the attacker has almost always advantage on the defender.
Let me clarify this once more. This odds are only valid when two players would randomly decide to attack and defend(that's what Rikuto's thread was all about) this odds are useless when we talk about players delaying there moves, reading there opponent or using any other plan to defeat there opponent. This is the true math behind two randomly attacking/defending players. And it shows that as an attacker you have advantage on a defending player and also proves that DOA is not as random(or random at all) as many of you believe or like to believe. If you disagree please backup your opinion with math or any other kind of proof that would prove me wrong. TNX

 

[Jefffcore]

Your math would be fine if the game had 6 equal options, but it doesn't. If you WANT to kill your odds you can use 6 different things, but that would be dumb. You can change your odds by choosing to do something else.

 

[HiguraShiki]

Actually an attacker has less options than the defender does.

 

[Sam Sultan]

Your math would be fine if the game had 6 equal options, but it doesn't. If you WANT to kill your odds you can use 6 different things, but that would be dumb. You can change your odds by choosing to do something else.

Of course you can change your odds by choosing to do different stuff(i mention that in almost all of my post with the phrase "This odds are only valid on random attacks etc"), that is called playing the game and it involves using a strategy, reading your opponent, timing your moves and spacing(a.k.a SKILL). Al im trying to say this whole time is that in most situation(giving randomly fighting players) the attackers have advantage on the defenders because of the random odds of whether an attack hits or misses or because of the likely hood of an defender to successfully defend the attacker . The advantage of an attacker can significantly decrees if the defender is reading the attacker well(or using any other strategy to increase his/her odds) or the other way around the odds of an defending player can significantly decrees if the attacker is reading the defender well(or using any other strategy to increase his/her odds).

 

[Murakame]

I like how the thread went from online complaints to discussing the options DOA offers to a person on the offensive vs. the person on the defense.

 

[Raansu]

I like how the thread went from online complaints to discussing the options DOA offers to a person on the offensive vs. the person on the defense.

Welcome to doac....errr FSD.

 

[Scornwell]

Welcome to doac....errr FSD.

Still waiting on obnoxious self promoting signatures.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Scornwell.

 

[Jefffcore]

Of course you can change your odds by choosing to do different stuff(i mention that in almost all of my post with the phrase "This odds are only valid on random attacks etc"), that is called playing the game and it involves using a strategy, reading your opponent, timing your moves and spacing(a.k.a SKILL). Al im trying to say this whole time is that in most situation(giving randomly fighting players) the attackers have advantage on the defenders because of the random odds of whether an attack hits or misses or because of the likely hood of an defender to successfully defend the attacker . The advantage of an attacker can significantly decrees if the defender is reading the attacker well(or using any other strategy to increase his/her odds) or the other way around the odds of an defending player can significantly decrees if the attacker is reading the defender well(or using any other strategy to increase his/her odds).

A player choosing from those options will still have the same odds against a random opponent.

 

[ILYA✰]

Welcome to doac....errr FSD.

Well this thread is about morons, so a little derailing should be fine....

 

[onedayitllmake]

To counter the first and 2nd hit it's (1/4)^2 = 1/16(6.3%), to counter the first 2nd and 3rd hit it's (1/4)^3 = (1.6%)
There are also other miscalculations in Rikuto's thread but i'm not gonna correct them all in this thread. This is just to show you that an attacking opponent has advantage over an defending opponent in any situation.

If you think that i'm not correct or i made a miscalculation(although it's elementary mathematics) or whatever please respond with a clear description of what i did wrong or why you disagree with me TNX.

I felt the need to chime in here so this incorrect information does not get spread around.
This information is completely incorrect and not at all how probability works. The events are independent.

The probability of countering stays the same, regardless of the previous outcome. If you counter wrong, the next time you get a clean slate to guess again no matter how many previous attempts you failed.

Think about it like a coin flip, the probability of guessing any single flip is 50%, period. In our case it is 1/4, or 29% or whatever the number you like. Each counter attempt is independent.

You are confusing it with 'with guess X times correctly, in a row'. Which is dependent on the previous event. The probability of guessing 4 coin flips in a row, is (1/2) x (1/2) x (1/2) x (1/2) = 1/16 = 0.0625 = 6.25 %, however that is not the case here.

Short version: Probability of countering correctly is the same the 4th time as it was the 1st time because that event is independent of the last one.

