PBR Posted August 11, 2013 Report Share Posted August 11, 2013 Likewise, PBR, hope real life stuff works itself out. However, on this counter TD issue you really are wrong. As Minark has said, this has already been clarified in another thread by Mike. The game engine doesn't have any form of "missed counter". That means the fighter quoted earlier definitely did go 5/5 on counter TDs. Having said that, Mike did say it's a bit more complex than that, but that's still the bottom line. okay maybe i am wrong but way i took it in the thread on mike was that a missed counter didnt count or record cause it was a missed opportunity more or less, that there were misses but not viewed that way or something to that effect -- im trying to catch up on it all -- personally i think the 100% deal needs looked at or nerfed, changed whatever you want to call it -- cause as was mentioned if someone just does 100% anything that is just too predictable and in real life just not able to get away with it -- yea some fighters (ex, askew, ronda) do but 99% dont and cant -- would like to maybe look at that first if its possible rather than mess with fight engine first cause i think that is more the issue -- if predictability was handled then they would have to change up -- as mentioned in wiki it says not to be predictable or 100 anything cause it will be too predictable but that just doesnt seem to be true -- cause some come out and do nothing but kick the entire fight or nothing but punch being very predictable with no sense of avoiding it edited: and on there is no missed counters what mike meant is that a counter is a successful punch or takedown, whatever -- missed counter is / was a missed opportunity to counter -- an actual counter is successful (thus the no such thing as missed counter) -- kind of confusing but i think that is the way it goes edited: damn i just noticed it 3:20 in the morning and she gonna be up wanting me up in about 4 hrs -- damn i know why i never had kids now -- lol 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gutz Posted August 11, 2013 Report Share Posted August 11, 2013 Not to say wrestlers don't seem to get taken down easy too. I swear my guys with almost elite wrestling, TD's and TDD seem to get taken down as easy as the 2 SNB guys i have Thats how it is.. Right now there is no point in training td defence more then lets say exceptional. That would be enough to stop takedown spamming but nothing seems to be enough to stop td counters. I would make it harder to land counter td if that is all you do and make it easier to escape standing. That way there would be more fighting in ground and standing even in same round. Right now its rare to see more then two escapes/takedowns in one round. What if there could be 3-5 each? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortfuse122829 Posted August 11, 2013 Report Share Posted August 11, 2013 Thats how it is.. Right now there is no point in training td defence more then lets say exceptional. That would be enough to stop takedown spamming but nothing seems to be enough to stop td counters. I would make it harder to land counter td if that is all you do and make it easier to escape standing. That way there would be more fighting in ground and standing even in same round. Right now its rare to see more then two escapes/takedowns in one round. What if there could be 3-5 each? This is one of the suggestions I have made, this isn't saying that there is no need for a reduction to counter TD or that it's not strange how TD's work. I just wonder if the amount of moves was increased on the ground if it wouldn't allow strikers to scramble back to their feet via escapes or ref stand-up and still have enough time in the round left to score points and possibly win the round The way it is right now, majority of ground fights I see are 4-6 lines between minutes so landing 1 TD in around leads to the fight being down about half the round or more. The way control is scored on top even when not scoring GNP makes it very hard to win a round like that unless you're dominating the striking game (which isn't easy at the top level) 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortfuse122829 Posted August 12, 2013 Report Share Posted August 12, 2013 This is one of the suggestions I have made, this isn't saying that there is no need for a reduction to counter TD or that it's not strange how TD's work. I just wonder if the amount of moves was increased on the ground if it wouldn't allow strikers to scramble back to their feet via escapes or ref stand-up and still have enough time in the round left to score points and possibly win the round The way it is right now, majority of ground fights I see are 4-6 lines between minutes so landing 1 TD in around leads to the fight being down about half the round or more. The way control is scored on top even when not scoring GNP makes it very hard to win a round like that unless you're dominating the striking game (which isn't easy at the top level) There is a second part to this that I think would also help. It seems that a lot of fights are won by this early energy advantage you gain by landing a TD and getting 2-3 mins of control on top (even when you only land maybe 2 or 3 GNP and don't do a ton of damage). That early energy advantage hurts you in several areas, it leads to more TD's landing by both regular shots and counter TD's and it also leads to the wrestler (one w/ the energy advantage) landing a higher % of his strikes which helps set up the TD. I am not sure if the problem is a flaw in energy recovery, or if maybe lowering the amount of energy that is used from bottom to control or try to adv position would help even this out a little bit? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
