Ask Team NINJA

[Rikuto]

In the case of jann lee's 66k, it meant the defender would have to be smart enough to realize there was frame advantage here. If he did not, the next 66k would hit him into a wall for a guaranteed launch combo, thus creating pressure. The "guess" comes from the defender trying to find a way out of the situation -- a situation he himself was at fault for putting himself in, as he should never have put his back to the wall in the first place.

The defender now has a difficult choice to make because of his error in his positioning judgment -- should he throw out a mid counter to try and stop the next 66k? or should he wait until Jann Lee tries for a Dragon Gunner to get the same result? Both result in guessing between different options, both are dangerous in this situation as they result in a large, guaranteed combo and both put the attacker at a distinct advantage over the defender due to lack of foresight on his positioning.

The defender here could use the counter to get out of the situation, and it would do a little damage. It would not be this overly abusable counter that stops absolutely everything like in DOA 4, however. This is a clear example of positioning tactics giving one player a CLEAR advantage over the other in the triangle system, and that is exactly how it should be.

 

[Matt Ponton]

To clarify that wasn't a "Tecmo-Koei rep". That was Shimbori-san himself. Mainly what I was thinking of was how a player can "expect" the smart opponent to do the most advantageous move (whether it's advantageous by frame disadvantage, power, or some other property), in this case it being either a Guard Break or Guard Advantaged. In the case of Jann Lee's you know that a smart player would WANT to follow up with the kick as it gives a knockback or juggle options on hit, and frame advantaged if blocked. When the Jann Lee has committed to you now know he's -11 on guard, so his options are continue the string in either , , . can be easily countered on reaction and punished with a launcher before it even hits ( for deep stun or for launch as an example) so that's not a smart option to be played. Minor side note: If the game had a side-step option then it would make valid sense as it's a 360 degree attack. The if done will lift stun a low holding/crouching/jumping player expecting the but if continued to be blocked then Jann Lee is -7, a much better option than the by far, but still semi-throw punishable (Non-grappler's strongest throws would not connect as they are 7i throws, but grapplers like Bass could do or Leon could do his Desert Falcon ). Jann Lee does NOT want to free cancel in this situation as he's -11 if he does, and easily noticeable as his hand is shown drawing back to neutral with enough frames to throw punish on reaction.

Jann Lee's order of priorities go (+1) > (-7) > (-15/Launchable). So, what is it that I'm getting at? Well the average competitive player would expect a Jann Lee opponent to do to get in as it's the most advantageous option for the attacker. However! Let's say the attacker knows that the defender knows of the advantages of this attack, then the attacker can mount a counter-read of the opponent expecting to hold. After all, their only options are to Hold/Block/Get Hit. Blocking puts the opponent at a disadvantage of one frame so generally the competitive player would decide between Hold/Get Hit. Knowing that the attacker would do a they would rather hold on a guess than get hit into the wall damage. This is where the "mind reading" ('Yomi' for you Otaku) comes into play.

Contrast the above with DOA4. The competitive player has the following string mix-ups and options off each:





The same options! But what's different? Well let's see what the disadvantage is on block to see the pressure:
(-12)
(-8)
(-10)
(-15)

Using what we based above the order for frame safety is:
> > >

So now, the attacker's options are to either do a disadvantaged attack that will take any 7i throw (minus Bayman since he doesn't have one) on ANY of his options including free-canceling, and the advantages he can get are either a critical stun or knockdown. THIS is the example people have for why DOA4 was worse than DOA3.1. It provides less reason to attack because the attacker is punished for attacking and their only rewards are to giving a "second chance" to the opponents.

I'm a bit drunk right now though so I'm going to end this post here and revisit it or respond to anyone who can clear it up for me.

 

[Raansu]

All that when he's drunk. Imagine if he was sober lol. Why are you and VP not in Japan yet? lol.

