Improve TAKEDOWNS and CLINCH attempts

[ajperok]

While we are improving the SIM.

 

Not all takedowns and clinch attempts are the same. Currently, this game treats them as they are. You can fight a very cautious fight, and then shoot a takedown and get your head kicked off and you can fight a super aggro fight then try to clinch like a little girl.

 

 

I propose we add a separate aggressiveness slider for takedowns and clinch attempts.

 

- There are aggressive takedowns where you are likely going to get hit. However, these also have a much higher success rate. You may even get hit and still complete the attempt in some cases.

- There are safer takedowns (like drags, knee pulls, singles) where your odds of scoring a takedown or lower, but they are also safer, expend less energy and your less likely to get your head countered off.

I think this should be implemented.

 

I also think we should have missed takedowns sometimes result in clinches. That is almost a common sense change, because it happens often.

------

 

 

This isn't an attempt to throw off the balance of the SIM towards wrestlers. It is an attempt to add some depth to the aggro-mauler type fighter and the delicate-technician type styles.

[mrfuji21]

+1

[Guest]

How do you suggest that we add takedowns where you get hit? Because failing an action is the only way it can get countered at the moment.

[ArtieBanks]

No need to improve the takedowns. What needs to be changed is a way to stop takedown spamming. After 3-4 takedowns in a row the rest should just be auto stuffed and auto countered. Same with sub spamming.

 

I am sure sometimes takedowns do end up in the clinch if you miss them it doesn't happen regularly but it does happen.

[minark]

No need to improve the takedowns. What needs to be changed is a way to stop takedown spamming. After 3-4 takedowns in a row the rest should just be auto stuffed and auto countered. Same with sub spamming.

 

I am sure sometimes takedowns do end up in the clinch if you miss them it doesn't happen regularly but it does happen.

 

While I do agree that takedown spamming needs to be nerfed, I definitely think takedowns need some adjusting. The fighters who don't takedown spam should be landing takedowns better than 30% to 40%. That's the reason everyone does takedown spam now is because it's the only way to get the fight to the ground with the takedown percentages.

[ArtieBanks]

While I do agree that takedown spamming needs to be nerfed, I definitely think takedowns need some adjusting. The fighters who don't takedown spam should be landing takedowns better than 30% to 40%. That's the reason everyone does takedown spam now is because it's the only way to get the fight to the ground with the takedown percentages.

 

http://www.mmatycoon.com/fightcommentary.php?FTID=446026

 

My fighter had the better wrestling and takedowns plus takedown defense were higher than exp. got taken down 6 times out of 9

 

http://www.mmatycoon.com/fightcommentary.php?FTID=498660

 

Landed half of the takedowns when set up correctly.

 

They are many factors that go into takedowns such as energy levels, damage taken etc. Hence why wrestlers struggle to get takedowns later into fights unless they have dominated that fight.

[minark]

http://www.mmatycoon.com/fightcommentary.php?FTID=446026

 

My fighter had the better wrestling and takedowns plus takedown defense were higher than exp. got taken down 6 times out of 9

 

http://www.mmatycoon.com/fightcommentary.php?FTID=498660

 

Landed half of the takedowns when set up correctly.

 

They are many factors that go into takedowns such as energy levels, damage taken etc. Hence why wrestlers struggle to get takedowns later into fights unless they have dominated that fight.

 

I understand that, and honestly maybe that's where SHIG or round by round sliders need to be adjusted. And as for those two fights, 4 takedowns in a fight is nothing especially compared to the amount of strikes he threw to set them up. Even in the fight where he hit 6 of 9, he threw many more strikes than takedown attempts. The only way to be successful at takedowns is to throw tons of strikes first and for a great wrestler who has his opponent outmatched, he shouldn't have to throw 10 or 15 strikes per 1 takedown attempt just for it to be setup enough for him to hit more than 40%.

 

Yes there are case by case instances where takedowns work amazing, but as a whole the best wrestlers on this game hit somewhere in the 40% range. In real life, many of the top wrestlers hit 60% and upward of 70% of takedowns. Now I'm by no means saying any elite wrestler should automatically get 60% and 70% takedowns, but the best wrestlers with good sliders that incorporate striking into their gameplan should be hitting at least in the 50% range if not the 60% throughout a career.