minark Posted August 12, 2013 Report Share Posted August 12, 2013 So, many have said it's slightly overpowered but almost everyone agrees that a complete nerf is too much. So I guess the best thing to do is figure out how much of a tuning counter takedowns actually need? And has there been any word of if there will be a change or is it still just us arguing with each other? lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PBR Posted August 12, 2013 Report Share Posted August 12, 2013 So, many have said it's slightly overpowered but almost everyone agrees that a complete nerf is too much. So I guess the best thing to do is figure out how much of a tuning counter takedowns actually need? And has there been any word of if there will be a change or is it still just us arguing with each other? lol think its more of trying to figure things out for sure or looking at all effects (like shortfuse's post above) -- or maybe ways to correct it first (bigger picture maybe) -- like the predictability of doing 100% anything, it should almost fail every time -- unless you just have a retarded fighter that cant tell -- but also i guess shig would help that maybe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 12, 2013 Report Share Posted August 12, 2013 CGrace won a fight. Game engine R broke big time! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeadlyDirk Posted August 13, 2013 Report Share Posted August 13, 2013 My guy says takedowns in general are a little overpowered, I've managed to take down people lately with as low as competent wrestling when i'd imagine the opponents had like sensational tdd etc. Having said all that though, if people want guys to be punished for having 100% counter takedowns then surely the same would have to be for those who have 100% counter strike? Meaning strikers would have to start adding takedowns and develop a ground game anyway to avoid being punished. 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 13, 2013 Report Share Posted August 13, 2013 Having said all that though, if people want guys to be punished for having 100% counter takedowns then surely the same would have to be for those who have 100% counter strike? Meaning strikers would have to start adding takedowns and develop a ground game anyway to avoid being punished. I guess I see it less as punishing the 100 percenters and more as rewarding diverse guys. When I go into a fight with mixed up counter strikes, clinching and takedowns I feel like there should be a little bump to the success of those counters. When in my experience I get the best results going for 100%. But maybe it depends on the intelligence of your fighter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DeadlyDirk Posted August 13, 2013 Report Share Posted August 13, 2013 I guess I see it less as punishing the 100 percenters and more as rewarding diverse guys. When I go into a fight with mixed up counter strikes, clinching and takedowns I feel like there should be a little bump to the success of those counters. When in my experience I get the best results going for 100%. But maybe it depends on the intelligence of your fighter. Yeh I would agree with that, that's a fair point, diversity should always be rewarded the most. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gutz Posted August 17, 2013 Report Share Posted August 17, 2013 http://www.mmatycoon.com/fightcommentary.php?FTID=582896 Just nice.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavyJones Posted August 17, 2013 Report Share Posted August 17, 2013 Seems like a fix to me, the manager of the fighter who lost announced his retirement from the game back in May so I highly doubt he set his sliders to win this fight. He probably had the allow takedowns box checked, whether it was done on purpose or not is the question. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLP Posted August 17, 2013 Report Share Posted August 17, 2013 http://www.mmatycoon...php?FTID=582896 Just nice.. lol, what a joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JLP Posted August 17, 2013 Report Share Posted August 17, 2013 Seems like a fix to me, the manager of the fighter who lost announced his retirement from the game back in May so I highly doubt he set his sliders to win this fight. He probably had the allow takedowns box checked, whether it was done on purpose or not is the question. looks like Hunts manager set his sliders to 100 counter, 100 counter TD. he got all the tds off counters so the allow takedown check box had nothing to do with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavyJones Posted August 17, 2013 Report Share Posted August 17, 2013 I still don't think it's the best example of counter takedowns being overpowered. McGee is super inaccurate and very predictable (throws nothing but punches) but maybe it will at least convince Mike to take a look at the calculations or whatever it is that needs tweaking. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MMATycoon Posted August 20, 2013 Author Report Share Posted August 20, 2013 I am going to look at it - it's just I can only do one thing and once and I want to finish TWGC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu_Pidasol Posted August 21, 2013 Report Share Posted August 21, 2013 From the other thread about this. I'm not sayng that counter takedowns aren't overpowered but what people seem to be forgetting are there is actually no such thing as a missed counter so the figures are always going to look misleading. Fighter A strikes = hit or miss. if miss then fighter B is either successful of not with a counter strike. (A basic run down on how it works) So in the fight above assuming one was set to 100% counter takedown. 1st takedown happened on the 3rd attempt - 2 missed strikes before the 3rd missed resulted in a counter takedown - 1 from 3 2nd takedown happened on the 1st missed strike = 2 from 4 3rd takedown happened on the 1st missed strike = 3 from 5 4t takedown happened on the 1st missed strike = 4 from 6 5th takedown happened on 4 th attempt - 3 missed strikes the 4th missed strike resulted in a counter takedown = 5 from 10 6th takedown happened on the 3rd attempt - 2 missed strikes before the 3rd missed resulted in a counter takedown - 6 from 13 7th takedown happened on the 2nd attempt - 1 missed strike before the 2nd missed strike resulted in a counter takedown - 7 from 15 8th happened on the first missed strike = 8 from 16 9th happened on the 6th attempt - 5 missed strikes before the 6th missed strike resulted in a counter takedown = 9 from 21 10th happened on the 2nd attempt 1 missed strike before the 2nd resulted in a counter takedown 10 from 23 11th happened on the 4th attempt 3 missed strikes before the 4 missed resulted in a counter takedown 11 from 27 12th happened on the 2nd attempt 1 missed strike before the 2nd missed strike caused the takedown = 12 from 29 After the 12th takedown there were 3 more missed strikes before the fight finished. Even if say that the very last actin of the fight is the missed strike that's still another 2 attempts. So the fighter realistically went 12 from 31 which is a landing rate of 39% Is a landing rate of 39% for a takedown wrong? My stronger grapplers are going at > 40% landing rate (granted that doesn't take into consideration shoot or counter takedown nor does it take into account of opponents). 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PBR Posted August 21, 2013 Report Share Posted August 21, 2013 I'm not sayng that counter takedowns aren't overpowered but what people seem to be forgetting are there is actually no such thing as a missed counter so the figures are always going to look misleading. this is my whole point -- sure it looks bad when shows you land 6 out of 6 takedowns and they were counter takedowns -- we need to know the entire numbers to know if or how overpowering they are -- without all the info we actually have no clue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 21, 2013 Report Share Posted August 21, 2013 This assumes that a counter is always attempted whenever anything is missed. Is this the case? I don't ever remember hearing a convincingly straight answer on how the counters are decided. But if so then there's the problem right there. By your reckoning the guy attempted 31 counter takedowns and suffered no energy loss for any of them. Regardless of the percentage of success this is a massive imbalance to the system as it offers enormous reward for zero risk, or even cost to stamina. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poraan Posted August 21, 2013 Report Share Posted August 21, 2013 this is my whole point -- sure it looks bad when shows you land 6 out of 6 takedowns and they were counter takedowns -- we need to know the entire numbers to know if or how overpowering they are -- without all the info we actually have no clue it doesent matter how many takedowns you try..... main thing is that everybody knows that counter takedowns+crappy ground game engine is overpowered... who would use counter strikes if you could get counter takedowns with same rate? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stu_Pidasol Posted August 21, 2013 Report Share Posted August 21, 2013 This assumes that a counter is always attempted whenever anything is missed. Is this the case? I don't ever remember hearing a convincingly straight answer on how the counters are decided. But if so then there's the problem right there. By your reckoning the guy attempted 31 counter takedowns and suffered no energy loss for any of them. Regardless of the percentage of success this is a massive imbalance to the system as it offers enormous reward for zero risk, or even cost to stamina. That's where it gets tricky.. You can't actually miss a counter like you can miss an aggressive strike. A counter is either successful or not. Mike has explained either in this thread or another how it works - my explanation is a basic breakdown of what he has said and what has already been discussed by others in this thread. I would assume the respective aggression levels of both fighters would play a part in the equation. If I'm wrong the I will stand corrected. Massive imbalance is stretching it a bit much - again I'm not ready to say whether they are overpowered or not yet. The game was a striker dominated game for so long - no longer can you have useless takedowns and hope your elite defensive grap and elite takedown defence and hope to survive.. Has it gone to far the other way?? Possibly. http://www.mmatycoon.com/fightcommentary.php?FTID=585142 A recent fight of mine - all the takedowns landed were counter takedowns on with a guy that has elite takedowns. He missed 16 strikes all up along with numerous clinch attempts - if something was horribly wrong do you think I would have landed more counter takedowns? When I was set to 100% counter grapple / 100% counter takedown. The original fight I really don't think can be read into to much. Any fighter without an offensive ground game will use counter strikes - be pretty silly for the kick boxers out there to takedown a grappler Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortfuse122829 Posted August 21, 2013 Report Share Posted August 21, 2013 That's where it gets tricky.. You can't actually miss a counter like you can miss an aggressive strike. A counter is either successful or not. Mike has explained either in this thread or another how it works - my explanation is a basic breakdown of what he has said and what has already been discussed by others in this thread. I would assume the respective aggression levels of both fighters would play a part in the equation. If I'm wrong the I will stand corrected. Massive imbalance is stretching it a bit much - again I'm not ready to say whether they are overpowered or not yet. The game was a striker dominated game for so long - no longer can you have useless takedowns and hope your elite defensive grap and elite takedown defence and hope to survive.. Has it gone to far the other way?? Possibly. http://www.mmatycoon...php?FTID=585142 A recent fight of mine - all the takedowns landed were counter takedowns on with a guy that has elite takedowns. He missed 16 strikes all up along with numerous clinch attempts - if something was horribly wrong do you think I would have landed more counter takedowns? When I was set to 100% counter grapple / 100% counter takedown. The original fight I really don't think can be read into to much. Any fighter without an offensive ground game will use counter strikes - be pretty silly for the kick boxers out there to takedown a grappler That's kinda been my defense as well Stu. I do believe that counter TD's may be a bit over-powered but not necessarily because of the 100/100 strategy. I think that some of the other issues at hand are how much energy is expended from either controlling or trying to advance position from the bottom. Either that or energy doesn't recover as much as it should. How many fights have you seen where the striker maybe wins the first round, he gets taken down in the 2nd, held down for 3 mins (not doing a ton of damage) and when the fight gets back to the feet suddenly he's out-striking the striker due to the energy advantage he gained by laying on top of his opponent. I also think that the amount of moves done on the ground is too few. I haven't done a ton of research and maybe I will start but if it's taking the striker on average 20 lines of text to force a ref stand-up, that 20 lines of text is often 2-3 mins on the ground when often times there isn't really that much damage being done to the guy on bottom. http://www.mmatycoon.com/fightcommentary.php?FTID=583715 ^^ Just a brief example, in the 2nd round of my title fight I landed a counter TD right before the 1 minute mark. We spent 3 mins on the ground. I didn't land 1 GNP, nor did a successfully advance position 1 time. Katsu swept me and got on top and landed 1 successful GNP. Yet that fight stayed on the ground for over 3 mins of the round? If Katsu wasn't another ground guy, and just happened to get a sweep and then a ref-stand up from the top position, how does the striker really stand a chance at winning the round when he has only the 1st and last minute of the round to try to score points? What if....It still took these strikers on average 20 lines of text (just a random number being used) to force a ref stand-up, but that 20 lines of text was only 60-90 sec worth of the round instead of over 3 minutes? It wouldn't re-introduce the issue where ref stand-ups happen far too often and start something new to bitch about like we had previously for the grapplers, but it would also maybe make 1 or TD's in a round less detrimental then it is right now...by giving the striker time to work to get the fight back up and score points standing. The way the system is right now, a counter TD to side control is almost a guaranteed 3 mins on the ground