 

[Rikuto]

Certain characters had more frame advantage than others. Bayman barely had any (like 2 moves, and they were sloooooooooow), but someone like Leon had several guard breaks that were unique enough in their own way to create a shitstorm of pressure nobody could match.

Ayane lacked frame advantage but she had her zoning, Bass had his punishment and was very much a noob-killing character, Hayate had rushdown, Jann Lee has zoning and traps, Genfu was god in general, and Busa is the same damn character he has been for every single game.

So yea, everyone had their own thing.

 

[OSTCarmine]

Certain characters had more frame advantage than others. Bayman barely had any (like 2 moves, and they were sloooooooooow), but someone like Leon had several guard breaks that were unique enough in their own way to create a shitstorm of pressure nobody could match.

Ayane lacked frame advantage but she had her zoning, Bass had his punishment and was very much a noob-killing character, Hayate had rushdown, Jann Lee has zoning and traps, Genfu was god in general, and Busa is the same damn character he has been for every single game.

So yea, everyone had their own thing.

I wonder how these things are decided. Does TN give certain charaters these traits, or does it come down to individual moves. Would be nice if they had some kind of coherent, universal method for deciding this, such as "Faster Character = More Frame Advantage" or "Strike Type Character [eg. Jann Lee] = More Frame Advantage" or "Move Type X = More Frame Advantage"
Does anybody have a general idea of how its done?

 

[Rikuto]

Universal methods are never really a good idea since they kill character uniqueness. . .

Besides that, that kind of methodology doesn't really work. . . I mean currently in doa 4, everyone is the same, some are just slower than others with no real benefit.

You don't want to give a super fast character too much frame advantage, because then what is a slow character going to do? they have nothing to punish so they lose the defense game, and they have no real way to beat out the faster moves either.

Giving slower chars frame advantage is actually a better idea, as they already lose the initial strike game in terms of speed, it is only fair that they make up for it by having frame advantage off their attacks.

Bass was an exception in 3.1 because while he was unsafe and the farthest thing from frame advantage, he had ground game and incredible throw punishment. He had a niche, and it was a deadly one.

Still, he's a good example of exactly how you can take someone from one end of the spectrum and make them unique instead of auto-balancing.

 

[Matt Ponton]

There's one thing I forgot to bring up: The hold system in each version.

Dead or Alive 3 had a three-point hold system. So when Jann Lee is weighing his options of or , it doesn't matter to the attacker. The attacker doesn't have to consider a punch or hold mix-up. This is a non-worry to him as he can focus on if the opponent has been conditioned to hold an attack - any mid attack. Jann Lee can focus on either attacking or reacting to a hold. Neither Jann Lee doesn't have to second-guess his option choice, nor does the opponent have to second-guess his.

Yes, I can personally see the merit in placing in a 4-point hold, but honestly it would be a negative to an already low-power portion of the triangle in this game due to the second-guessing it can cause. Allowing for a four-point hold system does give merit to the string being used, otherwise Jann Lee really serves no purpose to use it as he already has a more advantageous mid in pretty much all required categories. If one were to add in linear sidestepping to the equation then one could claim that , , and would all be viable in this case. Jann Lee would want to use if they feel the user is going to crouch, jump, block, or hold mid punch; if he feels the user is going to hold mid kick, crouch, or jump; if he feels the user is going to Free-Step Dodge or mid hold. Please note that the only reason that Jann Lee has to use is if he does not want to commit to the , be safe from the most damaging throw if the opponent is a non-grappler, or wants to hope for a counter hit to initiate the stun-launch game. Remember, the lift stun from is not applied to Slow Escape as it lifts you off the ground.

Keep in mind that this all refers to the situation of being blocked. It's an entirely different game than if it's on hit or counter hit. On hit, Jann Lee is free to free-cancel and react to a holder or reset the meta-game all over. Raansu knows this well after the ass whooping Jann Lee gave his Hitomi in DOA3 at DID7 .

Note: It is possible to hold the on reaction, it's just obviously a hardcore skill as the is fast. However, I personally (at one point) could do it on reaction by reading the animations, today though I'm out of practice.

