A Poll and a Plea: Make Stance Switch Great for the First Time Ever

[Quan Chihuahua]

No meme sir, just somebody who uses the button. For the delay. And for a reason previously stated.

I did accidentally give some thought to the matter however. If the only reason you want to get rid of stance switch is because the button is being wasted on something then there could be tons of options other than some game changing mechanic.

Option one. A short hop.:
Instead of pressing up and doing a full jump you could grab stance switch and get a hop that goes up enough that you can avoid lows. But it isn't a full jump so you don't get an over head off of it. And you can be thrown out of the short hop. Adds something to mess around with. But ultimately doesn't change the game.

Option two. A different interactable button.:
Using the second interactable would do something different. For instance, instead of throwing something forward it could be thrown up diagonally. Ending up with situations where you have thrown something expecting a jump in and you will have caught your opponent out of the air. And as long as it doesn't juggle into a combo it wont be game destroying. Then in situations where you have used the edge of the stage to jump out of the corner, the second button will have no different effect. So it wont change the escape option, and your opponent can still read your escape and neutral jump punch you.

Option three. Another option.:
Insert different option here.

There are three fun alternatives. Wont change any games, wont break any games, can't be abused or under used anymore than the way they are used now. And it is just better because I said so.

I like your short hop suggestion but depending on how it's implemented it could change the game just as much as mine or moreso, especially if you could combo punish pokes with it. My idea is essentially a more difficult to execute version of SF3's high parry that could also add a hail marry defensive option against lame guaranteed chip out deaths, plus it would make advancing strings slightly more risky to use. All of these are good for the game and the super high skill, high risk involved would ensure that its effect on the overall meta of the game would be miniscule. Your ideas are fine too but why would they be better?

 

[Lycanthos]

I don't think you understand. What you're talking about is repurposing animations to do something that wouldn't make sense for them to do. Imagine that you repurposed universal sweeps to be overheads... that would look weird. For them to do what you're talking about, they would have to create a new animation that looks exactly like what it would be meant to do: Dodge. It would have to be a dodge or parry animation across all characters. Simply repurposing an already existing animation would be lazy and uninspired. It would cheapen what NRS's vision was for that particular mechanic. I don't want a cheap-looking animation. If they added that feature, I'd want them to put hard work into it, not simply add properties to something that already existed.

 

[Quan Chihuahua]

I don't think you understand. What you're talking about is repurposing animations to do something that wouldn't make sense for them to do. Imagine that you repurposed universal sweeps to be overheads... that would look weird. For them to do what you're talking about, they would have to create a new animation that looks exactly like what it would be meant to do: Dodge. It would have to be a dodge or parry animation across all characters. Simply repurposing an already existing animation would be lazy and uninspired. It would cheapen what NRS's vision was for that particular mechanic. I don't want a cheap-looking animation. If they added that feature, I'd want them to put hard work into it, not simply add properties to something that already existed.

Stance switch already looks like a dodge. Turning your body from one side to the other can be used to dodge attacks. A slight side step or body adjustment might accompany it in real life but stance switch conveys the idea just fine for a 2D fighter.

 

[24K]

I like your short hop suggestion but depending on how it's implemented it could change the game just as much as mine or moreso, especially if you could combo punish pokes with it. My idea is essentially a more difficult to execute version of SF3's high parry that could also add a hail marry defensive option against lame guaranteed chip out deaths, plus it would make advancing strings slightly more risky to use. All of these are good for the game and the super high skill, high risk involved would ensure that its effect on the overall meta of the game would be miniscule. Your ideas are fine too but why would they be better?

I definitely think it would be better. I suppose you would be able to punish low pokes with it, which would help the other complaint people have of to many characters getting full combos off of low poke special cancels. Though the gravity could just be higher and damage scaling could be higher. Or leave it all the same. There are ways to keep it in tune with the game.

The thing you are adding about it being more difficult is wrong though. A parry is a tap in time with the attack. Your stance switch idea would literally be the same thing. So with that. I vote short hop.

 

[Quan Chihuahua]

I definitely think it would be better. I suppose you would be able to punish low pokes with it, which would help the other complaint people have of to many characters getting full combos off of low poke special cancels. Though the gravity could just be higher and damage scaling could be higher. Or leave it all the same. There are ways to keep it in tune with the game.

