Should Last Breath and Avoid Chip Death be revised?

[Eldriken]

Where are any of you getting the idea that I want chip finishes removed? That's not what I'm saying at all. Read the posts again.

 

[Afumba]

First of i think chip should kill, so should DoT for that matter. People just need to get over it.

About the last breath, i ageee that it doesnt do much against strings but i dont think this game needs more/better comeback mechanics.

If it is changed like you stated above then it should take 1 defensive bar for 1hit or 1 of each bars if its a string/combo with 3+ hits.
Make the mechanic be usable even if the bars arent full. On the next round offensive bars lost come back with the same amout of meter they had when they got removed. Defensive start with 50% of what they had and slow recovery.

 

[Eldriken]

First of i think chip should kill, so should DoT for that matter. People just need to get over it.

About the last breath, i ageee that it doesnt do much against strings but i dont think this game needs more/better comeback mechanics.

If it is changed like you stated above then it should take 1 defensive bar for 1hit or 1 of each bars if its a string/combo with 3+ hits.
Make the mechanic be usable even if the bars arent full. On the next round offensive bars lost come back with the same amout of meter they had when they got removed. Defensive start with 50% of what they had and slow recovery.

Again, I ask: where did I say to remove chip kills? I never did. I didn't even hint at it. You would still lose all the same if you don't have the defensive bars.

 

[trufenix]

Why not just say get rid of chip kills, that's what you want.

 

[trufenix]

Again, I ask: where did I say to remove chip kills? I never did. I didn't even hint at it. You would still lose all the same if you don't have the defensive bars.

Okay, but if you don't, you've literally just reduced the match into a turtle fest. At low health I will just back up into the corner wait for you to do anything, block and punish. That's the end of every match in your adjusted universe.

 

[zerosebaz]

No way. Last breath is already a good compromise between the people who hate chip death and the ones that love it. The only change I would accept would be making it so your fb attack doesn't take the other defense bar when you are on last breath, so that you may do it twice. But honestly, I would prefer if they left it as it is.

 

[Eldriken]

Okay, but if you don't, you've literally just reduced the match into a turtle fest. At low health I will just back up into the corner wait for you to do anything, block and punish. That's the end of every match in your adjusted universe.

Okay, that's fine. But what if the character is Erron Black and he does his mid shots? You still lose. A lot of good walking back did you, huh? He uses his projectiles in a way that you block them three times and you've lost.

This same thing can be applied to block strings. Do you really think just walking back against most characters in this game is gonna save you from blocking at least 3 attacks if you're waiting for them to do something, unsafe or not?

I don't feel it works like that, especially if they have a substantial life lead and/or toolkit.

It wouldn't turn into a turtle fest at all in most cases.

 

[grandabx]

The game needs REAL solution to keep chip honest, otherwise don't call it a game based around neutral. Last breath and flawless block aren't it. I'll debate this with anyone, NRS staff is welcome as well.

How corny of a win is sweep into DOT? Neutral is about back and forth counter-play. Not B.S. with no competitive value.

Punishing players for doing their job when attacked....

SMDH

 

[wsj515]

As a Black Adam player who will defend orbs killing to this day, I think the mechanic should stay as is, but flawless block should totally nullify chip when on last breath. Could create some awesome Daigo moments.

 

[Afumba]

Again, I ask: where did I say to remove chip kills? I never did. I didn't even hint at it. You would still lose all the same if you don't have the defensive bars.

Sry if you took this personally. Maybe i should have made it more clear... i didnt mean you by this, it was more of a general statement addressed to people who ask for the removal of chip/DoT kill.

Your idea is still too comeback friendly/in favor of the person utilizing it thats why i made some adjustments with which i would vote "yes". The way you suggest it its a clear "no".

 

[Eldriken]

Sry if you took this personally. Maybe i should have made it more clear... i didnt mean you by this, it was more of a general statement addressed to people who ask for the removal of chip/DoT kill.

Your idea is still too comeback friendly/in favor of the person utilizing it thats why i made some adjustments with which i would vote "yes". The way you suggest it its a clear "no".

