This isn’t really in response to anything, but just a question I though would be interesting to pose to you guys. I know this question was tossed around right after release but I am curious if anyone’s stance on this issue has changed since then with the advent of the DHC glitch and other such things being found. Feel free to weigh in as you see fit.
Only damage I think should be lowered severely is X Factor damage. Some characters have more difficult combos to get out their 600k damage, lowering their damage wouldn’t really do much if everyone damage was nerfed, but it would FEEL like you had to work a lot harder since you were used to it doing more. Would people be opposed( or even mad) about lowered damage across the board? Yes, but I don’t think it would change gameplay much to keep them angered about it.
Only thing that worries me about lowering the damage is the Timer. I feel if general health was increased a majority of matches would end in time outs.
I say yes, and at least run some “low damage” side tournaments sometimes… It gives the game a much more interesting feel, especially that Sentinel doesn’t have the most health anymore. Hulk and Thor are actually going to be hard to kill, even though they could technically be kept out more easily than Mags, Wolv etc. Meter management becomes more important, etc.
In that regard I really wish you could turn off X factor also, haha. Actually they could run tournaments based on training mode LOL
My main problem with lowering damage is what it means for characters like Hulk.
Sure, you can say “but Hulk would still do damage, but not AS high damage”, but that’s like making a case that a soldier would be just as effective using a flintlock instead of a Smith & Wesson. What makes Hulk a scary character is that, if he hits you right and has DHCs/XFC behind him, that costs you a character. A hurting/bleeding character is not the same as a DEAD character. For example, let’s say I’m facing a team of Zero, Tron, and Sentinel and I’m using Magneto. I know that your Tron assist is a problem, so after playing very cautiously and conservatively, land a hit and I snap her in. Being able to kill her efficiently would be my top priority, but with damage turned to Low, there’s no guarantee that I’d kill her, so she lives to fight another day. Now I have to go through this long, slow process of trying to find a hit against this Zero/Tron/Sent combination that wouldn’t have been anywhere NEAR as big of a problem if I could have touch-of-deathed Tron.
This is my biggest problem with “low damage” fighters (as in, low damage unless you have combo execution like Poongko or Sako): it turns most fights into a slow, “resource battle”. I have to exhaust tons of resources (meter, X-factor, personal ace-in-the-holes) just to do decent to high damage. It also potentially turns every match into a slow drawl, which is not why most people pick Marvel over SF4.
:eek: To your point, but not necessarily in agreement, I do find that lower damage tends to enforce meter management.
Basically, lower damage is great if you’re interested in a more strategy-oriented game. The pace can slow down or pick up depending on the style of player. Players who can manage meter effectively tend to pace themselves without slowing down the match, but they also tend to take less risks, as each character becomes more important with respect to their niche (utility assists, meter building combos, high health, etc.). Expending resources, while not necessarily completely eradicating a character or team (which is still possible in the lower damage modes), forces the victim to then think on their feet; risk calling the assist out and have it get tagged…or hold back and risk the lower defense opening the point up to a KO or snapback? The attacker also gets an interesting buff in the sense that, if they manage their resources intelligently, they get to force the defender to play their game mentally. It’s very much an “on the hunt” sort of feeling if you’re into that.
Lower damage games do not necessarily lead to more time outs. However, teams that specialize in timing out have an easier time in lower damage modes. I think that’s a very important distinction.
How are people going to defeat Phoenix with low damage? It will be much harder to prevent her from getting 5 bars.
As insane as this might sound, the damage per hit in MvC3 is roughly the same as it was in MvC2.
Except there is one big difference:
- In MvC2, most characters had one good BnB: low short > launcher > magic series > flying screen. As a result, many characters that had no air super or didn’t just go ABC xx super had poor damage output.
- In MvC3, nearly every single character is able to do an OTG into a super of choice (or the super just OTGs itself), which turns a basic magic series into a very easy 50% combo. If you don’t have an OTG like Chun or Cap, there’s tons of good OTG assists to choose from to extend combos.
I would keep the damage output as it is. A character like MODOK can still be a threat simply because a simple BnB combo of his can do ~660,000. Even if you’re not an amazing character, as long as you have good damage output, you can make some noise in this game. That’s why I like high damage output mainly – it helps to make the differences between top and low tiers not as drastic as it was in MvC2.
If you want to lower damage, get rid of the DHC glitch and tone down X-factor first.