The thing you are adding about it being more difficult is wrong though. A parry is a tap in time with the attack. Your stance switch idea would literally be the same thing. So with that. I vote short hop.

I explained why it would be more difficult, because SF3 parries had a 6-10 frame execution window, while a stance switch dodge would have to take active frames into account, so the window would usually be 3-5 frames large despite the 7 total invincibility frames, and could be smaller. Plus SF doesn't have strings so you usually only had to parry 1 normal to get a punish but in Injustice you'd often have to dodge through an entire string to get a punish and not get punished yourself.

And also, even if you like your idea better, it would have to use a totally different button and an additional animation because we know stance switch as an animation isn't going anywhere. So since we know stance switch is here to stay, the question is what properties should it have, not what can we replace it with. I didn't suggest this mechanic just because I thought it was a great idea but also because it's simple and has a practical chance of being added into future games, which I don't think your idea does.

 

[24K]

You can't use stance switches animation for what you are suggesting. It would look Goofy as hell. You mentioned the Daigo parry which wasn't just a normal. And having less than 6 frames or whatever would make it a guessing game since most people will say anything lower than that is not react-able too. So people would have to learn the rhythm of every single string in the game since they wouldn't be able to do it just on reaction.

A short hop would be universal to most of the cast. Females would have one animation made for them that they would all use. Males would have another. And tanks like Goro and FT would possibly have another. Chances are the system they use would allow them to animate one wire frame that would make all the necessary adjustments to the rest. Of course it would be the same for a new stance switch animation, but there are still issues. Like I said the current animation wouldn't work. You would look like a fool on screen. If they remade the animation it wouldn't need to be a stance switch any way, they could make a parry motion that would look more logical. But one animation wouldn't be OK. Because if you did a dodge or parry motion with your upper body or arms, while your opponent is doing something like a sweep, you will look like a fool. And vice versa for the a lower body animation during an over head.

But the animation isn't the issue. If they can animate the whole cast they can make provisions to animate something like this. The issue is purely game play. Its bad enough the newer players complain about barriers stopping them from getting into fighting games. Adding a falsely difficult move would piss them all right off. And in a popular title like Mortal Kombat that is a no no. And something that should be reserved for "side games" like anime fighters. Not to mention it would make MK something it isn't. Like removing the block button. MK has a block button, if they removed it then it wouldn't be MK. Same as adding in a parry. Where a short hop could be used by anybody starting out in the series or fighters as a whole. And it doesn't change the game. If somebody uses a normal jump in the corner to neutral overhead your only guaranteed options on the ground as the other character would be to upper cut if you want to challenge them or block. They would be jumping over your lows anyway. And more often than not they will jump over your mid if your reactions or reads are off. With a short hop they would get less damage, so it wouldn't always be the chosen option. And you would have the ability to grab.

Short hop adds something to the button. Instead of having stance switch just because they didn't have anything else to put on that button. It adds to the meta without taking away from the game. It gives the hopper more options. It would be easy to animate. Anybody would be able to use it. And it makes high end play a little more in-depth.

You would also need to look into things like, when can you parry. It wouldn't be fair to allow parry out of block. Since you could then block a string, expect the last hit and parry it perfectly. Since you would know exactly when it is coming thus making your parry impossible to miss. This is proven by us as players already being able to punish unsafe strings. Which is what a parry off of block would make every string. Even on a safe string. If you are now adding open frames where a parry is possible, the blocker would effectively be cancelling your active frames into his parry. Stopping you from getting block strings going.

Then if you allow the players to parry an entire string to allow them to attack back, it has the same effect of parry out of block making it impossible to set up frame traps. Of course this is only possible if there is enough open frames for you to be humanly capable of reacting.

