What's new

What would you change about DOA?

O

OldsmoBuick

Member
d3v said:
Two way street, while more pushback makes punishing harder, it also makes piling on pressure harder. The thing is however, the defensive player doesn't need to punish to turn the game in his favor. Simply being able to stop pressure and return things to neutral can be enough.
Click to expand...
I do agree with you, but judging from the post that DR2K responded to, the person seemed to be looking for added safety, after having their offence stopped.

I didn't chime in to weigh in, in either person's behalf. I for one, don't feel more pushback is needed. but dawnbringer is entitled to an opinion. I say, if an intelligent conversation is taking place, -- or can be had -- let's have one. I feel that the dialogue can be helpful to our community. Even when I don't agree with either side, I may come to understand someone else's stance on an issue.
 
O

OldsmoBuick

Member
shunwong said:
I think I understand what you mean, but this would be solved by giving characters some moves that give frame advantage.Right now the neutral game in DOA goes like this: The first one who attacks is a sucker. Why? If it whiffs you can get punished. If it's blocked you are at negative frames. If it hits and stuns you still can be held, if it hits causing no stun you are at negative frames too. So people tend to play a waiting game. Wait till the other one moves, not much reward in taking the initiative. Give characters some moves that give them frame advantage and people will be more proactive.
Click to expand...
Frame advantage on block is trickier than it looks on paper. If a move grants +2 frame advantage on block, that move will grant something similar to that on hit. If said move is not a standalone attack, the frame advantage actually causes the string to become a 2 in 1 or possibly a 3 in 1. If said move is a string-ender... when do 'I' get to play?
 
O

OldsmoBuick

Member
Jann Lee should be able to enter DS, without first performing an action.

Jann Lee's DS should have a low hitting(high crushing) attack,

I'm not evev going to complain about his shortage of low crushes... (I think I just did...)
 
Raansu

Raansu

Well-Known Member
OldsmoBuick said:
Jann Lee should be able to enter DS, without first performing an action.

Jann Lee's DS should have a low hitting(high crushing) attack,

II'm not evev going to complain about his shortage of low crushes... (I think I just did...)
Click to expand...

His DS is fine the way it is.
 
Awesmic

Awesmic

Well-Known Member
Standard Donor
Zeo said:
Is someone seriously asking for Jann Lee buffs?
Click to expand...
You dad-gummed right I am. His voice definitely needs to be buffed.

I want Piccolo Lee back. Hell, insert Jacky Bryant's sound clips if you have to since they pretty much did it for the VF characters anyway, but anything's better than the current Japanese voice...
 
Zeo

Zeo

Well-Known Member
Awesmic said:
You dad-gummed right I am. His voice definitely needs to be buffed.

I want Piccolo Lee back. Hell, insert Jacky Bryant's sound clips if you have to since they pretty much did it for the VF characters anyway, but anything's better than the current Japanese voice...
Click to expand...
The guy does a great job as Lancer from Fate/Stay Night, but he's not exactly good for a kung fu character voice. We need more of a "Bruce Lee" type like the original VA. Or just.... bring him back.
 
Raansu

Raansu

Well-Known Member
OldsmoBuick said:
It's inexcusable for a character to have a stance, that they cannot execute at will.

Also, since every attack from DS is high blockable and linear, I'll never get my opponent to open up.
Click to expand...

1p+k puts him right into the stance and it's evasive, what more do you need from neutral? The entire point of DS is to be used as a mix up. It was never intended to be a good tool used at neutral. That's why he wont go into the stance at the "ready fight" in the beginning of the match because he as a 9 frame jab from the stance and it would be WAY over the top if he could execute that right at the start of the fight, and its also why he's unsafe when transitioning into the stance on block. It was never designed for that purpose.

The only time you should be going into DS from neutral is when doing his evasive step back and "maybe" as a mixup on block if you notice they never jab you out of it or if they keep holding low. DS is fine the way it is, he doesn't need any more ways to go into DS, nor does he need any buff of any kind. He is a solid character and is perfect where he is right now.

Also, why are you trying to open up your opponent with DS? That is why you have the dragon gunner, that is why it as an OH. The entire point of that move is to open up your opponent and get a free stun into a two guess mix up. It sounds to me like you're playing Jann Lee incorrectly.
 
Roroko

Roroko

Member
OldsmoBuick said:
Frame advantage on block is trickier than it looks on paper. If a move grants +2 frame advantage on block, that move will grant something similar to that on hit. If said move is not a standalone attack, the frame advantage actually causes the string to become a 2 in 1 or possibly a 3 in 1. If said move is a string-ender... when do 'I' get to play?
Click to expand...

Isn't that why the damage threshold exists?
 
O

OldsmoBuick

Member
@ Raansu: 1P+K isn't instant access to DS. It's still an action used to transition into, DS. I made a similar comment about Hayate, and I made the exact same comment about Pai. I stand by my original post; its inexcusable for a character to have a stance, that they cannot execute at will.

I don't aim to be abrasive, but... since when is a 9 frame jab over-the-top? It doesn't have a follow-up attack, and the stun is not SE-worthy -- not even on CH. What's more, this isn't 'Flowchart Ken'. If I want to play Jann Lee differently than others, I should have the basic tools to do so -- even if that means I'm using him 'incorrecly'.

Hayate not being able to cancel into WD was a glaring oversight -- WAS a glaring oversight. Players with multiple stances -- or that make good use of 1 -- not having a CB from their stance(s) was a glaring oversight -- WAS a glaring oversight. I view this the same way. If 1 or 2 players don't have what every other player that fits into that group has, they're fundamentally flawed.
 
D

dawnbringer

Active Member
OldsmoBuick said:
@ Raansu: 1P+K isn't instant access to DS. It's still an action used to transition into, DS. I made a similar comment about Hayate, and I made the exact same comment about Pai. I stand by my original post; its inexcusable for a character to have a stance, that they cannot execute at will.
Click to expand...

I've used bold in the quote for a point of interest. Do you have an example of "instant" stance transition to illustrate your point?
 
KwonJigglypuff

KwonJigglypuff

Well-Known Member
I would change Helena's ponytail and give her more flexibility/evasiveness with her Bokuho stance. And more speed.
They got rid of her PP2KP, don't care. They want her to rely on her BKO stance, okay. Well then work on it.
 
synce

synce

Well-Known Member
This whole argument doesn't even make sense. Dragon "stance" isn't a stance, it's a transition/cancel. A stance has many options and you can move back and forth during. If that's what you're asking for then they'd have to give his movelist the Helena treatment :)
 
D

dawnbringer

Active Member
You must log in or register to reply here.
ALL DOA6 DOA5 DOA4 DOA3 DOA2U DOAD
Top