qwerty Posted January 11, 2015 Posted January 11, 2015 It would not be a defensive tool, because it would be detrimental to the teching player. Teching is not a get out of jail free card unless you're playing against someone who doesn't know better.
Dime_x Posted January 11, 2015 Posted January 11, 2015 No tech on ground throws (they arent even that good in this game) but have a tech on airthrows. Seems logical to me. Groundthrows give you many ways to get out of them via reversals, backdashes, throw invulnerable moves, FD jump out, not being throwable for a huge amount of time after coming out of block/hitstun. Airthrows give you waaaaay less ways to get out of throw tech traps... So throws techable in the air. Not on the ground.
qwerty Posted January 11, 2015 Posted January 11, 2015 I would agree with that if 1F jump was in Xrd (pretty sure at this point that it is indeed not) and if there was less blockstun across the board. Even though I don't like the inconsistency of having one kind of normal throw techable and one not, I could definitely live with that. Ground throws are definitely good in this game, though.
TheRealBobMan Posted January 11, 2015 Posted January 11, 2015 It's still possible to delay tech if you want to. Hell, you could STILL tech the traditional way by mashing. It's just that, in the situations where teching on the first frame is the right move, you can actually tech on the first frame. This is much easier on stick than on pad, so if you're a stick player you might not realize how helpful this could be to other players. I think that's where the problem lies. You seem adamant that teching on the first frame is always bad, when it's not. Sometimes it's the right play. Missing that window when you made the decision to tech there sucks. Once you get to this point, the argument turns into "where is it acceptable to have execution difficulty" type stuff, so I don't want to go there. I'd probably be fine with it either way since I'm a stick player, though if people started saying GG is a clone of BB if GG decided to adopt that, I'd fart in someone's mouth. I'm thinking more about pad players that have to deal with not being able to hold a button and alternate pressing 2-3 more buttons on consecutive frames to get out. But anyway, the statement: It would not be a defensive tool, because it would be detrimental to the teching player. Teching is not a get out of jail free card unless you're playing against someone who doesn't know better. This is where we have a problem. There will be times where someone will actually drop a tight link unintentionally and wont have a setup for it to be a frame trap. In that circumstance, teching on the first frame would not be detrimental. Really, if a combo has a 1-frame link and the player dropped it by 1 frame, the only time to tech would be in the 1-frame window. Are you going to say that it's wrong to avoid the follow up damage there because it would be scaled by whatever came before it? What if RISC was flashing? What if the setup was really early in the combo and was done specifically because it leads to 200+ meterless damage (where the throw reset does significantly less damage)? It's irrelevant that teching isn't a "get out of jail free" option. It's a mechanic the game expects you to be able to use. This is kinda like arguing that reversals should have a 1-frame window because wakeup DP isn't a "get out of jail free" card. Reversal options have their window based on other factors that are much more important than "XX% of the time you shouldn't do this, so we're going to make it hard to do". That said, while I'd be ok with hold-to-tech (IE you'll tech on that frame if the frame started with you holding the button), I wouldn't be ok with buffered techs. That's the point where you're removing control from the player. Maybe he was trying to do X move and YRC it, and got counter hit by a lvl 1 attack while he was doing the input. Now his YRC is a buffered tech, and the other player gets a tech trap setup on accident while the guy who got hit is trying to intentionally delay tech because he knows the attacker is going to go for a reset.
qwerty Posted January 11, 2015 Posted January 11, 2015 I feel like we've gone all over the place. Allow me to reiterate my points to help clarify: 1. Buffered techs would make 1F windows possible to tech out of in any circumstance, instead of something that can only happen if the player knows the combo is going to be dropped. This effectively turns any 1F tech window into a 50/50, which cheapens the value of escaping those tight windows in black beat combos (not in the sense of requiring the execution; execution is a means to an end here). Thus, people expect it and learn how to beat it, with an option select of some sort or perhaps something like a crossunder. 2. Buffered techs would negate the advantage of double tapping for the players that utilize it. Being able to choose two distinct tech points gives the defending player more say in how he's positioned after the tech. This is undoubtedly a good thing. I don't know why we're still talking about delayed techs still being an option, of course they are lol. But the dynamic behind making that decision would change entirely, which is what I've been trying to say. Of course there are also situations where you do want to tech on the first frame, but chances are if you're able to identify those as you play, you'll at least sometimes get it.
