A few days ago I was watching some high level game on sf5 ( tokido vs a guy with guile that was playing like out of this world, Liquid NuckleDu ) In one of those figths This guy did such a great come back and all the people was so hype.. Come Backs are good for Hype. KI has one of the best come back potential in any fighting game . And this is good. But I think that a small change , could make it even greater. What if Cheap Damage kill is gone? What if A blocked special move or shadow move don’t kill you , only a confirm hit can kill you.
The mechanics in KI with this could make a lot for the game at med and high level . What do you think ?
You don’t make comebacks happen just to make them happen. Comebacks are hype sure. But consider why. Comebacks are hype because the losing player has the skill to turn it around by playing correctly and making the right reads. In KI, you have the tools to avoid the chip kill. Are they trying to chip you out with a Shadow Fireball? Use a projectile invulerable move. Trying to pressure you? Shadow Counter. If chip kills don’t exist, it reduces the hype because the player can just block and wait it out which is less hype. Imagine this scenario and tell me which is more hype. Both players are in danger and one of them is knocked down. The player standing throws a fireball to chip out the opponent. However, the player knocked down makes a read and uses Shadow Windkick to go through and takes the win. Hype right? Would the hype still be there if they just blocked? It would make the game much slower once both players are in danger.
Did you just call NuckleDu “a guy”? He’s one of the greats in SF!
I’d be fine with removing chip kills but I don’t think it’d make that much of a difference as chip damage in KI is v/ small compared to SF for example.
If you want to make comebacks more hype, all you need to do is simply take a page out of an old FG book…namely War Gods:
Or in other words, add a “comeback victory” end tag to a fight to sit alongside “Awesome” and “Supreme”…That’s really all you’d have to do.
If you manage to be put in danger without meter, then the opponent landing a lockdown generates hype. There is also the possibility of the chip being just short of killing which can generate a lot of hype. Just turtling to avoid the chip damage when low on health doesn’t health.
Lol, wasn’t aware of that! is it to avoid what they call “cheap ending” or something like that? I recall playing Darkstalkers on my dreamcast and whenever I got a kill with a super at the very end they would call it something like that haha.
I’m not sure if I’m fond of this. I don’t feel is unfair if they kill me with chip damage. I know what they say about comeback potential but I’m not feeling KI lacks it. The combo breaking system plays a big part in this game regarding to comebacks.
Supers can chip kill. Makes for posing some subtle balance issues though, as characters with grab supers are incapable of chip kills, where others have projectile supers they can meaty with for the win from range.
I don’t trust Capcom’s ability to balance a fighting game though. I’m sort of convinced they’ve cemented the identity of a genre that they practically invented, but don’t really understand.
I think in SF4 it was a bit boring as we had A LOT of people uppercutting on opponent’s wakeup for the guaranteed kill. Hardly exciting. KI has such small chip damage comparatively that it’s almost as if chip couldn’t kill. Almost.
I’m a little surprised by that. Care to explain why, or is it just a preference?
As one of the horde of scrubby Ken players I favor a meaty fireball when I have the opponent on the ground with just a magic pixel left. It’s great for the winner to have a foregone conclusion, but I’m not sure that I really miss it in SF V.
I’m not sure how I feel about it in KI though. Chip is low so you almost always need a shadow move to chip kill someone.
It creates fake tension. There isn’t much difference between having 50 life left (ie, the amount of a jab) vs 1 life left. From mid screen you know you are mostly safe from death, often for a pretty long period of time.
Yes, there are moments where you are guaranteed to die in games with chip deaths, but I actually like that because it forces you to treat the moments before it with more seriousness. There are also moments where you are guaranteed to die in SFV (ie, no v-reversal + your opponent has super), and the answer is simply to try and not let that situation happen to you.
No chip deaths kinda works in SFV because the rest of the game is so basic and you have so few options besides blocking to avoid taking close-range damage, but I really don’t want it becoming something that all fighters aspire to do.
Capcom is good making fighting games, but his skills in terms of balancing can be debated.
Several characters of their games are very bad, they can’t be used in a competitive way.
SF3 had Yun and Chun-li as top tier characters, and characters like Twelve, Q or Sean were just crap compared to them.
Dan is a joke character and is very weak in every game he is present.
Dee Jay was always weak on SFIV, and never got enough buffs to make him competitive
SFxT has several balance problems among many characters. Some are very strong, others very weak
Marvel vs Capcom series has characters like Vergil, who are godlike, and others like Hisen-Ko, who are very very bad
I really don’t care about how competitive they are, I’m kinda low tier hero. Q(sf3), Hugo(both sf3 and sf4, Paul, Hugo(SfxT)… Always enjoyed them, even being bad among the other characters
Their games have a tendency to contain extremely good characters, and extremely bad characters, amidst questionable design decisions - V.SF4 Sagat/Akuma, AE Yun, SF3 Chun… SFV is loaded w/ questionable decisions in a delayed balance cycle, like Chun’s VTrigger or the wriggling mass of bugs that is Urien’s Reflector… SFxT had more Dan-level characters than any game has a right to (Yoshi, Heihachi especially)…
I guess it seems like they don’t often ask whether something is good, or why it is good, same going for subpar and bad.
Then, let’s not forget that their method of creating a more “read-based” game was to artificially inflate the inherent input lag so things that look (and by all rights should be) reactable were simply not so.
I’m honestly more curious as to what gave you the impression that they were “kings of FG balance”? Especially when you frequent a forum of an IG-balanced game? Do you actually believe a SF game has ever been better balanced than our own beloved KI (not the old ones, they don’t count)?
