Strategy vs Execution: Where do you stand?

[zeech]

There is no way you’re going to make it work not matter what you do it is going to be Rock Paper Scissors.

Edit

You have no idea what that word actually means so stop using it.

1. Well, it’d be interesting to explore. I think the chance exists that you could be proven wrong.

2. Putting aside the FG jargon, Yomi is also a card game created by Sirlin. It might have some insights into a turn based FG, although not much since it has no positioning and has an element of chance IIRC.

[xes]

I have no idea what your point is.

My point was that creativity becomes less of a factor as a game matures, so its kind of a red herring as far as the discussion of improving your skills goes.

It’s all well and good that people love searching for stuff for its own sake, but seriously. How much ‘creative’ stuff do you see these days in the older games, when people are playing to win?

You know infinitely more about marvel than me, so I’m seriously curious. Sure seems like the way you get and stay good is to learn one of the established good teams and learn the established good techniques with them. Still, correct me if that’s wrong. (Yes I know about the whole ‘low tier’ thing, but that’s kind of a sideshow, innit?)

edit:

(Eg. Blocking, throws, overheads, mixups all fundamentally rely on the concept of limited reaction speed, which doesnt exist in turn based. How do we substitute for these very important mechanics?)

it’s messy, but you can include the concept of ‘recovery’ in a game, or tie reactions to a renewing resource (so possible reactions cost X points to do, you gain 1 or more points a turn).

Another way you could do it would be blind turn planning with simultaneous resolution. Sure you’re losing the aspect of reaction, but planning and prediction become fairly important then.

Finally, and honestly, a modified RPS system could work quite well anyways, its not automatically bad.

~~

The trick is that you’d be wanting to design the game to represent fighting not the specific characteristics of fighting games. Trying to reproduce overheads and crossups just because they’re in the FG genre would only make the game sloppy and arcane.

[jedpossum]

1. Well, it’d be interesting to explore. I think the chance exists that you could be proven wrong.

You’re supposedly a programmer a rough idea can made easily in at least a scripting language.

[xes]

should note, a number of old CCGs had turn-based fighting mechanics, thinking specifically of Rage first edition.

In that case it let you build a deck of potential moves with strict limits on deck building, and that refreshed once you used them all up.

So, for instance, you could have a maximum of (3 I think) dodges in your combat deck, and had to use them responsibly. The limited resources element made it a lot less Rock Paper Scissors’y.

[Viache]

Wow, Rage.

As I recall, both players played combat actions simultaneously, so it wasn’t really turn based. Or at least not UGO-IGO. But I probably haven’t played that game in 10 years or more.

That game had some stupid/hilarious exploits too. You could hit someone with Head Wound for 5 rage or something, and Head Wound denied the opponent’s next combat action. Then you can drop Entrail Rend as a bluff. Since your opponent can’t play a card, your bluff is automatically successful and they eat a ton of damage.

[xes]

Wow, Rage.

As I recall, both players played combat actions simultaneously, so it wasn’t really turn based. Or at least not UGO-IGO. But I probably haven’t played that game in 10 years or more.

That game had some stupid/hilarious exploits too. You could hit someone with Head Wound for 5 rage or something, and Head Wound denied the opponent’s next combat action. Then you can drop Entrail Rend as a bluff. Since your opponent can’t play a card, your bluff is automatically successful and they eat a ton of damage.

Yes, yes indeed you could! Also good for that were the cancels (Klaital Stargazer, for instance, you could beat entire decks using him and a good combat deck)

http://images.trollandtoad.com/products/pictures/166779.jpg

pictured above: A whole pile of bullshit

Ilthuain still has a complete set of Rage up through the Wyrm, afaik. Game was dumb as hell, and didn’t even begin to understand balance, but was weirdly fun.

[shuntsurigi]

Didn’t have time to read all 20 pages, but that has never stopped me from dropping my 2 cents

I’m sick of people thinking things “should be” this way or that. The best universe is one where there is a variety of different things being explored.

It’s good to have games that are heavy on execution (I just wont play them ), and I’d like to see some games that are zero-execution as well. (Turn based fighting game?). And everything in between. Heck, in one game, let’s have a variety of characters and modes that are execution heavy or strategy heavy, execution light or strategy light, etc.