Most of the reason why the game’s damage seems retarded is due to XF and DHC glitch. Stuff where you dont have to know anything but a simple concept and get huge damage. Anything else that does a lot of damage requires a lot of execution or button presses or comes from a character that’s supposed to put big hurt on you with their basic normals and specials like Hulk, Sent or Thor.
To whit: Lowering damage makes a game “more strategic” in a red herring sort of sense. Taking away a component of offense (damage) indeed inherently increases the necessity of strategy (I need to tactically compensate for my inability to deal offense), but it also removes an element of that strategy (the payoff). To once again use an example of real-world warfare, let’s say that I know my enemy has infantry positioned at position Alpha. I decide to send a larger platoon of men that will flank and ambush them on their way to position Beta. That’s simple and cut-and-dry. But, let’s assume that, at position Beta, there’s reinforcements with artillery (tanks, anti-personnel missiles, etc.). Now, if I send my platoon to intercept them between Alpha and Beta, I risk the possibility that the infantry can call for reinforcements if my ambush is too slow to wipe them out. So, it boils down to this: in the former scenario, I make a tactical decision that really has few negative repercussions if not executed flawlessly–in the latter scenario, I make a tactical decision which could prove disastrous if one of several things goes wrong.
If you don’t follow the metaphor, let me put it this way: Yes, neutering offense creates more “strategy”, but it makes gambling pay off less. It’s basically creating a game in which there’s “more strategy”, as if having strategy in and of itself was a good thing. Strategy is a precursor to payoff, and lessening the payoff to invoke more strategy is akin to talking your girlfriend into a threesome and prematurely ejaculating during foreplay. Having more of a good thing doesn’t really matter if the payoff for it is stripped apart in the process.
Similarly, I’m not interested in “playing a game more mentally” just for the hell of it. Mindgames for the sake of mindgames is not an improvement.
Not exactly. She’d gain more meter if there’s a combo that would have killed an enemy normally, because they’ll survive to take more punishment. However, at the same time, she’d also gain less meter with every attack her team lands, since every attack would deal less raw damage.
Sure Phoenix gains more bars but on the flipside on lower damage she has to take longer to kill you and burns more of that X Factor that everyone seems to have such a problem dealing with.
I’m not a fan TOD combos.
That’s my problem with the game.
80% combos shouldn’t be the norm.
Edit: I already know IT’S MAHVEL.
I don’t get the comparison to MvC2. Aren’t these games totally different? MvC2 you generally require two to three well-connected hits to kill someone* - MvC3 generally initially requires one to two hits of often mediocre quality to kill someone.
I’m probably off in my specifics, but I think you get my general concept.
IMHO, the whole game engine is tailored to the current game output. It makes complete sense to me within its crazy. If you start decreasing damage output, I think you have to fix^H^H^H update the game to allow for more contact. Weird stuff like floaty jumping and other distance-friendly tweaks have to be reassessed. =\
I enjoy crazy MvC3 as it is. I’d love this sort of thing to be in MvC3:AE, though.
*: one of the reasons why Cable is good: he has one of the best ratios of damage to hit quality
Just about every character can pull off at least 500k of dmg from basic combos. For most of the cast that’s around 800-900k that’s half of life gone easily. The proclaimed saying of “one hit and you’re dead” applies greatly to the matter at hand. I’m not fond of the dmg output in this game, but can understand why characters like Hulk are needed to dmg high.
No, she’d kill you just as fast. The 10% / 25% damage reductions in Low/Lowest are not enough to negate Dark Phoenix’s XFC3 damage buffs.
Lower damage settings still keeps the high damage characters doing high damage. You can’t do a blanket damage nerf, you have to nerf specifics. For example, remove the damage boost or minimum scaling of 50% on XF because having both is overkill.
That’s not what’s being asked, though. If that’s what lowering the damage hinges upon, then we might as well take this to any number of “Super MVC3 Wishlist” threads.
Here’s my major problem with lowering the damage, it isn’t Dark P, it isn’t time outs, it’s the fact that it makes X-Factor even more powerful.
The more you lower the damage, the fewer CKCs we will see without X-Factor, which would mean, to do a game changing maneuver in the game you would have to rely on X-factor even more. It makes X-Factor even more important which is fucking terrible.
Might encourage people to burn X Factors early a bit more though as opposed to just going KAOKEN TIIIIIIIIMES TEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEN at the end of a match for retard damage.
Really though, I’m not even saying this is something that SHOULD happen, just felt like putting the discussion out there.