The only logical way to add a parry into the game would be to have enough frames so a parry can be done on reaction by the majority of the population. Making it a lot easier than you are suggesting. And to allow it only on the first hit. Which would immediately cancel the opponents string, making you as the person doing the parry plus. So you can then effectively do a reversal. This would then raise the issue of whether or not the person who just got parried should be in parry block stun. Or if they can then cancel your first hit with their own parry. If they can't perform their own parry it makes the game a sit an wait game where the person who attacks first will get the damage, because there are so many frames for a parry to come out that it would be rare a parry wouldn't happen. So nobody would want to attack. The other option of allowing consecutive parries would mean the game would hit a stale mate as the players would just keep performing parry after parry. If there is no chip damage on a parry nobody would get a kill. And it would be a tied match when the timer counts down.

I know you said it would be hard. Because there would be a tight window. But it can't be so tight that it purely a guess if you want to parry the first hit. And no mater how tight it is, if you allow parry out of block it would always be achievable because you aren't instantly reacting to a hit, you have a whole string to sit and wait through. People punish with a space of one frame.

 

[Quan Chihuahua]

You can't use stance switches animation for what you are suggesting. It would look Goofy as hell. You mentioned the Daigo parry which wasn't just a normal. And having less than 6 frames or whatever would make it a guessing game since most people will say anything lower than that is not react-able too. So people would have to learn the rhythm of every single string in the game since they wouldn't be able to do it just on reaction.

A short hop would be universal to most of the cast. Females would have one animation made for them that they would all use. Males would have another. And tanks like Goro and FT would possibly have another. Chances are the system they use would allow them to animate one wire frame that would make all the necessary adjustments to the rest. Of course it would be the same for a new stance switch animation, but there are still issues. Like I said the current animation wouldn't work. You would look like a fool on screen. If they remade the animation it wouldn't need to be a stance switch any way, they could make a parry motion that would look more logical. But one animation wouldn't be OK. Because if you did a dodge or parry motion with your upper body or arms, while your opponent is doing something like a sweep, you will look like a fool. And vice versa for the a lower body animation during an over head.

But the animation isn't the issue. If they can animate the whole cast they can make provisions to animate something like this. The issue is purely game play. Its bad enough the newer players complain about barriers stopping them from getting into fighting games. Adding a falsely difficult move would piss them all right off. And in a popular title like Mortal Kombat that is a no no. And something that should be reserved for "side games" like anime fighters. Not to mention it would make MK something it isn't. Like removing the block button. MK has a block button, if they removed it then it wouldn't be MK. Same as adding in a parry. Where a short hop could be used by anybody starting out in the series or fighters as a whole. And it doesn't change the game. If somebody uses a normal jump in the corner to neutral overhead your only guaranteed options on the ground as the other character would be to upper cut if you want to challenge them or block. They would be jumping over your lows anyway. And more often than not they will jump over your mid if your reactions or reads are off. With a short hop they would get less damage, so it wouldn't always be the chosen option. And you would have the ability to grab.

Short hop adds something to the button. Instead of having stance switch just because they didn't have anything else to put on that button. It adds to the meta without taking away from the game. It gives the hopper more options. It would be easy to animate. Anybody would be able to use it. And it makes high end play a little more in-depth.

You would also need to look into things like, when can you parry. It wouldn't be fair to allow parry out of block. Since you could then block a string, expect the last hit and parry it perfectly. Since you would know exactly when it is coming thus making your parry impossible to miss. This is proven by us as players already being able to punish unsafe strings. Which is what a parry off of block would make every string. Even on a safe string. If you are now adding open frames where a parry is possible, the blocker would effectively be cancelling your active frames into his parry. Stopping you from getting block strings going.

Then if you allow the players to parry an entire string to allow them to attack back, it has the same effect of parry out of block making it impossible to set up frame traps. Of course this is only possible if there is enough open frames for you to be humanly capable of reacting.

The only logical way to add a parry into the game would be to have enough frames so a parry can be done on reaction by the majority of the population. Making it a lot easier than you are suggesting. And to allow it only on the first hit. Which would immediately cancel the opponents string, making you as the person doing the parry plus. So you can then effectively do a reversal. This would then raise the issue of whether or not the person who just got parried should be in parry block stun. Or if they can then cancel your first hit with their own parry. If they can't perform their own parry it makes the game a sit an wait game where the person who attacks first will get the damage, because there are so many frames for a parry to come out that it would be rare a parry wouldn't happen. So nobody would want to attack. The other option of allowing consecutive parries would mean the game would hit a stale mate as the players would just keep performing parry after parry. If there is no chip damage on a parry nobody would get a kill. And it would be a tied match when the timer counts down.

