NP seems to occur in skullgirls. If it is a problem Capcom should track it and just ban people. If a few are ruining the experience they don’t deserve to play.
That means they’d have to do actual work.
@otter You said SF4 wouldn’t make sense with alpha counters because auto block + mashing does the same job. Alpha series has autoblock so you could mash in that. I honestly don’t understand what you disagree with/think is off topic. Care to elaborate? Genuinely confused.
Is it cause Alpha 3 has guard break? You hadn’t mentioned that part, just the autoblock. On that topic Alpha also has LESS true block strings because only chainable lights and one hit or a jump in heavy to one hit mid/heavy canceled to a possibly unsafe special are true block strings in alpha so you could still mash through em if you are willing to take the risk, Alpha 3 didn’t even have any links outside of a jump in attack according to james chens old FAQ. Plus Alpha 3 was the only one with a guard break but A1 and A2 had alpha counters.
Could you expand on your thoughts regarding alpha counters in SF5 and previous SF games?
I really want to see what the deal is with supers in SF5. Have they been replaced with ultras entirely? Is there choice in whether or not you have them? I would love to see a demonstration that actually demonstrates the various systems of the game…
It’s my understanding that Alpha Counters are meant to be a way to escape block strings, which are more powerful in games with 1 frame throws. SF4 has very few block strings, so combined with autoblock and input buffering, churning the butter is essentially an alpha counter. I don’t think this applies to other SF games.
Sorry if I was rude. Thats all I was getting at.
The more I think about it the more I don’t want meter to carry over between rounds and for meter building to be increased in comparison to sf4.
People will do flashier combos to end rounds that aren’t game clenching.
The “I’m going to lose so time to do a bunch of stuff to build meter than try to random ultra them if they try to think about punishing it” aspect that tends to bog down the end of rounds goes away.
You don’t get “punished” for ending a round with a super instead of doing it at the start/middle.
It seems less frustrating for the player and better for spectators.
I’d rather not lose game depth in order to make it more flashy.
AFAIK most throws in Alpha Series were 5F or 6F startup except air throws (might be wrong on this. I’m fairly certain that only air throws were 1F but I might be wrong on ground throws exact amount), I think only the marvel series and GG have ACs and 1F throws (probably a couple other games I’m forgetting). In GG and MVC the 1F throw thing is offset by gattling/magic series allowing block strings to push you out of throw range more easily with true block strings. And as I said, SFA had a more limited blockstrings other than chainable normals, less than even SF4 since SF4 has at least a bunch characters with 1 or 2 + on block normal that they can then do a true block string to another normal (Like Ken farMP -> crMK is a true block string, or Sakura closeLP - closeHP, or Honda closeMP - crLP, lots of chars have a close Medium to crouching light true block string in SF4 actually. Plus many true block strings cancel normals were negative on block or hit.
CvS2 also has alpha counters and 6F throws, but it’s pretty important to have alpha counters in CvS2 given the guard break + custom combos.
You are right regarding why alpha counters are in games, but I don’t see why they should or should not be in SF5. Hell, SF5 obvious has some stuff that might encourage the need for an alpha counter type move. Ryu (and possibly others) have a guard break. Chun might be able to lock you down with fireballs or something else (aren’t sure if her powerup mode has any other properties besides double fireballs, though the distance where she could lock you down probably would be outside of an alpha counter range anyways.)
It’s probably too early to say whether they should or shouldn’t be in SF5, but if the trend continues with the types of things we’ve seen so far in powerup modes some defensive tool might be a good idea.
You weren’t rude in any way, but you didn’t explain yourself and I was a bit confused. I don’t like it when someone flags anyones post (my self or otherwise) in a situation where it’s not obvious why they would flag it then don’t bother to explain their reasonings. A fair number of people just lurk and disagree with people but maybe are the only person who disagrees with said post, then they never say what/why they disagree. If you disagree with me, that’s totally cool. Let’s just have a discussion about it, maybe you know something I don’t, or have a different view point to share. It’s the equivalent of walking up to a couple of people having a conversation at a party and just saying “nope” or “wrong” and walking away. Confusing and a little annoying but not a big deal, lol.
Eh… I’d rather keep meter carry over between rounds. I mean in ST it’s kind of nice in some ways, but meter carry between rounds adds another layer to the game. You’re right in some ways about end of rounds but planning ahead for a new round is interesting to me. That is one of the reasons I was disappointed with the 3v3 mode in USF4, meter doesn’t carry over so you lost that concept of battery and anchor chars.
I agree with Veserius. The only downside to this however is if the game has any meter dependent characters, or that make heavy use of anything meter related every round, spare meter for them between rounds could make a huge difference and if meter carry isn’t present could put any potential characters like that at a disadvantage.
I still prefer single round meter though, even though it takes away from the resource management and takes away from the metaphorical chess game that takes place in SF, it would still promote use of your meter every round and make each round an “All-out battle” if you will. A positive change that adds to the fun factor of the game whilst making it a hell of a lot more exciting to watch and play, because y’know…as much as we love playing it competitively it IS a game at heart and should predominantly revolve around being fun/engaging.
