The Argument Against Variation Lock

[Barrogh]

Serious question for those who want variation lock:

Do you really want to have a game with 90 characters?

We will have game with 90 characters regardless of what rules on picking / repicking those characters will be.

No, and the game will not have 90 characters. It will have 30 characters with 3 variations. The above is a false dilemma.

Semantics. Some games have different characters more similar to each other than Ninjutsu and Demonology (or whatever it's called) will be even if they will have same normals - which probably won't be the case.

I mean, are you guys are really saying that difference between fullscreen zoner and rushdown are less noticeable that between 2 rushdowns? As in, enough to allow freely changing between 2 former ones, but not between 2 latter ones?

Ofc if we end up with variations that are actually aren't that different (think Raiden with VB versus Raiden with f23 as opposed to Kabal with GB and Saw versus Kabal with ND(c)), then what I posted above won't apply, but I feel it won't be the case...

 

[Konqrr]

I don't understand the people that want to stop people having this debate. We are learning quite a bit about the game from the streams and we know enough to at least start the debate and it can evolve the more we find out.

The three best options I think are

1. Winner is locked to character and variation. Simple, no fuss, no complications.
2. Winner is locked to character, not variation, but has to choose and stick to a variation before loser picks theirs. Seems sensible, but can lead to delays and is slightly more complicated.
3. Winner is locked to character, but variation is blind select and the winner is not restricted. I personally think that this is the best option of the three if NRS do decide to involve a blind variation pick mechanism where you press button 1,2 or 3 to pick your variation. This will lead to real mind games and hype straight from the character select screen. I also haven't seen a logical argument as to why this system couldn't work.

I like option 4:
Winner is locked to character, but can change variation if opponent changes either their character, variation, or both.

I like Sub-Zero. If I win and my opponent decides to counter pick character or variation, I should have the option to use another version of my same character to compete.

This makes the most sense to me.

 

[WakeUp DP]

The problem is that this isn't exactly something that's totally new to fighting games. Other games have had similar things. For example Arcana Heart.

This is what I've been saying the whole time.

Changing arcanas in AH not only alter characters attack and defense, but they give them a whole new set of special moves as well.

@haketh already gave an excellent example of this.


Another example would be moon phases in Melty Blood. In addition to changing characters attacks, these phases will also sometimes change their movement options as well, which is more than what MKX does.

The point is, any game that has character variations will, no matter how simple of complex those variations are, always change the match up depending on the variation. More importantly, we (the communities in the FGC that play these games) have been okay with allowing these variations all this time.

I understand that alot of folks here only came in to competitive fighting games with MK9, but alot of the issues people seem to complain about, stuff like counter-picking, having certain variations better than others, etc. are things that have been in other games before and, are actually accepted.

Counter picking? This was the norm back in the 90s with games like SSF2 Turbo and SFA2.

Variations affecting matchups or certain variations being better than others, old hat.

Agreed!

Most peeople here dont have much experience with fighting games so they see counter picking/having bad MUs, zoning and defensive style as they are issues, when in fact this has been part of fighting games since forever and its fine.

 

[SneakyTortoise]

I like option 4:
Winner is locked to character, but can change variation if opponent changes either their character, variation, or both.

I like Sub-Zero. If I win and my opponent decides to counter pick character or variation, I should have the option to use another version of my same character to compete.

This makes the most sense to me.

Isn't that option 2 that I listed?

 

[Paul the Octopus]

Yeah doesn't it just suck when the Chun or Yun chooses a different super art to counter pick you.....

I'm fucking awful at 3s, so maybe i missed something that happens at higher levels, but aren't the top tiers top tiers in part because they just pick one SA and call it a day(amongst other things)?

As for "variation is always good"

I play bug zapper raiden and beat your commando grip kano(5-5).
You counter pick dvorah who has a 6-4 vs zapper(ironically)
I counter pick portal 2 raiden who's got 7-3's vs all of dvorah's styles and win.
The real outcome here is that dvorah is just not viable, period, because one variation eliminates her from the game.

Is this a likely example? No. Is something like this possible? Yes. NRS is far from perfect at balance, and i'm all for the ruleset that gets the largest viable cast in without being insane, whichever that is. It's just as likely that we wind up with another 3s where almost no one bothers switching.

I'm glad you brought up this example, because I think this where I think this is where a number of people are getting confused. My point is that you should have enough foresight to NOT pick d'vorah in this case. You should consider Raiden's variation options (there's only 3) before picking your character. You should pick a character where, no matter what variation Raiden picks (and don't forget he has to pick first), you have an option which is 5-5 or better (maybe even 6-4 or 7-3 in your favor).

Where this breaks down is if Raiden has a variation that is completely unbeatable and there's no possible character that can handle his variation options. But that that is a general balancing issue, not a rule-set or variation issue.

I did some research and it seemed like in Arcana Heart, the most similar thing we've seen in regards to variations in MKX, and it was ok for the winner to change their Arcana (Variation).

I thought something like this might be too complicated for this community, but if we are to establish these rules and people are able to understand them, I do think it would be most interesting, fun, and beneficial to allow the winner to change their variation. Especially if loser changes character.

I'm going to quote your post and add it to the OP if you don't mind. Unfortunately, a lot (definitely not all!) of TYM won't take a point seriously unless it comes from a top player. Just let me know if you prefer I remove it. Will remove right away.

 

[AK L0rdoftheFLY]

No character lock, no variation lock. But winner picks character/variation first. Simpletons.

Well actually he explained himself and it jn fact was different from this.

Reading is as simple as it comes simpleton.

 

[ChaosTheory]

The idea behind allowing the loser to counter-pick is to prevent major blow ups. It's the same reason why the ball is given over to the team who just scored on in football. The loser should get a slight advantage in order to maintain some level of parity, but not receive an over-whelming advantage.

Forcing the winner to stick with variation could be an over-whelming advantage and skew the match in favor of the loser.

A couple of things...

First, if you have to choose the lesser of two evils (as I see it); then winner picks character, loser picks character, then blind select variation is absolutely better than character lock. At least then the loser doesn't know exactly who he's playing until after he selects his own character.

All I'm looking for is a completely even playing field before starting a match. That means no advantages for any reason. Anything player 1 can do, player 2 should also be able to do without restriction.

I don't like the football analogy because it's apples and oranges. Both football teams alternate possessions whether you score or not. That's not giving an advantage to the loser. The game starts with a coin flip.

We don't do that. By nature, the competitors start off even. But then we introduce handicaps. Is it because it makes for more 2-1's instead of 2-0's?

 

[CrimsonShadow]

I did some research and it seemed like in Arcana Heart, the most similar thing we've seen in regards to variations in MKX, and it was ok for the winner to change their Arcana (Variation).

I thought something like this might be too complicated for this community, but if we are to establish these rules and people are able to understand them, I do think it would be most interesting, fun, and beneficial to allow the winner to change their variation. Especially if loser changes character.

@d3v said this 5 pages ago

But ultimately, I think it's pretty simple:

Stage select: If the loser changes character, you both get to blind pick variation. Done. Super simple, easy, no complications. No silly follow-the-leader variation counterpicking.

The people who say "I should be able to pick the worst combination of character and variation for your character and variation" remind me of the guys who were defending picking the worst stage for their opponent in Injustice. We all know how that turned out, haha. Keeping things more even with double-random ended up being much better for the game.

 

[HeroesNZ]

@d3v said this 5 pages ago

But ultimately, I think it's pretty simple:

Stage select: If the loser changes character, you both get to blind pick variation. Done. Super simple, easy, no complications. No silly follow-the-leader variation counterpicking.

The people who say "I should be able to pick the worst combination of character and variation for your character and variation" remind me of the guys who were defending picking the worst stage for their opponent in Injustice. We all know how that turned out, haha. Keeping things more even with double-random ended up being much better for the game.

I'm not too sure about having Blind-Select in Character Lock though.

The thing with Blind Select in Character Lock though is that it gives the Loser less of an advantage. The point of Character Lock is that the Loser ultimately gets to counter-pick the Winner's variation. If the Winner Blind Selects his Variation then it'll go like this:

-> Loser counter-picks by choosing a different character
--> Winner counter-picks by choosing a Variation
---> Loser chooses a Variation

In this case, the Winner ultimately gets the final counter-pick. It may not be as great a counter-pick as choosing a different character but it's still an advantage. The only way to make it fairer would be to make the Loser Blind-Select their character too (lessens the chance of the Winner successfully counter-picking), except it would still mean that the Loser has less of a chance to counter-pick the Winner with their Variation.

Simply having no Blind Select is the optimal method imo, because it means that the Loser gets the final counter-pick, as it should be.

-> Loser counter-picks by choosing a different character
--> Winner counter-picks (to a lesser extent) by choosing a Variation
---> Loser counter-picks by choosing a Variation

Seems fairer to me.

 

[Alien Substance]

The way I see it, each character has a core moveset, and the variations add to that core moveset.

Think of variations like attachments to a firearm.
- A sniper rifle is a zoning weapon. Variation 1 puts an underbarrel shotgun attachment to give it some close-range power, but it's not a full-fledged shotgun, the sniper rifle is still primarily a zoning tool, and the added weight makes it harder to keep steady. Variation 2 cuts the scope for the iron sights, now it is more like an assault/sniper rifle mix, but it sacrifices some long-range ability to be more rounded out in the midrange footsie game.

- An assault rifle is a jack-of-all-trades. Variation 1 adds a grenade launcher to increase its mid-range power, variation 2 gives a precisional scope for better zoning, variation 3 adds an extended magazine to buff up its natural power at the cost of what the other two variations would give.

- A shotgun is a close-range brawler. Variation 1 can add explosive shells for damage, variation 2 can add a muzzle attachment to round it out for mid-range combat, variation three could add an underbarrel flamethrower for pyromaniacs.

- A light machine gun is a pressure machine. Variation 1 adds a bigger ammo box for better pressure, variation 2 adds a grip attachment for better stability (or, movement), variation 3 adds a flare launcher for confusion (a neat projectile for the projectile-less character).

- And then there's this freaky weapon: the Kaballin's MMH-A1. It has all the rounded-out power of an assault rifle (variation 1), it can transform itself into a sniper rifle (variation 2), and it has a separate barrel for firing special shotgun shells (variation 3).
Though I think this gun is DLC, if I am not mistaken.

The way I see it is, after a match, you have 3 options:

* You can hit rematch to go straight back into the match.

* Loser can change character or variation.
- If loser changes variation you keep yours.
- If loser changes character you can change your variation, after which the loser picks his variation.
(*Note, the loser has to be able to see which variation the winner picks to give him more of an advantage.)

* Loser keeps everything the same and a stage is randomly selected.

This makes it just like Injustice/MK9 except in this case, the winner can counter-pick to a certain extent. The loser still gets the advantage.

Variations are attachments to a core character, not an entirely different moveset. It changes match-ups and it makes having to learn your character a different process with the rules quoted above, but that is the nature of the beast! That's how it is with variations in this untraditional game.

NRS added these variations for a reason, and we should not just brush them aside in favor of the traditional rules of other popular fighting games. By the inclusion of these variations, MKX is not traditional. NRS knew that they could make something fun and potentially very hype by adding the variation stuff! To limit variations with a winner-is-always-variation-locked rule is to defeat the purpose of variations.

More fun and hype = Better recognition (probably) and longer MKX life.
Less fun and hype = When's Injustice 2?

Accept the variations,
Embrace the variations,
Love the variations.

My life does not revolver around firearms.​

 

[CrimsonShadow]

I'm not too sure about having Blind-Select in Character Lock though.

Blind select just for the variations -- not the character.

 

[HeroesNZ]

Blind select just for the variations -- not the character.

Yeah, I know. That's why I quoted my post, because it explains why Blind-Select just for the Variations isn't favourable.

 

[AK L0rdoftheFLY]

People are finally starting to get it.

 

[CrimsonShadow]

Yeah, I know. That's why I quoted my post, because it explains why Blind-Select just for the Variations isn't favourable.

I think:

1) People may be overstating the extent to which a variation can counterpick an entire character. We don't know much about it yet.
and
2) In general, I don't think constantly counterpicking variations, however they shake out, would be good for the game. Counterpicking characters is what it is; counterpicking stages was decidedly lame, and adding yet another factor to the counterpick list doesn't seem like the kind of thing that makes the game more enjoyable.

If anything, variation freedom would enable more character-consistency and make for more interesting tournament matches. So I have no sympathy for people who are trying to get free-ticket doubled-up counterpicks and complaining that they get less of an advantage.

Too bad -- learn your character and level up

 

[cyke_out]

A couple of things...

First, if you have to choose the lesser of two evils (as I see it); then winner picks character, loser picks character, then blind select variation is absolutely better than character lock. At least then the loser doesn't know exactly who he's playing until after he selects his own character.

All I'm looking for is a completely even playing field before starting a match. That means no advantages for any reason. Anything player 1 can do, player 2 should also be able to do without restriction.

I don't like the football analogy because it's apples and oranges. Both football teams alternate possessions whether you score or not. That's not giving an advantage to the loser. The game starts with a coin flip.

We don't do that. By nature, the competitors start off even. But then we introduce handicaps. Is it because it makes for more 2-1's instead of 2-0's?

You will hardly ever go into a situation where things are even. Players scout and know thier opponents characters and can potentially counter pick off of a read even with blind pick.

The football analogy works. The only way a team can get possession is to stop the other team, by a turnover or holding the offense to force them to punt on 4th down. The only other way to gain possession is to have the offense score. In your fighting game example, why do it? The defense didn't do anything to prevent a score, so why reward the losing team by giving them the ball or punish the scoring team? If one team gets the ball at the 1st half the other team starts with it at the 2nd. Any other time the defense wants the ball, they have to earn it. If the offense scores, they just get it again.

This is the same as loser not getting to counter pick. Why reward him? Why punish the winner?

Counter picking is not a bad thing. it's not a broken system. It doesn't need to be changed or fixed. If the only reason why people are against winner changing variation is to limit counter picking then that is shaky platform. It promotes parity, allows players to find holes for thier mains bad match ups and creates more character variety in tournaments. But it shouldn't be an auto win silver bullet for the loser, which is why the winner should be allowed some leeway to protect himself from the losers trump card.

 

[coolwhip]

I think:

1) People may be overstating the extent to which a variation can counterpick an entire character. We don't know much about it yet.

How can you claim people are overstating if you acknowledge "we don't know much about it yet." The reason I think we should go with the safest option at first is precisely because we don't know how much variations will impact things. You assuming that people are overstating them implies you're assuming they won't make THAT big of a change. You could well be right, but there's no way to know as off right now and basing any decision off assumptions is faulty.

2) In general, I don't think constantly counterpicking variations, however they shake out, would be good for the game. Counterpicking characters is what it is; counterpicking stages was decidedly lame, and adding yet another factor to the counterpick list doesn't seem like the kind of thing that makes the game more enjoyable.

If anything, variation freedom would enable more character-consistency and make for more interesting tournament matches. So I have no sympathy for people who are trying to get free-ticket doubled-up counterpicks and complaining that they get less of an advantage.

Too bad -- learn your character and level up

I don't necessarily disagree with this part, but holy shit, the community is going to be UNBEARABLE for MKX. The game is 5 months away and already people are telling others to level up. <3 you Crimson, by the way

 

[HeroesNZ]

I think:

1) People may be overstating the extent to which a variation can counterpick an entire character. We don't know much about it yet.
and
2) In general, I don't think constantly counterpicking variations, however they shake out, would be good for the game. Counterpicking characters is what it is; counterpicking stages was decidedly lame, and adding yet another factor to the counterpick list doesn't seem like the kind of thing that makes the game more enjoyable.

If anything, variation freedom would enable more character-consistency and make for more interesting tournament matches. So I have no sympathy for people who are trying to get free-ticket doubled-up counterpicks and complaining that they get less of an advantage.

Too bad -- learn your character and level up

I don't want to have to be playing footsies at the Character Select Screen. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't want the Evo 2015 Finals to come down to "Oh, I thought he was gonna pick Inferno Scorpion so I picked Displacer Raiden, but he actually picked Ninjutsu Scorpion so I got bopped".

Using Blind-Select Variations is effectively like allowing the winner to pick a stage in Injustice, while the Loser has to random-select a stage because they changed their character. You're giving the Winner a chance to have the advantage, even though they won. That doesn't seem as fair to me. Blind-Select or no Blind-Select it really doesn't make much difference in all honesty but I just like the idea of no Blind-Select more.

 

[CrimsonShadow]

I don't want to have to be playing footsies at the Character Select Screen. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't want the Evo 2015 Finals to come down to "Oh, I thought he was gonna pick Inferno Scorpion so I picked Displacer Raiden, but he actually picked Ninjutsu Scorpion so I got bopped".

I think my point is, if that's the biggest reason you got bopped, then you should invest more time in your tournament play skills and character knowledge.

But, it's probably a moot point here -- if the only way someone can win is by directly counterpicking variations, they probably wouldn't make the EVO finals anyway.

 

[ChaosTheory]

@cyke_out

I don't know what to tell you, man. You can't compare a fighting game with football.the games are built fundamentally different from the ground up.

Football has separate offensive and defensive units that take the field separately. A fighting game is one on one and the participants have all of their tools available to them at all times.

So now you are trying to compare offensive possession in a two-platoon system with a tactical advantage in a one-on-one fighter. It doesn't work. You don't gain possession of the ball because it's an "advantage" because the other team beat you. That's a false equivalency. Football was fundamentally built to alternate possessions in a two-platoon system. Only one offense can be out there. When one of a couple of events occurs, it's the other team's turn.

What we're talking about here is a distinct tactical advantage given to the loser of a match. It's a handicap by definition for the winner. Is it not?

 

[coolwhip]

My only problem with the suggestions made my LOTF, Crimson and others is once the game is out there for a year or so, and the top players become familiar with who everyone plays and which variations they prefer, who they have as an alt, etc...the winner could anticipate who the loser will go to and change his variation accordingly. Other than that, I don't have any concrete reason as to why I don't like that option.

 

[SneakyTortoise]

My only problem with the suggestions made my LOTF, Crimson and others is once the game is out there for a year or so, and the top players become familiar with who everyone plays and which variations they prefer, who they have as an alt, etc...the winner could anticipate who the loser will go to and change his variation accordingly. Other than that, I don't have any concrete reason as to why I don't like that option.

But they wouldn't necessarily, that's where mind games come into it.

The winner could think okay, I just beat his variation 1 sub with my variation 1 scorp so he'll switch to variation 2 sub so I'll switch to my variation 2 scorp to counter.

But under blind pick, the loser might be thinking okay, I just lost, but he's going to expect me to change to variation 2, so he'll pick variation 2 as well. In this case, I'll just pick variation 1 again which actually beats his variation 2.

The winner can anticipate all he wants, he's still not going to know what the loser might do and so this will create a bit of hype and tension straight from the get go. Even more so as the set progresses too.

 

[coolwhip]

But they wouldn't necessarily, that's where mind games come into it.

The winner could think okay, I just beat his variation 1 sub with my variation 1 scorp so he'll switch to variation 2 sub so I'll switch to my variation 2 scorp to counter.

But under blind pick, the loser might be thinking okay, I just lost, but he's going to expect me to change to variation 2, so he'll pick variation 2 as well. In this case, I'll just pick variation 1 again which actually beats his variation 2.

The winner can anticipate all he wants, he's still not going to know what the loser might do and so this will create a bit of hype and tension straight from the get go. Even more so as the set progresses too.

Exactly, meaning that you'll be forced to make reads at the character select screen. That sounds ridiculous to me.

 

[HeroesNZ]

I think my point is, if that's the biggest reason you got bopped, then you should invest more time in your tournament play skills and character knowledge.

But, it's probably a moot point here -- if the only way someone can win is by directly counterpicking variations, they probably wouldn't make the EVO finals anyway.

Can we not do that thing where we act like we live in a fantasy-world where MUs mean nothing, where if you try your hardest you can overcome anything, and where we all frolic in the daisies living happily ever after? If you are somewhere like Evo and somebody counter-picks you then chances are that you are of equal skill anyway, in which case the MU becomes everything.

But I digress. The main point is that Character Lock is the optimal choice for tournaments.

 

[CrimsonShadow]

My only problem with the suggestions made my LOTF, Crimson and others is once the game is out there for a year or so, and the top players become familiar with who everyone plays and which variations they prefer, who they have as an alt, etc...the winner could anticipate who the loser will go to and change his variation accordingly. Other than that, I don't have any concrete reason as to why I don't like that option.

Yeah, I mean the last thing I 'll say in this thread is that these are just starting suggestions -- we shouldn't expect anything we start with to be set in stone a year later. Or even a few months later.

But I will also add that, if MIT would pick Scorpion against Detroit at EVO, anything can happen; so as long as Vegas (or King/PL) are in the tournament, you may as well just roll the dice. You know what they say about assumptions

 

[chemist4hire]

Tournaments should enforce a random select rule at all times to completely eliminate counterpicking and ensure everyone keeps up to date on match ups. Or we can wait for complete mode to be released as DLC were all the variations for one character are combined and variation counterpicking is eliminated.

In all seriousness, all this depends on how different the variations are from each other. If the gap is great, then variation lock should be enforced. If the gap is non existent then variation select is allowable. If it is in between, I suggest you learn all varitions of your character and that random variation select becomes the standard at the character select screen. lol I think if that became the norm people would go nuts.