[ArtieBanks]

I understand that, and honestly maybe that's where SHIG or round by round sliders need to be adjusted. And as for those two fights, 4 takedowns in a fight is nothing especially compared to the amount of strikes he threw to set them up. Even in the fight where he hit 6 of 9, he threw many more strikes than takedown attempts. The only way to be successful at takedowns is to throw tons of strikes first and for a great wrestler who has his opponent outmatched, he shouldn't have to throw 10 or 15 strikes per 1 takedown attempt just for it to be setup enough for him to hit more than 40%.

 

Yes there are case by case instances where takedowns work amazing, but as a whole the best wrestlers on this game hit somewhere in the 40% range. In real life, many of the top wrestlers hit 60% and upward of 70% of takedowns. Now I'm by no means saying any elite wrestler should automatically get 60% and 70% takedowns, but the best wrestlers with good sliders that incorporate striking into their gameplan should be hitting at least in the 50% range if not the 60% throughout a career.

 

Then it makes it a wrestlers world. Throw a few strikes then land a takedown. Gives strikers what 4-5 mins max to knock out the wrestler in the whole fight maybe less. In the fights that wrestlers tend to struggle is when they have no kicks and get mauled by kicks so they have no energy.

 

In the Crassus fight his damage slider got moved up. It must have been an accident by me but he would have been quite tired. Also the fighter i was against had the same prime for wrestling as Crassus. You look at Anderson vs Sonnen 2. Sonnen landed 1 takedown outta 3 or 4. Sonnen has prolly the best takedowns in the ufc and the best pure wrestler. The takedown he got was when he countered Anderson striking. Quite a few takedowns come that way. When the wrestler counters a strike with a takedown. I believe they should be more common. To stop strikers throwing huge damage against them if they miss they risk getting that counter takedown.

[minark]

Then it makes it a wrestlers world. Throw a few strikes then land a takedown. Gives strikers what 4-5 mins max to knock out the wrestler in the whole fight maybe less. In the fights that wrestlers tend to struggle is when they have no kicks and get mauled by kicks so they have no energy.

 

In the Crassus fight his damage slider got moved up. It must have been an accident by me but he would have been quite tired. Also the fighter i was against had the same prime for wrestling as Crassus. You look at Anderson vs Sonnen 2. Sonnen landed 1 takedown outta 3 or 4. Sonnen has prolly the best takedowns in the ufc and the best pure wrestler. The takedown he got was when he countered Anderson striking. Quite a few takedowns come that way. When the wrestler counters a strike with a takedown. I believe they should be more common. To stop strikers throwing huge damage against them if they miss they risk getting that counter takedown.

 

With the Anderson Silva and Chael fight, it's kind of like I was saying earlier. When you only use a 1 fight example, you're going to always find something proving what you want to prove, but I'm not going by 1 match percentages. I'm talking about career percentages. An example that could go the other way is Chael vs. Anderson 1. Silva who has a takedown defense percentage of defending 80% of takedowns was taken down at will and dominated. If you go case by case, it's easy to see what you want. And I do think Counter takedowns are by far the easiest way to get them IRL. That's why earlier I was saying that maybe SHIG needs to be looked at especially for wrestlers. SHIG definitely doesn't seem to work like it needs to be.

 

And I'm not saying that a top wrestler should be able to shoot 20 times a fight and hit 15 of them. I'm just saying a fighter who shoots once or twice per round should have higher overall percentages as a top tier wrestler. I consider anything over 6 to 9 takedowns in a fight takedown spamming anyways. But I do think that a strategy that leans towards counters and towards choosing your shots should be much more successful against a wrestler.

 

Now as far as that meaning the wrestler will dominate, I think if we just pop up percentages you're right. But I think that's where the strategy should play a huge part. An aggressive fighter who comes in swinging and throwing bombs should be easier to take down and a fight who picks and chooses his shots fighting accurately and slightly defensively should have a much better chance to stop the takedown. But as it is now, it seems no matter what the strikers aggression vs. counter sliders are, if they have high enough takedown defense, they're going to defend at least 6/10 takedowns in most cases. And that's a top notch wrestler. I've seen elite wrestlers who set up get completely obliterated by fighters who had superb wrestling primary.