Execution can be fun. In a game like Devil May Cry 3, every combo becomes a little minigame where you try to do a variety of cool things, difficult things, different things, etc. That’s why training mode can be fun in FGs too.

However, strategy is much more interesting to THINK about. (inherently, execution is not as interesting to think about since it’s less of a mental thing. Apart from designing new viable combos and stuff.)

That “turn based fighting game” example I mentioned, is a fascinating topic for me. If we remove every aspect of execution from a FG, including reaction speed, and make a game that still works, how much strategy is left? And what additional strategy stuff do we need to put in there to make it competitively viable purely from strategy?

I have heard people describe Virtua Fighter as a turn based game. It might be the perfect fighting game for you. It is for me.

[Leebee_Link]

let’s just say I prefer Battlefield to CS

[Optimus_Cack]

Whoever compared DMC3 to fighting games needs to remember bosses have set patterns and very specific responses to specific situations (although it was very much made with some fighting game concepts in mind). Beowulf will always walk up and swing on you three times at the first part of the fight. The rhythm of the reapers’ teleports are constant and uniform. You can see what kind of attack Cerberus can and cannot do at a given moment judging by the heads. You deal with each threat in a very set way. Real live players do not. Any decent player will try to adapt in some way, shape, or form. You don’t out-fox the CPU.

[p.m_novaroad_pilot]

just coming in to say that anyone that describes vf as a turn based game is really silly
thats my nice way of say (and now the other flip side of it ) that it sounds really fucking stupid
no offense

[Rioting_Soul]

Do wish the game was maybe six buttons ro something because the number of Macros are ridiculous and kind of counter intuitive.

I bought the game on launch and still haven’t wrapped my head around all the universal systems. I get dyslexic or something when looking at them in the manual. I bought it for the 360 but probably will get it for the PS3 because I can’t IAD consistently on stick.

[BlackAttackPro]

Execution. In a match my mind is always buzzing with ideas but my fingers cant deliver.

[shuntsurigi]

just coming in to say that anyone that describes vf as a turn based game is really silly
thats my nice way of say (and now the other flip side of it ) that it sounds really fucking stupid
no offense

I think LA Akira said it. He seems to know a lot about VF.

Your post, on the other hand, adds nothing to this discussion and is insulting as well. 10,000 troll points for you. Congrats.

[tataki]

I think LA Akira said it. He seems to know a lot about VF.

Well, “turn based” isn’t really an accurate way to describe it, he said it just so Ultradavid will be able to grasp it easier.
He could give him a more accurate and confusing description and say that the momentum is constantly changing back and forth between the players, and that momentum (advantageous position aka “you can move first by X frames”) dictates the options available for both players. But it’s not like you are forced to “wait for someone to finish his turn”.

[reikinou]

I just wanna say…

this thread gave me cancer. Oh, and Xes too.

[p.m_novaroad_pilot]

I think LA Akira said it. He seems to know a lot about VF.

Your post, on the other hand, adds nothing to this discussion and is insulting as well. 10,000 troll points for you. Congrats.

ok mister name dropper lol
he should have articulated his point better
turn based doesnt do that description of the game justice
especially when you fighting a akira that can frame trap you, guard break/unblockable you, and combo you to oblivion in a split second

[Komatik]

He did say that the game was about taking turns (who has the advantage) and stealing the turn back. But do remember it was a tutorial for beginners, not some exhaustive essay on the nature of VF. It’s like if I started to go in depth on some obscure combo deck with a decision tree straight from Hell while trying to teach someone how to play Magic. In short, it doesn’t make any goddamn sense.

[shuntsurigi]

Interesting discussion at VFDC about turns: http://virtuafighter.com/threads/getting-out-of-that-turn-based-fights.16558/

[CrimReps]

My execution isn’t bad but my strategy game is better.

Every person should learn footsies on 3s, even if they started with SFIV

[Optimus_Cack]

My execution isn’t bad but my strategy game is better.

Every person should learn footsies on 3s, even if they started with SFIV

One word: parries