Can we get a consensus on Character/Variation Lock rules?

[TopTierHarley]

Except theirs precedent for Variation switch for winners

zzzzzz done with these convos till people get some real exposure to how other games handle this. Either way I'm still going to play MKX no matter what rules the community goes with but I'm going to push for variation switch at NWM.

THIS!

 

[Peckapowa]

The rules we have been using for the past 5 years weren't in a game that had 90+ characters and will inevitably be littered with 7-3 MUs. Each variation can easily, on average, have at least 8-10 MUs that they lose 3-7 or worse.

That makes sense, maybe we should do 3/5... There are going to be dominAnt and useless variations regardless, but we shouldn't stop Stryker players from picking kenshi to help with jade matchup. That's just the balance of the game.

 

[cyke_out]

People need to broaden their fighting game knowledge before declaring a ruleset as being the only way all games hande things.

Only the Sith deal is absolutes... And this very line .... But whatever.

Some games allow the winner to change his characters options. Some games don't. The majority of games that have options to change something, allows the winner to do so.

That seems pretty cut and dry to me.

Winner can change variation if loser changes character, but winner must pick variation after loser picks character but before loser picks variation.

 

[HeroesNZ]

Lock everything for winner! There are going to be counters using variation types alone. How is this hard to agree on?

Lmao, the argument for Variation Lock is that it's the simplest method.

Simple =/= Effective. You people argue that Variation Lock is what we're doing now and it's been proven to work, except MKX is not IGAU/MK9. It's a different game. Nobody has answered this question yet:

How is Variation Lock any different to letting the loser pick their stage & character in IGAU/MK9?

In Variation Lock you're giving the loser an insane advantage. It's fucking stupid lol.

I mean, imagine facing @FOREVER KING in Variation Lock. He'll be unbeatable lmao.

What I said has literally happened before, in a previous fighting game with a similar variation system. They changed to character lock because variation lock gives the loser too much of an advantage.

It's not rocket science. Answer the question in my quote.

 

[Braindead]

That makes sense, maybe we should do 3/5... There are going to be dominAnt and useless variations regardless, but we shouldn't stop Stryker players from picking kenshi to help with jade matchup. That's just the balance of the game.

I agree. Kenshi will wreck Jade anyway, but giving the Jade player an option to help a bit with the MU helps more with keeping the balance, which is the main goal behind the counter-picking system as a whole.

 

[TotteryManx]

I'll give you an example, master of storms raiden and displacer are not going to play anything at all like each other, nor sub zero with clone or cryomancer. Theyll have radically diff my numbers

Ding ding ding! We have a winner! I would imagine storm lord would be good for keeping rushdown characters out of your face while displacer is more of a anti zoning variation. Those two will have different MU numbers against different variations. Its great for character loyalists.

 

[Compbros]

Ding ding ding! We have a winner! I would imagine storm lord would be good for keeping rushdown characters out of your face while displacer is more of a anti zoning variation. Those two will have different MU numbers against different variations. Its great for character loyalists.

The same is true for Melty Blood/ Arcana Hearts but they allow a switch. People keep giving the "it's been the way for years, why change it" but we're not looking at games that are very similar to our situation in MKX that have set a precedent for what to do.

 

[SneakyTortoise]

For what it's worth, 16 Bit, a tournament veteran who has been working in QA on the game thinks Variation lock is how it should be played out.

 

[REDRUM]

I love the idea of no variation lock at all just character locks for the Winner, ESPECIALLY in the infant stages of MKX so things can get fleshed out in time and we get to see more variation possibilities in fights...

 

[Compbros]

Also, regardless of what is picked, I will be playing how the community chooses but I feel "no variation lock on a loser character switch" is the best option.

 

[Compbros]

How about this, can we a least TRY various options at these locals and such when the game first comes out instead of just going with char/var locked for a few months and then just sticking with that because people will think it's too late to change things?

 

[TotteryManx]

No variation lock for either player could be fun now that I really think about it, but having the winner choose first JUST so the loser can 100% counter pick seems silly.

 

[TotteryManx]

How about this, can we a least TRY various options at these locals and such when the game first comes out instead of just going with char/var locked for a few months and then just sticking with that because people will think it's too late to change things?

I think we can always push to change things if we dont like it. The community was successful in changing the 2/3 rule.

 

[Eddy Wang]

What is wrong with you TYM? LOL, 50 votes from the character + variation lock in this thread are from variation loyalists, i knew that thread about 90% of tym being character loyalist was a huge bill, TYM is filled with lots of tier whores, shm.

Anyway, the variation system doesn't completely changes characters, it only adds a few different set of tools that will slighly not drastically make the character play a bit different, but inside of what he was designed for, like someone said before, it doesn't turn scorpion into Quan Chi.

This is almost like switching ultras in street fighter to even the odds if losers picks another character, fighting against an Ibuki with U2 and fighting an Ibuki with U1 its the slightly the same thing, the only thing that you have to have in mind is that 1 ultra is used in a different way than the other, but this doesn't change her main game at all.

It makes sense the winner be able to switch variation if loser picks another character, but winner still have to pick variation first, so loser can still have an advantage.

The first option encourages character loyalist and the community to actually explore their character at full extent and knowing inside out of the matchups.

The option of Character + Variation lock encourages lots of counterpicks and variation loyalists.

