• As part of the relaunch of Skullheart, ALL previous threads have been archived. You can find them at the bottom of the forum in the Archives (2021) section. The archives are locked, so please use the new forum sections to create new discussion threads.

Possible new IPS

Cool, well then i like at this point in time:

The 200 undizzy length
The ch properties for longer combos (but id like even more of a descriptor for ch... Id like it to be next to impossible to not notice a counter hit)

I dont like at this point in time:

The lower damage
The decay (and this basically is a non like of resets being gimped by decay)
The fact that undizzy starts at stage 3 (messes with otg assist starters, which one would think id be glad about, and on one hand i am... On the other hand... Different combo... More memorization... More unfun stuff... More dont like)
 
Dime_x said:
The fact that undizzy starts at stage 3 (messes with otg assist starters, which one would think id be glad about, and on one hand i am... On the other hand... Different combo... More memorization... More unfun stuff... More dont like)
I *REALLY* like this, for the following reason:

This is a vid of the 2nd to last test (where repeated enders added 50% bonus Undizzy to followup hits yada yada):

With Undizzy only starting from Stage5, Mixup>ABCLaunch>Airstring>Super>DHC deals 8-9k in 3v3 even if you hit the opponent at 1500 Undizzy. It makes the deterioration meaningless.
Even in the current build(!) I can kill in two touches (touch combo, mixup, touch super dhc) like this (My quick testrun ended with opponent on 1k life, but I'm pretty sure it's possible with an assist and/or a better combo and/or a character not blessed with Parasoul's damage output).
If we remove the deterioration, there is little difference between having it and not having it (aside from having it being a buff for multichain airstarters*), which also means that I don't really get what you're on. "Messes with OTG Assist starters"? [c.LK c.HP > Stuff] is Stage3 at the Stuff, just like [Updo > OTG c.LK c.HP > Stuff] is Stage3 at the Stuff. This doesn't affect assist starters at all?

*Which I wouldn't mind, they're cool
 
Icky said:
I never wrote my initial post on disliking counter hits specific combos for you. And it did feel like you were attacking me because I couldn't think of any good reason as to why you'd be replying to my post otherwise.

...

So I clarified. See?

You in part typed it for me (it is a public forum after all), unless you were just practicing your typing?

Anyway, thanks for clarifying. I have no problem with counter hit specific moves/combos/etc, and I was just curious what someone would.
 
@IsaVulpes
Ok let's break that combo reset down...

The thing that seems to be more broken than anything in that combo is parasouls meter gain, she gets a meter for it from the first combo which seems a bit much to me... But going on a look at your conventions:

1. Its 3v3 which is not 1.00 ratio.
2. You are using a character that just got her damage buffed as of mde but probably didnt get her meter gain nerfed as a part of the damage gain... Which creates an imbalance.

3. You use a ground tech chase where you know where the opponent is going to tech roll to. Thats got to be the slowest reset in the history of mankind, and though i cant remember if it actually applies to that build but isnt there no decay on opponent teching? So there a 3 way chance for you to get the tech direction wrong.
4 and 5. You use a 1 hit super high damage assist (lnl) into combo into dhc to the games highest powered dhc...


Given all those things i much more think its an "out of context" situation and I'm not particularly mad at my character dying to 1 reset in 3v3 anyway.


Though yes i do see your point i think that the issue is more in the moves that you are using and in the way in which you decided to use them than this being something to make note of.

Now if every "decent" team configuration could easily do this, then we might have a problem, but it seems highly specialized from where im standing.
 
IsaVulpes said:
I have no idea what you just asked. He was talking about Bella damage midscreen being higher than in the corner, .. .. ..what's your question about?

E: WAIT, Did I misunderstand this and he's referring to Bellas midscreen being higher than FILIAS corner?

I was definitely referring to how cerebella is now doing more damage midscreen compared to corner.
 
Dime_x said:
1. Its 3v3 which is not 1.00 ratio.
Everything I care about is 3v3 :P

3. You use a ground tech chase where you know where the opponent is going to tech roll to. Thats got to be the slowest reset in the history of mankind, and though i cant remember if it actually applies to that build but isnt there no decay on opponent teching? So there a 3 way chance for you to get the tech direction wrong.
Undizzzy resets if the opponent ground techs, and stays the same if he doesn't.
This video was a showcase for "There's no actual incentive not to ground tech ever, because even if your Undizzy stays on, you will die to getting touched"

The thing I did in the current build* was:

c.LK c.MK c.HP
- j.MK j.HP xx L.Toss, j.HP
s.MP 4HK xx H.Toss,
SJ j.LP j.MK j.HP
--235 Undizzy here, so Combo ends, I then do a Crossunder--
c.LK c.MK c.HP
j.MP j.HP xx L.Toss, j.HK
Snipe DHC Argus

These two combos together build around .95 bar (so you can do the DHC from a 1.05 Meter start),
And leave the opponent at ~1k life. No assist at all, no "slowest reset in history", no optimized combo,
..no kill; but yeah, any halfway decent assist is gonna do it I suppose? Or a better combo, or whatever.