I know you said it would be hard. Because there would be a tight window. But it can't be so tight that it purely a guess if you want to parry the first hit. And no mater how tight it is, if you allow parry out of block it would always be achievable because you aren't instantly reacting to a hit, you have a whole string to sit and wait through. People punish with a space of one frame.

Stance switching out of block wouldn't be possible unless there's a gap, so I don't see how that's a problem. And parrying the first hit of a string should always be a guess unless it's slow because you can't react to a normal unless it's slower than 17 frames, and most aren't, so the size of an execution window doesn't change whether a move is reactable or not. If I can't see and react to a move then it doesn't matter if I have a 100 frame execution window, it's still a read to counter it. A smaller invincibility frame window would only make it a more difficult read, not a more difficult reaction.

As for stance switching not looking appropriate as a high/mid dodge I just disagree, stance switching looks very much like a dodge as it is in my opinion and would not look silly. It would only look silly if people would be doing it all match, but the risk factor ensures that would not be viable. Next, your argument about it being annoying for casuals would be fair if stance switching would be a common or even a semi-common maneuver, but it would be way too risky for that as I've explained. Stance switch even in competitive play would make zero difference in 90% of all matches, so how much less of a difference would it make for casual online play?

Regardless, by your logic we shouldn't have zoning either because it's already far more off putting to casuals than an extremely tight unsafe dodge mechanic would be, yet they still buy the games. It would make no significant difference to casuals, and NRS games with an invincible stance switch would still be NRS games, and they'd even still be NRS games with a parry too, because why wouldn't they be?

Lastly, let's hypothetically say I liked your short hop idea more than mine. Would I make a thread campaigning for it? No, because stance switch is likely never going away, and even if it did, the chance of it being replaced with such an abstract, little difference making mechanic would be extremely low. I made this thread because it doesn't require the devs to do anything but add a new property to an existing move, yet it would still largely benefit the game's competitive value and fun factor.

 

[24K]

Stance switching out of block wouldn't be possible unless there's a gap, so I don't see how that's a problem. And parrying the first hit of a string should always be a guess unless it's slow because you can't react to a normal unless it's slower than 17 frames, and most aren't, so the size of an execution window doesn't change whether a move is reactable or not. If I can't see and react to a move then it doesn't matter if I have a 100 frame execution window, it's still a read to counter it. A smaller invincibility frame window would only make it a more difficult read, not a more difficult reaction.

As for stance switching not looking appropriate as a high/mid dodge I just disagree, stance switching looks very much like a dodge as it is in my opinion and would not look silly. It would only look silly if people would be doing it all match, but the risk factor ensures that would not be viable. Next, your argument about it being annoying for casuals would be fair if stance switching would be a common or even a semi-common maneuver, but it would be way too risky for that as I've explained. Stance switch even in competitive play would make zero difference in 90% of all matches, so how much less of a difference would it make for casual online play?

Regardless, by your logic we shouldn't have zoning either because it's already far more off putting to casuals than an extremely tight unsafe dodge mechanic would be, yet they still buy the games. It would make no significant difference to casuals, and NRS games with an invincible stance switch would still be NRS games, and they'd even still be NRS games with a parry too, because why wouldn't they be?

Lastly, let's hypothetically say I liked your short hop idea more than mine. Would I make a thread campaigning for it? No, because stance switch is likely never going away, and even if it did, the chance of it being replaced with such an abstract, little difference making mechanic would be extremely low. I made this thread because it doesn't require the devs to do anything but add a new property to an existing move, yet it would still largely benefit the game's competitive value and fun factor.

Well if you allow a parry out of block through a gap in a string it will be used constantly in high level play. Especially if it isn't something that needs to be meter burned. Why would anybody waste their meter on burning a move through a gap when they could just parry their way through for free. And they will know when the gap will be there since they would have to have burned through it anyway. So they wont miss it.

You can react to almost all the normal's in the game. And adding open frames after the normal to allow you to get your parry in will make them more react-able. For example, if a move is 5 frames and you have a 5 frame window to parry, that becomes a 10 frame move. I just used those figures for my point. But what its clear enough. So a parry wont be hard.

