Different tactics per round

[Guest]

I'm still absolutely stunned that some managers do not see the value in different tactics per round.

 

It's simple and ESSENTIAL for the development of the game, imho.

 

Me too. It would still be nice to see a poll about this, since I think that the majority of managers would understand, that different tactics per round would only do good for the game.

 

And I don't think it's a good idea to do it so that you can have plan A and plan B. I think that wouldn't be good for the game. BUT if it was done so that you can have for example high accuracy on first round and then in the second round you could pump up the damage and so on, it would be great.

[Guest]

so when is this getting implemented?? it would be an amazingnew facet to the game that i could really use well

[Guest]

I just stepped over this and i think its a good idea.

 

What i would like was already mentioned but i mention it again. The Sliders are fine but what i suggest is having 3 Tactic Slots for a fight.

 

i.e. in a Football Manager i play online, you can say, if after 60 Minutes your behind, change Tactics to this or that.

 

What we could do here is Slot 1 being your normal Tactic you start with and then get several Options for the other Slots, like "if Standup moves (kickes, punches etc) hit less then 40% in RD1 then THEN go to ground in RD2" or "If Opp. scores more then 50% Takedowns THEN try to stay standin completely" or something similiar.

 

It might be a bit more complex this way though.

[Guest]

I'm still absolutely stunned that some managers do not see the value in different tactics per round.

 

It's simple and ESSENTIAL for the development of the game, imho.

 

Absolutely the greatest improvement that could be made in this game IMO.

[Rambo]

Absolutely the greatest improvement that could be made in this game IMO.

 

 

Disagree. The game runs great the way it is. I don't think "controlling every tactic for every round" is necessary. Sounds like way too much work.

 

 

Now the option of having different tactics per round, would be different I guess. But for what purpose? It sounds like it'd be complicated as hell to implement. And then what about 5 round fights? How do you program the game to pick up on your normal 3 round fight, and change your setting to where you can choose tactics for 5 rounds in a title fight? All of it seems overly complicated and a lot of work to add.

[PBR]

Disagree. The game runs great the way it is. I don't think "controlling every tactic for every round" is necessary. Sounds like way too much work.

 

 

Now the option of having different tactics per round, would be different I guess. But for what purpose? It sounds like it'd be complicated as hell to implement. And then what about 5 round fights? How do you program the game to pick up on your normal 3 round fight, and change your setting to where you can choose tactics for 5 rounds in a title fight? All of it seems overly complicated and a lot of work to add.

for managers or fighters that only fight one style then yes it dont serve them a purpose that much but for those managers, fighters that have more than one style could use something like this

[Guest]

Disagree. The game runs great the way it is. I don't think "controlling every tactic for every round" is necessary. Sounds like way too much work.

 

 

Now the option of having different tactics per round, would be different I guess. But for what purpose? It sounds like it'd be complicated as hell to implement. And then what about 5 round fights? How do you program the game to pick up on your normal 3 round fight, and change your setting to where you can choose tactics for 5 rounds in a title fight? All of it seems overly complicated and a lot of work to add.

 

It would just add so much. New tactics and IMO realism. Obvious example, you could work a guy's body in the first to tire him out and then go for a KO in the second. Don't forget that both fighters would have new options each round and so every new round will take on its own character, depending on what they decide. So, to carry on my example, you may guess that your opponent plans to wear your body first round and KO you second, but you can prepare cunning tactics to exploit this. It still comes down to rock/paper/scissors in the end, but I'm all for more options.

 

There would be nothing wrong with, or no disadvantage in, continuing to use fighters who use the same tactics throughout. If it's "way too much work" a manager can still use a simple tactical style and win just as often if they do it right.

 

I agree it sounds complicated to implement, but the thread and the suggestion was started by Mike himself so it must be possible and something he is willing to consider doing.

 

One alternative to extra sliders for every round that comes to mind is the introduction of "if/then" option buttons. Format like this.. If (drop-down menu) then (drop-down menu). There could be many options and a manager could choose none or up to 3 "if/then" pairs. This would allow many (optional) refinements while keeping the tactics page the same size.

Specific examples might be

If (five consecutive takedown attempts fail) then (stop takedown attempts)

If (opponent is rocked) then (increase aggression 50%)

If (opponent cut) then (increase attack head 50%)

If (losing badly on points in last round) then (See How It Goes 100%)

 

You could use these in combination to add a "sub-plan" to your tactics.