*Note that this actually doesn't work in the current build, because it's going to burst on the j.MP (as Undizzy triggers on Stage3).
This was a theoretical case for "What if everything stayed the same, but Undizzy could only trigger in Stage5".
If Undizzy just *didn't count* before Stage5 and had a lowered border (say, 150) to balance it out,
Parasoul would have it way easier as my first airstring thingie are whooping 100 Undizzy.

Dime_x said:
I'm not particularly mad at my character dying to 1 reset in 3v3 anyway.
It's.. okayish? I mean I don't like it, but it's.. alright, sort of? ..But that's beside the point. My point was:

If Undizzy deterioration stays in, then Stage3 trigger is a *LOT* better, as Stage5 trigger makes the deterioration meaningless;
Seeing that Combo>Reset>Stage2+3+Super+DHC ends in a kill anyways.
 
konkrete said:
After playing a bit, 200 and stage 3 tracking undizzy seems a bit much, but im still playing the old way. Perhaps something like 250 undizzy, same ch bonus but doing the "more undizzy for using same enders" thing?
I like added stun for the same enders more than for just the same moves. It was mentioned before, but the latter punishes harder links. The former simply discourages things that look loopy. The issue is that, since it's possible to use a move at the end of one chain and in the middle of another, the stun would have to be retroactively applied to the start of the next chain. Either that or just apply the added stun to any instance of the move, once it's been used to end a chain. Of those two, I'd prefer retroactive application. You could even double the stun value of the move after a repeated ender. There would still be a chance to link from it, but the bump in stun would mean it wouldn't go much farther.
 
IsaVulpes said:
This gives much more precise feedback than you'll get after a "Shortened Combos, Increased Damage except for Bella, removed Undizzy Decay, plus some more stuff, oh and there's this Fortune nerf" huge batch.

That's pretty much exactly what I want in the next set of patches (though not the Increased damage for non-Bellas)
 
Banging these out back to back doesn't really leave a lot of time to organize any playtesting sessions outside of the training room and see how it works out in matches imo. Beta lobbies are not very active and for me it's mostly been "find the combo under these conditions" type of thing like a trial mode or something.

Having said that, I've had a hard time getting my friend who I play with regularly to try out the beta experiments anyway lol. He says he won't change it up until he's forced to.
 
The beta lobbies not being active, and not really seeing what normal folks do with the new system, is a huge drawback.

This is why IPS changes for the official game need to hold off until the BB beta and having some more folks play under the new rules (as much as I like the idea, we need to make sure that this is a good change for mid-tier players as well)

Folks generally won't go into a beta to try wonky system changes, but they will go into a beta to try out a new character.
 
Alstein said:
The beta lobbies not being active, and not really seeing what normal folks do with the new system, is a huge drawback.

This is why IPS changes for the official game need to hold off until the BB beta and having some more folks play under the new rules (as much as I like the idea, we need to make sure that this is a good change for mid-tier players as well)

Folks generally won't go into a beta to try wonky system changes, but they will go into a beta to try out a new character.

Most people are content going into training mode, trying out various combos, seeing what sort of damage they can milk out of the new undizzy system, and go by that. Since undizzy only starts to matter once you land the hit and start doing your combo, you don't really need a second person there to test out changes to it.
 
We all know what will happen when combos become shorter, some people already play by using shorter combos; there will be more resets and people will need to learn the neutral game. I don't see any reason to develop the meta for shorter combos when it's pretty well known. The implications of the current experiment can be understood by looking at any reset-oriented style that currently exists (maybe not the ones that are so assist dependent). What really needs to be tested right now is the limits of the combo system and the tech that comes out of it, which does not need any sort of multiplayer. I'm not advocating the abandonment of beta lobbies for the current beta but I certainly don't think its a serious issue.
 