Adding a universal parry to the game would make all the parry's that are in the game already useless, who would use a character specific parry when they can use the easy one trigger parry.

The animations in the game are a little exaggerated at times, to make it better to look at. But a punch looks like a punch. A kick looks like a kick. And turning around looks like turning around. You can't even say it looks like an abstract exaggerated parry or dodge. No real fighter moves like that. It is inefficient. Looks silly when thought of as a dodge or parry. And sticking with the WYSIWYG understanding of any game or table top, What You See Is What You Get. So the animation would have to be changed.

As for the casuals complaining. The general attitude they have is that they don't like execution barriers. I myself prefer to have a game with techniques and moves that I can't do. Makes me happy to keep trying. But as I found out in another post, not everybody sees it that way. So it will irritate a lot of people just because they can't do it. Even though we have discussed that it wouldn't be hard to do since it will work in situations where others are reacting and counter attacking any how.

And a parry should never be a guess. Guessing is not something players should be doing and encouraging it isn't a good thing. A parry should be done on reaction to make it fair. And if it can't be done on reaction in some very limited situations, it should be done on a read. So making it so hard that it has to become a guess wouldn't make it worth it. And how would you make it that tight anyway. By adding 3 frames for the gap. Fine at that level it may have to be a guess on the first hit. Which means nobody would bother to try and parry or dodge on the first hit since they can wait for the string to finish and get the damage, or wait for the gap and get the damage. They can skip the gap and wait for the end of the string because the universal parry system makes it so no string is safe. Or they do choose to fire it off in a gap. Regardless of when they do it, it will be super easy because they know exactly when the hit will come. And this is all going in circles now and leads right into......... Why would anybody meter burn through a gap. If a parry is easy, even at its hardest level, and free.

There is no reason for stance switch. I highly doubt it is in the game because it was meant to have one. It is there because they didn't have anything else to put on the button. If they were willing to change the properties of it, they would just be willing to change it to something else. Such as a short hop. And since this has become stale, because it has boiled down to me and you going back and forth over a move that looks silly and wont be hard to perform while taking so much away from the game. I propose a solution. Instead of a stance switch goofy dodge, and instead of a very cool short hop idea, what about a small sort of jump type motion.

But after reading your posts again I have noticed something very important. You do think a short hop is a better idea. And I agree with you, it is a better idea. And you are welcome to claim it as your own and make a poll for that. You will have my vote supporting your short hop idea. And probably @RagsTheGoat 's vote as well.

 

[Quan Chihuahua]

Well if you allow a parry out of block through a gap in a string it will be used constantly in high level play. Especially if it isn't something that needs to be meter burned. Why would anybody waste their meter on burning a move through a gap when they could just parry their way through for free. And they will know when the gap will be there since they would have to have burned through it anyway. So they wont miss it.

You can react to almost all the normal's in the game. And adding open frames after the normal to allow you to get your parry in will make them more react-able. For example, if a move is 5 frames and you have a 5 frame window to parry, that becomes a 10 frame move. I just used those figures for my point. But what its clear enough. So a parry wont be hard.

Adding a universal parry to the game would make all the parry's that are in the game already useless, who would use a character specific parry when they can use the easy one trigger parry.

The animations in the game are a little exaggerated at times, to make it better to look at. But a punch looks like a punch. A kick looks like a kick. And turning around looks like turning around. You can't even say it looks like an abstract exaggerated parry or dodge. No real fighter moves like that. It is inefficient. Looks silly when thought of as a dodge or parry. And sticking with the WYSIWYG understanding of any game or table top, What You See Is What You Get. So the animation would have to be changed.

As for the casuals complaining. The general attitude they have is that they don't like execution barriers. I myself prefer to have a game with techniques and moves that I can't do. Makes me happy to keep trying. But as I found out in another post, not everybody sees it that way. So it will irritate a lot of people just because they can't do it. Even though we have discussed that it wouldn't be hard to do since it will work in situations where others are reacting and counter attacking any how.