 

An obvious example plan might read..

If "round < 3" then "increase target body 50%"

If "round > 2" then "increase target head 50%"

If "round > 2" then "increase damage 50%"

So you set your head/body slider to 50%, but you actually get 75% body in the first rounds and 75% head in round 3, and you step up your damage 50% too in round 3 for the KO.

 

Of course, it doesn't have to be limited to if/then. You could have "if and if/then", "if/then and then", "if/then/until", etc etc.

[Guest]

I agree with everything that Ipponist just said.

[Guest]

-----

nope....done said it twice before in this thread and i'll say it a 3rd time i guess. the "if" system is the worst out there. its tedious. its aggrevating. its repetitive. it'll ruin the game in my opinion if that ever happens. im not just sayin that either. i played a game like that and it wasnt fun.

 

[Guest]

This suggestion makes a lot of sense and should be implemented.

 

If (opponent is rocked) then: (increase aggression 50%)

If (opponent cut) then: (increase attack head 50%)

 

I also think that if you are going up against a very strong, skilled striker you may want to back off a bit first round to tire him out. If your cardio is superior his then this IS a real strategy in fighting. Avoid the big knock out blows for the first half of the fight, tire him out and then G'n'P the striker for the win.

[Guest]

I have to agree I do NOT like the if system. Well maybe its not the system, but I also played the boxing game (vivi.com!?) and not only was it very difficult to understand at first, it was just annoying to make the game plans and the obvious result is quitting the game at some point... Obviously the system wouldnt have to be that complex, but I wouldnt like the direction.

 

Other stuff Im not sure about... I love the current system and how easy and quick it can be done. Maybe it can be better, maybe it would start to be too much...

[Guest]

I have to agree I do NOT like the if system. Well maybe its not the system, but I also played the boxing game (vivi.com!?) and not only was it very difficult to understand at first, it was just annoying to make the game plans and the obvious result is quitting the game at some point... Obviously the system wouldnt have to be that complex, but I wouldnt like the direction.

 

Other stuff Im not sure about... I love the current system and how easy and quick it can be done. Maybe it can be better, maybe it would start to be too much...

yea that was the game that i played as well. it was a really accurate game as far as logic goes. but just like you said, the way the gameplans wer setup just ruined it.

[ajperok]

Vivi dot.com was ridiculious, people had written 1000 line fight plans. I know plenty of those top managers are here now for a number of reasons. I wouldn't really call it "accurate". I haven't seen many fights in my life where fighters just take turns knocking each other down, it was pretty common to just go knock down for knock down in Webl.- that and the code was known, it was really just a math game in the end.

 

Still there could be some simplistic value to rounds. I'm not just talking about "if he's hurt, go for the kill" "if he is cut- go for that cut" , I thought we had that in fighter confidence and intelligence already?. If we can micro manage every aspect of our fighters in the ring, lets just turn them into cool robots and shit because that's more or less what they would be.

 

I'm more talking about pace..., on a macro level

 

I should be able to come out super aggressive go for the KO, or shoot a bunch of takedowns etc.. Now if it goes to the 2nd round, and I was unsuccesful- will I still keep doing that?

or come out full counter against someone who bull rushes like a nut. I don't think that would be any huge imbalance. It could be a little bit like Vivi though in that regard.

 

Maybe, "see how it goes" does some of that, or does it? I will go as low as 40% follow orders sometimes and have still seen the failed takedown after failed takedown.

[Guest]

Maybe, "see how it goes" does some of that, or does it? I will go as low as 40% follow orders sometimes and have still seen the failed takedown after failed takedown.

 

Maybe your fighters are just dumb?

[damonster]

I liked to see this added, so I could try and get a KO first round, half try second round then third round just fight to win the round.

[Guest]

I think a slightly different version would be better.

 

A "Fight Plan"

Where you choose a 'focus' for the fight and you would get bonuses in that field and disadvantages in a contrasting field.

Very much like the UFC Undisputed 10 game.

 

You research your next opponent and notice he is a striker with very little takedowns. Your fighter is a strike as well.

You can set your focus to "Striking" or boxing or how ever you want to do it, and get bonuses to your striking and striking defense while sacrificing takedown/takedown defense points.

 

These bonuses only last for the fight. Maybe the bonuses can increase in amount depending on your fighters intelegence/experience. Because it makes sense that he grows mentally and prepare better for the fight.