Soviet Bear Posted January 11, 2015 Posted January 11, 2015 MikeZ's article: I don't like AC as much as he did, because it felt bloated to me. A lot of moves were unnecessary because Force moves were better options. The only super I ever saw in serious matches was Ky's Sacred Edge; I liked the Story mode, but I can see why people would want fighting. I still think MK9 did story mode in fighting games best; I agree with Option selects being bad; I agree with certain inputs (like half-circles) being out-dated; No Negative Edge is not a deal-breaker for me, but it would make life easier for me. I'm not personally too impressive with my inputs; I think there are many reasons to play Xrd over previous GGs. Most of all because the Roman Cancel system is the most fun I've had so far. Sirlin's article: I agree with most of it, surprisingly enough. I'm probably less torn on the Blitz Shield than he is, though, but that's because I love parry mechanics in general. All in all, I think both articles bring up valid points and different approaches. I don't agree with MikeZ's entire design philosophy, but that's fine. I think we need more fighting games that take from each other or oppose each other. Especially because MikeZ makes fighting games; I don't want all fighting games to be like Guilty Gear or ASW games. I respect the crap out of Skullgirls even if the game doesn't click with me, because it has a clear direction that it sticks with.
MoralHazardPay Posted January 11, 2015 Posted January 11, 2015 I feel like we've gone all over the place. Allow me to reiterate my points to help clarify: 1. Buffered techs would make 1F windows possible to tech out of in any circumstance, instead of something that can only happen if the player knows the combo is going to be dropped. This effectively turns any 1F tech window into a 50/50, which cheapens the value of escaping those tight windows in black beat combos (not in the sense of requiring the execution; execution is a means to an end here). Thus, people expect it and learn how to beat it, with an option select of some sort or perhaps something like a crossunder. 2. Buffered techs would negate the advantage of double tapping for the players that utilize it. Being able to choose two distinct tech points gives the defending player more say in how he's positioned after the tech. This is undoubtedly a good thing. I don't know why we're still talking about delayed techs still being an option, of course they are lol. But the dynamic behind making that decision would change entirely, which is what I've been trying to say. Of course there are also situations where you do want to tech on the first frame, but chances are if you're able to identify those as you play, you'll at least sometimes get it. I think you're mistaking buffered techs for held techs. A held tech just means that if you're holding the button and you are able to tech on that frame, you tech. A buffered tech means that if you press a button and are able to tech within the next X frames you tech on the first possible frame if X is within the buffer. A held tech grants the player that wishes to tech more control, while a buffered tech takes away some control (if you press the button, you will tech on a larger window) in exchange for reliability. Absolutely no changes in dynamics happen with held techs; all it means is that you always tech when you want to tech rather than mashing and hoping you hit the right frame. There's a removal of execution barrier here, but I'm fairly certain that nobody is arguing that the teching execution barrier is a sacred cow. If someone wants to tech out of your black beat combo, they get to. You know when your combo is techable, so you can choose to do a techtrap if you think they'll tech. Seriously, you can still double tap or delay your tech or whatever. All that hold to tech does is give you an additional choice on the defense, that if you don't think they're going to do a techtrap you can always escape a blackbeat as opposed to mashing and hoping.
Dude Butts Posted January 11, 2015 Posted January 11, 2015 Air resets in BB and P4U are also things you need to keep in mind, yet don't see all that often. Hold-to-tech doesn't add an unneeded layer, it just makes air ukemi more intuitive. sorry, I just couldn't agree less. The lack of hold-to-tech or buffered techssaved the guy I was playing last night from most of my tech traps, and saved me from most of his, because we both practiced them in training mode with the dummy set to tech on the first available frame. People who argue otherwise might as well just be reaffirming the stereotype of Guilty Gear players being stubbornly stuck in the past. and I would just as soon submit that people who argue to simplify just aren't good enough yet to see the merits of having inputs be more specific.
qwerty Posted January 12, 2015 Posted January 12, 2015 I think you're mistaking buffered techs for held techs. A held tech just means that if you're holding the button and you are able to tech on that frame, you tech. A buffered tech means that if you press a button and are able to tech within the next X frames you tech on the first possible frame if X is within the buffer. A held tech grants the player that wishes to tech more control, while a buffered tech takes away some control (if you press the button, you will tech on a larger window) in exchange for reliability. Absolutely no changes in dynamics happen with held techs; all it means is that you always tech when you want to tech rather than mashing and hoping you hit the right frame. There's a removal of execution barrier here, but I'm fairly certain that nobody is arguing that the teching execution barrier is a sacred cow. If someone wants to tech out of your black beat combo, they get to. You know when your combo is techable, so you can choose to do a techtrap if you think they'll tech. Seriously, you can still double tap or delay your tech or whatever. All that hold to tech does is give you an additional choice on the defense, that if you don't think they're going to do a techtrap you can always escape a blackbeat as opposed to mashing and hoping. I understand there is a difference, but I don't see how what I'm saying wouldn't apply to both; you'd just have to time a buffered tech in a 1F window.