How is it too comeback friendly? Look at how the game is played in most cases. Look at what characters can do.

If your opponent has 50% health and full bars while you're at 1% and full bars, do you really think you're guaranteed a comeback? What if it's Geras? Sonya? Skarlet? Erron? Jax? Almost anyone?

Some can lame you out from afar and others can start their offense rather easily. All they have to do is make you block three different times and you're toast.

They don't -have- to do a blockstring or multi-hitting special move if they choose.

Geras does his bodysplash (block number 1 and defensive bar number 1), he then d1s you (block number 2 and defensive bar number 2). You're now on your absolute last leg and none of your defensive bar has or is close to being full. Anything will kill you.

It can still function all the same. It would just be player dependent on how they go about it.

 

[grandabx]

As a Black Adam player who will defend orbs killing to this day, I think the mechanic should stay as is, but flawless block should totally nullify chip when on last breath. Could create some awesome Daigo moments.

But Flawless Block is nothing like a parry in Street Fighter. Street Fighter doesn't have normal attacks that chip. SFV has gray life (recoverable life) but it can't kill on it's own. Street Fighter doesn't have throw-breaks that chip or DOT that kills. In MK, Flawless Blocking through reactionary skill has the odds highly against the defending players (for doing their job of defending in the first place). SFV has already solved it's issue with chip. It happens like normal, but a chip-kill can only happen through a super attack. The same thing as Injustice. How the hell did MK go backwards or is it a case of being different for the sake of being different?

 

[M2Dave]

Hm imo Fatal Blows are a more important Problem they should look into first (the fact that there is such a huge difference between Fatal Blow Range/Startup and that they are armored so you kinda have to play super passiv against it).
Dont think the point of Last Breath is to survive entire multi hitting strings (attacks) but to give some RARE Comeback moments while FB happen every game.

Well-said.

You cannot have an honest discussion about a mechanic that promotes a comeback and exclude fatal blows from the conversation. They are the elephant in the room and must be addressed first before you contemplate altering the last breath system, which I would personally leave untouched.

Fatal blows do 30%+ of damage that cannot be broken away, can be reused until they successfully connect, and are the farthest ranged attack for most characters. They have adequate benefits and do not need the armor on start up, which is counterproductive to the heavy footsies meta of the game. They should serve to enhance combos and whiff punish, not to play pre-patch Mortal Kombat X.

 

[Eldriken]

This isn't about Fatal Blows, guys. I'm not discussing the overall balance of the game, just one particular mechanic within the game.

Fatal Blows need to be adjusted, but this isn't about what needs to be changed first. It's just general discussion about one specific mechanic.

 

[Vslayer]

I agree, we talked about it over the mic and I feel like what @Eldriken explained made a lot of sense. It should last for the whole string. And honestly, if your opponent turtles or blocks you can either back up and let them whiff since they're gonna be looking get a big combo in for the comeback, or just got for a grab. Blocking may leave you vulnerable for a D2, but honestly, when it's down to the wire not many players have the reaction to let go of block.

 

[grandabx]

First of i think chip should kill, so should DoT for that matter. People just need to get over it.

About the last breath, i ageee that it doesnt do much against strings but i dont think this game needs more/better comeback mechanics.

If it is changed like you stated above then it should take 1 defensive bar for 1hit or 1 of each bars if its a string/combo with 3+ hits.
Make the mechanic be usable even if the bars arent full. On the next round offensive bars lost come back with the same amout of meter they had when they got removed. Defensive start with 50% of what they had and slow recovery.

Chip negation isn't a comeback mechanic. Chip-kill without a way to keep it skilled/honest, it's an exploit. I'm not asking for the removal of chip. I'm asking for tools to force a player to earn the very last bit of damage.

Say both players are at 1% health. Forcing a player to block and lose because of it isn't skill. Opening a player up and cleanly taking them down to 0 is a example of winning neutral.

MK right now with 1% health = blocking with your face.

Chip and DOT should take the opponent down to 1%, where the player now finishes the job. If anything, chip-kill and DOT with no countermeasures is casual. Who can't win in that situation/fashion?