No single round meter for me. One of the points of meters is to record what has happened during a match and make it so one given moment is affected by the past actions during that match. Take away carryover and rounds 1,2 and 3 are identical to each other, and as a viewer every round but the last losses some relevance.
There may be decisions like to wakeup DP or not that ultimately become a dice roll, but meter management isn’t one of them. Better yet, there is no clear wrong and right answers and you can do fine with any of them. I don’t see at all how suddenly the game becomes more fun when you remove that kind of strategy and depth.
Also, without carryover the beginning of each round is more predictable and similar in the sense players can’t get out of the gates with big damage or cancels until the middle of the round. A player that saves meter deserves the chance to go nuts since second 99.
It is only reasonable to spam specials if you have no life and even chip damage will kill you; in that circumstances single round meter won’t help either and you may be better off walking forward to the opponent.
Anyway, revenge meter is already supposed to fill that role of bringing excitement to each match (yeah, not very convinced myself), so let EX meter bring continuity between rounds.
Not anymore. But I still like having meter gained from a previous round though. Give the person a nice meter advantage and could easily take the next round if he used his meter wisely.
All fine points that reinforce meter carry carrying over into SF5. It just gave me an idea as well, would anybody like the concept of a “Classic Mode” where there is no revenge meter present, and single round meter? I think that would be dope.
I am 100% in favor of single round meter. Ultras were probably partially put in place to remedy slow meter gain. So what if every round is essentially the same? How is that inherently bad? I’d argue that round predictability makes for a stronger foundation for balancing and general strategy. Take Hugo in SF4 for example. Round 1 vs. projectile characters is spent trying to build super for round 2 as, with super, the entire matchup changes. So why not just have a weaker but more dependable super from round 1?
Honestly meter management is not a very interesting thing altogether and not something I want to be a part of core fighting game skill. If it were up to me I’d have, at most, 1 round super bars used for nothing else other than a signature super, ST style. I want as much as possible that’s superfluous to core skills to be stripped back.
You just worded what I was trying to put across in a better manner, thanks for that.
Slightly improved meter gain speed in favour of single round usage. I just think it would make for a quicker paced game and shake up the stagnant meta a bit. Like you said, meter management isn’t exactly exhilarating to watch/do and can force some characters into not giving their all every round. In my head that just makes things seem a little lackluster.
A “barebones” type gamemode would be cool to reach out to the older ST fanbase, no revenge and no meter carry. More things dependent on fundamentals and reads as opposed to execution and combos into high damage. Would be a nice touch to cater to their OGs.
I’d rather meter carry over the rounds.
This is coming from 3rd Strike, a game where match-ups were very meter dependent as most of what helped make characters really strong was tied to it - something I foresee happening in Street Fighter V. This led to the interesting situation where a player had to choose between spending their meter to end a round quickly while losing their momentum (since they had no meter), or saving that meter to retain momentum, at the cost of having to work harder for the win. For example, a Chun players could try to SA2 then reset into another SA2 after the super jump cancel and possibly kill (that’s about 80% or so damage if they get it), but that’s at the cost of not having meter for the second round (or even just the rest of the round if it doesn’t kill). Everyone who’s played 3S at high levels know that Chun you can’t make any mistakes on a Chun with meter, so not having meter for the next round gives the other player a breather (and might allow them to start their own momentum and build their own meter).
Now, it gets even more interesting once you go into deeper levels of yomi. For example, when a player knows that the Chun that they’re facing (or any other character really) does not want to blow their remaining stock of meter, they can use this to their advantage. Of course, there’s the risk that the opponent is at an even deeper level of yomi where they know that the other player knows that they don’t want to spend their meter. It’s stuff like this which is part of what, for me, adds to the label of 3rd Strike being a “game with no absolutes.”
For Street Fighter V, I could see the same thing happening, with players considering whether or not to burn meter to end a round if there’s a chance that it might be better to save it for V-trigger in the next round, while at the same time, using knowledge of this (and that their opponent might want to do so) to their advantage.
Why is that actually a good thing though? It’s artificial depth. Building meter is a mostly passive exercise that occurs as a secondary result of natural play. Essentially, the game builds meter for you, so decisions based around spending it should not significantly impact your strategy or style as a player.
Using meter however is an active choice. More importantly, meter plays an important role, especially in games where meter powered options can change the match up, as what I see SFV becoming due to V-trigger and different length meters. Might as add some depth to it instead of just making it so that using meter is the best choice everytime you have it.
Which is why I don’t really like meter at all unless it’s used for a one off super or something of that nature. The game just passively inflicting decisions on you in that way interferes with whatever strategy you might have had in play. “Oh, I have two meters now, I can be aggressive with this.” is a significant shift of momentum on something the player made no real conscious decisions or took any risks to attain. The risks are built into normal play decisions, not the actual attaining of the meter, which is completely separate from choices you would have made anyway when playing the game, meter or no. That’s why I say it’s artificial depth. This is made less of a problem if meter doesn’t carry over as using this meter just becomes more natural to each round rather than something that significantly shifts the flow of entire matches.
Well you’re probably looking at the wrong game considering that meter looks to be an important part of SFV’s meta.
I thought this was the thread where we talk about stuff we’d like to see.