but that would take away the excitement for when they actualy manage to make a long combo. And also the matches would be shorter and less back and forth.
I wish this was true. I’ve been trying for a long time and I don’t think it’s working, lol. I even have likened the game to poker a lot; it’s another game where you need to make reads with imperfect information but strong hunches, which has been greatly strengthened by the advent of online poker that lets us explore the problem space at 100,000x the rate of casino poker, and (surprise surprise!) we’ve learned that taking more risks and playing aggressively is considerably stronger than passive “scared” play. Originally, it was just a few “online wackos” that seemed to be doing way better than the expected line, and then we realized that their strategy is actually pretty sound. Now the entire poker world plays aggressively (if you don’t, you get run the heck over) and the game is no less stable or filled with variance, but definitely much more interesting.
If only people would understand that KI is the same way.
Taking the counter breaker risk is worth more than the sum of its parts. Looking only at the negative side of your guess, even if you’re 80% sure it will work out, is not the optimal way to play.
I think it’s kind of crazy that people will do wind kick (blocked) and then risk a DP, but these same people are scared to counter break. The DP is considerably riskier and leads to less damage, and there are ways for the defense to handle it with delayed button + blocking OSes, and you open yourself up for a full punish. Counter breakers catch all break attempts (there are no OSes to save you), do 50%+ immediate damage and strong mental damage, and are no more or less based on noticing opponent patterns than trying to DP someone who presses buttons. But rather than look at the numbers, most people will try to play with emotion. In fighting games, science beats emotion every time.
3 Likes
I agree that combo breakers happen way too often in the game…but I’m not sure how they could change that in the current system other than simply making a few more things unbreakable, which would probably just piss more people off.
1 Like
Still trying to understand why some people feel that breakers should be mitigated. I see “there’s too many” but not a lot of “there’s too many because…”.
Honestly, I’d say there’s more of a chance of another type of breaker being implemented in S3 than there is of an existing type of breaker being nixed/nerfed.
1 Like
I feel as breakers are fine.
before go around changing core mechanics we should look at this:
Man, this just keeps coming up these days, doesn’t it? People seemingly want less combo-breakers or the more popularly used “guess breakers” citing older KI being harder to use breakers in or the lack of skill required etc. I dunno, I like the two way mechanic, even if guess breaking is an intended or unintended consequence.
I also read that higher level players or pro players aren’t using counter breakers because they’re too risky. I mentioned this in another thread and got zero replies on it, so I’ll throw the idea out there again and if it’s utter garbage, no problem. Again, just throwing the idea out there:
What if instead of leaving you wide open for an attack, a whiffed counter breaker actually did a move / animation that simply returned both character to a neutral position with some distance? Like maybe Orchid does a back flip kick and by the time she lands and the opponent lands, you’re both back at a neutral state where no one has an advantage?
It doesn’t cash out damage, of course. Maybe the white damage is reduced by half as a penalty for whiffing a counter breaker, but that seems like a much more affordable penalty than a dropped combo + open for opponent’s attack. This would just be dropped combo + halved white damage. I mean, if you opened the opponent up again quickly, you’d be looking at a higher ender level, so in a way, it still favors offense without reducing an opponent’s ability to break a combo as some seem to be proposing.
If doing this allowed pro players to feel safer using the best weapon in the game for countering combo breakers, would something like this make sense, or am I way off base here? Perhaps if it favors the offense too much, instead of half white damage, a whiffed counter breaker drops a combo and opponent’s white damage is completely refilled?
this defeats the entire risk of using a Counter Breaker, and if we’re going to do that, we might as well remove all breaking, as there needs to be risk on both the offensive and defensive end of things.
The problem isn’t the breaking/counter breaking mechanics, it’s the player mindset. They’re too stuck in their “I’m attacking and shouldn’t have to take risks, but you’re gaining too much from your risks” way of thinking. When I play with my friends or against random people online, Counter Breakers happen, and are super impactful. I don’t stay away from them simply because I might miss. KI has two way interaction, and everything about the combo system has built in risk. That’s why it’s different from SF or MK, and needs to remain so.
Why does this defeat the whole risk of using a counter breaker?
The risk for doing the counter breaker is that you’re choosing to drop your combo for the promise of landing the counter breaker. You sacrifice the rest of your current combo to thwart a defensive maneuver.
If it doesn’t land though, you drop your combo and you don’t cash out the damage you were able to do. Sure, if it’s a five hit combo, that might not be a huge deal depending on where you’re at in the match, but what if it’s a third of someone’s life bar that you’re essentially giving back to them if the counter breaker whiffs? Is that not risky enough? Plus, you lose some of the white damage that you did (or all, as I proposed at the end of my post).