 

[Afumba]

How is it too comeback friendly? Look at how the game is played in most cases. Look at what characters can do.

If your opponent has 50% health and full bars while you're at 1% and full bars, do you really think you're guaranteed a comeback? What if it's Geras? Sonya? Skarlet? Erron? Jax? Almost anyone?

Some can lame you out from afar and others can start their offense rather easily. All they have to do is make you block three different times and you're toast.

They don't -have- to do a blockstring or multi-hitting special move if they choose.

Geras does his bodysplash (block number 1 and defensive bar number 1), he then d1s you (block number 2 and defensive bar number 2). You're now on your absolute last leg and none of your defensive bar has or is close to being full. Anything will kill you.

It can still function all the same. It would just be player dependent on how they go about it.

I could make a counter example using yours... What if i block my opponents string, basically costing me nothing as at that point def meter is useless, manage to open him up and cuz i am Baraka, Sonya etc i will kill him instantly. So instead of me being dead i blocked his pressure for free and won.

You also missed my point and i never said anything about easy comback but on last breath against an opponent with 50-90% life your comeback chances should be abysmal. And with comeback friendly i meant that it raises his comeback chances basically for free. How is your mechanic not in favor of the person at last breath? Instead of dying he is alive, doesnt get more in favor than that.

In a game were chip is allowed to kill its bs to have a free superblock mechanic while at last breath. If you want to change it then it has to have a serious cost. Its not a cost being at last breath but the merit of the player who put you there, so why should this player be allowed to have a mechanic this strong without drawback. So i am not against a change but make it have a true cost so there has to be a choice. Just losing a defensive bar that most cant use anyway at this point is not enough. Honestly speaking its not even enough for how it works right now in lots of circumstances given that you get the full bars back next round.

So my question is why do you want to give the player about to lose an even better mechanic without any drawback or cost whatsoever? And as you didnt even address my proposal i have to assume that that is what you want and in my opinion the last breath person should only get a mechanic that raises his comeback chances if he is willing to give up something in return. At the end its his fault why he is in that position. Everything else is just unfair for the person who put you in last breath.

 

[Eddy Wang]

Flawless block at chip kill area is weaker than chip avoided, so what its the point of flawless block when you are about to die if it kills your entire defensive bar?

 

[M2Dave]

This isn't about Fatal Blows, guys. I'm not discussing the overall balance of the game, just one particular mechanic within the game.

Fatal Blows need to be adjusted, but this isn't about what needs to be changed first. It's just general discussion about one specific mechanic.

Last breath and fatal blows are related mechanics because both encourage comebacks. You would like people to "stagger the string and then start pressuring again" to finish each other off, which would only create more opportunities to get hit by random fatal blows. In this hypothetical situation, I would not be staggering anything. Instead, I am turtling and playing defensively considering that any button I tap could get me killed.

Your idea is fine. Just not in conjunction with the current functionality of fatal blows.

 

[Eldriken]

Last breath and fatal blows are related mechanics because both encourage comebacks. You would like people to "stagger the string and then start pressuring again" to finish each other off, which would only create more opportunities to get hit by random fatal blows. In this hypothetical situation, I would not be staggering anything. Instead, I am turtling and playing defensively considering that any button I tap could get me killed.

Your idea is fine. Just not in conjunction with the current functionality of fatal blows.

Okay. I see your point and you're 100% right. I honestly didn't think of that. Thanks for pointing it out.

 

[Afumba]

Chip negation isn't a comeback mechanic. Chip-kill without a way to keep it skilled/honest, it's an exploit. I'm not asking for the removal of chip. I'm asking for tools to force a player to earn the very last bit of damage.

Say both players are at 1% health. Forcing a player to block and lose because of it isn't skill. Opening a player up and cleanly taking them down to 0 is a example of winning neutral.

MK right now with 1% health = blocking with your face.

Chip and DOT should take the opponent down to 1%, where the player now finishes the job. If anything, chip-kill and DOT with no countermeasures is casual. Who can't win in that situation/fashion?

Actually it is in a game were chip is allowed to kill as it raises your chances of not dying/winning so it makes a comeback more likely. We can argue over how to name it but it doesnt change what it does.

