Keeping an eye on the fight engine since the changes

[CardiffWanderer]

I dislike commenting on the fight engine but I feel strongly enough to say that I feel that all extreme counter settings are a little overpowered.

[762x39]

You all make very good points, yes the changes are better than before. People have to spread skills out like the changes were meant to do. You have to have some ground game to survive now, that is as it should be. If you don't want to train ground then build for K1. That said, I still think the counter takedowns are a little strong, not a lot but just a little. I like the idea above about having it look at your standup some to be able to avoid the strike to begin the counter takedown. I still wouldn't change much but if it is to be changed that is what I would look at, try to make improvements not just weaken counter takedowns. They were a good add and still are, just need a little tweak to make it a great add.

[LanceTempleton]

Oh okay then, so people hitting counter takedowns in the beginning of every round on people as low as 95% counter isn't a problem because you can still fight them on the ground. Okay.

 

lol...pretty much.

 

i am not sure why the ground game and sliders keep coming into a discussion that someone brought up that counter takedowns are overpowered.

[ArtieBanks]

Like I said, you continue to make my point for me. If people want to avoid being taken down and getting destroyed they will add an element of wrestling or BJJ to thier fighters. I know not every fighter is Otso, but Otso is an example. The point is, counter TDs themselves aren't the issue. The fact that most fighters don't have a ground game is. As soon as "everyone will be doing it" as you say they will, then people will adapt to that as well. We're seeing a change in the game, and striker builds from the previous era aren't as successful because now there's a viable option for another gameplan.

 

 

How about we just start the fight on the ground then? I have seen many fights in which a good wrestler couldn't land one takedown against the striker. You wanted an example well how about Danza vs Valentine. He landed counter td's with no real problem against a SUPERIOR wrestler. Who not only has takedowns but has takedown defence he has a great ground game i just got ouslidered because of some brutal lay and pray. I was higher counter than him yet he still countered me as much as i did him. they were at least 10-15% more counter between us. My problem is the viable option is pretty much unstoppable unless you have an Otso. With the skill caps etc having a Otso will be dead in 12 months. I am not wanting it nerf'd completely but i want more of a penalty for going 100% counter td. as i said its basically like going 100% damage imo because it can win you the round or even the fight more often than not.

[shortfuse122829]

lol...pretty much.

 

i am not sure why the ground game and sliders keep coming into a discussion that someone brought up that counter takedowns are overpowered.

 

Because counter strikes and counter TD's is essentially the same thing. In most fights where a counter TD is landed, if that fighter was set to 100 counter strike, he would most likely still counter in the same spot just throw a punch/kick instead of shoot for a TD. So to say counter TD is overpowered is basically just saying counter is over-powered. I doubt there is a huge difference in the amount of energy lost by throwing a counter punch as doing a counter TD.

 

The only trouble-some part about counter TD's for a fighter is you land on your ass, whereas if the guy were 100 counter strike you would still get the chance to continue striking.

 

I think for a wrestler to have the ability to choose to make his counters a grapple attempt instead of a strike attempt (when you probably don't want to be standing) is an imperative part of the game and having to game-plan.

 

I think it would be easier to change the calculation to the amount of moves that are done on the ground based on the counter/agg slider then it would to try to re-calculate how the engine works.

 

The main issue that i see is

 

1. TD's are sorta over-powered in the eyes of the judge's, specifically when a fighter lays on a guy for 2+ minutes and lands 1 GNP strike.

 

2. Because the ground game is typically 3-5 lines a minute, giving up 1 TD usually leads to losing the round.

 

I've been beating wrestlers by either A. accepting i am giving up the TD and just amping up the aggression so i score a lot of points before and after. or B. jacking a lot of damage if i counter

 

The reason is if you give up a TD and it kills half the round laying on the ground doing nothing, and you only out-land your opponent by a few strikes (as long as accuracy isn't super far apart) then you pretty much lose the round.

 

If the amount of moves on the ground was adjusted, I think strikers would have more time to get the fight back to feet and still have enough time left in the round to potentially steal it back

[shortfuse122829]

I still am trying to understand the argument of counter TD is over-powered because you don't lose enough energy on missed counters? Why do people still believe missed counters exist? First of all that concept doesn't even make sense if you ask me, that there are a bunch of "hidden" moves your fighter is throwing and losing energy by throwing that aren't showing up on the fight stats at the end? Second, Mike has already come out and explained (though not very well) that there is no such thing as a missed counter, so the argument that you don't get punished enough for going 100 counter grapple 100 counter TD based on energy is completely a moot point IMO until Mike states "missed counters" exist

[Erik]

Some people seem to have gotten way too used to fights never actually going to the ground.