just due to the time it takes to get back to full-guard and then force a ref stand-up. I think a change to either how energy is recovered OR how much is expended controlling on bottom would help wrestlers not have this detrimental energy advantage from being held on bottom and not taking a ton of damage would help keep the energy on a more realistic level when guys are NOT taking tons of damage on the bottom. I think increasing the total number of moves on the ground would also help in the sense that a TD or 2 wouldn't be such a killer when it comes to the judges score-cards because it would at least give striker's the opportunity to win the rounds despite being taken down. Now with all that being said, that wasn't a defense of counter TD not being over-powered. The fact that you can land a counter TD against an opponent w/ useless TD's is just the most absurd thing I've ever heard. That would be like me throwing nothing but counter head-kicks on high damage and getting head kick KO's with useless kicks. Not sure if it's possible to code but if you're fighting a guy with Sens -- wrestling sens ++ d grapple and elite level physicals I think it should take at least superb TD's to even have the opportunity to land a counter TD. I don't know if that's even possible to code specifically because it might be not be the actual TD skill level that decides the counter opportunity. If you are checking a leg kick on the feet it is likely MT, strike def and kicks that are helping you defend that not TD's. So going 100 counter grapple 100 counter TD might not be able to be stopped by that. If it's possible though I'd like to see u needing a certain level skill in order to land them 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mystery Posted August 21, 2013 Report Share Posted August 21, 2013 That's kinda been my defense as well Stu. I do believe that counter TD's may be a bit over-powered but not necessarily because of the 100/100 strategy. I think that some of the other issues at hand are how much energy is expended from either controlling or trying to advance position from the bottom. Either that or energy doesn't recover as much as it should. How many fights have you seen where the striker maybe wins the first round, he gets taken down in the 2nd, held down for 3 mins (not doing a ton of damage) and when the fight gets back to the feet suddenly he's out-striking the striker due to the energy advantage he gained by laying on top of his opponent. I also think that the amount of moves done on the ground is too few. I haven't done a ton of research and maybe I will start but if it's taking the striker on average 20 lines of text to force a ref stand-up, that 20 lines of text is often 2-3 mins on the ground when often times there isn't really that much damage being done to the guy on bottom. http://www.mmatycoon...php?FTID=583715 ^^ Just a brief example, in the 2nd round of my title fight I landed a counter TD right before the 1 minute mark. We spent 3 mins on the ground. I didn't land 1 GNP, nor did a successfully advance position 1 time. Katsu swept me and got on top and landed 1 successful GNP. Yet that fight stayed on the ground for over 3 mins of the round? If Katsu wasn't another ground guy, and just happened to get a sweep and then a ref-stand up from the top position, how does the striker really stand a chance at winning the round when he has only the 1st and last minute of the round to try to score points? What if....It still took these strikers on average 20 lines of text (just a random number being used) to force a ref stand-up, but that 20 lines of text was only 60-90 sec worth of the round instead of over 3 minutes? It wouldn't re-introduce the issue where ref stand-ups happen far too often and start something new to bitch about like we had previously for the grapplers, but it would also maybe make 1 or TD's in a round less detrimental then it is right now...by giving the striker time to work to get the fight back up and score points standing. The way the system is right now, a counter TD to side control is almost a guaranteed 3 mins on the ground just due to the time it takes to get back to full-guard and then force a ref stand-up. I think a change to either how energy is recovered OR how much is expended controlling on bottom would help wrestlers not have this detrimental energy advantage from being held on bottom and not taking a ton of damage would help keep the energy on a more realistic level when guys are NOT taking tons of damage on the bottom. I think increasing the total number of moves on the ground would also help in the sense that a TD or 2 wouldn't be such a killer when it comes to the judges score-cards because it would at least give striker's the opportunity to win the rounds despite being taken down. Now with all that being said, that wasn't a defense of counter TD not being over-powered. The fact that you can land a counter TD against an opponent w/ useless TD's is just the most absurd thing I've ever heard. That would be like me throwing nothing but counter head-kicks on high damage and getting head kick KO's with useless kicks. Not sure if it's possible to code but if you're