|
My laptop is poo poo but I was able to get into training and goof around for a bit. My initial impression is that it is expectedly unsatisfying to do a cool combo and then realize that almost all of it was just a single button press. Smash avoids that by being based on frenetic and difficult platform movement, but in a game with standard fighting game movement I see everything being that simple ultimately hurting its longevity.
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2015 23:22
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 10:23 |
|
|
Jmcrofts posted:The Kinetic Advance (roman cancel/FADC-like) stuff is very fun in combos, you should mess around with that. I did. That was the exception to the "mostly single button presses" thing. However, that then leads into another issue the game has, which is that the scaling is ridiculous.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 31, 2015 23:33
|
|
|
Codes for people who are still somehow not in this Rockem Sockem game: U9QGZ-YGOQN-LG44I-URJFZ-ZSNCG WZPT1-I6OIK-8TL2K-1RVBN-EJQJK
|
|
#
¿
Aug 5, 2015 23:06
|
|
|
Let's get this out of the way first: links exist in fighting games as a consequence of moves being designed in parts - startup, active, and recovery frames, plus the number of frames of hitstun they cause. The only ways to remove links from the equation are to make all moves too slow to combo after your fastest recovery move, make all moves recover too slow for your fastest startup move to combo, make hitstun low to nonexistant (this is a common complaint with SSB brawl), or specifically code the game to not allow normals to link when your character returns to a neutral state (NRS does this in MK and Injustice). The question you really should be asking is why they made links important to optimal combos and/or BnBs in this game. The answer probably is just that they made most/all of the links wide enough (or added a buffer to help hit smaller frame windows of links) that they felt it was justified. It does not take much practice at all to muscle memory a three frame link in a game like SF4, and Rising Thunder apparently has a buffer to provide you an even wider margin of error, so if that is still not enough for you, maybe the genre is just not for you. If chains are all you have the stomach for in fighters, there are options. You can get by on chains alone in games like MK, Injustice, and even some anime fighters like UNIEL and Skullgirls, but in all cases you will also still have timing windows to hit after the chains (for connecting juggles, for instance).
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2015 00:38
|
|
|
The Gorp posted:Blazblue doesn't have links, it has gattling combos. Just because BB is built on a gatling chain system doesn't mean there's no links. Links are still extremely important to many characters in that game.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2015 00:41
|
|
|
Honestly, Shukaro, if you spent the time it took you to make your 16 posts in this thread in training practicing your character(s) important link(s), you'd probably have several of them down at a solid success rate already.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
Shukaro posted:Or I could just not care about this kinda lovely alpha fighting game instead. Y'know since I was just wondering why "accessible fighter" needed you to mash out/time normal combos instead of having an "accessible" normal combo setup like you would expect. Ok, bye then. I wish you luck in your future endeavors.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 6, 2015 01:03
|
|
|
Dias posted:I dunno, if you're stuck in a rank because you can't win consistently in it, it seems like it's working as intended, dude. This post would make sense if it hadn't already been established that the matchmaking isn't based on your current rank at all by multiple people in multiple posts. If I were the one mad about this setup I'd still be mad about this post instead of backing off like Trykt because of the willful ignorance contained therein. Edit: I'm mad that Trykt is backing down on this, even if it's true that he was probably saltier about ranking in dumb FG alpha than he should have been. Shadow Ninja 64 fucked around with this message at 02:58 on Aug 18, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2015 02:56
|
|
|
Buhbuhj posted:[21:58] <TheP_Baby> don't play rising thunder
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2015 02:59
|
|
|
teagone posted:There's a behind the scenes algorithm that determines your matchup/skill rating, not your rank. JUST AN FYI. Yeah, and that was established multiple times earlier, too, which is why making that post Dias did was ignorant and honestly comes across as trying to bait an already frustrated person into getting even angrier for no good reason.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2015 03:00
|
|
|
