Damn straight. I think NRG should come out with a stage that is tailored to tournament play, ie no interactives at all. This game should be based on skills on both players, not whether one of them has more access to the interatives than the other one.
They don't have to. An option to turn them off at stage selection exists already.
Well its only be a month & a half, so lets just either make the actual game play just like MK9, or make the rules of playing it at a tourney just like MK9.This is exactly how I feel, but didn't bother posting it. Probably would have been called an idiot for try to let the game breathe.
I do feel they should be tweaked, but if they're not (Like NRS decides not to tweak them to other players liking), are we going to start banning stages? I understand what happened at UFGT, but this seems so sudden. Hell, Aris (one of NRS past harshest critics) has been more accepting to how the game currently is (and how NRS made the game) compared to most on this forum. Just confused is all
What about input bug? We also need to rebalance, needs more 9-1 matchups.
*sigh* I've been to more tournaments than you have. Knowing the rules means knowing that everytime you sit down you may get a stage you don't like. It's the same in MK with drawing a Kabal on Rooftop Day or a similar situation in any other game. If you cannot handle this concept then yes you shouldn't play.
If the problem is your opponent using the interactibles then stop them from using them. It doesn't matter the size of the cannon if noone is there to pull the trigger.
How is it a huge advantage if both players have access to the same interactibles? It's all part of the strategy dood. Let's say You and I are playing Catwoman vs Bane. Now you know that I'm gonna want to use the interactibles to stay away from your command grabs and lure you in for bombs. What do you do? One possiblility is to run around tossing all the interactibles whether they hit me or not just to get rid of them or you could camp them so I'm afraid to use them for fear of getting nailed myself. Those are only two of the more obvious possilitites.That's not what I mean by losing the match before it starts. I don't mean literally losing before the match starts, because for one that's not even possible. What I mean by that is the opponent already, before the match starts, has a huge advantage based purely on luck if it's random stage or 50/50. And for some match-ups, the stage makes, for example, a 5-5 MU turn into a 7-3 or worse MU.
Again though, this isn't what the thread is aimed at. That is a ruling problem, and if the interactables are nerfed, it won't be nearly as big of a problem. Also, you need to check that attitude at the door, and remember who you're talking to.
Woah man, we don't want another Cyrax.
44% unblockable damage seems legit to me man, we should just level up.
While I feel the sentiment is too extreme, and I do enjoy interactables since they add another dimension to the game, I agree with the gist of what you're saying (though I'm more in line with Juggs about nerfing them, rather than banning them). Watch the match PL lost, or 16 Bit vs. Dizzy and notice how much they can add to the randomness of the game. They obviously favor power characters significantly too. On some stages like Metro, they're ridiculous, as it forces you essentially spend the entire match worrying about getting hit with one (especially if you're gadget character against a power char) instead of actually starting offense.
That's something match-up specific. The example he gave applies to all characters on that particular stage. Huge difference.