MoralHazardPay Posted January 12, 2015 Posted January 12, 2015 I understand there is a difference, but I don't see how what I'm saying wouldn't apply to both; you'd just have to time a buffered tech in a 1F window. Because you lose zero defensive options when you have access to hold to tech, but you can end up in a worse situation with buffer to tech. Let's assume you have perfect execution. You want to tech on frame X. You do not want to tech on frames X-1 or X+1 even if you are unable to tech on frame X. Assume a 2 frame buffer. If you press tech on frame X and you are still in an untechable state (due to your opponent delaying their string) but enter a techable state on frame X+1, you'll tech on frame X+1. To avoid this, you might press tech on frame X-1. But maybe your opponent did a slightly faster string than you expected, so you tech on frame X-1. Granted, people generally don't have frame precision in areas such as this and thus buffers do more good than harm for the defensive player, even at super high levels of play (see: wake up reversals). But with a press to hold, you only press to hold if you want to tech on the first possible frame while the button is held. You lose absolutely no options; double tapping works exactly as it has, and people who mash to escape would just hold the button... leading to the exact same situation as we have now, except people are able to make the game better understand what they want
Destin Posted January 12, 2015 Posted January 12, 2015 If you have to have strict timing to do a combo, why shouldn't you have somewhat strict timing to tech it? At even mid-high level, you will know the point that people might drop combos. It's usually one difficult spot or two. This hold to tech becomes a non-issue, you ALMOST ALWAYS tech exactly when and where you want. I mean, at high level, people don't drop combos, so you only see the black beat if they intentionally went for an impossible combo that does more damage gauging that you won't tech. Buffered tech would be horrible, I think we can all move past that one. Hold tech has more of an argument, but one thing GG seems to do that defines it's feel is that it is VERY responsible in non combo situations. You push a button, you get a response. I would be rather disappointed seeing the hold button thing become a norm in other situations as well, dramatic hold buffer windows. Tech throw windows are unnecessary. There are many counters to throws, and some characters have different throw lengths. If I am correctly staying my 4 pixels out of range of sol's throw with dizzy, should he be able to tech my throw? That was a difficult positioning by me that will be watered down by throw techs. Besides this you have defender throw advantage (invul), jump invul on frame one, backdashes. At the end of the day, guilty gear is a game with a very specific pacing. Throw breaks slow down the pacing, the importance of decisions, increases abilities of half assed defensive options. It makes characters harder to open up, and give you even more power from jumping away.It can be jarring for players coming from later SF's, where every defensive option comes with a pair of diapers in case maybe your decision was a bit too risky. But GG forces risky decisions often. You do not sit around waiting 20 seconds building up for the action point to be hit, it comes up in the first few seconds. This is ok, it's a different design vision. There are many fighting games that cater to the slower, defensive OS laden styles as well, but I certainly don't want GG to walk in that direction.
QSpec Posted January 12, 2015 Posted January 12, 2015 Not to throw fuel onto the fire, but I just finished watching the NEC15 AC+ tournament... lots of throws. (Almost?) No throw techs.
sren Posted January 12, 2015 Posted January 12, 2015 If you have to have strict timing to do a combo, why shouldn't you have somewhat strict timing to tech it? kinda one of the things that seems pretty complete about Guilty Gear is how precision on defense is kinda valued as much as precision on the offense. IBs, parries and FD kinda allow room for the defensive side to be almost as active as the one in the attackin' one. the tech system seems just an extension of that, kinda allowin' some sort of balance on dropped combo punishes (probably givin' room to actually go for more complicated stuff instead of "tournament combos" only like in most other games) there are already plenty of games that come w/ "trainin' wheels" systems (like hold to tech), why try to turn Guilty into another one of those instead of try to actually "step it up"...
