Sentinel as a point character is still Sentinel. He dominates one class of characters, still takes 2 combos (or 1 DHC trick/1 x-factor combo) to kill, still loses to the usual suspects, etc.
But there are a (fairly large) underclass of characters who depend heavily on Sentinel either to get in or keep out and they depended most heavily on the fact that his assist took too many resources to kill (usually 2 meters + x-factor or 3 meters straight) meaning that it probably wouldn’t happen or would take a more specialized setup or extreme carelessness to happen. Given now that Sentinel is much much easier to nuke from practical/fast starters, nerfing Sentinel hurts those characters more than it actually hurts Sentinel himself.
It’s one of the first things I thought when I heard how drastic the life nerf was. Results will tell if this is the case and if people go out of their way to target Sentinel assist. I think it will happen, with the examples I gave seeming like very obvious suspects (Zero/Sentinel, Deadpool/Sentinel).
^The reason Marn is not impressed.
Seems to be a common reasoning with top players, first reaction by JWong as well - play Sentinel on point or not at all.
I would have preferred Sentinel as Assist-tier like Tron via damage nerfing. But we’ll see what happens.
The first part is exactly why it’s bad. They had a very general idea of how the game should be played or how they want it to be played, which could be really different than how it might end up being played when all is said and done. Let’s take SF2 for example, combos (being able to hit one attack and make the next attack unblockable) was a glitch.
What if the developer was like “this is not how I envisioned my game to be played” and removed it a month after it had been discovered? It might have been years before combos became a staple in fighting games if it was removed, or it could’ve been put into another game intentionally and well received, who knows.
What if they had patched MvC2 regularly? Nerf Iceman and Guile when people thought they were overpowered, Cable was found to be cheap, nerf him. People would’ve never looked to beat those tactics if they were just getting removed, it would’ve slowed or altered the course of discovery.
How is the metagame going to be discovered if it is dynamic, always changing or in danger of changing? What if Sent ends up needing that health so they patch it back? What if Sent’s high health made players depend on him and now without that, another set of characters that Sent inadvertently blocked from being overpowered show up?
It is unpredictable and random and with time, it becomes more predictable and clear what the metagame is. If they keep shuffling the deck, the game will take longer to peak. These change WILL affect the metagame, the order of discovery changes when you remove the problem.
They balanced the game during develop to how they expect the game to turn out and wanted to play. When they throw it out there, it becomes a life of its own. Now they can actually keep making changes to make sure their vision comes true since it’s easier and cheaper to patch instead of making a new game. There’s no alternate path this game takes if the company can keep the game on track to their vision unless they actually approve of the deviation.
It hasn’t changed in terms of usefulness. But agreed it’s a lot less safe.
Not sure if the possibility of getting random hyper’d can be considered in a tier list though; re: Phoenix.
Opinions please, I have no idea.
Yeah 400k nerf is a real kick in the ass to an assist that’s vulnerable for 4 years and has a huge vulnerable box.
I’m still waiting for like one legitimate weakness about Dante. I just dont see anything bad about him. Not that I’ve played against a lot but how do you even hit him? Like seriously. He probably has some trouble against zone based characters but then he has a teleport for that too. He has the potential to do pretty much anything in order to win once he’s all figured out IMO.
You’re implying that the game won’t be done if you balance it out, which is wrong. It’s also moot because in your example, the characters that would have been worse off, could have been balanced. That’s why your line of thinking is flawed
Which have no application because one can always use balance to modify those variables from any point in the game’s life span
Then I suggest you try to discuss the reasons why you disagree with the changes in condemning changes as a whole with an illogical statement such as “it’s too early”. I’m not sure what Capcom has planned for the other characters but I agree that they should also be balanced for viability.
Sentinel can still evolve as a character though. That’s the point.
Adjusting a character’s health total is a balancing tool though. You stating that it “doesn’t necessarily change anything in terms of balance” doesn’t make it so. In this case Sent dies faster, can’t take many risks and can’t be called out as an assist willy nilly. One of the things this allows is for 2 character + sent mentality is brought down a peg, which was problematic.
Bringing WoW into this discussion only ends up obfuscating things. It’s a very different game, with very different variables. It’s also nothing like any fighting game out there, which is what we’re discussing. Just because you don’t like the devellopments in PvP from it, that really doesn’t apply to MvC3, at all.
I disagree, at least for now. I’m on the fence if he’s top five or not right now, but there is a lot of potential in his character. As he is right now, he’s very versatile and Jam Session assist is very good. I’d say his only weakness right now aside from dealing against some zoning characters with assists is his execution requirements to meet his true potential, but eventually execution does not factor into how good a character is. Dante is one of the few characters in the game in which doing an easy BnB versus doing a hard BnB is the difference between a 500 damage combo with meter and a 700-800 damage combo with meter. The meter gain difference is huge as well; he can do comparable damage without meter compared to some characters with meter, making him a great battery.
If you put him in a player than doesn’t crack under pressure and has good execution, his potential is huge. Let’s say we put him in the hands of Latif (former top GG player and one of the best C.Vipers in the U.S.), he would really shine as a character because Latif’s execution is absurd.
I would say Dante does have an execution barrier, but it’s not high enough to matter in the long run.
That doesn’t make it a nonissue simply because you’re saying that not making a mistake is better than correcting the mistake later. You’re implying that it is, which makes this line of thinking circular logic. You’re also implying that the end result from doing nothing will be better then taking active participation in devellopment which is simply untrue.
The more I fool around with Doom, the more I think he is top tier. His rushdown just seems to be getting better and better the more people find out about him. He completely negates pushblock. One hit anywhere on the screen means you either die right away from a TOD combo or get looped into a corner, which against Doom is not a nice place to be. He has sick throw option selects as found by Alioune and described in great detail by Devil Jin in the forums.
All of this in addition to being a great zoner (see Dios X’s Doom for example) and has the most durable beam in the game. Arthur has to throw an axe and then 2 lances to beat it cleanly, which cannot be done on reaction.
What if scenarios are horseshit. I could just as easily turn around and say “what if they didn’t and instead decided to implement a balance cycle, modifying frame data, adding moves and making all characters viable”. You’re also presuming that progression via strategies wouldn’t have occured if balancing was available for MvC2. The game would have still evolved. People would still be devising strategies. It’s a moot point.
[/quote]
Metagame will still occur regardless of how many “what if scenarios” you throw at it. That’s the point. People will simply play the game and discover things only they will have more likely a chance to have more options available to them because of balance. Worrying about an alternate path that may or may not exist is flawed thinking because one could easily argue that by not balancing the game, you may not have access to another, more interesting path. In this case, you try to balance the game to allow for all characters to be viable and in turn provide more choices for teams and synergies.
I don’t think you understand what the phrase circular logic means, you seem to be just using it as a replacement for “I disagree”. Also I didn’t say “do nothing”, I said “wait until you have good information to do something”.
Anyways, that’s enough arguing about arguing. Can we actually talk about the fucking game again?