[shortfuse122829]

Some people seem to have gotten way too used to fights never actually going to the ground.

 

I have 17 grapplers on my roster so maybe I fall into Soyster's category of being able to defend or fight on the ground if it goes there, but I have won and lost very few fights due to counter TD.

 

I have beaten wrestlers who landed a few TD's on me by both KO and decision, and i have lost with wrestlers i landed counter TD's with by both KO and decision, so I just haven't been fighting the same up-hill battle I see everybody else talking about.

 

A few of the guys I have talked to and are struggling with it got pretty conservative on their sliders though in an attempt to not give counter opportunities, and IMO that typically leads to you giving up a normal TD anyway, falling behind on energy and then not doing enough to get the fight back to even. Being behind on energy only leads to counter opportunities for the opponent which hence leads to counter TD's anyway.

 

That's why I just accept I am getting put on my ass against wrestlers and work around it

[LanceTempleton]

Because counter strikes and counter TD's is essentially the same thing. In most fights where a counter TD is landed, if that fighter was set to 100 counter strike, he would most likely still counter in the same spot just throw a punch/kick instead of shoot for a TD. So to say counter TD is overpowered is basically just saying counter is over-powered. I doubt there is a huge difference in the amount of energy lost by throwing a counter punch as doing a counter TD.

 

 

 

Well if you are saying that it should be just as easy to counter TD someone as it should be to counter jab them then I have no real argument with you, besides the fact that I totally disagree, but it is a different discussion.

 

My whole point in saying counter TDs are over powered is exactly what you are saying. Counter TDs seem almost as easy as counter striking someone now.

 

I am seeing fighters with competent TDs landing TDs early in 2 out of 3 rounds against guys with elite TDD, etc.

 

That's my only point.

 

I never get involved in these discussions, because I honestly don;t enjoy the flaming that ensues here when you give an opinion (not from you btw).

 

Mike asked me my opinion on CTD's so I am giving it. They are overpowered in the fact that they are way too easy.

 

Like I said your argument is that a counter strike should be just as easy as a counter TD to land then that is a different argument and one in which I disagree with and imo that is REALLY game altering and org owners are going to be super pissed soon as the days of the 25% fight ratings will be upon us again shortly.

[shortfuse122829]

Well if you are saying that it should be just as easy to counter TD someone as it should be to counter jab them then I have no real argument with you, besides the fact that I totally disagree, but it is a different discussion.

 

My whole point in saying counter TDs are over powered is exactly what you are saying. Counter TDs seem almost as easy as counter striking someone now.

 

I am seeing fighters with competent TDs landing TDs early in 2 out of 3 rounds against guys with elite TDD, etc.

 

That's my only point.

 

I never get involved in these discussions, because I honestly don;t enjoy the flaming that ensues here when you give an opinion (not from you btw).

 

Mike asked me my opinion on CTD's so I am giving it. They are overpowered in the fact that they are way too easy.

 

Like I said your argument is that a counter strike should be just as easy as a counter TD to land then that is a different argument and one in which I disagree with and imo that is REALLY game altering and org owners are going to be super pissed soon as the days of the 25% fight ratings will be upon us again shortly.

 

Ya I am not here to flame or rip guys for having an opinion. I used to get yelled at by guys wanting to keep their advantages for putting so much information on the engine in the forums but I would rather people understand it then have unnecessary changes made because people are complaining about something they don't fully grasp.

 

I may be wrong on the counter strike/grapple theory Lance, that's just an assumption because Mike never stated that he made a change or addition to any calculations on how they would work different, just that you now had the option to make your counter attempts be a grapple instead of a strike. If there were different calculations or it was really involved (ex. maybe having useless TD's makes you more susceptible to a counter TD?) then I would think that would've been better explained. Since it was NOT, i am running under the assumption that they're really the same thing, minus the fact you can make the choice now

[JLP]

http://mmatycoon.com/fighterprofilemanager.php?FID=126828

Exc- wrestling, respectable+ TDs and landing TD's at a very good clip in his last two fights against superior wrestlers with what I would guess was at least sens or better TDD. Too bad for me he has no offensive ground game and got hosed in one decision.

I think counter TD needs to be made a slight bit less effective, but is a very good addition to the engine. Someone earlier advocated striking stats being involved in the calculation as well and I think that is worth looking into.

[shortfuse122829]

Also, I dunno that I am saying it SHOULD be easier then throwing a counter jab. Going off the assumption though that a counter is a counter and you just now have the option to do a TD instead of a strike I am not really sure if there is a way to calculate it for it to be harder, and I don't want to see the option eliminated where you counter and it could be 3 counter strikes before your wrestler lands a counter TD.

