Yeah honestly, its hard to picture that standing, I think it would be a good system if it worked the way I thought it did though 
Since the game runs one round per game it might not be that bad. I wanna see an open test where many solid fighting players get to try it out before they change it.
NRS isnât retarded so there had to be a reason they did this,if I had to guess it would be to prevent the games being won or lost too fast.
No they donât. They have risk vs. reward considerations, rock/paper/scissor scenarios, and best reply dynamics when players of similar engagement are participating.
Also, I donât know where you get this âdouble blindâ business from (which is not a term often used in ludology or game theory). Fighting games have traditionally been perfect information games, because all players can see all possible moves at any point in the game.
Going âFORWARDâ isnât a linear process. Game design is creative and iterative, so there isnât just one way to move forward. There are certainly ways to remain static as well, and that appears to be what youâre advocating. Endlessly tweaking versions of Guilty Gear (nothing against that game, mind you) will only move the genre so far, and even if this new game fails, at least it has ambition.
It depends on how much meter it costs. If this is a huge risk, there should be a huge potential payoff.
Give it a chance. The design for the mechanic hasnât even been finalized yet.
Who marketed that way? Each interview Boon has given he expressed how he wants the game to be in the same vein as a superhero blockbuster. The way the mechanic is presented is likely in line with that.
The problem is that, whoever has the most meter at any given time has a much greater advantage, seeing as it gives them both the ability to do big damage as well as negate any big damage. The last bit is important as it means that meter can be used not just to prevent any further damage (which is what traditional burst/breaker mechanics have done), but to actually negate any damage that comes your way. Now imagine if getting hit actually builds a player the meter needed to negate that damage.
Damn, Tataki beat me to pointing out how it sounds like DoA5âs cliffhanger system.
It depends just as much on the cost and payoff of everything else using that resource too.
The part thats jarring is undoing the damage, just seems⌠senseless somehow, beyond that nonsensical.
Need to see the way they actually apply it though, to some degree it can be covered in presentation.
at this point i thought that srk would learned that not every fg needs to be âtournamentâ material
for god sake people, some games are meant to be played for fun, not for the âcompetitiveâ value
So Clash is a combo breaker
-I think undone damage is the damage you took from the current combo before executing âClashâ
-You, âthe breakerâ, risk meter to break the combo to get life back or take extra damage
That doesnât sound bad on paper but what is the game you play to win this âClashâ?
You can see the moves AFTER they are performed, not AS they are being performed. You can never REACT to the EXECUTION frames of a move, which forces you to make a decision based on ANTICIPATION for it.
So you canât KNOW a Ryu is doing a c.MK. By the time you realize it, itâs already in the PAST, after point of impact.
its a presumably blind bid, person who puts up more meter wins.
I imagine its like the system for the âDuneâ board game. You both decide what to sacrifice, and the person whoâs willing to sacrifice more wins.
So for instance, lets say youâre being comboâd, you have 3 bars and the guy attacking you has 4.
There are a few scenarios that can happen:
[LIST]
[]You can assume heâll sacrifice 4, enough to make it so you canât win and sacrifice 1. He wins the clash but loses his whole bar, and you lose the clash but lose a tiny amount of meter.
[]you can try to doubleguess, hoping that heâll go for the minimum, and you can surprise him by going all in. If it works, he loses half his bar, you lose 3/4ths, but all the damage is negated.
[*]For some reason you could try to hedge and pick 2, but that seems like a bad idea depending on what happens on a tie.
[/LIST]
Having just worked that out, what happens on a tie is a huge deal. Maybe it just keeps the current damage but ends the combo. So, actually, is the question of whether you can âbet 0â in a clash, it entirely changes the tactics (Iâd presume the latter isnât true, seems like a bad scene)
It also means that its not worth going for a clash if your bar is really behind, unless for some reason you just want to force the meter drain.
Isnât that like 90% of how Marvel does defense? You canât react to most of the shit in that game either so whatâs your point?
I donât know how NRS is planning on using it, but hereâs my takeâŚ
You know how most games have an indication of how much health is lost in a combo by replacing the yellow health bar with a temporary red bar (Tekken, for example). Now, in this system the red bar stays until the combo is completed (like in Blazblue). If you are being hit, you can choose to do a clash at any point in this combo, but it is to your benefit to do it after a good deal of damage has been done because then you have the most to gain through winning the bid. Your opponent could use meter to extend combo damage, but is worried then about having less meter in which to bid if you do decide to break, so he/she could either:
- continue the combo with a low damage variant, saving meter for the clash
- use meter for a higher damage variant, dropping the combo before you have the opportunity to break
- continue the combo regardless, hoping you use meter for the bid, and lowball the counter bid, leaving the attacker at a meter advantage for the remainder of the match
If done properly, this adds a new layer of meter management and combo strategy.
While thatâs true, guessing/judging competitive worth is kind of a staple of these discussions. Itâs just the way SRK rolls (and youâre lucky nobody said âthis is a site for competitive players!!!â)
If its an important aspect of how people think of a game, its worth bringing up and talking about (although probably severely premature at this point)
edit:
Itâs kind of great that I just tried to list out the options from the defenders POV and here you are doing the flip side of it 
Care to guess what a tie does?
I would give it to the attacker, but it might act as a standard breaker and just end the combo.
Looks amazing. NRS always delivers.
There is an argument that fighting games have imperfect information because of they have simultaneous resolution (which I would disagree with because the play dynamic is, in most cases, real-time de facto sequential), but there is no way it can be âblindâ because all players are aware of both the possibilities of play at any node and the reality of play at all previous nodes.
Itâs a pretty neat way to keep combos short.
I wonder whatâs the minimum âmeterâ required to initiate the clash.
I really doubt thereâll be a zero option to bet.
Iâma guess you need X amount of meter to initiate âClashâ and then you bet the other meter to win the âClashâ.
Clash âbluffsâ would be kinda silly, yeah.