I don’t see how that harms the two way interaction. If anything, it encourages the attacker to try and counter break more while at the same time not hindering the defender from combo breaking. If anything, I’d assume that it might help that mind game between two opponents trying to read one another and figure out when they’ll use a breaker both on defense and offense, at least at higher levels.
Some people have proposed making it harder to combo break and I’m not a fan of that idea at all. I want to see the two way interaction preserved.
I agree that it’s a mindset issue to some extent, but if pro players don’t feel that the risk/reward favors them enough to counter break as it is, maybe that’s a clue that there’s a bit too much risk involved as it stands?
Mind you, I’m not advocating for this idea. I know it sounds like I am (I proposed it after all), but I’m just trying to think of something that would help people that seem slightly resistant use the tools that are already in the game. I love combo breaking as it is currently and don’t want to see that aspect sacrificed just so someone can feel like they earned the reward to hit me with a full combo just because they opened me up. I enjoy that uniquely KI mechanic and don’t want to see it changed.
whiffing a counter breaker is what adds the real risk to attempting one in the first place. It’s the equivalent to getting locked out from missing a combo breaker - you mistimed or misread the opportunity, and are now open to taking damage from it. Resetting to neutral and clearing potential damage is a risk, but only slightly, as the current way a whiff works swings the balance more to the defender’s favor. Adding space between the characters also helps the attacker avoid some strike backs, and actively hurts characters who aren’t strong getting in, and actively helps zoner characters.
The mindset is what needs to change, period. Whiffing a Counter may leave you open, but that’s the risk you are REQUIRED to take. Same as screwing up a Combo Breaker leaves you wide open to a longer, heavier combo. The fact that they are pro players means they understand the game, but it doesn’t mean their thinking is correct on everything.
Risk/Reward is the backbone of KI, and the defender and attacker both need equal risks, which is what they have now.
1 Like
Dropping your combo is NOT a risk. That’s simply forgoing an advantage, but there’s no real penalty involved with that in itself. It’s the delay after the whiffed counter-breaker where you can’t do anything that’s the real risk as it gives your opponent a chance to counter-attack.
But isn’t the forgoing of an advantage almost always a risk in and of itself? There’s no guarantee that you’ll be able to get in on your opponent again or get off a combo like the one that you’re currently doing at that moment. The penalty is that you essentially give your opponent back the damage that you could’ve taken from them. If you’re near the end of a match, that’s a very risky maneuver.
I’ll grant you it’s not the same kind of risk as whiffing a counter breaker currently, where you open yourself up to damage. But is giving your opponent more health really that much better than losing some of your own, especially when you can always combo break out of your mistake?
Currently, an opponent that’s taking damage in a combo has two options: Take the damage or combo break. If they combo break and fail, they get locked out, which means more damage, but if they successfully combo break, they’re no longer getting pummeled. Take more damage or take no damage is an easy choice, which is why we see a lot of breaking and guess breaking.
On the other side, if a counter break whiffs, not only do you end the combo, but you open yourself up to damage. You’re basically losing twice in that proposition (your forgone damage done plus your own safety), where an opponent who whiffs a combo breaker only loses once (more damage).
I get that when you successfully counter break, you’re rewarded with a nice long lockout and a resetting of your KV meter, but does that offset what you lose by whiffing a counter breaker attempt under the current system? That’s not rhetorical (none of this is), I’m curious what you think.
If some pro players are deciding that the counter breaker is too risky to actually use it, do you see a way to make it more enticing, or should IG even bother trying to make it more enticing? Is this, as has been said, merely a matter of SF and MK players needing to get used to a two way system where opening an opponent up doesn’t automatically guarantee you a “damage reward,” or is there a solution that might balance the risk/reward of the counter breaker a bit to the point where pros would use it, but the game’s two way mechanic wouldn’t suffer, thus making everyone happy?
Sorry, I know that’s a bit loaded. I’m just trying to think of something that wouldn’t harm the gameplay as it stands, but would also reduce risk a little on a mechanic that currently seems to have some heavy downsides, at least to the point where some players at high levels aren’t going near it, instead choosing to alter how they play and attempting to skirt the combo system entirely. This isn’t particularly a problem for me, as I don’t play at a high level, but could this be a problem for the tourney scene? By the way some are talking, it certainly seems to be.