[jacky67]

clinch attempt are easy

[ArtieBanks]

With the Anderson Silva and Chael fight, it's kind of like I was saying earlier. When you only use a 1 fight example, you're going to always find something proving what you want to prove, but I'm not going by 1 match percentages. I'm talking about career percentages. An example that could go the other way is Chael vs. Anderson 1. Silva who has a takedown defense percentage of defending 80% of takedowns was taken down at will and dominated. If you go case by case, it's easy to see what you want. And I do think Counter takedowns are by far the easiest way to get them IRL. That's why earlier I was saying that maybe SHIG needs to be looked at especially for wrestlers. SHIG definitely doesn't seem to work like it needs to be.

 

And I'm not saying that a top wrestler should be able to shoot 20 times a fight and hit 15 of them. I'm just saying a fighter who shoots once or twice per round should have higher overall percentages as a top tier wrestler. I consider anything over 6 to 9 takedowns in a fight takedown spamming anyways. But I do think that a strategy that leans towards counters and towards choosing your shots should be much more successful against a wrestler.

 

Now as far as that meaning the wrestler will dominate, I think if we just pop up percentages you're right. But I think that's where the strategy should play a huge part. An aggressive fighter who comes in swinging and throwing bombs should be easier to take down and a fight who picks and chooses his shots fighting accurately and slightly defensively should have a much better chance to stop the takedown. But as it is now, it seems no matter what the strikers aggression vs. counter sliders are, if they have high enough takedown defense, they're going to defend at least 6/10 takedowns in most cases. And that's a top notch wrestler. I've seen elite wrestlers who set up get completely obliterated by fighters who had superb wrestling primary.

 

You pick one fight then i pick one fight. You will see its random at best. Wrestlers can have a great day at the office or a horrible day i think that can be agreed.

 

What about if the other guy has the same wrestling skills? GSP is an elite wrestler as far as MMA terms go. You look at the guys he has faced. Hughes, Kos, Sherk, Fitch even Karo who as much isn't a wrestler but hes got Judo. All struggle to get GSP to the ground. Cain who fought Brock who is an elite wrestler also. Brock landed 1 TD that Cain basically stood straight back up from. Skills is a huge factor in things.

 

If you change the way TD's are done like making you have to have TD's to stop TD's same way it is with kicks it will ruin a lot of great strikers who have little to no TD's. In my opinion if Mike was to change and add in two new seconds then he would also have to let guys choose where their skills go. Which then causes mass confusion as you can then change your fighters all round game.

[minark]

You pick one fight then i pick one fight. You will see its random at best. Wrestlers can have a great day at the office or a horrible day i think that can be agreed.

 

What about if the other guy has the same wrestling skills? GSP is an elite wrestler as far as MMA terms go. You look at the guys he has faced. Hughes, Kos, Sherk, Fitch even Karo who as much isn't a wrestler but hes got Judo. All struggle to get GSP to the ground. Cain who fought Brock who is an elite wrestler also. Brock landed 1 TD that Cain basically stood straight back up from. Skills is a huge factor in things.

 

If you change the way TD's are done like making you have to have TD's to stop TD's same way it is with kicks it will ruin a lot of great strikers who have little to no TD's. In my opinion if Mike was to change and add in two new seconds then he would also have to let guys choose where their skills go. Which then causes mass confusion as you can then change your fighters all round game.

 

Well, I think his idea was to let them take away from any skill to put towards those 2 new skills. I don't think you can change all your skills around or take away from an old skill to give to an old skill.

 

But as far as the takedowns thing go, I think I'm wording it wrong. I definitely agree, that a wrestler can have a great day or a bad day. And as far as even skill when it comes to wrestling I guess it really depends on fighting style and aggression IRL. With GSP, he's such a conservative, un-aggressive fighter that it allows him to see and react much faster. Which is why I think when it comes to the game, an aggressive striker should get taken down MUCH easier. He should be forced to fight a bit more conservatively in the game. So I don't necessarily want the wrestler to dominate but more or less I think counter takedowns on this game should be more successful than they are against an aggressive fighter.