It's all about weighing the string options and reacting to the moves themselves, not just the hit level of a move. Going to the 4-point system can not only "give less of a chance for the holder to connect", but it also can cause a greater chance for the competitive player to second guess themselves. This is the same danger I have with making it a six-point hold system. Too many options that overlap in properties can lead to user confusion. This is a personal issue I had with Dead or Alive 4 as every attack's main property was to put the opponent in stun, with various attacks being a launcher at any point in the stun. The game itself forces you into the stun game so hard, and any move is viable for not only putting you in the stun game but also keeping you in it as well. I prefer limited options that have their own reads overtop of an abundance of options that do everything.

 

[OSTCarmine]

Universal methods are never really a good idea since they kill character uniqueness. . .

Besides that, that kind of methodology doesn't really work. . . I mean currently in doa 4, everyone is the same, some are just slower than others with no real benefit.

I dont really mean it that way. What im asking is: When they decided on frame advantages for moves in DOA3.1, how did they go about choosing which characters get what.
As an example - Any projectile attack in a game like SF will have a certain amount of knockback on block. Non projectile moves may not have the same amount of knockback effect. But knowing that a projectile has hit, both players can make a fair estimation of the outcome regardless of whether it was blocked or not. The projectile is easy to spot, its effects are simple to understand.
Applying this to DOA, If the frame advantage moves were defined clearly, according to a universal system [note - i dont mean universal as in everybody gets a move like this] would it not make it easier for both players to get a good read on the situation. If both players are well aware of whats going on, it should also eliminate some guessing in those situations.
I ask because I dont see too much coherence or structure regarding the distribution of these moves, or the definition of the moves themselves. Please correct me if im wrong

 

[Rikuto]

tbh i have no idea who was calling most of the shots on DOA 3.1

it's the great mystery. I'd like to shake his hand though.

As for making it universally easy to notice, well its a thought isn't it? A little visual effect to tell you when you have advantage, or disadvantage... ive long thought about that. With a guard break its obvious, but guard breaks are different and we cant just give all frame advantage moves a guard break.

The other school of thought is, should we do this? One of the reasons for having frame advantage moves in a game is to separate people who do their research from the people who don't. It creates a layer that automatically weeds out lazy players, something that is unfortunately needed in DOA really badly due to its current shallow state.

in a perfect game, i can't imagine it would be necessary to hide such data visually. But sadly...

 

[Matt Ponton]

Nothing wrong with showing one guard animation that indicates advantage and another with disadvantage. Telling how much advantage is a different story though.

 

[Rikuto]

I'd be up for experimenting with it... lord knows the casuals wouldn't figure it out anyway.

 

[OSTCarmine]

I'd be up for experimenting with it... lord knows the casuals wouldn't figure it out anyway.

lol, We are the 1%
About the visual efx thing - We only need really subtle clues such as slight knockback or a forced backstep. ATM when an Atk of adequate strength is blocked the blocker will indicate the effect of the impact by leaning back/being pushed back slightly. Upon Guard break this animation is much more pronounced, the blocker will stagger backwards. The "Advantage on Block" animation can be something in between these two extremes. No need for any fancy business, or to indicate how much advantage is gained. Just a basic heads up that the smart players take note of, that anybody else will completely ignore

 

[virtuaPAI]

lol, We are the 1%
About the visual efx thing - We only need really subtle clues such as slight knockback or a forced backstep. ATM when an Atk of adequate strength is blocked the blocker will indicate the effect of the impact by leaning back/being pushed back slightly. Upon Guard break this animation is much more pronounced, the blocker will stagger backwards. The "Advantage on Block" animation can be something in between these two extremes. No need for any fancy business, or to indicate how much advantage is gained. Just a basic heads up that the smart players take note of, that anybody else will completely ignore

-I like that concept. Maybe when you do an attack that is at disadvantage, you recoil back. Or when you do an attack that gives an advantage your opponent recoils back.

