Re: USF4 changes!
- From: Di Lhong <numotd@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: cpt-fgc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 17:07:38 +0200
Ben -
http://i1.cdnds.net/14/23/618x378/death.jpg
On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 5:01 PM, Wynand-Ben <paashaasggx@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> You leave Lei alone!
>
> *Death stare*
>
> ------------------------------
> From: numotd@xxxxxxxxx
> Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 16:46:05 +0200
> Subject: Re: USF4 changes!
> To: cpt-fgc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
> However, nerfing Lei's ff+3 hitbox would be nice too...that move cost me
> WCG team tournament...stupid teammates think they can dodge that
> move...Round 1, Fly! -_-" Round 2, Fly again! T_T
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 4:43 PM, Di Lhong <numotd@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> My argument is the same with Ben. TTT2 and BR is the same. TTT2 is
> actually more balanced. Improved movement is one thing people still have a
> hard time grasping because in BR they could spam a move and shut down an
> opponent...now? not so much...not counting the TA madness, TTT2 solo is
> much better than BR. Comparing how BR used to be better than TTT2 is BS.
>
> eg. Nina was top tier in BR because her df+1 shut downs every option you
> can do against her. And Nina constantly pressuring you + her being a CH
> baiting character is not the easiest to win against in BR. They barely
> nerfed her in TTT2 other than Ivory Cutter...she gained some nice new mids
> and yet she's not as strong as BR...improved movement is everything. Same
> goes with Lars df+2 ff+1+2 in BR having catching poor sidestepping system.
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 4:37 PM, Di Lhong <numotd@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Well i'm sure they are some unusual BS crushing moments. But those unsual
> crushing moments is and always has been the same since T5 or BR...just
> because you do a linear mid, doesn't mean that move should beat a low or
> what not...just registering that your hopkick is a mid is wrong. You must
> also consider the ACTUAL hitbox of the move...Zaf going under hopkicks
> makes sense because she's literally crawling while hopkick is pretty up in
> the air even tho it's a mid.
>
> The few moves that needs bug fixing is Bruce's and Law's fff+3 hitting
> characters even tho they jumped across someone already...but these stuff
> might be hard to fix...not sure how their rigging works (but considering
> some characters still have animations from T3...capos...i'd say it's
> hard)...hopefully they'll revamp the whole movelist in T7. Capos animation
> is so bad lolz
>
> Tracking is pretty ok. Only some roundhouse move needs better tracking
> (Drag's uf+4, Eddy's uf+4, etc being sidesteppable is weird...not easy to
> ss but still, not fun when your opponent is a ss bastard)
>
> Every character have moves to deal with crushing moves...Paul's d+1 is one
> of the best, Lee's df+4, etc. Some are very generic and
> non-flashy/rewarding...but it's better than eating Lili's d+3+4...
>
> My only complaint is Lars df+2 recovering super fast on wiff / hitting
> airborne opponent...that move is true BS...also have weird crushing
> property...along with his df+1 going under second hit of Tsunami's lolz
> Otherwise, i have no issue with any move or the game at all. :)
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 4:14 PM, Manase Zote <bmlzote@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Nah bra, not bs is bs.
> Not all glitches are bs as some where beneficial to the overall meta game.
> Cross ups, links, cancels and not in SF4 p-linking or plinking are some of
> the positive glitches that were discovered and left by devs. Negative
> glitches like handcuffs infinities or abnormal damage output due to scaling
> which all of which can lead to death combos etc are what is bs.
> On 25 Jul 2014 16:06, "Nicholas Robertson-Muir" <nicmuir@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> Every fighting game has its bs.
> If it wasn't for fighting game bs, we wouldn't have had combos for as long
> as we do. Lol.
> I just hope to see some serious "flash" from the new Tekken game.
> On 25 Jul 2014 15:55, "Donaldson, Alasdair" <alasdair.donaldson@xxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> There is lots of BS in the Tekken games - Aking or Julia's sweeps going
> under hopkicks... Bob's uppercut going under demo man...Paul's shoulder
> going through moves...
> I love the tekken games, but there is random crap.
> *From*: Di Lhong [mailto:numotd@xxxxxxxxx]
> *Sent*: Friday, July 25, 2014 03:43 PM South Africa Standard Time
> *To*: cpt-fgc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <cpt-fgc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> *Subject*: Re: USF4 changes!