 

I guess my issue isn't with takedowns as much as it is with the game engine and sliders. It really just seems to me like it favors strikers so heavily because a low level wrestler can stop takedowns from a great wrestler and just dominate whether the wrestler mixes in strikes or not. I think the only reason this should happen is when the manager of the wrestler has an unreasonably bad strategy or spams takedowns. When wrestling is even, that's where I think the strategy should become the one and only deciding factor on who wins the takedown battle most. If the striker outsmarts the wrestler, then it becomes a sprawl and brawl battle and when the wrestler outsmarts the striker, it's going to be a long day on his back for the striker.

 

Does that make more sense then what I was saying earlier or do you still just think I'm throwing out nonsense? Lol

[ajperok]

How do you suggest that we add takedowns where you get hit? Because failing an action is the only way it can get countered at the moment.

 

This has been touched on in the past when we touched on exchanges. If I rush in to clinch with you in real life it isn't an immediate yes/no.

Perhaps the trick would be a multi-stage action.

 

1) attempts to clinch (Result: yes/no/maybe)

1a) yes = now your clinched

1b) no = you missed, still standing, counter can be thrown

1c) maybe= partial clinch, counter can be thrown, then repeat equation above.

 

That would also be ok for takedowns. Takedowns aren't always smooth. Sometimes a takedown can take a few movements.

[ajperok]

FOR THOSE OF YOU MINUSING.......

 

Why would this make it a "wrestlers" game?

I never said make takedowns "more effective".

 

I said not all takedowns are the same. So if you disagree, your saying every takedown attempt is exactly the same? If you think that, you probably shouldn't be posting in an improvements thread, because your more concerned about your own self interest than improving the game.

 

 

Again this has been talked about many times.

If I have a big brute and he wants to clinch, and he is fighting a little 5% damage guy, he should be able to attempt to bull rush to achieve that clinch, even if it means getting hit a few times on the way in.

 

If I have a guy fighting a cautious fight, who wouldn't mind going to ground if the opportunity presents itself... yet I can put in that tactical fight plan, however when he shoots that one takedown he is going to be totally reckless? How much sense does that make.

 

 

 

Don't be afraid of improving the strategy in the game.

[Guest]

This has been touched on in the past when we touched on exchanges. If I rush in to clinch with you in real life it isn't an immediate yes/no.

Perhaps the trick would be a multi-stage action.

 

1) attempts to clinch (Result: yes/no/maybe)

1a) yes = now your clinched

1b) no = you missed, still standing, counter can be thrown

1c) maybe= partial clinch, counter can be thrown, then repeat equation above.

 

That would also be ok for takedowns. Takedowns aren't always smooth. Sometimes a takedown can take a few movements.

 

I'd love this and think it's the next logical step for this game engine. I don't see what people are downvoting you for.

[Lockdown]

If you change the way TD's are done like making you have to have TD's to stop TD's same way it is with kicks it will ruin a lot of great strikers who have little to no TD's.

 

Kind of like how the Kickspam era ruined a lot of grapplers and anybody else who hadn't trained kicks?

 

+1 for a Takedown era, we've yet to have one!

[rac2]

Agree with TS.

 

Chael Sonnen would never had taken Anderson Silva down in the current engine. He goes for it, he is predictable, doesn't even care about striking defense, but he rather relies on his granite chin not to get ko'd, and yet he manages to get the takedown because of his high risk/high reward aggressive takedowns.

 

It's almost impossible to take somebody down in the current engine unless you rely on unpredictability. That's not realistic.

[Erik]

Takedowns really do need some fixing, both in terms of the predictability / mixing it up factor and in terms of the silly outcomes the Mount TDs are insanely frequent.

 

 

Just looked over some of my guys fights and excluding guard pulls it looks like it's about 25-30% of takedowns wind up in Side Control/Mount. Should probably be around 1/5 of that often to Side Control, let alone Mount.

[Italscratch]

Even if you get that takedown, referee standups are also far too inconsistent. One minute on mat, some controling of me (few undesired rolls towards control) and opponent and viola, standup bangin here we go.

 

I've gone as far as 90% agressive and still was being stood up due to inactivity of other fighter...i think maybe solution toward referee standups should be to calculate (value more) activity of top fighter more then the bottom one, so if bottom fighter just holds on a position and hopes for referee to help him, he could be punished by losing a round. (open to lay and pray abuse, but fuck it those aren't so popular in RL either so could take hit on fighter popularity or fight rating).