Camail said:
We all know what will happen when combos become shorter, some people already play by using shorter combos; there will be more resets and people will need to learn the neutral game.
No, then it will be combo > reset > combo>reset > combo> reset > death. And if at any point they guess correctly, it doesn't necesarrily put the game back to neutral. if the player being reset mashes a reversal, they can most likely combo off of it which starts the chain again, and if they block the other person can keep pressure and more likely open them up due to how strong offense is. The only way to make there be more neutral is to shorten combos a shit ton and make resets much, much, much weaker/riskier.
 
Icky said:
No, then it will be combo > reset > combo>reset > combo> reset > death. And if at any point they guess correctly, it doesn't necesarrily put the game back to neutral. if the player being reset mashes a reversal, they can most likely combo off of it which starts the chain again, and if they block the other person can keep pressure and more likely open them up due to how strong offense is. The only way to make there be more neutral is to shorten combos a shit ton and make resets much, much, much weaker/riskier.
As someone who plays primarily with resets (As all my non-Filia combos are 5k, sometimes 6k with meter and 7k with meter in the corner) I can say that it does not go combo > reset > combo > reset unless they struggle to predict what I'm going for. As for reversal supers, without DHCs the only ones that turn into a combo mid-screen are Gregor Samson and Val's scalpels (to my knowledge anyway, there might be 1 or 2 more). As for defending successfully againt a reset, it more than often puts the game back to neutral. Throw techs push both players onto the same standing and pushblock (when used properly) has the potential to either return to neutral or to punish a persistent opponent that won't let up on their pressure.

I do think that when resets actually become a main focus people will start off with very little neutral game because they have no clue how to defend against a reset and just get caught up in one after the other, but once people realise their optimised combos aren't quite enough to win matches against good players they'll have to both learn to defend against opponents, learn to get back into a position where they can change the flow of the match (in other words get back to neutral) and learn how to actually open their opponents up more than once a match (in other words actually play neutral).
 
IsaVulpes said:
If we then notice that Bella didn't actually need that damage increase, we lower her stuff again, and continue testing.
Tbc.

This gives much more precise feedback than you'll get after a "Shortened Combos, Increased Damage except for Bella, removed Undizzy Decay, plus some more stuff, oh and there's this Fortune nerf" huge batch.
Zidiane said:
What's this about a Bella damage nerf?
I don't remember Bella getting nerfed or buffed (damage wise) in a while. Where's this talk coming from?
 
IsaVulpes said:
It was an example. There is no Fortune nerf either.

You were the first to mention Bella changes. You mentioned it in the same breath you mentioned things currently being changed/discussed possibly being changed. I'm not always on, I'm not in the IRC, I'm not watching the streams, so I couldn't know if Mike maybe had a surprise stream talking about some new nerf.
 
i dunno, i dont think anybody can come to solid conclusions about the way a game is going to play after only testing new systems for a single day before it is changed to something else.

you cant really conclude anything worthwhile from a single days test, plus the fact that the amount of people actually playing the beta is gonna be pretty darn small to begin with.
 
Doing a single combo in training mode can very much so prove to Mike that combos are still too long for his taste.
 
It may be just my age... but I always liked the games with shorter combos. It puts more emphasis on fundamentals, mindgames, reads, etc vs outright execution. One of the reasons I can't stand playing MvC3. Why should someone get a full 100% combo on someone just for opening them up ONCE, then literally force a 50-50 "guess" on the incoming (which has nothing to do with reading ability, it's an outright guess at that point) and possibly get another right after. Make people work for their openings/damage. :D Just my opinion though.
 
I'm very satisfied with the recent testing in the current beta. (250 Undizzy, different undizzy stuff etc.)

Combo length is shorter but overall options/varieties to reach optimal damage are still present as are fancy combo pathways. Grab combos are doing a good damage too which makes them something to fear also. Damage is a bit less than before, but I'm sure some characters will still net beefy damage. CH bonus is good but not insanely huge to make you memorize a whole new thing, but enough for you to experiment with during matches.

So far I'm having a pretty positive impression of this one. =)
 
Is CH based specific combos still going to be a thing now? If so then training mode will soon have CH options added to make things easier to test things out based on the to-do-list .
 