NecroTheReaper Posted January 12, 2015 Posted January 12, 2015 I dont see how making something easier makes it more rewarding. Strict teching for strict combos is a joke though. If its so strict that you're dropping it, dont do it. You're getting rewarded with better damage, better oki, or more corner carry. Why should the opponent be punished if you dropped it? You can always go practice it more. You know what ypu can't practice or recreate? How your opponent dropped his combos. If my execution wasn't on par for what I was doing, HELL YES I should be punished for dropping it, easily. Saying you deserve a second chance for bad execution is stupid.
qwerty Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 Because you lose zero defensive options when you have access to hold to tech, but you can end up in a worse situation with buffer to tech. Let's assume you have perfect execution. You want to tech on frame X. You do not want to tech on frames X-1 or X+1 even if you are unable to tech on frame X. Assume a 2 frame buffer. If you press tech on frame X and you are still in an untechable state (due to your opponent delaying their string) but enter a techable state on frame X+1, you'll tech on frame X+1. To avoid this, you might press tech on frame X-1. But maybe your opponent did a slightly faster string than you expected, so you tech on frame X-1. Granted, people generally don't have frame precision in areas such as this and thus buffers do more good than harm for the defensive player, even at super high levels of play (see: wake up reversals). But with a press to hold, you only press to hold if you want to tech on the first possible frame while the button is held. You lose absolutely no options; double tapping works exactly as it has, and people who mash to escape would just hold the button... leading to the exact same situation as we have now, except people are able to make the game better understand what they want Using that same situation, if you were to hold a button for whatever advance input buffer (let's say 5F since that's what BB and iirc P4U have), holding from frame X-1 would net you a tech in any of those situations, would it not? Double tapping would still work exactly the same in a game with no negative edge like Xrd, but in a game with negative edge like +R, you would still have incentive to double tap (which is in fact the best argument against it in that game). Still, I don't see how any of this changes my original point of held or buffered techs making teching out of tight windows more expected and changing the dynamic of choosing whether to tech at that point or not.
qwerty Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 Tech throw windows are unnecessary. There are many counters to throws, and some characters have different throw lengths. If I am correctly staying my 4 pixels out of range of sol's throw with dizzy, should he be able to tech my throw? That was a difficult positioning by me that will be watered down by throw techs. Besides this you have defender throw advantage (invul), jump invul on frame one, backdashes. At the end of the day, guilty gear is a game with a very specific pacing. Throw breaks slow down the pacing, the importance of decisions, increases abilities of half assed defensive options. It makes characters harder to open up, and give you even more power from jumping away.It can be jarring for players coming from later SF's, where every defensive option comes with a pair of diapers in case maybe your decision was a bit too risky. But GG forces risky decisions often. You do not sit around waiting 20 seconds building up for the action point to be hit, it comes up in the first few seconds. This is ok, it's a different design vision. There are many fighting games that cater to the slower, defensive OS laden styles as well, but I certainly don't want GG to walk in that direction. I agree on principle that you should be at an advantage with an extended throw range (and indeed you are even with throw techs), but there are exceptions to the rule. If we're talking a totally escapable tick throw/proximity block situation, then yes, I agree that you shouldn't rely on throw techs to get out of those. Yet, we don't see people do that because there are better options in those escapable situations, like you said. Which brings me to my main defense of throw techs: for situations where you would otherwise eat shit, they are the last line of defense. Sure, you have an extra 4 pixels on Sol, so you should be able to tick throw from four pixels away. But let's be honest; you are not just doing standard tick throw setups with Dizzy, especially not in +R. Chances are you have a fish, spike, bubble, or some combination of the above on top of Sol, and he's probably going to be forced to block for quite some time. If he knows a throw is coming somewhere in the middle of that, I don't see why he shouldn't be able to tech it. Slows down the pace of the game? I beg to differ. It's not like you aren't at a pretty serious advantage already, and you can definitely continue to press it after a throw tech. It's a brief pause, kind of like an "oh shit" moment, at worst (which is also exactly what throws are in regards to the pace of the game). Then of course, if you still find yourself not liking throw techs, I have to ask: would you rather get counter thrown instead? I do agree with your sentiment towards the end, though, and if anything GG shows that you can have a plethora of defensive option selects and still maintain a fast, steady pace.