Dias posted:Wait, isn't the objective of a good ranking system to contain players of the same level in it? You just use ELO to achieve that purpose, and the rankings are a more visible way of rating progression. If Player A is in Silver and his ELO puts him up against players in Masters whereas Player B is in Silver and his ELO puts him up against players in Bronze, who's more likely to advance to Gold versus who is probably more deserving of advancement?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2015 03:03
|
|
|
What it boils down to is this paragraph from the RT blog: http://risingthunder.com/2015/08/13/a-peek-inside-the-rising-thunder-match-maker-and-ranking-tiers/quote:The two systems have different design goals: skill rating is the most accurate read of your real skill that we can make. Ranking tiers are designed to be easy to understand and fun. It’s possible for players of fairly equal skill to wind up in different ranking tiers. Whether or not this is a good thing is an interesting experiment, and getting the answer right is exactly why we wanted to do Alpha testing! Personally, I think the answer to the rhetorical question posted in this paragraph is something like this: if players of basically equal skill level end up in vastly different tiers (e.g. Silver vs. Masters) because one player made it to Masters before the ELO or whatever their algortihm was really shook out and the other player has been stuck in Silver while fighting the best skill level players in the game, that's a bad system. As much as you want to say ranking doesn't matter (and to be honest, in an Alpha it really doesn't matter much), it is the key element of player "skill" and development that the devs are showing, so for it to be wildly inaccurate compared to your own ELO/skill level is bad. Edit: It also raises more confusion for people who aren't aware of the hidden skill rating or its use as the primary tool in matchmaking, as they wonder why they keep getting matched up to signficantly differently ranked players. They even acknowledge this confusion aspect in that same article. This aspect should shake out over time, but until it does, it's another confusing element of RT's dual commitments to ease of understanding vs. obfuscating information. Shadow Ninja 64 fucked around with this message at 03:20 on Aug 18, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2015 03:17
|
|
|
DatonKallandor posted:How does less safe, invincible moves make the game slower and less active? I'm seriously curious. I'm not sure what you're misunderstanding here because this game has one button invincible moves that can be made safe with Kinetic Advance, which is what tends to bog down the gameplay into slow over-careful defense since both players have to play around one button invincible moves that can be made safe.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2015 22:47
|
|
|
DatonKallandor posted:Frankly I think you are simply massively wrong. Those one button moves have cooldowns. Long cooldowns. You can do far more invincible moves in Street Fighter, MvC or any other non-cooldown fighter. You can be safer more often in those games, yet they're not "too safe" or "slow". RT is simply newer. The windows of vulnerability in RT is longer than in other games. It's not the games fault those windows aren't exploited yet. People just haven't adapted yet. It takes a long time - new poo poo is still being discovered in Street Fighter 4 and that's been out for ages. The idea that RT is already "solved" is absurd. "Doing more invincible moves" and "being safer more often" are not in any way equivalent. Moves with invincibility like DPs have drawbacks. Generally they're majorly unsafe on block and on whiff. In the case of blocks, some games let you expend meter to make things safer. In SF4, the most FADCs you're gonna build up in a normal round is usually 3 if you're trying hard, whereas I have seen on stream and been told that it is not uncommon to build up 6 or more Kinetic Advances in a round. That's quite a few more times you can press that one button DP and not have to worry about much of anything as long as you don't straight up whiff it. Edit: I don't have anything to say about the "solved" statement because I don't think it means anything to the issue at hand. Also, if you enjoy RT, then by all means keep enjoying it and playing it. That's really quite fine. I'm just pointing out an issue I see with it that would lead me to not want to play it even if my computer could handle the game. Shadow Ninja 64 fucked around with this message at 12:26 on Sep 18, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2015 12:24
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 10:23 |
|
|
DatonKallandor posted:Well then the entire issue is KA, not one-button anything. DPs are as unsafe on block as they always are, and have longer cooldowns than in other games. KA lets you subvert both. The issue is KA then, is it not? Yeah, I think having moves with invincibility but also drawbacks can definitely be fine. My claim in my two previous posts was always that the combination of that with too many Kinetic Advances was detrimental to the game.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2015 21:17
|
|