And a parry should never be a guess. Guessing is not something players should be doing and encouraging it isn't a good thing. A parry should be done on reaction to make it fair. And if it can't be done on reaction in some very limited situations, it should be done on a read. So making it so hard that it has to become a guess wouldn't make it worth it. And how would you make it that tight anyway. By adding 3 frames for the gap. Fine at that level it may have to be a guess on the first hit. Which means nobody would bother to try and parry or dodge on the first hit since they can wait for the string to finish and get the damage, or wait for the gap and get the damage. They can skip the gap and wait for the end of the string because the universal parry system makes it so no string is safe. Or they do choose to fire it off in a gap. Regardless of when they do it, it will be super easy because they know exactly when the hit will come. And this is all going in circles now and leads right into......... Why would anybody meter burn through a gap. If a parry is easy, even at its hardest level, and free.

There is no reason for stance switch. I highly doubt it is in the game because it was meant to have one. It is there because they didn't have anything else to put on the button. If they were willing to change the properties of it, they would just be willing to change it to something else. Such as a short hop. And since this has become stale, because it has boiled down to me and you going back and forth over a move that looks silly and wont be hard to perform while taking so much away from the game. I propose a solution. Instead of a stance switch goofy dodge, and instead of a very cool short hop idea, what about a small sort of jump type motion.

But after reading your posts again I have noticed something very important. You do think a short hop is a better idea. And I agree with you, it is a better idea. And you are welcome to claim it as your own and make a poll for that. You will have my vote supporting your short hop idea. And probably @RagsTheGoat 's vote as well.

Just because a string has a gap in it doesn't mean the opponent is going to frequently try to stance switch through it because the player on offense could simply stop the string, stagger it, or cancel it into a special to defend against it. Plus many strings branch off the same normal, like f23 and f2d1, so if f23 had a gap, just do f2d1 instead and punish me for trying to "parry" it. So there would be plenty of defense for it, plus the timing would still have to be near perfect so more often than not they'd just get launched for attempting it.

You can't possibly react to a 16 frame attack or slower, so no you can't even react to half the moves in NRS games. If a move starts up in 5 frames, that means you cannot possibly see and react to it. If you do something to counter it, it has to be a read. If I had a 5 frame window to stance switch through it, that would mean I would have to make a read that he's going to use this 5 frame move within 5 frames of me pressing L2. That's an impossible read and if the opponent decides to use any of his hundreds of other options at that single moment, the stance switcher gets punished, so no one would ever stance switch in the neutral with a read unless they were desperate.

And regular parries would still be useful because they are vastly less risky and have a much larger window to parry successfully, at least 20 frames larger. By the way, if what you're saying is true that you could react to most moves with stance switch, then you'd be seeing much easier to execute normal parries a TON more in competitive play, but you don't because most instances parries are used in are on reads.

Guessing is a skill in fighters because it's not pure guessing but logical prediction based on your opponent's patterns and impulses. Parrying in SF3 usually required guessing and parrying in NRS games almost always requires guessing too. Stance switching would be the same, just a harder guess. And I don't think you're getting how difficult it would be to stance switch through most attacks in the game. Even if I tried to stance switch through the 2nd hit of superman's f23 on reaction, I'd only have about a 4 frame window to get through all its active frames, so that's almost instantaneously pressing L2 the moment f23 would hit. If I'm a single frame late or early I get launched, so even then it would be extremely risky.

And I've explained the benefits this mechanic could bring so I do prefer it to yours because yours doesn't add nearly as much depth and potential hype to the game, no offense. As for the argument about casuals not liking it, just stop please, it's irrelevant and I've already explained it would make no difference to them and definitely wouldn't stop them from buying the game. I appreciate the discussion but it seems like you're just trying to pad your post with this.

 

[NeroOps]

They should keep it because I use it while I'm t-bagging/trolling it's kind of funny imo it's like the char is doing a little dance

 

[24K]

I use it to look at the lady bums.

I disagree that you prefer your idea. I already said you prefer mine. And I am fine with that. So you don't need to get aggressive with me. I didn't realize you meant that the parry would happen during the active frames of the move you are trying to parry. I thought you were adding extra frames after the active frames to allow a space for the parry. It would definitely happen extremely frequently in place of using armor through a gap. Yes people could stagger. But they can do that now as well. So every time a move is armored through, replace that with the parry. And it wont be hard to do because you know exactly where the gap is.