What PJ Bottoms says is something I've stated on SRK. With many of the older 90s fighting games like SF2, Samurai Shodown, World Heroes, etc. There wasn't near as much emphasis on combos. Combos were often short and certainly something u should know. However 95% of your learning happened facing people, learning strategies, learning spacing, etc. Maybe 5% on combos. Now u have to spend 50% of your time in training, if u want to stand a chance doesn't matter if you are the greatest neutral game player in the world. You better be able to pull off long if not optimum combos. To do that, you'll need to spend boring hours in training room. Maybe it's an age thing for me too, I'm an adult. I got tons of other stuff even for spending my leisure time on, I'd rather not have to sit in training room for hours working on execution.
 
blufang said:
What PJ Bottoms says is something I've stated on SRK. With many of the older 90s fighting games like SF2, Samurai Shodown, World Heroes, etc. There wasn't near as much emphasis on combos. Combos were often short and certainly something u should know. However 95% of your learning happened facing people, learning strategies, learning spacing, etc. Maybe 5% on combos. Now u have to spend 50% of your time in training, if u want to stand a chance doesn't matter if you are the greatest neutral game player in the world. You better be able to pull off long if not optimum combos. To do that, you'll need to spend boring hours in training room. Maybe it's an age thing for me too, I'm an adult. I got tons of other stuff even for spending my leisure time on, I'd rather not have to sit in training room for hours working on execution.
Then why did you pick up this game? It doesn't sound to me like you want to play a game like Skullgirls.
 
SGs (for now) is my break from SFs pacing and higher emphasis on ground game for the most part. I like to bust out longer combos without facing the ridiculousness of a Zero or Vergil-based team and X-factor as a prerequisite.
 
Icky said:
Then why did you pick up this game? It doesn't sound to me like you want to play a game like Skullgirls.

Unfortunately this holds true of pretty much all fighting games these days, specially the 2d genre. ;)
And it's not like we don't like playing fighters period, and as expected they have evolved over time into what they are today. I think people like me and blu who grew up on the old fighters just prefer them is all. Not saying they are bad games :) (except MvC3... I can't even watch that game anymore, haha)
 
Not even 3D games are safe from the increased combo length problem. SC5, Tekken Tag 2, VF5:FS, and DoA5U all have longer combos than ever before in their respective series. The bigger problem is actually when what happens is that they increase combo options, then they go "Hey, if the combos are too long, they'll die too fast! Better give them more health!" so what happens is that combos do the exact same percentage, but poking is rewarded significantly less and is more of a method to set up your launcher mixups(in 3D games), rather than a means of controlling your opponent & doing spacing well. VF5:FS sorta doesn't have this side effect because they pretty much just increased combo options without nerfing poke damage, making the game just deadlier overall.

I think Skullgirls is the first fighting game I've EVER SEEN that has been lowering combo length in each iteration. Maybe we should considering lowering health too, so that poking is inadvertently buffed? :P
 
PJBottoms said:
Unfortunately this holds true of pretty much all fighting games these days, specially the 2d genre. ;)
And it's not like we don't like playing fighters period, and as expected they have evolved over time into what they are today. I think people like me and blu who grew up on the old fighters just prefer them is all. Not saying they are bad games :) (except MvC3... I can't even watch that game anymore, haha)

Count me in. My first game was Tekken 2 (well, technically SF2, but I never played that vs anyone).

I don't necessarily think age is too much a factor though. I think the problem is what we perceive as fun. I love the neutral game. I think that is when characters are at their most different, skill is most obvious, and fun is the highest. I view learning massive, high damage combos like DDR or guitar hero. I can see the appeal, but I have zero interest in getting good at it.
 
I think increased combo length is just a symptom of trying to one-up your last installment and trying to make it flashy and appealing to buyers, because its something that's easy to show off to players to 'wow' the public and sell the game.

How easy is it to sell "Street Fighter 5 - Ryu still does cr.MK into Hadoken Edition" to FGScrub#2357 who has no idea what fighting games are actually about and just wants to see combos?
 
I like neutral (that shit is hype)

I like the idea of combos being a few chains of less damaging moves to deal bigger chunks of damage that can be compared to a special move in an RPG, especially since there's the chance they can be dropped (however small that may be) and there can be variety in different combos.

I don't like the idea of RPGs having special moves that deal more than half health damage for very little cost over a special move that takes a tenth of a health bar. As such I don't like chunky combos with which only 2 or 3 are required to win a match.

As if that weren't enough on its own imagine you're playing an RPG where the special move takes 20 seconds to play its animation, this is the move you're going to be using over and over again, no matter how hype it looked at one point you are going to get very tired of seeing this same thing over and over and over.

With a focus on resets instead of crazy combos, we end up with the stuff that isn't part of the neutral game also being fun, with players actually staying engaged because they need to look for an opening (reset) to make their escape or begin their offensive, while the player comboing has to predict what his opponent is going to try and do (mash super, block low, grab tech, dash away, etc.), and this stops it from just being some turn-based Pokemon tournament that's all about who's spent the most time grinding for special hidden numbers to increase their damage and one-shot everything.
 