 

Just out of curiousity though, why do you think it should be easier to land a counter jab against a guy who has sensational boxing, elite punches and strike def. but a counter TD should be harder to land against a guy with sensational wrestling, Elite TDD and useless TD's? Seems to me the grappler is more equipped to defend a counter strike then the striker would be to defend the TD.

[LanceTempleton]

http://mmatycoon.com....php?FID=126828

Exc- wrestling, respectable+ TDs and landing TD's at a very good clip in his last two fights against superior wrestlers with what I would guess was at least sens or better TDD. Too bad for me he has no offensive ground game and got hosed in one decision.

I think counter TD needs to be made a slight bit less effective, but is a very good addition to the engine. Someone earlier advocated striking stats being involved in the calculation as well and I think that is worth looking into.

 

This pretty much sums it up for me.

[CardiffWanderer]

For slow people (me), can I just check that there are effectively three arguments happening here that are somewhat interlinked.

 

The first is whether it should be as easy to land a counter takedown as it is to land a counter strike.

 

The second, whether people are possibly (as I'm not entirely sure anyone 100% knows how the system works) using counters to their advantage (possibly unfairly) because failing to land a counter does not cost energy.

 

The third argument being more complex. Effectively, takedowns should be more difficult due to the (perceived) limitations of the ground game.

[shortfuse122829]

http://mmatycoon.com....php?FID=126828

Exc- wrestling, respectable+ TDs and landing TD's at a very good clip in his last two fights against superior wrestlers with what I would guess was at least sens or better TDD. Too bad for me he has no offensive ground game and got hosed in one decision.

I think counter TD needs to be made a slight bit less effective, but is a very good addition to the engine. Someone earlier advocated striking stats being involved in the calculation as well and I think that is worth looking into.

 

Not really sure how that shows that counter TD is over-powered to be honest, you landed as many or more normal TD's then you did counter ones. That would show more that TD's are just over-powered IMO.

 

http://www.mmatycoon.com/fightcommentary.php?FTID=568883 - your fight against Luger, you landed 1 counter TD in the first round. A round in which you won, got the early energy advantage and landed 2 counter strikes in the round before the counter TD at the end. Both your other TD's were normal ones.

 

http://www.mmatycoon.com/fightcommentary.php?FTID=578190 - your most recent fight the first TD you landed was again a shoot TD, not a counter. You laid on top for a bit then was swept and threw up some subs. The 2nd round you clearly beat him standing and were winning the 3rd round standing before again landing another counter TD.

 

Winning the energy game leads to counters. I have had plenty of fights on 70 aggression against a guy on counter where I ended up with more counter opportunities by dominating the fight

[LanceTempleton]

 

Just out of curiousity though, why do you think it should be easier to land a counter jab against a guy who has sensational boxing, elite punches and strike def. but a counter TD should be harder to land against a guy with sensational wrestling, Elite TDD and useless TD's? Seems to me the grappler is more equipped to defend a counter strike then the striker would be to defend the TD.

 

Because of the physical effort involved in actually taking someone down to the mat as opposed to that of landing a quick strike.

[shortfuse122829]

Because of the physical effort involved in actually taking someone down to the mat as opposed to that of landing a quick strike.

 

I can get on board with that, but that would really be more a matter of having it cost more energy to land a counter TD then to land a counter strike more than it would be making it easier to defend. I would be fine with that but I don't think it helps you stop counter TD's having it cost more energy.

 

Using that same theory thought process, it should cost more energy for a counter head kick then for a counter jab, and a counter uppercut then a counter jab. Maybe it does already, I am not really sure.

[LanceTempleton]

I can get on board with that, but that would really be more a matter of having it cost more energy to land a counter TD then to land a counter strike more than it would be making it easier to defend. I would be fine with that but I don't think it helps you stop counter TD's having it cost more energy.

 

 

Yes and no.

 

I still think it is much more difficult to land a TD than it is to land a quick strike therefor the success ratio would also be lower imo not just the energy spent.

[minark]

I can get on board with that, but that would really be more a matter of having it cost more energy to land a counter TD then to land a counter strike more than it would be making it easier to defend. I would be fine with that but I don't think it helps you stop counter TD's having it cost more energy.

 

Using that same theory thought process, it should cost more energy for a counter head kick then for a counter jab, and a counter uppercut then a counter jab. Maybe it does already, I am not really sure.

