Destin

I want all of Queen in this game. Anything less and I will be unsatisfied. (Also David bowie for purposes of under pressure.)

Dizzy with some real clothes on would be amazing. At least an alt costume will let me dress my girl up.

I'm just going to let you paraphrase my arguments from now on.

Although I was just arguing the general ideas of tools versus options(Is this the lingo we are using?), it was pretty much this mindset that I was arguing against.

I believe he was arguing that the removal of FB's and SB's was an absolute negative because of a decrease of tools. I was responding to this and a few others like it. Trying to show how by your definition, increasing "tools" can decrease net "options" within a characters own moveset, though I admit I myself used the words interchangeably. Specifically I found this issue in many places in AC, and am happy to see them pull backwards to Reload.

, there's no way to pretend that the removal of FRC isn't bad for the core gameplay of GG. I can't think of a single character that doesn't love the shit out of at least one of their FRCs, and would hurt from the loss of the mechanic as a whole. While you understand a lot, you're applying it in the wrong places. Also, note, GG is so matchup-centric that lots of options are useless in one matchup and great in another. 99% of the time, as Millia, there's no reason do use H disc FRC as Millia when you can use FB disc instead. However, that option, useless as it might seem, is useful the 1% of the time you're up against Baiken. For this reason, it's really hard to say what is and isn't useful, since everything needs to be viewed through the lens of matchups. I don't remember being anti-FRC anywhere? I am quite a fan of that mechanic, and did another dissertation arguing in favor of them pages back. Edit: I would also simplify my argument to fixing what isn't broken, but I wasn't sure people would understand exactly why these additions could be so damaging without a proper explanation behind it.

I am nothing if not verbose. And you just like AC more competitively because you are a Pote player =). Seriously though, it is exactly that. I am fantastically optimistic about a #R balance. Enough so that I trust them with the new slowdown RC. And I don't think people should worry about impossible dusts being gone, they weren't really THAT hard or technical.

Ooph, it's an early morning after a looong night. But I cleaned it up a bit for you.

Ugh, I tried to read to catch up but it was too bad. Look, for the "removing tools is ALWAYS a bad idea" people. Go play marvel, you have 30 times more options because you can cancel you moves on whiff, and call in secondary characters. By adding an ever increasing number of "tools", you do not inherently make it so there are more valid options for characters. If some options become dramatically more useful than others, you obsolete all the others. There is such thing as "move balance" beyond simple character balance. For example, in SF4 as vega I can live with just 1/4 of my attacks. The rest are just there and useless. If the ones that were good were toned down, then I might find myself actually using those other moves. Street fighter sticks you with like 20 or so odd normals, so its very hard to balance them. This is a situation where more tools created less variety. In Guilty Gear reload as dizzy, the ONLY normal I could give up and still play a mostly intact dizzy is standing P. EVERY SINGLE OTHER NORMAL IS USEFUL. This is GREAT move balance. I am forced to make decisions on spacing and normal choice around a bevy of different normals! All are useful in their own ways and create more intricate and interesting Nash equilibriums (the game theory that is the heart of many fighting game decisions). Now let's add a new tool say, the jumping down S she got in AC. A new tool means more variety right? Well in this case, no. Jumping down S had so much use, it obsoleted huge portions of her moves. It hit in almost 360 degrees, it had GREAT priority, it combo'd into H, into P, or into itself with the right setup and another air dash. It gave dizzy a completely unnecessary instant overhead from half screen. It dumbed down the decision making on aerial normals so much I was getting bored. Should I use jump P to cover this area and get the fast recovery, maybe jump k to pull up my hitbox, jump H is risky but has a great reward? Or maybe I will get most of all of those situations covered in one move. Now the rest are much less useful, thank you new move. Most importantly what this new "tool" did was protect the area right below dizzy in the air. Now as someone who had played dizzy for 12 years I understand that the way the character was designed in XX on she was not supposed to be able to cover this area easily. She has 2 fast long distance air dashes, she has incredible tools for controlling space, and is packed with some of the best air normals in the game for most angles. If a player managed to get in under dizzy when she had no bubble protecting her, their reward was that dizzy had no tool for this and had to eat their mixups/pressure. This made the aerial spacing spacing games depth evaporate. For laymen who didn't understand the in's and out's of the dizzy matchups this might go completely unnoticed. But for those of us who have grinded this game out over numerous different iterations, what it did was make it turn off the game. It was boring. And I didn't even go into why giving one character a super powerful option can ruin the OPPONENTS options, which is even more important. Force breaks could be done right, the idea of using 25% meter to do a move isn't inherent flawed even within guilty gear's mechanics. The problem is, it wasn't. The game wasn't designed for them, and all these moves ruined the move balance in many cases. People keep harping on as if they are filling some sort of hole a character had in their gameplan? MvC3 has a ton of holes in characters gameplans, they need to just refigure entire characters, add moves, take away moves! Reload was not like this. It didn't NEED any other moves to be an incredibly deep game. They just sorta popped up and got thrown in there in order to make more people buy the game so it felt more new. Not some balance decision but a sales decision, and many people bought into it. Accent Core was even more obvious than slash about it. Mori said in an interview "I love guilty gear!! I'm going to put completely new mechanics in the game to make it fresh!" And then, cue tons of new completely unnecessary bullshit changes. Instead of rounding out gameplans they spiked sillyness and scrubbyness. (which does to be fair, have the effect of making the game more accessible). The game is going back to it's reload roots because that is where all of the characters tools actually complimented each other. That is where most things had a purpose, and were designed from the beginning to interact with each other and other characters moves. What Mori did was add 3 new pieces to chess to invigorate sales. Thank god we are going back to what I would consider to be the best developed fighting game in the history of the genre. (Note, I am not saying that character balance was the greatest in Reload, though it was no worse than AC if you were playing in tournaments at that time. I am saying that the foundation was way better.)