The game doesn’t need to change for the pro players, they need to ADAPT TO THE GAME. I’m kind of getting tired of even discussing this, because there’s no good reason to decrease the risk other than that some tournament players don’t like it. I really don’t understand why you’re still prompting questions about the change, when you’ve already said you don’t want it to happen. Just because the “pros” choose not to use Counter Breakers doesn’t mean it’s the correct way to play, and a change should be made to accommodate that choice.
Again, failing a combo breaker and failing a counter breaker both result in you being punished by taking damage/more damage. Succeeding the counter breaker grants you more damage, forcing a failed combo breaker. This seems fair and balanced to me, as you’re taking a risk, whether you’re on the offensive or defensive end of the combo…
You don’t play this game the same as MK, SF, or any other fighter, and I don’t care how good someone is, if they don’t understand that and can’t adapt to the mechanics, they have no right to complain about it. I am mediocre at MK and suck at SF, but I’m not looking for those series to change things to be more like the fighter I DO play decently, KI.
Please understand I’m not meaning this to be aggressive or attacking you in any way, but I find the concept of changing this feature specifically because “the pros” don’t like it so incredibly entitled it’s unbelievable. I felt the same way about “quickscoping” in the COD series; originally a bug and not intended to be in the game, but because the “pro” players liked that unbalanced garbage bug it’s been maintained.
The risk for getting locked out and counter breaker whiffing needs to be similar. If you get locked out,the opponent can do a lot of damage. If you whiff a counter breaker,the opponent can start a combo. If you change it to where whiffing a counter breaker is safe,there edge is in the attacker and not the defender.
compared to their people who want a change s they can get a free beating n smeone this ne actally seems the lest harmful to KI’s core-mechanics. May also retain the game’s identity as well.
Or ya know: we can help these pro-players actually get more comfortable with using the counter-breakers.
So far I prefer your idea if such a thing has to be changed. on wiff you drop the combo and both you and your opponent are all set back to neutral. what you suggested is a billion times better than what anyone else on the side of less breakers has said.
1 Like
Yes, they could adapt to the game, or they could simply choose not to play it. I’m not saying that’s the worst thing in the world, but it’s not exactly a victory for the possible growth of the franchise either.
Now, I’m not a pro player and don’t really follow the tourney scene, so for me, that’s really no big loss, but the idea behind having a discussion here, for me at least, is to see if there’s a way to make everyone happy.
I get that you’re tired of having the discussion though. My initial reaction to the ideas being thrown out was a mixture of confusion and anger. Why would people want to tear out the very fabric of what makes this game unique? I’m right there with ya in that regard.
But while I don’t want to see combo breakers nerfed just so pro players can “earn the right” to do one way damage, I also think that it’s a conversation worth having if it can lead to something that’s good for all parties involved, which is why I was doing a little brainstorming.
I see what you’re saying by “damage for damage” here, but by that logic, a successful combo breaker ends a combo. Couldn’t an unsuccessful counter breaker accomplish the same thing? Combo ending for combo ending?
As far as punishment… I still see an attacker giving up the damage they’ve done as punishment for whiffing a counter breaker. You’re giving health back to the opponent. When you’re late in a match and you choose to counter break, you’re making the conscious, and perhaps dangerous decision to give up your advantage and the damage you’ve done for the possibility of doing more damage by anticipating your opponent’s combo break.
To me, that’s an even trade that’s smart enough to be a valid strategy with some inherent risks, but not so risky that pro players will outright ignore it and skirt the combo system entirely.
It’s a heck of a gambit if you’re an attacker, just as trying to combo break is a gambit. Do you keep taking damage, or do you try and break the combo while risking more damage? I think it’s a bit easier on the defensive side, so why not make the decision to counter break a little easier on the offensive side?
Yeah I don’t want KI to have to bend over backwards to suit a different type of player that’s used to having their fighting games their way. That’s not what I’m saying. But if people playing the game at a high level find counter breakers to be so risky that they’re not even using them, I still think it’s worth talking about IF it doesn’t result in people wanting to turn KI in to MK or SF. I definitely don’t want that.
No not at all, man! I don’t see what you’re saying as aggressive because I feel largely the same as you as far as keeping KI what it is and I don’t think you’re attacking me. We’re just having a conversation here. 
It might sound like I’m playing devil’s advocate here, which might be a tad obnoxious, but I’m really not. Like I said, I was just throwing the idea out there to brainstorm and see what could be done to make both pro players happy and keep KI what it is currently, which is the game that I thoroughly enjoy. I have no problem with keeping the game as it is. None whatsoever. But I also want as many people to enjoy this game as possible, and if that can be accomplished better without current fans having to make any real sacrifices, then to me, it’s worth exploring to find out if that’s even possible.