 

Two things here, don't all punches land at the same power level? If that's the case with this game, then why would an uppercut take more energy then a jab if they're technically thrown at the same damage/power level? A head kick I can agree should take more energy, but with the way the fight engine is, it'd be a ridiculous overhaul and a lot of nonsense to have to completely re-do the engine to make a jab take more energy than an uppercut.

 

And while it may not help you stop TD's in the first round, if the guy has no energy on top or in the later rounds this should help you stop later TD's or should help transitions on the mat and will affect the other fighter while on top. That's where the huge difference will lie.

 

This is no better than the 100% counter strike era really. It wasn't ok then, but for some reason it is now? You should have to strategize your takedowns and actually need to do something with that slider for it to be effective.

 

 

*Edit* - Basically I'm saying there are 3 things in the stand up. You've got punching, kicking and takedowns. There are variations, but it's been said by Mike in the past that these are all flavor text. So now it needs to be decided the energy loss on each and takedowns should have the most energy loss similar to real life. Then second most kicks and least energy would obviously be punches.

[minark]

Setting to any level of countering reduces your energy recovery from each move, so your energy doesn't go down, it just recovers more slowly.

 

Now, my only issue with CTDs being overpowered at the moment... Is it that they are overpowered or that it's too hard to get up once you are on the ground? I don't think one or two CTDs per round is overpowered per-se. If it's actually getting up that's the problem, I don't want to patch CTDs, then have two things that are less than ideal, rather than just one.

 

This just seems like a terrible combination IMO. Counter TD's are easy and if we overpower standing up to go along with it, we'll have entire fights that are counter TD, get up, counter TD, get up, counter TD... etc. Just doesn't sound like a lot of fun at all. I still see this as no different than the counter strike era only with takedowns now.

[shortfuse122829]

You're nuts if you really think this is as bad as the 100 counter era. I've beaten 100 CG/CD using 3 sets of totally different sliders. 100 counter could be beat by 100 counter.

[shortfuse122829]

100 CG/TD**

[JLP]

 

 

Not really sure how that shows that counter TD is over-powered to be honest, you landed as many or more normal TD's then you did counter ones. That would show more that TD's are just over-powered IMO.

 

http://www.mmatycoon.com/fightcommentary.php?FTID=568883 - your fight against Luger, you landed 1 counter TD in the first round. A round in which you won, got the early energy advantage and landed 2 counter strikes in the round before the counter TD at the end. Both your other TD's were normal ones.

 

http://www.mmatycoon.com/fightcommentary.php?FTID=578190 - your most recent fight the first TD you landed was again a shoot TD, not a counter. You laid on top for a bit then was swept and threw up some subs. The 2nd round you clearly beat him standing and were winning the 3rd round standing before again landing another counter TD.

 

Winning the energy game leads to counters. I have had plenty of fights on 70 aggression against a guy on counter where I ended up with more counter opportunities by dominating the fight

I think those regular TD's were more of a lucky roll on the RNG. I just dont think a fighter with respectable TDs should be landing around 66% no matter what the circumstances. Blackford turned into my counter TD test dummy and pretty much convinced me that counter TD is overpowered due to his success in grabbing them relative to his lack of skill.

If counter TDs are this easy to grab it wont be long before we see fighter who really dont need to sink much points at all into TD's or TDD. If you can have a fighter with good ground skills then you dont need TDD. If you can grab TD's with respectable TD's why would you bother putting any points into that skill either?

Thats pretty much how i am building all my projects now. We are going right back into a needing a certain cookie cutter build to be successful at the top level.

[minark]

You're nuts if you really think this is as bad as the 100 counter era. I've beaten 100 CG/CD using 3 sets of totally different sliders. 100 counter could be beat by 100 counter.

 

Beaten how? Beaten with your ground game? Beaten by stuffing the takedowns and striking? And are you positive these guys were set 100% on CTD's? Were there skills somewhat similar to yours? I've beaten guys using a takedown strategy as well, it's just usually I had them out skilled or they really had no idea on sliders.I'd be really interested to see which fights these are just to be able to read them ad judge for myself what happened and see your side of things. Maybe you've found the secret to them nobody else has.

[shortfuse122829]

I hear u on that JLP, but at the same time I know a fighter who dropped his TDD for transitions & stuffs TD's w/ barely any TDD. His last loss took him out of the top 10 p4p. Dunno why that happens especially your shoot TD's. I'll look for examples of specific fights tomorrow Minark. I've used a 70 agg mid 60's acc to beat 100 CG/TD by both UD & KO, also beaten it w/ 60 counter 67 DMG by both KO & decision, and also beat it on agg/dmg twice