 

[Berzerk!]

Agree, telling these things via clear animation is a good idea and thanks to DOA's fluid animation style should work well with its existing style.

VP: Animation on disadvantage could be done well such as in Virtua Fighter 5FS, if you have a low roundhouse sweep blocked, the animation changes to show the leg stopping (doesn't complete its circular motion that it would on hit/whiff) and the character goes through a tiny recovery animation.

That's a clear but subtle indication that the defender has an opportunity.

 

[grap3fruitman]

I know it's too late to submit questions but I'm just writing these down somewhere in case we get another chance in the future and just so I don't forget.

• The Ninja Gaiden series is well known for being a very difficult action game that requires players to be very knowledgeable and smart while being very unforgiving to players that aren't. The Dead or Alive games, particularly 4 and Dimensions, are the exact opposite of this and forgive the less knowledgeable player at almost every opportunity while slapping the wrists of the more knowledgeable players. Why do you feel there is this kind of discrepancy between two series of games by the same developer? Can we look for a different attitude with future DOA games?

• From what we've seen so far, Team Ninja is making very significant changes with the graphics in DOA5. On the other hand, the gameplay looks identical to DOA Dimensions. Why is Team Ninja being so forward moving with the graphics but so scared to make significant leaps with the gameplay? I feel that fans would really like to be surprised with much better gameplay just as we have been with the graphics. We need substance with our style!

 

[R4712-VR88]

On the other hand, the gameplay looks identical to DOA Dimensions.

IT WAS A FREAKIN' ALPHA BUILD OF THE GAME! ALPHA! THE TRAILER WAS JUST MADE AS AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT DOA5 WILL BE LIKE! GOD!!!1

 

[Raansu]

IT WAS A FREAKIN' ALPHA BUILD OF THE GAME! ALPHA! THE TRAILER WAS JUST MADE AS AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT DOA5 WILL BE LIKE! GOD!!!1

First impressions mean everything. Alpha or not, they should of made an effort to show they are trying to change the system, not just talk. I commend TN for taking the steps they have been taking, but until we see more, all we can judge is the video we have.

 

[R4712-VR88]

First impressions mean everything. Alpha or not, they should of made an effort to show they are trying to change the system, not just talk.

Least talking is better than nothing. Heaven forbid it's so hard to please you people.

 

[Rikuto]

Ehhh. . . there is truth on both sides here.

I'm feeling all of you on this. But frankly, Grap3, all that question would do is piss them off and risk alienating us from them. Not because its a bad question, but because its already been asked, and he's already swallowed his pride and agreed to listen to us. Shimbori has been told this before several times now, and he has acknowledged the displeasure of the hardcore. I understand best of all how badly we've gotten burned with 4/D, but there is such a thing as overkilling a statement. In his eyes most people only care about the flare when they look at a trailer, not dissecting the gameplay -- that's left to us. So he improved on flare, and made additions to gameplay instead of changes to existing gameplay.

We're going to keep fighting on the issue obviously, but there's only so many times we can call them out on something released in pre-alpha.

They've been very forward, let's not piss them off by calling them "too scared" to do anything, when all they've been doing is asking US what they SHOULD change. If Hayashi and Shimbori were getting into yelling matches over counter-holds, then it's pretty obvious at least one of them is taking our concerns to heart.

If the game gets closer to release and we're still seeing no improvement, obviously it will be a question worth revisiting in earnest. Until them, give em a chance.

 

[Raansu]

Least talking is better than nothing. Heaven forbid it's so hard to please you people.

It's not that its hard to please some of us, its simply that many of us no longer trust TN. I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt, but in the end it doesn't change the fact that doa4 left a very bad sour taste in many players mouths, and DoAD did very little to fix those problems, and the interviews PL had with TN before DoAD came out did not help improve that trust. I'm still sitting on a wait and see basis, but like grap3, I still feel pretty burned seeing doa4 mechanics in the announcement trailer of the game.