I agree that it doesnt take much skill but it also doesnt take much skill to steal a win with an FB but we have that too.

If you want to remove chipkill= thats fine. But if you allow it then its part of the gameplay and if you want to have a mechanic that mitigates it you need to make it have a drawback that fits the benefit. Otherwise whats the point?

Earn= this is a fantasy story people tell themselves. A person chipping you to death doesnt have to earn anything. He already earned the right to chip you dead as he outplayed you by putting you at chipdeath range first. So in my oppinion and by all logic he already earned everything he has access to, its your fault for being at chipdeath. So you can like chipkill or not but "earn" has nothing to do with it.

Completely disagree with DoT damage. It should kill. Damage of those skills is balanced with DoT in mind, not allowing DoT kills makes such moves inferior in these situations. If we are at 15% hp, your move does 15 raw = i die. Mine does 10% + 5% DoT = why shouldnt you die?

Your 1%/1% example is also flawed. Lets say we remove chipkill completely and using your example what do we do about characters that are better at opening people up compared to some who maybe relied on chipkills in certain situation? How do characters with unsafe high/low fare against characters with safe high/low? Slower characters against too fast characters? Etcetc Not hard to see who comes mostly out on top in your 1%/1% scenario.

 

[wsj515]

But Flawless Block is nothing like a parry in Street Fighter. Street Fighter doesn't have normal attacks that chip. SFV has gray life (recoverable life) but it can't kill on it's own. Street Fighter doesn't have throw-breaks that chip or DOT that kills. In MK, Flawless Blocking through reactionary skill has the odds highly against the defending players (for doing their job of defending in the first place). SFV has already solved it's issue with chip. It happens like normal, but a chip-kill can only happen through a super attack. The same thing as Injustice. How the hell did MK go backwards or is it a case of being different for the sake of being different?

You seem to be against chip killing, that's never going to change - so why would you be against a skill based way to stop being chipped out? Whether or not flawless block functions like it does in SF is irrelevant.

 

[LawAbidingCitizen]

How is it too comeback friendly?

I feel Last Breath is already incredibly strong as is. The bars come back instantly after round regardless of victor.
If you can put in the work and make the right reads you can make a comeback with Chip Avoided and Last Breaths help. Being able to block pokes and projectiles to save yourself and make a comeback is extremely strong.
Personally I liked chip death and felt the player who wins the neutral and took thier life down to 1% deserves the win long before the 2 additional chances. I've accepted the mechanic now my only issue is you get bars back instantly next round.
Back on topic I feel it could he very strong to be able to avoid chip with Flawless Block but I'm not completely opposed to the idea but how would it work with it only giving 70% reduction currently when Flawless Blocking.

Question:
Are you asking for Flawless Block and Last Breath to stop damage from combo strings even if its 3 hits? If so that would be a total of 6 hits avoided plus how many times you can block within 3 frames after?
Are you suggesting FB avoids all damage at the end of the round after Last Breath? If so I think that's far to strong. Those mechanics cost a defensive bar for a reason and rightfully so, they can help a player steal the match from the opponent that played better and having free chip avoided from FB seems to easy to me.
Sorry if I misunderstood, that's why I'm asking for clarity.

 

[Eldriken]

I never mentioned Flawless Blocking being a part of it. I only likened my idea to how it would work.

If you Flawless Block the first hit of the string, any successive hits from that string get treated as being blocked as such, but only in chip damage mitigation.

All I'm saying is that a defensive bar saves you from an entire blockstring. Chip kills are still entirely possible. If they block with no defensive bar, they're done.

 

[LawAbidingCitizen]

I never mentioned Flawless Blocking being a part of it. I only likened my idea to how it would work.

If you Flawless Block the first hit of the string, any successive hits from that string get treated as being blocked as such, but only in chip damage mitigation.

All I'm saying is that a defensive bar saves you from an entire blockstring. Chip kills are still entirely possible. If they block with no defensive bar, they're done.

So only if its flawless blocked on first hit it blocks all three hits with Chip Avoided and Last Breath?