the "X" factor (MK2)

[Sub0's-Icy-Balls]

***this thread is about MK2, MK9 people please move along***

The character matchup guides have been helpful and insightful, but I feel like they are missing one important thing... (the "X" factor). Take the Mileena vs Reptile guide for example, I know it's a 9-1 matchup most of the time, but we should really be asking ourselves "how does reptile achieve that one win?"
I like to equate MK2 to chess (which I play A LOT of). In chess a low ranked player (reptile) is probably going to lose to a higher ranked player (mileena) but there is always a chance that the low ranked player just has the higher ranked players number that day and wipes the floor with him. It's all about reading your opponent and what they are doing that match, and I feel a player with expert knowledge of that is going to be able to swing that 9-1 match into a 5-5 or better match.
and I know MK2 is broken so this doesn't apply to say Liu Kang sitting in the corner against SUB, or similar scenarios that are impossible to overcome skill wise.
But with that being said, I would love to explore this more, even talk about specific people to better understand how they play. Mike Caldwell recently told me what gave his Lao the most trouble with SUB, and when I tried it I did do better. So there is definitely something to this!

 

[MKB]

Good points. Please also keep in mind that the default questions I pose in the matchup threads are merely there to stir conversation and get people thinking. You do not have to answer them if you wish and may instead pose your own questions (or post videos, strategies, etc.) As long as you are keeping the discussion focused on the two characters in question, you can say whatever you want!

 

[mortal_jason]

We can't give away ALL our strategies

I think it's about player levels.
To use MKAK's rating base, If two 2300 level players play Reptile vs Mileena, it's gonna be 9-1 for Mileena.
If a 2300 plays a 1600 that same match, it will probably be a 5-5 or better match for Reptile if the 2300 uses Reptile.
2300 vs 1300? Probably 10-0 for Reptile.

The "X" factor really is player skill. Everyone has their stronger and weaker fighters, so you have to break it down even further.
Someone like InsaneBoss is going to 10-0 just about everyone's Reptile with his Mileena.
But what would happen if he had to use Reptile vs someone's elite Mileena?

 

[Dyzvhtynzal]

The thing is Jason, we do give away all our strategies. That's the difference between a winner and one who has to reach in his/her pockets for more quarters. The better player recognizes how to exploit a style of play while the lesser opponent is content with using a system that doesn't work or won't for very long. Even I can defeat an elite player, but my percent chance of winning decreases with each match regardless of character selected. It's the reason I think tier is an illusion. What good is Milenna against Reptile if she becomes predictable? This is exactly what happens.

 

[Dyzvhtynzal]

In addition, I think the chess/MK2 comparison is a poor analogy. This is not a personal attack but merely an opinion, and I can be persuaded. Unless we are considering mirror matches, I see no resemblance. And even in a mirror match there might be moves one side can use that the other cannot. I've seen some prominent MK2 players make the suggestion that the two are similar, (seemingly indistinguishable) but...... to me.....it's like comparing pineapples to coconuts. Sure, you eat both of them, but that's where the similarity ends. Why chess? And though what I've written appears to be confrontational, I'm just looking for some understanding of the relationship. Cuz I don't see it.

 

[Dyzvhtynzal]

Apparently, we have some chess players here. This is good. Sometimes conversation can lead to discovery. Okay. I'll defend the proposition that chess equates to MK2 for purposes of entertainment and to possibly reinforce the belief. Attack at will.
If I had to make an argument........
1) As much as I hate to admit it, chess does involve anticipation and therefore prediction.
2) Though interaction is not turn based like chess, there is an element of action/reaction.
3) Both chess/MK2 allow mistakes, (sometimes a tremendous amount of mistakes) that may or may not be punished.

I suppose it ultimately depends on your perspective. You could say chess applies to everything or nothing if you wanted to and back it up quite easily. I just think a better analogy can be made.

 

[mortal_jason]

MK2 is like chess in some ways, and unlike it in others.

A good way to sum it up is that an unbalanced match like Mileena vs Reptile is like 2 chess players playing with 1 of the players starting without some of their pieces. An expert chess master could still beat a beginner chess player easily, even if the expert started without all his pieces. Just the same way that using Reptile wouldn't really be a big disadvantage vs a scrubby Mileena. But if you use the same analogy but with both players being expert level chess players, then the player with all pieces to begin, will almost always win. And so it is in MK2.