 

[VirtuaKazama]

I'm loving the math here.

 

[SilverKhaos]

If you're not going for guaranteed damage, you're playing more random. The result isn't even educated guessing, it's just random guessing. You can have your opinion of what's fun, but I don't see the logic in making the game harder for yourself.

You're also going completely against how the game was designed to play. By that logic, you don't actually "like" the game for what it is, so why play?

You'd have to define what you think of as "random". Because as far as I've always known, for something to be "random", it must be uncontrollable and unpredictable, the former of which is non-applicable, the latter, debatable. Not going for guaranteed damage isn't playing random, its just not doing follow ups and juggles (as the primary source of damage). Aka, free/guaranteed hits.

As for "how the game is designed to play", it differs from character to character. Mila, for example, CAN focus on it, but her overall moveset, mechanics, and gameplay is more akin to realistic fighting than standard 3d fighter fare. Mila is more ground game than other characters (sans wrestlers), which I enjoy, a lot lol.

 

[shunwong]

You'd have to define what you think of as "random". Because as far as I've always known, for something to be "random", it must be uncontrollable and unpredictable, the former of which is non-applicable, the latter, debatable. Not going for guaranteed damage isn't playing random, its just not doing follow ups and juggles (as the primary source of damage). Aka, free/guaranteed hits.

As for "how the game is designed to play", it differs from character to character. Mila, for example, CAN focus on it, but her overall moveset, mechanics, and gameplay is more akin to realistic fighting than standard 3d fighter fare. Mila is more ground game than other characters (sans wrestlers), which I enjoy, a lot lol.

You have to understand people are getting really annoyed by you claiming to have some kind of Yomi superpowers to make DOA5 less random. The stun game in DOA is random: That's a fact. Why don't you go play Virtua Fighter and test your Yomi there? You like defense? VF has defense up the wazoo. Fuzzy, ETE, TEG, ETEG, etc. If you really have good defense and good yomi you will succeed in Virtua Fighter.

 

[HiguraShiki]

You'd have to define what you think of as "random". Because as far as I've always known, for something to be "random", it must be uncontrollable and unpredictable, the former of which is non-applicable, the latter, debatable. Not going for guaranteed damage isn't playing random, its just not doing follow ups and juggles (as the primary source of damage). Aka, free/guaranteed hits.

As for "how the game is designed to play", it differs from character to character. Mila, for example, CAN focus on it, but her overall moveset, mechanics, and gameplay is more akin to realistic fighting than standard 3d fighter fare. Mila is more ground game than other characters (sans wrestlers), which I enjoy, a lot lol.

Random means you are doing random attacks without aiming for a goal. You aren't going for any guaranteed damage so you basically have no goal except to do any attack you feel like doing until you hopefully win. If you are going for guaranteed damage, you have a goal. You know your moves inside and out and you attempt to do moves not to just hit, but to set up for guaranteed damage.

Mila's overall moveset is not realistic to fighting. You are just saying that because you think it makes you sound intelligent. Mila's ground game is not realistic at all. If it was realistic, Mila would do more than just 3 punches or a throw. She would aim for various attacks on the ground and try to tap the person out.

You are completely and utterly 100 percent wrong.

 

[SilverKhaos]

Random means you are doing random attacks without aiming for a goal. You aren't going for any guaranteed damage so you basically have no goal except to do any attack you feel like doing until you hopefully win. If you are going for guaranteed damage, you have a goal. You know your moves inside and out and you attempt to do moves not to just hit, but to set up for guaranteed damage.

Mila's overall moveset is not realistic to fighting. You are just saying that because you think it makes you sound intelligent. First of all, no MMA fighter practices just kickboxing and grappling. Second of all, Mila's ground game is not realistic at all. If it was realistic, Mila would do more than just 3 punches or a throw. She would aim for various attacks on the ground and try to tap the person out.

You are completely and utterly 100 percent wrong.

Milas moveset is MORE realistic, I said. Pay attention before you respond.

Also, the "goal" is to HIT THEM. (HARD. Preferably in a way that sends them flying back, or crashing to the ground.) That is literally the ONLY goal I need in a fight, since it's, yaknow...the goal and entire point of a fight.

And like you said "random means you are doing random attacks without aiming for a goal". I do deliberately do specific attacks with the goal of hitting them. Aka, it is in no way random.

Not thinkin this through very hard, are you?