I think it’s an interesting suggestion, and I’d disagree that it “breaks” KI’s 2-way interaction. It would certainly make counter breakers more used though, which to a certain extent is probably the real question. I think I’d fall more along the spectrum of keeping them high risk/high reward, but it’s certainly not the worst gameplay idea I’ve seen on these forums.
Thanks! Yeah, if I had my choice, I’d also prefer to leave it as is, as well.
Of course, if the counter breaker’s risk were to be reduced by returning both players to neutral on whiff, I’d think that the advantage of actually landing a counter breaker could be slightly nerfed to compensate on the other end. Maybe the lockout time is reduced slightly? Maybe the KV is only reset 80% and not 100% as it is now?
I know, I don’t even like typing that lol. Again, I personally have no problem with the system as it is. I just want to reiterate that one more time. If something like this would make higher level players use counter breakers more and feel like it was safer for them to engage in the two say combo system, then that’d be great.
I’d just rather do something that accomplished that through a means like this, as opposed to placing a greater emphasis on manuals or tightening combo breaker windows or creating a meter that you have to fill before you can use a breaker and a bunch of the other stuff that I’ve read on here that either blatantly skews the system in favor of hardcore / pro players or outright destroys the two way system that’s personally one of my favorite parts about playing the game.
I do get the criticism of this idea though. I disagree with some of it, but some of it could certainly be valid (to me) under the right circumstances. Who knows, maybe they put something like this in and people just mash both the combo breaker AND counter breaker buttons on both ends and the combo system actually takes a hit at high levels. Or maybe that meta game of “will they combo break now? / will they counter break now?” becomes much more intrinsic within the combo system itself and both sides become more cautious and learn to read their opponent’s more. Tough to say.
I’d think that there would be a lot of variables involved in making a change of this magnitude and it’s entirely possible that doing something like this could have a lot of intended and even unintended consequences. I’d be open to something like this, but I’m also more than happy to leave things as is, as I enjoy the current dynamic. Curious if anyone else has any ideas.
It’s a lot more disruptive to the game and community at large to change things like this when the much more logical solution is for the FEW who are otherwise against Counter Breakers to adapt their thinking.
I can’t wait for the reveal of S3 stuff to roll out so we can see less of this sort of pointless stuff. I have plenty of respect for the skill level someone has to have to be a KI tournament pro, but that doesn’t mean that their opinion should matter any more than the rest of the community. I guess let’s put it this way; if certain characters are almost never seen in tournaments but other people in the community enjoy playing them, does that mean that those characters should be removed, or given super buffs just so the pros will like them?
Here’s a personal example. I play Thunder, and I play him far more rushdown than I do as a grappler. Because that’s my tendency, should Thunder’s moveset be changed to suit me?
I still don’t see how dropping a combo (on purpose) is a bad thing. First of all, if it’s done on purpose, that means you’re probably prepared for whatever your opponent might do to begin with, which means you won’t be at a disadvantage. Furthermore, many players do this specifically because they believe that their opponent won’t react fast enough until it’s too late - then the player will perform a combo-reset a split second after dropping the previous combo. This is a risk, I admit - but in most cases, as I said you’re not going to do it unless you’re confident your opponent’s not going to react to it fast enough. So, basically, it’s a double-or-nothing trade. There’s a slim chance your opponent may block, sure, but that’s not a bad thing - you’re just not getting anymore advantage out of what you could’ve been doing instead. Conversely, if it works (and in my experience, it most often does), the KV meter resets and you get to extend your combo for even MORE damage.
A good example is when I use Aganos. Mid-combo, I can perform a heavy AD (after lock-out) into shadow payload assault - I can then chunk up, set up a wall, and then ruin or shadow ruin my opponent through the wall. Since I performed the shadow payload assault after a heavy AD, the opponent is still in hit-stun and will automatically take the damage, which usually hovers around 40-50%, depending on how long the initial combo was. However, if I take a risk and use any other AD, my opponent will have time to recover before I hit the ground with my shadow payload assault - thankfully, most players don’t see this opening and don’t block it. When this happens, I complete my initial combo of about 30% damage or so (on average) and then with highest combo level (which carries over from the previous combo), I can do the shadow payload assault into wall-crash with ruin for a further 30-40% damage. So, my choice is simple - guaranteed 40-50% damage or take a (minor) risk and get 60-70% damage instead. Worst case scenario? My opponent blocks, I still get the 30% damage from the initial combo and I’m still at advantage to chunk up or punish my opponent as the rocks come crumbling down from the shadow payload assault (since they’ll be forced to block it or perform a throw attempt - which I’ll be expecting).