Icky said:
Then why did you pick up this game? It doesn't sound to me like you want to play a game like Skullgirls.

I picked it up cause it stood out. Most of the games released this generation are sequels in a franchise that started a long time ago. Skullgirls has a completely fresh look, it has a squid girl, it has a dev team who is constantly striving to perfect their product rather than just line their pockets, it has the best soundtrack since SF2 thanks to Michuru Yamane as well.
 
Back to the topic at hand though guys, which is the skullgirls IPS. :) Let's not derail this into a "this game's combo length vs that game's combo length" thread. Sorry if I started the tangent, lol.

I guess my main point was if the new IPS is making the combos shorter, I'm all for it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Raz
Well at 250 it's shortening them in the sense that it takes away one sequence of launcher-> air combo -> restand for me and I can deal. It's not restricting me too much with Valentine, but Squigly's floatiness/weight class/hurtbox is getting my on nerves more than it used to with the adjusted combos I made (still works on everyone, but timing is way more strict with her or I risk her passing over me).

Not really finding any significant use for green vials except to guarantee the opponent will get taken to the corner (maybe meter too... didn't really check). No matter where I am on the screen I think I can get more damage with a shorter purple vial combo.

Counter hit undizzy bonus I only really use to flesh out a dhc combo (I wish air supers could be DHC'ed btw), because my normal combos just omit certain normals here and there that imo aren't worth it to spot a CH mid-match then add them back on and risk messing up my timing.
 
So what's everyone getting for damage on this patch? My first go at it gets like 6.4k with val, with a 50/50 reset available any time I'm doing an air chain. It's not amazing but I guess I'm kind of glad. And the time it takes to do a combo is really short.
 
Getting 7.7k with Peacock and 7k with Squigly. They're basically my regular bnbs, with a chain or 2 chopped off. 10 and 12 seconds, respectively. Haven't messed around with counter hit stuff.

Edit: Video

The landing s.HP relies on proper timing of the air series, so that Peacock lands close to the opponent. Harder to do on light characters. Probably worth it to find something less risky.
 
Last edited:
For 1 bar (universal)...

Valentine 6.5k-6.8k in corner depending the route I take (6.8k is stricter on lightwieghts). 5.8k midscreen (can be brought up to 6.6k if I end up close enough to the corner to make savage bypass wallbounce).

Fortune 7.4k in corner. 6.5k midscreen.
 
Fortune midscreen (head-on): 7.4k
Fortune midscreen (head-off): 5 or 6 something thousand. Head attacks give 45 stun right now though so....
 
Last edited:
I'm getting around 8.6k for 1 meter from a non-counterhit c.LK with Painwheel in the corner. Not much more from a heavy counterhit.
Slightly over 7k for 1 meter midscreen.
I feel like 250 undizzy might be a little generous, things felt a lot snappier in the previous experiments. Then again it could just be Painwheel.
 
I'm not entirely sure how to articulate my thought on this whole thing but here goes.

First off I want to say I think starting stun count at stage 3 is kind of frustrating. I feel like I'm running into a brick wall with a tunnel painted on it. There's so much combo potential but it just ends so abruptly.

I think a bigger problem here is the design of the overall game and the changes Mike is trying to push. Maybe push isn't the right word? I know he is just experimenting, but I'm willing to bet he is going to end up changing IPS/Undizzy for the next update. Anyway, the fact that we have so much freedom with launchers, restands, otgs and such kind of gives into an open-ended system with a ton of combo potential. Taking this into account, the game feels really awkward with varies implementations to limit combos. I CAN still technically combo, but I actually can't because of new things triggering bursts. Yes I know I can reset and should reset, I'm not that incompetent. The good players are doing them even now so I don't see why people feel like people aren't doing it enough.

I'm not even arguing that I want my combos to go on for 15 seconds or anything, I just don't feel like drastically limiting combos works for this game. Vampire Saviors is probably my next favorite fighting game and combos in that game are generally short and simple. The thing is, the game was DESIGNED THAT WAY from the start. You can't loop launchers and stuff forever because of the way knockback on attacks works in the game (obviously there are exceptions to this like bullet's loop). I feel like Mike is trying to turn the game into something it wasn't really designed to be from the start.

Obviously there needs to be some limit to combos. I honestly think combo length is fine in MDE, but I'd be willing to try it with the undizzy limit set a bit lower like 250, with counter hit subtracting 100 to allow the combos we can do now in MDE (assist counterhit can reduce by 25 or 50). I still feel like it should start tracking in stage 5 as well. I'm fine with assist starters scaling to 66% damage.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top