 

Having a "Fight Focus" is very realistic in real MMA. You see fighters trying to improve whatever field their opponent is weaker in and try to Buff up their own weaknesses.

 

This way there isnt any "What if" settings because fights are not live.

[Guest]

My sensational wrestler just fought to a 30 minute decision loss in which he attempted only 2 takedowns.

 

http://www.mmatycoon.com/fightcommentary.php?FTID=272838

 

How the fuck did that happen. I had him set to attempt a takedown just over 20% of the time so as not to takedown spam. What a ridiculuos unrealistic game this is.

[Bullum]

I definitely vote in favor of Round by Round tactics. Would bring more strategy to the game.

[Guest]

My sensational wrestler just fought to a 30 minute decision loss in which he attempted only 2 takedowns.

 

http://www.mmatycoon.com/fightcommentary.php?FTID=272838

 

How the fuck did that happen. I had him set to attempt a takedown just over 20% of the time so as not to takedown spam. What a ridiculuos unrealistic game this is.

i know where you coming from man. but i think that you're jumping the gun a little bit. sometimes its frustrating when you know in your head what you want your fighter to do but just cant get the sliders exactly like you need 'em to make your fighter do it. that's part of the "game" aspect of it. figuring out the sliders in such a way that you can almost know exactly what your fighter is gonna do is what makes it a challenge. dont get frustrated. everybody suffers losses and sometimes it's no fault of your own. just dumb luck and somedays, the dumb luck bites ya. you just gotta realize that when dumb luck isnt biting you, it's probly biting your opponent. so it's kind of a two way street and both lanes have pot holes. you just gotta take the lumps when they come

[Guest]

My sensational wrestler just fought to a 30 minute decision loss in which he attempted only 2 takedowns.

 

http://www.mmatycoon.com/fightcommentary.php?FTID=272838

 

How the fuck did that happen. I had him set to attempt a takedown just over 20% of the time so as not to takedown spam. What a ridiculuos unrealistic game this is.

 

Your fighter probably has low heart or confidence or both and when your opponent is swarming and hitting him, he just becoming more and more passive hence the very low aggressiveness outcome.

[ajperok]

My concern is the fighter ability to "see how it goes" needs to be somehow incorporated into different rounds. Fighter intelligence is an incredibly underrated attribute, as not everyone thinks 100% "follow orders" is the way to go.

If Mike can somehow incorporate what my fighter learned in the 1st round as he goes into the 2nd, even if I have a slightly different fight plan.. then I would support the idea. If this is just another attempt by the micro-managing math guys to remove any randomization.. then I am 100% against it.

[sergio]

I think it would be interesting to play. But it would be nice if it was type A and Plan B if the plan is missing.

Example:

Plan A Plan (Main):

Keep the fight standing trading punches.

Plan B Plan (reserve):

Use combinations and lead to the ground.

Alas it was an option like this:

When you activate the plan B? Round 2, Round 3 or when you are losing.

[sergio]

I think it would be interesting if I had Plan A and Plan B.

Finishing with the 'Follow my orders / See how it goes' and put tables.

Eg:

• 
   
  
• Plan A Plan (if you're winning):
  
• Use 100% punch - Single Shot 70% - 75% Counter
  
• Plan B (Use the second or third round):
  
• Use 35% Takedowns - Ground and Pound 70% - 70% Finish
  

 

It would be interesting.

Though the idea of ​​using different tactics by round I think it would be good.

[TK]

My sensational wrestler just fought to a 30 minute decision loss in which he attempted only 2 takedowns.

 

http://www.mmatycoon.com/fightcommentary.php?FTID=272838

 

How the fuck did that happen. I had him set to attempt a takedown just over 20% of the time so as not to takedown spam. What a ridiculuos unrealistic game this is.

 

 

In addition to what android said, your fighter was also being peppered with energy sapping strikes.

 

I've had it happen myself where my fighter is just not responding or doing anything. It's not a great feeling to witness it, but, it's part of the game and helps to make it realistic.

[ajperok]

In addition to what android said, your fighter was also being peppered with energy sapping strikes.

 

I've had it happen myself where my fighter is just not responding or doing anything. It's not a great feeling to witness it, but, it's part of the game and helps to make it realistic.

 

 

Doesn't extremely poor self confidence also cause that?