Regular parries that are in the game aren't used mid string. So they are done on read or just thrown out willy nilly to condition opponents. Or when they will be convertible into something.

The parry system will always be easy if the exact place in a string that it needs to be done in is known. You will have the entire beginning of the string to react to and wait for your space.

It wouldn't add hype. If we are lucky there may be a moment like Evo Moment # 37. Which happened once. There is no real hype situation that happened any other time.

Can't just stop. It may not stop casuals from buying the game. But it will make them moan more.

Maybe I cant react to them and I am reading like a mofo. But from what I have read and heard the average person reacts around 12-14 frames. Add some years of playing games such as fighters based heavily around frames. And that will drop. I don't know the frame data off the top of my head, but I recall Reptile having a fast over head. If I am blocking low and I see the over head I can react. Pretty much the same with all over heads bar a few with animations I don't react well to. Granted it is just letting go of down. But grabbing stance switch would be just as easy. Except, you know, a funny animation.

Blah Blah Blah to anything else I missed. Repeat circle argument. Blah Blah Blah.
Just stick with that slick short hop idea you had.

 

[Quan Chihuahua]

I use it to look at the lady bums.

I disagree that you prefer your idea. I already said you prefer mine. And I am fine with that. So you don't need to get aggressive with me. I didn't realize you meant that the parry would happen during the active frames of the move you are trying to parry. I thought you were adding extra frames after the active frames to allow a space for the parry. It would definitely happen extremely frequently in place of using armor through a gap. Yes people could stagger. But they can do that now as well. So every time a move is armored through, replace that with the parry. And it wont be hard to do because you know exactly where the gap is.

Regular parries that are in the game aren't used mid string. So they are done on read or just thrown out willy nilly to condition opponents. Or when they will be convertible into something.

The parry system will always be easy if the exact place in a string that it needs to be done in is known. You will have the entire beginning of the string to react to and wait for your space.

It wouldn't add hype. If we are lucky there may be a moment like Evo Moment # 37. Which happened once. There is no real hype situation that happened any other time.

Can't just stop. It may not stop casuals from buying the game. But it will make them moan more.

Maybe I cant react to them and I am reading like a mofo. But from what I have read and heard the average person reacts around 12-14 frames. Add some years of playing games such as fighters based heavily around frames. And that will drop. I don't know the frame data off the top of my head, but I recall Reptile having a fast over head. If I am blocking low and I see the over head I can react. Pretty much the same with all over heads bar a few with animations I don't react well to. Granted it is just letting go of down. But grabbing stance switch would be just as easy. Except, you know, a funny animation.

Blah Blah Blah to anything else I missed. Repeat circle argument. Blah Blah Blah.
Just stick with that slick short hop idea you had.

I've read anything faster than 17 frames, and that's being generous, is practically impossible to react to. I also remember reading a thread on here where they were talking about a reaction time test online that sonicfox took and his fastest reaction time was 1/19th of a second, the equivalent of reacting to a 19 frame move. Aside from that the only real thing we disagree on now is the difficulty of hitting a 3-5 frame execution window on reaction, and it's just speculation without being able to lab it anyways so yeah. You've convinced me of 2 things though, 1. That stance switch should only have 5 or 6 invincibility frames on start up instead of 6-8, and B. That your short hop idea is in fact better than mine. Your arguments R just 2 persuasive 4 me. Now you just make the campaign thread for it and we'll compare your user feedback to mine.

 

[24K]

17 frames is very slow. 19/100ths of 100 frames would be 19 frames. 1/19th of 60 frames is like 3 or 4 frames 60 divided by 19. And what you test on makes a big difference. Tests where red changes to green I am slower than blue changing to yellow. Tests where a line is staying still then starts to wriggle I can react to faster. Using my work laptop with a stiffer button means my reaction times are skewed as it takes more effort to press the button than it does when I use my 360 remote on my PC at home. Though I do think 3-4 frame reaction is a bit exaggerated even for the Fox.

Thanks. I appreciate the compliment.

I won't make a poll for a short hop. Way to insecure to see what people would think. (Insert blushing face). Plus I would probably cheat.