It's also like chess, because without a run button, it allows for smarter, calculated gameplay. Sure, some matches are lopsided. But there are so many great match ups in MK2 (Lao vs Kitana, Sub vs Scorp etc) where it certainly can be compared to maneuvering your chess pieces around.

Both players don't act simultaneously in chess, but there is the same element of prediction and anticipation going on. It just takes much faster reflexes in a video game like MK2. LOL isn't there a MK chess game in one of those embarrassing PS2 MK games?

 

[Dyzvhtynzal]

Lol, I have played chess for 20 years. You can take my front four pawns. Then I'll murder your King. What I'm saying is that lack of material can mean advantage.....development wise. Depends on pieces taken, sure. Here, have all my pawns. See what happens.

 

[mortal_jason]

Lol, I have played chess for 20 years. You can take my front four pawns. Then I'll murder your King. What I'm saying is that lack of material can mean advantage.....development wise. Depends on pieces taken, sure. Here, have all my pawns. See what happens.

Depends on the pieces yeah.

 

[mortal_jason]

I find that hard to believe. An expert chess player with two pawns, a king and a bishop is not beating a beginner who has all of their pieces. Also, you can't sit on a lead if you're winning. You are always forced to defend and attack. That's why the addition of the run button was needed, but then it skewed the game too far in favor of offense. You see, it all goes back to trades. Without trades and without the run button, 2d MK becomes too skewed in favor of defense (with the exception of the 3 top tier in MK 2). However, without trades, and with the run button the game becomes too skewed in favor of offense. There's no happy medium. 2d MK's crazy imbalance will never be fixed. I think it's just a disappointing reality of the game's fundamental design, unless they add trades (will never happen), or do something drastic with defensive tools (third strike style parrying?), or something else, but I'm way off topic.

If they allowed people who played MK2 a lot to balance it out, we could make a better version, so that every match was about as even as Kitana vs Lao.

The problem is not with it being 2D. It's just that when they made it, they didn't realize how broken some characters and moves would be. If they tweaked a few things for each character, it would be an even more incredible game.

 

[Dyzvhtynzal]

How can a game like this even be balanced unless everyone has identical movesets and same specials? What are the most balanced fighters? Name them. Are mirrors the true test of ability? If so, that's boring. Might as well play Karate Champ. The fact that there is imbalance is exciting. It's why people still play the game. It gives all players an opportunity to win. Think people are missing the purpose of the de$ign. It was intended to be fun for people of all skill levels. And it succeeds. Chaos will always be more interesting than order. Most of you meatballs just don't get it.

 

[mortal_jason]

How can a game like this even be balanced unless everyone has identical movesets and same specials? What are the most balanced fighters? Name them. Are mirrors the true test of ability? If so, that's boring. Might as well play Karate Champ. The fact that there is imbalance is exciting. It's why people still play the game. It gives all players an opportunity to win. Think people are missing the purpose of the de$ign. It was intended to be fun for people of all skill levels. And it succeeds. Chaos will always be more interesting than order. Most of you meatballs just don't get it.

Yeah I have always liked the different tiers. It makes getting a win over top tier with bottom tier fulfilling.
For those who would like a more fair fight all around though, a little balancing would go a long way.

I would say Raiden is the most balanced fighter. He has the moves that always keep you guessing, but he's not OP.
He can compete with top tier pretty well, but he's still low mid-tier.

The player who is more skilled with that particular fighter will usually win the mirror. I find mirrors always exciting, personally. They take away all talk of counterpicking and tier comparison.

The balancing thing has probably be talked to death already. But simply giving the ninjas better CQC, and removing 1 special move of each of the top tier, would balance it out a lot. Also, like MIKECALDWELL suggested, both ninjas should be able to slide underneath all projectiles. People always argue where Kitana, Lao, and Shang fit in the 4-6 spot. It would be nice to be able to argue more characters into those spots. That said, I love the game the way it is. It's just fun to think about a revision to make it more balanced sometimes.