I'm fine with counter pick, but all in favor that if you want to counter pick you better know pretty well from inside out all variations you choose to whore it up, so i'm not liking where this is going.

 

[imblackjames]

Im cool with anything where the winner picks everything first....id prefer everything locked for winner but im cool with shaking things up for MkX

 

[Compbros]

I think we can always push to change things if we dont like it. The community was successful in changing the 2/3 rule.

But we stuck with interactibles. 3/5 doesn't change gameplay like interactibles/variations and, despite some in the community calling for interactibles off months later, it fell on deaf ears as the community just accepted interactibles.


http://testyourmight.com/threads/interactables-need-to-be-disabled-for-tournament-play.42950/

First post:

it's a little late to start bringing stuff like this up...

Edit: Pages and pages of discussion, interactibles stayed. I want to avoid that.

 

[Pig Of The Hut]

What would be the purpose of variations then? Why would someone pick a new variation after they lost in the counterpick instead of just counterpicking the counterpick altogether? Seems like a waste of a new system in a new game.

Your question makes no sense. If a person loses they can pick any character,
Any variation they want . Winner can't change anything

How about you prepare your character and variation for every bad MU and good MU and bad variation and good variation .

Every single person is overly thinking this and wasting their time

It is NOT complicated at all

 

[TopTierHarley]

Your question makes no sense. If a person loses they can pick any character,
Any variation they want . Winner can't change anything

How about you prepare your character and variation for every bad MU and good MU and bad variation and good variation .

Every single person is overly thinking this and wasting their time

It is NOT complicated at all

Then what purpose do variations serve?

 

[HeroesNZ]

Your question makes no sense. If a person loses they can pick any character,
Any variation they want . Winner can't change anything

How about you prepare your character and variation for every bad MU and good MU and bad variation and good variation .

Every single person is overly thinking this and wasting their time

It is NOT complicated at all

Exactly, it's not complicated.

IGAU worked similarly to MK9 and hence used rules similar to MK9's.

MKX seems much more similar to Melty Heart/Arcana Hearts, and so it should use rules similar to Melty Blood/Arcana Hearts.

 

[RoboCop]

It seems like this boils down to 2 major factors:

1. Is counter-picking good or bad?
2. Just because we've had the same rules for 5 years we should never, under any circumstance, revisit them.

The first point is a matter of opinion. I, personally, can't stand counter-picking. I think tournaments should be won in the battle screen, not in the character-select screen. Allowing the winner to change their variation if the loser changes characters helps alleviate this problem without negating it entirely. It's a rather good compromise. As @Braindead said, with all of the possible MUs in this game (approximately 2,592, but who's counting), the odds of most variations having multiple 3-7s or worse is almost inevitable. Allowing variation switching will be the difference between a handful of viable characters and a full roster of viable characters. If a variation has even a single 3-7 MU (which again, will be the case with 71 MUs per character to consider), then that variation will see as much tournament life as Kano and Cyborg. In fact, with so many MUs, this game has the potential to be utterly dominated by counter-picks or a very elite few variations with no dire MUs, which would be absolute poison for its longevity as a competitive fighter.

For the 2nd point, I don't think "because it's always been that way" is ever a valid reason for anything. There should always be some concrete reason to point to. "Because it's always been that way" is not an argument; it's a brush-off. If it's always been that way, then I need to know why. Maybe the reasons it was that way in the past no longer hold up when applied to a game with 2,592 MUs. All I'm asking for is a legitimate discussion.

To the pro-lock players, I hope you'll take just a sec to consider these arguments. If you still don't agree, that's fine, but please share your thoughts on why. If there's something I'm missing, what is it? If you're just a fan of counter-picking then it's just a fundamental difference of opinion and there's nothing left to debate. I'm in the process of reading through the 9 pages of discussion, but there's a lot of bile in this thread to go through. I know this is a hot-button issue, but I promise that if you tag me in a post with valid arguments I will absolutely hear you out; I will read every word and considering every point you make. Right now I think a lot of people are arguing without really knowing why, or knowing what the other side is taking issue with. Hopefully we can get this hashed out right. Feel free to PM me if you want to discuss the issue without feeding this thread.

 

[BoromiRofGeo]

Winner can change variation if loser changes character, W. picks variation before L. picks variation
this is the most logical to me.
i will push this kind of ruleset in my country.

 

[Pig Of The Hut]

Then what purpose do variations serve?

3 different forms of a character each having pros and cons that each can be used to get the job done yet u should pick the one that best fits u as a player that gives u the best chance to handle everything in the game.

 

[SaltShaker]

seems pretty cut and dry to me.

Winner can change variation if loser changes character, but winner must pick variation after loser picks character but before loser picks variation.

This. This! THIS! This 100x.

This should have been a 1 page thread. You can clearly see the difference between people who actually have fighting game knowledge on a broad spectrum and people who only know MK/NRS games only.

 

[Eddy Wang]

Winner can change variation if loser changes character, W. picks variation before L. picks variation
this is the most logical to me.
i will push this kind of ruleset in my country.

This is what Africa has agreed on too.

 

[Pig Of The Hut]

This is what Africa has agreed on too.

Well if the Angolans agreed on this then wow we are behind the times, we better hurry before we trolled

o u evil wang u