fighting a guy with Sens -- wrestling sens ++ d grapple and elite level physicals I think it should take at least superb TD's to even have the opportunity to land a counter TD. I don't know if that's even possible to code specifically because it might be not be the actual TD skill level that decides the counter opportunity. If you are checking a leg kick on the feet it is likely MT, strike def and kicks that are helping you defend that not TD's. So going 100 counter grapple 100 counter TD might not be able to be stopped by that. If it's possible though I'd like to see u needing a certain level skill in order to land them I'm not going to enter this discussion really, i'm mostly just happy to read and you 'vets' just ignore me anyways, but I already said this 3 weeks ago on this very thread: Personally I don't think counter takedowns itself is over-powered at all, counter takedowns always were and always will be successful a higher percentage of time than shoot takedowns in rl as an example. But I do think that the calculations for getting counter takedowns needs to be changed a little, in the fact that fighters can be very successful atm at getting counter takedowns with very little takedown skill, that's what needs to be changed imo. Make the takedown skill a higher percentage of the equation for success. That's the main thing that needs to be changed, but other changes are needed aswell of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shortfuse122829 Posted August 21, 2013 Report Share Posted August 21, 2013 I'm not going to enter this discussion really, i'm mostly just happy to read and you 'vets' just ignore me anyways, but I already said this 3 weeks ago on this very thread: That's the main thing that needs to be changed, but other changes are needed aswell of course. I ignore most of the stuff said in these kinda threads normally tbh -- People just automatically jump to something is broken when they can't figure out how or why things work the way they do and Shortfuse has a "short fuse" and wants to break his computer reading these threads most times. I learned after the last changes though that wasn't the best way to handle the situation because Mike made an unnecessary change to the effectiveness of mount and sweeps. People complained and it got changed, rather then look at what other factors were at play. Mount and sweeps were so effective because the majority of guys who aren't sure what to do on the ground use a 90 counter 90 control 90 adv plan on the bottom which is an EXTREMELY effective strategy from guard. It's already harder to land GNP and adv pos from guard, and the high counter makes it even harder which used to force quick ref stand-ups from guard. In order to get around those quick ref stand-ups guys on top used to feel like that had to go higher aggression and higher finish (worrying less about positioning) in order to be "more active" which left them open to sweeps from the high counter fighter on bottom due to their lack of concern on position in an effort to be more active. This strategy actually used to be less effective under the old engine because your aggression just made you miss more from guard which usually helped the guy on bottoms case because previously very little credit was given for missed GNP, a miss was as good as not throwing, there was little credit given for trying to be active. <<<<<<<<<<<<<< That change is also why guys can keep fights on the ground so long these days with doing not a lot of damage at times. Also why i think rather then take away that credit for misses and go back to the quick ref stand-up days we should instead increase the amount of moves on the ground. So wrestlers keep their ability to have time to work a little, but it doesn't end up taking more then half of a round. The effectiveness of mount was the complete opposite effect of 90 counter 90 control 90 adv from bottom. While that strategy is EXTREMELY effective from the guard, it as absolutely useless from side control bottom or mount bottom. If your opponent has you in the mount and your strategy is to lay there and do nothing = 90 counter (essentially 0 moves), 90% of the few moves you try are to hold on for dear life...then when exactly are you trying to get OUT of mount bottom? You're not. Which is why guys used to get mounted and get their face bashed in. So now I try to keep up on what people say, unfortunately EDIT: sweeps to mount were way too frequent though 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 23, 2013 Report Share Posted August 23, 2013 hey there should be another important improvement to this game .. some of the fight organization owners, just abandon their organization and leave without any notice or without releasing the fighters... and this would put the fighters as well as the manaers of the fighters in an uncomfortable situation .... i think u undesrstand what i mean .. and he fighter can't be released from the contract until the inactivity clause expires .. i think there should be something to avoid this, some other way to make this thing right ..... please consider this, game admins .. 1 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts