The Argument Against Variation Lock

[trufenix]

this is such a hilariously bad argument im surprised it was you who said it. are you kidding?

So, no actual explanation? Got it.

 

[HeroesNZ]

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.

 

[RelentlessOhio]

I cant wait to see how tournament managers are going to figure out specific rules for this shit.

People bitched at first over IGAU, and this is going to be a nightmare.

 

[WakeUp DP]

In Street Fighter they only do character lock. You can change your Ultra whether you won or lost.

In my opinion Ultra's are the same as Variations as far as character individuality.

Coming from the king of counter pickers haha. On inj you would button check with one char and if you didnt like the stage you would go back and pick a dif char in hopes to get a better stage hahahah

 

[RelentlessOhio]

Seriously Ultra's are nothing like variations. Variations change a character's mechanics drastically, all the way around. Ultra's are just bullshit you use when you have enough meter.

 

[trufenix]

Should characters in Injustice be allowed to switch their supers after winning? Why/Why not?

If you're asking me personally, No, they shouldn't. I don't think the winner should get to change anything that could alter the matchup in any way even a miniscule amount. You won one way, you have to defend that win the same way.

The answer is they should not, and more importantly they cannot, because it isn't in the game and therefore its a silly argument to have. There isn't an ultra select system in injustice and there isn't a variation system in SF4. There might be Ryu and Evil ryu but there also isn't a Guile and Evil Guile either so its a completely nonsensical point.

The semantics of how its done is irrelevant. Competitive Melee requires you to literally turn half the game off, reduces the stage selection by half and have a gentleman's agreement on several other things that could still potentially happen. Every other scene has resetting cabs / consoles, putting in codes, banning characters and moves, and whatever else it takes to uphold the rules for decades, so the notion that in game restrictions / allowances are some iron clad rule is counter productive. If we base our rules solely on what the game allows then every MK ever has allowed winner to completely reselect everything. Does anyone think that's okay?

Either way, you're all too caught up on my evil ryu example to actually address the point. Should the winner be allowed to change the match up (in any way) on win? I say no. And if you say yes, where's the line? Is it one move? Three or more moves? Walk speed? The name under the life bar? What?

 

[Braindead]

????

I don't know I just thought you'd like the comment that I tagged you about lol.

Looks like you gave up your mission to call out random scrubs trying to talk high-level stuff.

 

[@MylesWright_]

As long as it doesn't lead to 16bit vs Dizzy Metropolis rooftop scenarios it doesn't really matter

 

[cyke_out]

Seriously Ultra's are nothing like variations. Variations change a character's mechanics drastically, all the way around. Ultra's are just bullshit you use when you have enough meter.

It's obvious you have never played sf4. Some ultra greatly change the match up. Some can instantly shut down any fireball from a certain range, making that ultra key in match ups versus zoning characters. Other ultras only hit in the air, forcing the opponent to fight in the ground. Imagine denying batman his J2 or hawkgirls entire game, that is a big change.

 

[SHAOLIN]

 

[ChaosTheory]

Rules, rules, rules.

Man, for people not wanting to complicate things... some of you really are fucking complicating things.

How about I pick my character, you pick your character, the game picks the stage?

Too many steps?

 

[Paul the Octopus]

The idea that this game will turn into a counter pick fest because of variations doesn't hold any water. We have zero evidence that variations are of a "rock paper scissors" nature, where one variation will 7-3 this while another will get 3-7'd, based strictly on the zoner, rushdown, counterzoner archetypes, where zoner > rushdown, counterzoner > zoner, rushdown > counterzoner, etc, etc. It's not going to be like that. It's evident the base character determines alot, and while variations may alleviate problems, they may be more adjusting the sails on the ship rather than turning the tides of the ocean.

As for "this will reduce counterpicking"

This anticipation doesn't work. Assuming variations DO work as easy counterpicks for any situation- thus enabling even the fiercest character specialists to counter pick with a new variation- this will not allow someone who is losing to counter their way to victory. It doesn't work mathematically

My game theory formulation
Each players has 3 variations, one that goes 5-5 with everything, and two others, that go either 7-3 or 3-7 with the two other variations of the other player. Basically, each player can voluntarily make it 5-5, or they can counter, though counter leaves them open to be countered back the next round.

1) First round, both are blind pick, so both players will go for their most balanced variation, guaranteeing a 5-5 as to not risk a bad matchup. So long as at least one palyer doesn't defect, it is 5-5/
2) Player A defeats player B in the first round of a 5-5 matchup, therefore the most skilled player won.
3) Player B defects and counter picks because they lost, and chooses a proper counter
4) Player A is locked in place, unable to do anything about the counter
5) Player B defeats player A.
6) Player A is now able to counter-counter-pick while player B is locked in
7) Player A wins.

Even with variation locked on both sides, counter picking doesn't have any effectiveness so long as the ability to counter is equal on all sides. the player who is able to win 5-5 matchups will still overcome the player who can only win when the matchup is in their favor.

And all this is still ASSUMING the "rock paper scissors" counter picking scenario that everyone else is assuming from variations for some reason. I don't think it will even come to this. Injustice with its very diverse roster still has many characters that have a large abundance of 5-5 matchups. It's possible for characters to be very different without changing the odds of the match.

Is this directed at me? To be clear, no where have I said this game will be a counterpick fest. My point is - for whatever degree of counter picking exists, allowing variation changes should result in the same or less counter picking (except for the situation I later noted).

A couple comments on your game theory example
- Yes, you are right that the better player will still win the set most of the time under variation lock. In your scenario, the victor of game one wins the entire set, as the remaining matches are determined by character selection.
- By allowing the winner to change variation and mitigate counter picking in certain scenarios (in step 4 perhaps he can change a 3-7 to a 4-6 by switching variation), you make it more likely that subsequent games are competitive and not simply determined by character selection. This is both more interesting and rewards player skill.
- I think what you are missing is the fact that player performance can vary. No one plays to their full potential every game and if you play a set where only game one matters, you increase the likelihood of flukey outcomes.

Do you agree?

 

[WakeUp DP]

Rules, rules, rules.

Man, for people not wanting to complicate things... some of you really are fucking complicating things.

How about I pick my character, you pick your character, the game picks the stage?

Too many steps?

We are talking about variations not so much stages lol

 

[Jim]

I see a lot of arguing saying variations are a "different" character, when all they do is add a special here or there. The normals are still the same.

This is not true. Some variants do change the normals. Look at Scorpion weopon vs demon. Range of normals is different and some are unique to the variant.

 

[Eddy Wang]

Seriously Ultra's are nothing like variations. Variations change a character's mechanics drastically, all the way around. Ultra's are just bullshit you use when you have enough meter.

Ultra Doesn't change drastically how the character plays but adds a different layer to the character options, which means, something you will do will be more susceptible to get punished by it now, which is taken in consideration.

The way i see in MKX, the characters overall are basically the same, the variation adds layers that gives characters other options that feel more suitable to one playstyle.

Which is why i think the winner should be allowed to counter pick with different variation if loser picks another character, but winner must to pick variation first, and to add some salt into it, winner should be allowed to blind pick his variation.

 

[Eddy Wang]

char lock for whole tournament but freedom to choose variations anytime.
i love how players like daigo wins evo just using one main char the whole tournament.

stick with your main char and have the balls to face bad mu,s
believe in your mainchar and don't counter-pick like a bitch!
:--P

switching variation even when the opponent loses is counter picking

 

[Badboy Takuma]

switching variation even when the opponent loses is counter picking

have you already played mkx?

 

[RelentlessOhio]

It's obvious you have never played sf4. Some ultra greatly change the match up. Some can instantly shut down any fireball from a certain range, making that ultra key in match ups versus zoning characters. Other ultras only hit in the air, forcing the opponent to fight in the ground. Imagine denying batman his J2 or hawkgirls entire game, that is a big change.

Yes I have, quite a bit because of my friend who loves it. It still is bullshit. I'm sorry. Comparing it to variations is comparing apples to fucking oranges. Read.

 

[haketh]

have you already played mkx?

You don't need to play the game to know that Variation Picking is a form of counterpicking, not that counterpicking is bad mind you.

 

[Tony at Home]

Is this directed at me? To be clear, no where have I said this game will be a counterpick fest. My point is - for whatever degree of counter picking exists, allowing variation changes should result in the same or less counter picking (except for the situation I later noted).

A couple comments on your game theory example
- Yes, you are right that the better player will still win the set most of the time under variation lock. In your scenario, the victor of game one wins the entire set, as the remaining matches are determined by character selection.
- By allowing the winner to change variation and mitigate counter picking in certain scenarios (in step 4 perhaps he can change a 3-7 to a 4-6 by switching variation), you make it more likely that subsequent games are competitive and not simply determined by character selection. This is both more interesting and rewards player skill.
- I think what you are missing is the fact that player performance can vary. No one plays to their full potential every game and if you play a set where only game one matters, you increase the likelihood of flukey outcomes.

Do you agree?

No, not directed at you. Just a general notion I'm picking up from everyone.

But I still wouldn't agree, because like I said, there's no evidence that variations work in a way that means the opponent can make it 3-7 easily even if they wanted to. The scenario I provided is actually a "worst case" scenario, just to show that even if that happens, it won't be too much of an issue. More likely, we will have matchups similar to injustice, but slightly more even, as NRS continues to improve on balancing as they did from MK9 to Injustice..

For example: Lex Luthor has one of the more bi-polar matchup charts in Injustice, and he still has a majority of 5-5 matchups. If one can't change the odds against Lex by going from characters as extremely different as Batman, Martian, Joker, Harley, etc- what's to say that having 2 other variations in one's pocket will give them easy access to hard counters in MKX?

Player performance DOES vary, but if we are taking into account player performance, than I think counter picking matters even less. People are naturally going to have variations they are best with, and they will actually be stronger sticking with their best variation at a 4-6 rather than moving to a variation they are less comfortable with that gives them a 6-4. I use Aquaman as a secondary, but I'm STILL more confident fighting a Sinestro using Lex instead of Aquaman. Raw experience with my character does more to ease the difficulty of the matchup than the new tools offered by something I'm not as experienced with. 6-4 variation counterpicks should really hardly matters, and 7-3's, for reasons I mentioned above, aren't going to be as readily available for variations as we might think.

It may turn out differently once the game is released, but for purposes of speculating what we should do on the game's immediate release- when we have no other choice but to use our best judgement to find appropriate rules- I believe it would be best to lock variations as we lock characters.

 

[Eddy Wang]

have you already played mkx?

 

[Badboy Takuma]

You don't need to play the game to know that Variation Picking is a form of counterpicking, not that counterpicking is bad mind you.

my argument was "char lock for tournaments" at least variation picking could help bad mu,s
for me that's not really counter-picking.

 

[ChaosTheory]

We are talking about variations not so much stages lol

Yeah, I know. And it's ridiculous. I'm seeing rules that look like 5 pages of iTunes Terms & Conditions just for how you pick a goddamn character. Over-complications under the guise of trying to keep things simple.

Simple would be what I mentioned. I pick my character, you pick your character, start the match. You don't need an algorithm for that system.

Oh, and it's fair.

 

[IrishMantis]

To stop all this complication.

How about Winner gets to change char, variation and stage

while loser has to stick with that char, BUT, the Winner chooses what variation the loser picks?
adapt to bad MU's yo.

 

[Eddy Wang]

my argument was "char lock for tournaments" at least variation picking could help bad mu,s
for me that's not really counter-picking.

that would be crazy sweet to try on a tournament, but i don't think this should be standard, but would be hella deep if true characters masters would be on a tournament switching only variations instead of play 1 variation per character