They said something about it just being with projectiles.

Yeah, I thought that was obvious about the YRC system. It was still done very elegantly, and could really look incredible in motion. It would give the audience a good clue that some cool shit was about to happen as well. (I was responding to kyle)

I can tell daisuke is a true Queen fan because he chose the best album to listen through.

Thank fucking god he is washing away all the garbage that was Accent Core. Not seeing those scrubby ass force breaks come back is the most exciting news of the year for me. I mean, it looked like the game was building off reload (the last one HE was involved with), but now that I am 100% sure of it, I might actually go back and start playing #R!

Two things here. First, where and why do you draw the line at certain execution boundaries. Why not have 5ppp autocombo autoselect and optimal combo? There has to be a reason, a point where you want execution to enter into the equation, or if not (which is a fine standpoint), why not take it to more logical conclusions? And, a bit aside, are you seriously arguing that hitting PPP is so difficult as to be prohibitive for new players? Secondly, I want the execution to lower to a point. I actually love things like how marvel 3 like you do LMHS jump LMHS land super. That was a good thing in my opinion, it really helped new players start playing the game. I don't actually mind the idea of an autocombo in guilty gear either! But I would like the optimal optimal stuff to require the level of attention and execution that it always have. That's why I like having easier variants, maybe a hold FRC that requires 35% instead of 25%. I suggested the hold to tech late because everyone seemed behind it, though I felt it completely unnecessary.

You only really need to increase accessibility to the level that people can actually play the game, not to the level that they are playing at the optimal level, if you do that they will still be playing the game. You give people a good combo that works and gets decent damage. Not the best combo that does the best damage and position. You give them a good tech that hits a decent window safely, then let them work to get that 1f tech. You give them decent movement, but perhaps make optimal movement something to work towards.

You only really need to increase accessibility to the level that people can actually play the game, not to the level that they are playing at the optimal level, if you do that they will still be playing the game. You give people a good combo that works and gets decent damage. Not the best combo that does the best damage and position. You give them a good tech that hits a decent window safely, then let them work to get that 1f tech. You give them decent movement, but perhaps make optimal movement something to work towards.

Even for hte second part, it becomes second nature. I'm not sure how to explain it. But let's think about this. There is a part of my combo that might have a 1f gap in it if I do something wrong. It's a hard combo, but doable, I go for it every time. Sometimes I mess it up and it blackbeats, I still get the combo. If the player is mashing, they might get out but are also likely to get a move that follows, possible CH setup bait. But the situation I see most commonly with my friends because of this, is they go for a single tap, maaaaybe two, around the time of the tech window. They know my combos, and it becomes a timing match for them too. If they are on point, they get out of that 1f gap safely (assuming I messed up). It requires finesse on both sides. Would people settle for an auto tech that came out on frame 3 after possible? Or that could only be done for neutral tech (1-2 f's later?) That seems like a reasonable compromise.

Accidental button presses is part of the danger of teching. I have counter hit setups for people who try to mash tech out of my combos.

When I used to fuck up my execution, you damn well better believe I had tech chases planned. That was like guilty gear 101, we were all doing that by year 2.

I have ALL SORTS of CH setups with Hos (and some for dizzy) if people are mashing tech. If they aren't mashing tech they often give me black beat combos. I'm not sure how much I like automation of things, but hold to tech certainly wouldn't be a deal breaker for me. I don't want people popping out of combos because they thought maybe I would fuck up. Should they be able to hold a button to reversal tech into dp as well? I mean, it's what they were going for, why add the difficulty? I much prefer making players take guesses as to where I might drop my combo than having an auto filter. (I mean, we have had alot of this conversation before, but couldn't you do the same with the FRC points, hold to frc?) I read an interview with Miyamoto once where he said, never do automatically that which you could let the player do. It takes away from the immersion, the feel of control over the character. I suppose a similar point might be in play here.

Learn where the holes are. I usually tech with a max of 3 button taps. I don't want a random move to come out and get me counter hit.

Actually this is not true. Because of the way guts works, it favors big single high damage hits towards the end of the match to not enact more of the guard gauge reduction. For example, a pote buster can take out chipp VERY quickly towards the end of the match because his guts will never kick in, whereas a high hit combo will do considerably less. I have actually optimized certain combos for high guts characters to get around this issue. Although this is minor, it does affect gameplay.

The hardest frc's are the ones with small windows that appear long after any visual/audio/input cues. Ino's frc is very easy, it's the inputting everything else with it, and the fact that it is part of her basic BnB's that makes it a difficult combo. I really can't think of any difficult frc's off the top of my head. The closest I can think of is chipp's command throw and dizzy's icespike, but really frc's are not hard at all.

I like the 50% versus 25% thing. Or even something like 25% or 20% if you hit it just right.