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

[RoboCop]

First post is being updated with Upcoming tournaments and which tournaments are running which rules. If you know the rules being run at a tournament please let me know.

Maybe it should be updated with the major points being made by both sides, along with their respective refutations. It's gotten a bit better in the last page or two, but it's only a matter of time before we start seeing the same old points being made, or the empty "IT SHOULD BE THIS WAY /CLOSED!!!".

 

[Desperdicio]

Seriously this is easily the best option. What is the point of variations if the rules end up being "absolute variation lock"?? Might as well not have them at all.

I already answered this on my comment. You can use different variations; what we suggest that you don't do is change variation after you win. What you're saying makes as much sense as saying "what's the use in having over twenty characters if winner is character locked?" on MK9. It isn't a valid argument, since nobody's saying that the variations aren't going to be used and well exploited.

Now to actually address this post.


It's not stupid, it's different.

Okay.

Yep.

Yep.

How? How is that stupid? "I know he can change variation now so I need to pick a character that can hold their own against all three".

They still gain the advantage because they still get the final pick in the counter picking. They still have final say. It's still up to them to pick a character that won't get bodied by any variation of the winner's character and then pick a variation that does well against the variation the winner picked. This is not stupid.

No, they don't get the advantage. The advantage is knowing what you're up against. Not just the moveset, but how your opponent plays it. If the opponent changes variation, the loser is up against something unknown, therefore as likely to lose as he was in the first round. That way, you're not giving him the advantage. If you lock the winner on his variation: should he win again, he's the real winner. If he loses, he gets exactly the same advantage as the loser had on the second round. I think this is the most logical thing to do if you want to remain loyal to the rules you had on MK9 tournaments. Different variations are like different characters in terms of gameplay.

Loser should get a free variation change. If they want a full character change then the winner gets a variation change.
This method rewards character loyalists and makes counter picking a less powerful option.

Variation lock rewards counter pickers.
The results would be (as a stated earlier) learning a main's best variation and a secondary's best variation to deal with counter pickers.

It seems like NRS added variations as a way to reward character loyalists. This system would be a way to carry that over to the competitive world.

In the end it will come down to a couple things.
1. Do you want to reward character loyalists or counter pickers?
2. Does your character only have one or two variations that you like? Meaning you don't want to be forced to learn all three.
3. Does the arguments of those people FOR variation change get heard by the right people before the status quo takes over due to lack of action.

We all know everyone on this site is going to play this game no matter what the rules. It just doesn't make sense that we can't change the rules to cater to way the the develops envisioned it.

Don't talk in the name of NRS and what the game is supposedly intended for. That's your interpretation: it isn't a valid argument.

To me this is like allowing the loser of Injustice to pick a new character and pick the stage they want. It's just double counter picking the winner.

There are different versions of each character that, in terms of gameplay, are the same as different characters. The point in having character locked on MK9 wasn't that the winner remained loyal to his character.

 

[Compbros]

If only ONE character in the entire game has variations that are significantly different from one another, that's all you need to say "hey, we need to run character and variation lock". But there isn't only one, we've already seen that with multiple characters. Giving a character a teleport when that character doesn't have one in other variations MASSIVELY changes how that character is played.

You guys are looking at like this: Takeda = Variation 1, Variation 2, Variation 3.
When you need to look at it like this: Takeda V1, Takeda V2, Takeda V3.

You will never be able to convince me that giving a teleport to a character doesn't make them an entirely different character. It's one move, sure, but so what? What defines an "entirely different character" isn't dependent upon HOW MANY differentiating factors there are, but the QUALITY of those factors. If this is true for even one character, the locked rule is warranted and needs to be enforced.

No, it's not. I'm not saying that, several people in this thread aren't saying that, the MB/AH community didn't say that, there needs to be discussion on this, not "oh hey, this one person changes quite a bit, lock every character". We should be trying out different systems to find what works best for the game and discussing it now so we can test them in the months to follow is the way to go. Even if it's full luck for majors and variation unlock for locals, we need to see both ways at play instead of just dismissing variation unlock is ridiculous or stupid.

 

[Juggs]

No, it's not. I'm not saying that, several people in this thread aren't saying that, the MB/AH community didn't say that

Didn't say what? Not really following here.

there needs to be discussion on this, not "oh hey, this one person changes quite a bit, lock every character".

Specifically, what is even wrong with that line of reasoning? Even when you simplify it to that level, it's still a completely reasonable thing to say.

 

[Compbros]

No, they don't get the advantage. The advantage is knowing what you're up against. Not just the moveset, but how your opponent plays it. If the opponent changes variation, the loser is up against something unknown, therefore as likely to lose as he was in the first round. That way, you're not giving him the advantage. If you lock the winner on his variation: should he win again, he's the real winner. If he loses, he gets exactly the same advantage as the loser had on the second round. I think this is the most logical thing to do if you want to remain loyal to the rules you had on MK9 tournaments. Different variations are like different characters in terms of gameplay.





There are different versions of each character that, in terms of gameplay, are the same as different characters. The point in having character locked on MK9 wasn't that the winner remained loyal to his character.

You still know what you're up against. Even if your opponent is locked they could switch things up, that's how people get hit with mixups and punished and the like, because they expect something and the opponent does something else. You're expecting flow charty things out of the player such as "he plays aggressive so I need to be defensive" but what happens if they suddenly start zoning/counter-zoning? Just because your opponent sticks with the same thing doesn't mean the next round will be played the same especially if you're picking something different, they can't be a Batman player and play Bane the same as Sinestro. Why remain loyal to MK9 rulesets when this system wasn't in place for MK9? The games where a system like this is in place allow a switch.


Characters have universal normals, strings, specials, what have you and sometimes they'll get new normals and strings with a variation. I just don't see it as a different character as much as the same character with 2 things taken away while something else is added.

 

[Compbros]

Didn't say what? Not really following here.



Specifically, what is even wrong with that line of reasoning? Even when you simplify it to that level, it's still a completely reasonable thing to say.

You were saying that if one character is changed significantly and I'm saying not that's not all that's needed and several people in this thread/other communites don't believe that's all that's needed.

It's not wrong, it's also not right though. I don't think something that's opinion based like this can be wrong or right and it's absolutely reasonable, I just don't agree. It's also reasonable to look at a variation unlock for characters as it's worked in other communities for years just like a character lock has worked for the average FG system for years.

 

[Alright RyRy]

How about this rule.

Just like Pokemon VGC. (You register with a team and you are stuck with them the whole tournament.)

So in MKX you register with 3 Characters / Variations and you are still with just those 3.

 

[SaltShaker]

The winner should not be able to counter-pick the loser.

Just imagine being in the seat when your deciding to "counterpick" your opponent.

He plays with Fisticuffs Johnny C You Picked Hellfire Scorpion

You go back the to the character selection screen, thinking "Ok I am going to switch characters but I also know that he has the option to counter-pick my counter-pick."

LMAO!!! Really? Are you serious??? No one is saying this.


It's astonishing that after all this time people are so stuck in their ways that they still aren't even understanding the argument enough to know what they disagree with.

 

[Compbros]

Maybe it should be updated with the major points being made by both sides, along with their respective refutations. It's gotten a bit better in the last page or two, but it's only a matter of time before we start seeing the same old points being made, or the empty "IT SHOULD BE THIS WAY /CLOSED!!!".

20 pages of gathering arguments and counter-arguments? No thanks. The last few pages maybe.

 

[Alright RyRy]

LMAO!!! Really? Are you serious??? No one is saying this.


It's astonishing that after all this time people are so stuck in their ways that they still aren't even understanding the argument enough to know what they disagree with.

Explain to me what this argument is about then.

If the winner gets to choose a different variation before the loser picks theirs not a counterpick?

 

[RoboCop]

Pff, maybe I can do it tonight or tomorrow. Just make a 2-column Word doc for each side, complete with arguments and counterarguments. I'm positive I can condense this entire thread down to a single page of viable information. Then you can just post a dropbox link to the doc or something. Though I doubt it will do any good.

 

[SaltShaker]

I already answered this on my comment. You can use different variations; what we suggest that you don't do is change variation after you win. What you're saying makes as much sense as saying "what's the use in having over twenty characters if winner is character locked?" on MK9. It isn't a valid argument, since nobody's saying that the variations aren't going to be used and well exploited.

So I don't follow. Are you saying that it will be less exploited when people are locked into facing 89 possible variations?

The whole purpose of the argument is for balancing sake, while trying to show people that counter picking will still be a very strong tool.

 

[Compbros]

Pff, maybe I can do it tonight or tomorrow. Just make a 2-column Word doc for each side, complete with arguments and counterarguments. I'm positive I can condense this entire thread down to a single page of viable information. Then you can just post a dropbox link to the doc or something. Though I doubt it will do any good.

Works for me.

 

[RoboCop]

Explain to me what this argument is about then.

If the winner gets to choose a different variation before the loser picks theirs not a counterpick?

Right. The winner has to pick first. That literally makes it impossible to counter pick, since the loser hasn't chosen a character for the winner to counter-pick.

 

[Desperdicio]

If only ONE character in the entire game has variations that are significantly different from one another, that's all you need to say "hey, we need to run character and variation lock". But there isn't only one, we've already seen that with multiple characters. Giving a character a teleport when that character doesn't have one in other variations MASSIVELY changes how that character is played.

You guys are looking at like this: Takeda = Variation 1, Variation 2, Variation 3.
When you need to look at it like this: Takeda V1, Takeda V2, Takeda V3.

You will never be able to convince me that giving a teleport to a character doesn't make them an entirely different character. It's one move, sure, but so what? What defines an "entirely different character" isn't dependent upon HOW MANY differentiating factors there are, but the QUALITY of those factors. If this is true for even one character, the locked rule is warranted and needs to be enforced.

Exactly.

You still know what you're up against. Even if your opponent is locked they could switch things up, that's how people get hit with mixups and punished and the like, because they expect something and the opponent does something else. You're expecting flow charty things out of the player such as "he plays aggressive so I need to be defensive" but what happens if they suddenly start zoning/counter-zoning? Just because your opponent sticks with the same thing doesn't mean the next round will be played the same especially if you're picking something different, they can't be a Batman player and player Bane the same as Sinestro. Why remain loyal to MK9 rulesets when this system wasn't in place for MK9? The games where a system like this is in place allow a switch.


Characters have universal normals, strings, specials, what have you and sometimes they'll get new normals and strings with a variation. I just don't see it as a different character as much as the same character with 2 things taken away while something else is added.

You're mixing two different things here: 1) Switching strategy. 2) Switching variation / character.
The former relies on skill. It's against chance, so it's a fair way to determine the winner. The latter adds to the element of chance in the game, therefore going against competitive play, unless, like I said before, you want to evaluate the capacity of the players to pick character, which, in my opinion, is not what a fighting game should be about.

 

[Shark Tank]

Explain to me what this argument is about then.

If the winner gets to choose a different variation before the loser picks theirs not a counterpick?

Winner picks variation first is the ruleset being proposed. If you CP someone smartly it's likely it'll be a case where losers new character's varations either beats or goes even with winners character's variation at worst. Winner may have a chance to mitigate how bad his next matchup from a 9-1 to like a 6-4. I mean this is all hypothetical and a case by case basis. My thing is I just don't see a scenario where Winner getting counterpicked in variation unlock will be worse than variation lock. At worst variation unlock doesn't mitigate anything, at best it reduces the amount of really bad matchups they have to play whereas in variation lock worst case scenario you win, your fucked next game, then the opponent is now fucked.

By the way I'm speaking in the context if you don't want or want to reduce counterpicking.

 

[Alright RyRy]

Right. The winner has to pick first. That literally makes it impossible to counter pick, since the loser hasn't chosen a character for the winner to counter-pick.

But you guys seem to be missing a point on where WE know what person plays what character. Maybe you guys are forgetting that?

If I know your 2 mains are Kano and Goro

and I beat your Kano you want to switch to Goro and I know that because I go on TYM and watch and listen I will pick the variation that suits better against Goro and not Kano.

That doesn't work. Especially when the game gets older.

 

[Compbros]

You're mixing two different things here: 1) Switching strategy. 2) Switching variation / character.
The former relies on skill. It's against chance, so it's a fair way to determine the winner. The latter adds to the element of chance in the game, therefore going against competitive play, unless, like I said before, you want to evaluate the capacity of the players to pick character, which, in my opinion, is not what a fighting game should be about.

We've played with chance, look at Injustice random stage and MKX will likely follow suit. Even though these stages can drastically change matchups we don't allow players to pick to minimize the chance. How is character switch - > variation switch -> variation pick unfair to determine the winner? The loser still has final say in how this matchup is played out.

 

[Alright RyRy]

Winner picks variation first is the ruleset being proposed. If you CP someone smartly it's likely it'll be a case where losers new character's varations either beats or goes even with winners character's variation at worst. Winner may have a chance to mitigate how bad his next matchup from a 9-2 mto like a 6-4. I mean this is all hypothetical and a case by case basis. My thing is I just don't see a scenario where Winner getting counterpicked in variation unlock will be worse than variation lock. At worst variation unlock doesn't mitigate anything, at best it reduces the amount of really bad matchups they have to play whereas in variation lock worst case scenario you win, your fucked next game, then the opponent is now fucked.

Your not "Fucked." every matchup is winnable. Yes some are super hard and stupid (Kenshi vs Cage) but we deal with it a move on.

 

[Shark Tank]

Your not "Fucked." every matchup is winnable. Yes some are super hard and stupid (Kenshi vs Cage) but we deal with it a move on.

I'm speaking worst case scenario, not on average

 

[Compbros]

If I know your 2 mains are Kano and Goro

and I beat your Kano you want to switch to Goro and I know that because I go on TYM and watch and listen I will pick the variation that suits better against Goro and not Kano.

But then you're forgetting that the loser is still picking the variation, so let's say your variation B is better suited for Goro and Goro's B counters your B. You're not factoring in the final pick of the loser in that equation.

 

[Juggs]

You were saying that if one character is changed significantly and I'm saying not that's not all that's needed and several people in this thread/other communites don't believe that's all that's needed.

Oh okay, thanks for the clarification.

Let me put it this way. Let's say I'm using Takeda and his Lasher variation. You're getting zoned out and out spaced and can't get in at all. You lose and want to use a character that has a good long range game and good projectile game. I see you pick that character, and then switch to my Shirai Ryu variation with a teleport, essentially counter picking your counter pick. That is a situation that should never happen, but could easily happen if winners variations aren't locked.

At any rate, I've said my part on the subject and would just be repeating myself from here on out. Unless there's something new I can add, I'll just be lurking.

 

[RoboCop]

But you guys seem to be missing a point on where WE know what person plays what character. Maybe you guys are forgetting that?

If I know your 2 mains are Kano and Goro

and I beat your Kano you want to switch to Goro and I know that because I go on TYM and watch and listen I will pick the variation that suits better against Goro and not Kano.

That doesn't work. Especially when the game gets older.

I'm afraid I'm not quite following you here. How would knowing what characters someone mains change anything? If my Kano gets beaten, I could fake you out by going to character select. You have to choose first. You think I'm going to pick Goro so you pick a variation that counters Goro, but then, as the loser, I pick some other character (or stick with Kano) to counter your counter.

One issue that I did just see is that the loser would need to declare they were changing characters when returning to the character-select screen, since the winner would remain locked if they just change variation.

 

[Alright RyRy]

But then you're forgetting that the loser is still picking the variation, so let's say your variation B is better suited for Goro and Goro's B counters your B. You're not factoring in the final pick of the loser in that equation.

I am factoring that in. That is why I am picking a certain variation of Cage because of I do not know which one you are picking.

This is the single reason alone character / Variation should be locked.

 

[Compbros]

OP is updated with tournaments up to Summer Jam. We have 1 tournament that's full lock (Toryuken), 1 tournament that's variation switch (Combo Breaker), and 7 Unknowns. If you know the ruleset for any of these please let me know.

Northwest Majors
Socal Regionals
Texas Showdown
Common Wealth
CEO
EVO
Summer Jam