 

This would also make standup fighters to invest more in def grappling (or whatever solution to that secondary is, in another thread there was mention of escapes), in order to be more active on the ground to work for that standup (leaving them more open to counter) and draining them more energy by doing so. If failed takedowns are heavily punished via energy drain this could be mirror image of that part of engine.

 

Just few thoughts.

[DeadlyDirk]

Positions in the clinch would definitely be pretty epic.

 

They seem to perhaps exist somewhat as you see text sometimes about trying to improve position and people having their back against the cage but it's hard to work out where you are in the clinch most of the time.

 

I think it could work pretty well like the ground game does if you added the positions similiar to how UFC Undisputed work with things like over/under clinch, double underhooks, single collar tie, muay thai plumb.

 

You could then have a stick position for those that want to dirty box/throw elbows in the single collar tie and peope who want to throw knees and elbows in the muay thai plun.

 

The over/under clinch and double underhooks would be more for working position, grinding opponents, attempting takedowns etc strikes from these positions should be possible but do pretty minimal damage unless up against the cage.

[Rambo]

TD's into mount occur around 5% of the time.

[Erik]

TD's into mount occur around 5% of the time.

 

Which is probably about 4.9999% too often.

[Guest]

I think they should be removed alltogether..

[Rambo]

TD's into mount are the wrestler's equivalent to a strikers flash knockdown/knockout. The flavor text of it is what's so disturbing. I think there needs to be a lot more flavor text/variations of TD into Mount, it shouldn't just be this simple line of text "Oh __ scored a TD into mount!" - wouldn't be so bad if there were 19 other variations of TD's into mount that weren't a colaberation of several words of text.

 

I know these might be a little long, might be confusing, but here are some quick examples:

 

[X] shoots in for a single leg takedown but [Y]'s defending well. [X] drives [Y] into the cage, but [Y] shows off his incredible balance and won't be taken down. [X] is holding on to that leg for dear life and [Y] starts to punish his body with a couple shots to the rib cage. [X] clamps on to his leg and tries to scoop him up --- [Y]'s going for a ride! [X] lifts him into the air slamming him into the mat landing in side control, but [Y] is stunned and [X] quickly advances to full mount.

 

 

[X] is struggling to take [Y] down here, but [X] is persistant. [Y] tries to break free but [X] has his back and has locked in a tight body lock. [X] is trying to slam him - he's trying... he's trying... no [X] just can't pick [Y] up off his feet, I wonder how long he'll keep trying this is getting embarrassing - wait we spoke too soon! [X] trips him and [Y] face plants the canvas. [X] has his back, [Y] could be in trouble! No, wait, [Y] rolled over and now [X] is in mount.

 

 

[X] shoots in for a double, takes [Y] down and effortlessly passed into full mount. [Y]'s coaches have to be frustrated, [Y] froze up like a deer caught in the headlights. With a little effort that mistake could of been avoided. I bet he's kicking himself after that one, [X] is in a dominant position.

 

 

 

You add about 17+ more of them, to the ones you have already, and that adds a lot more variety in the flavor text which might make it more acceptable for a lot of people. You make TD's to the opponents back possible. Give it 1.5% and give TD's into mount 3.75% to 4.20%. 420 is just a good number, and a slight, non-ground breaking improvement from the current 5% area.

 

 

Right now TD's into mount - the text is so meaningless - it's like "X knocks Y out with a jab. X wins by KO." Speaking of which, there needs to be about 10-20 more text lines for knocking an opponent down. Gettin tired of seein the same 3-4 everytime a fighter gets knocked down.

[Erik]

TD's into mount are the wrestler's equivalent to a strikers flash knockdown/knockout. The flavor text of it is what's so disturbing. I think there needs to be a lot more flavor text/variations of TD into Mount, it shouldn't just be this simple line of text "Oh __ scored a TD into mount!" - wouldn't be so bad if there were 19 other variations of TD's into mount that weren't a colaberation of several words of text.

 

Nah, it's still really bogus -- very few times have we seen a takedown where the guy ends up in mount in under a few seconds, and when we do it's usually a guy like Maia just instantly passing rather than the actual takedown.