MoralHazardPay Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 Using that same situation, if you were to hold a button for whatever advance input buffer (let's say 5F since that's what BB and iirc P4U have), holding from frame X-1 would net you a tech in any of those situations, would it not? Double tapping would still work exactly the same in a game with no negative edge like Xrd, but in a game with negative edge like +R, you would still have incentive to double tap (which is in fact the best argument against it in that game). Still, I don't see how any of this changes my original point of held or buffered techs making teching out of tight windows more expected and changing the dynamic of choosing whether to tech at that point or not. People will hold to tech and tech on the first frame until people start doing techtraps. Then they'll mix up first frame held techs with late techs. That's a great thing! You've added a lot more back and forth mindgames because now you have the guess of early or late tech at all levels of play rather than "I have the read that he's going fo the early tech, but my techtrap might get screwed up because it's a 1f window for him to tech out and I get punished even though I made the right read."
NecroTheReaper Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 By this point, since there's people defending mash to tech, I'm gonna say its preference based. I dont see why that can't just be a choice in later games as to how you want to tech, since the frames would all be the same.
redsilversnake Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 It's not preference, it's ad hoc reasoning. qwerty wants to believe he's making good arguments, but it's more likely that the only real reason he wants to keep mash-to-tech is because that's what he's used to/how the games have been, rather than having actually thought it out.
qwerty Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 People will hold to tech and tech on the first frame until people start doing techtraps. Then they'll mix up first frame held techs with late techs. That's a great thing! You've added a lot more back and forth mindgames because now you have the guess of early or late tech at all levels of play rather than "I have the read that he's going fo the early tech, but my techtrap might get screwed up because it's a 1f window for him to tech out and I get punished even though I made the right read." It is a great thing... for the aggressor. Which is what I've been saying the whole time. The current mix up is between early techs with variable timing and late techs with variable timing, which makes the aggressor have to consider much more in the case of the former. If we want a version of Guilty Gear that rewards offense even more than it already does (which, judging by the disdain for throw techs, may very well be the case), then sure. The reason I play Guilty Gear though is not to open people up constantly, it's to play a smart spacing game on both offense and defense while having ample options for both.
qwerty Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 It's not preference, it's ad hoc reasoning. qwerty wants to believe he's making good arguments, but it's more likely that the only real reason he wants to keep mash-to-tech is because that's what he's used to/how the games have been, rather than having actually thought it out. I have been more than reasonable with you dude, but you are starting to push it. If my arguments are so wrong, debunk them. Otherwise, you're just adding to the already pitiful signal to noise ratio of this forum.
MoralHazardPay Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 It is a great thing... for the aggressor. Which is what I've been saying the whole time. The current mix up is between early techs with variable timing and late techs with variable timing, which makes the aggressor have to consider much more in the case of the former. If we want a version of Guilty Gear that rewards offense even more than it already does (which, judging by the disdain for throw techs, may very well be the case), then sure. The reason I play Guilty Gear though is not to open people up constantly, it's to play a smart spacing game on both offense and defense while having ample options for both. But you can still mash! There are zero options taken away from the defensive player!
Maho Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 Double tapping would still work exactly the same in a game with no negative edge like Xrd, but in a game with negative edge like +R, you would still have incentive to double tap (which is in fact the best argument against it in that game). Just so you know, negative edge never worked for air recovery, you could only use it for specials.
qwerty Posted January 13, 2015 Posted January 13, 2015 I get what you're saying. Really, I do. But we need to go back and acknowledge the root of the desire for held techs, and that is the ability to get out as soon as possible so you don't eat a combo. If you have a consistent way to get out of dropped combos as early as possible, most people (even many good players) will instinctively take that because, as we all know, eating a black beat combo sucks. The issue arises when we start talking about ways to bait that, which would require little to no commitment on the behalf of the attacking player. Obviously, better players will start to delay their techs more if they're getting hit by resets, but there is still always that tempting option to just get out ASAP. As it currently is, getting out of a combo on the first frame is actually quite difficult and in many situations is not desirable because it places you directly above your opponent. So in a sense, the current system is preventing the kind of thing that I don't want, which is teching becoming even more of a hazard to the defending player in those kinds of situations. What the addition of held techs would do is add that extra layer of "what if"; if the opportunity to get out of a combo immediately is always there, it's always going to be a tempting option for obvious reasons. Ultimately, though, at higher levels, it is going to turn into a game of doing combos that hide option selects that beat those perfectly timed early techs. Why would those be so strong you may ask? Because the timing would be perfect every time, and would require little to no adjustment on the attacker's behalf. If there is a clearer way to explain my issue with it, I don't know what it is. I feel as if I've exhausted every effort there is to explain it.
Recommended Posts