>
> The ones that people have issues to punish is the super strict -10
> frames moves with weird block recovery/stun...eg. Nina's uf+3...you used to
> be able to jab her once she lands on her feet...now you have to punisher
> her mid air but with the weird block recovery or frame lag...she's
> considered grounded already...Steve's b+2, Hworang's uf+3+4, etc. all the
> same...Jack's df+2 is not part of the brokeness of the game...it's been the
> same since BR...luckily he got nerfed badly in TTT2 and most people learn
> how to fight against him that he's not a threat like before...
>
> Stuff that suddenly goes thru or weird crush system is the same as BR.
> Zaf's b+1+2 going thru or under low mids is common in BR. It's not a new
> broken thing that comes in TTT2...or Feng's qcf+1.
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 3:39 PM, Manase Zote <bmlzote@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> That Blanka representation...
> One game is not enough.
> On 25 Jul 2014 15:32, "Sean Carrington" <theseancarrington@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> Got this from BoyX2121 this morning.
> Anyone interested here?
> On 25 Jul 2014 15:01, "Wynand-Ben" <paashaasggx@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> It will depend greatly on the range it used and the other characters
> punishment options.
>
> There are plenty of legit reasons why it could go unpunished if used at
> the correct range.
>
> ------------------------------
> From: alasdair.donaldson@xxxxxxxxxx
> To: cpt-fgc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: USF4 changes!
> Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 12:57:28 +0000
>
> Yup, -14. Even with that people aren't punishing. Sad.
> *From*: Wynand-Ben [mailto:paashaasggx@xxxxxxxxxxx]
> *Sent*: Friday, July 25, 2014 02:51 PM South Africa Standard Time
> *To*: cpt-fgc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <cpt-fgc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> *Subject*: RE: USF4 changes!
>
> Jacks df+2 is bloody -14
>
> Depending on the character(mostly range issues) its not hard to punish.
>
> Cant blame the game if they are asleep.
>
> They only reason I can see them being hesitant to punish is due to range.
>
> ------------------------------
> From: alasdair.donaldson@xxxxxxxxxx
> To: cpt-fgc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: USF4 changes!
> Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 12:34:13 +0000
>
> Strict? Just crappy. Did you watch the Evo finals? If JDCR can't punish
> properly, how are the rest of us expected to?
> Watch the top8 and take a shot everytime you see a Jack df+2 go
> unpunished. You'll be under the table in no time at all.
>
> *From*: Di Lhong [mailto:numotd@xxxxxxxxx]
> *Sent*: Friday, July 25, 2014 02:19 PM South Africa Standard Time
> *To*: cpt-fgc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <cpt-fgc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> *Subject*: Re: USF4 changes!
>
> Yeah the punishment is much more strict than it was...due to the weird
> recovery frame.
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 1:53 PM, Ryan Williams <ryan820509@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> Shit that is punishable one minute and not the next, wonky axis issues,
> etc.
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 1:50 PM, Di Lhong <numotd@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> What bug? the basics is still the same :)
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 1:48 PM, Donaldson, Alasdair <
> alasdair.donaldson@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> TTT2 is buggy as all hell. DR and BR were good. Tag2 is not.
> *From*: Di Lhong [mailto:numotd@xxxxxxxxx]
> *Sent*: Friday, July 25, 2014 01:46 PM South Africa Standard Time
> *To*: cpt-fgc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <cpt-fgc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> *Subject*: Re: USF4 changes!
>
> TTT2 IS good :) but solo would be cool too. so we can go back to our
> mains...
>
> now i just have to find my true main...hmmm maybe it's time for Lee.
>
> Poor Harada, being swarmed with the same questions by fans lolz.
>
>
> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 at 1:35 PM, Wynand-Ben <paashaasggx@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> FU
>
> TTT2 is good lol
>
> ------------------------------
> Date: Fri, 25 Jul 2014 13:27:07 +0200
> Subject: Re: USF4 changes!
> From: gieroadsteve@xxxxxxxxx
> To: cpt-fgc@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>
> I hope it feels like an old Tekken game made for old people like me :/
>
>
> On 25 July 2014 13:20, Ilitirit Sama <ilitirit@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> http://www.gamenguide.com/articles/12175/20140723/tekken-7-release-date-unsure-pc-version-confirmed-jun-kazama.htm
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> The information in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally
> privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this e-mail
> by anyone else is unauthorized. If you have received this communication in
> error, please address with the subject heading "Received in error," send to
> the original sender, then delete the e-mail and destroy any copies of it.
> If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying,
> distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it,
> is prohibited and may be unlawful. Any opinions or advice contained in this
> e-mail are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing
> KPMG client engagement letter. Opinions, conclusions and other information
> in this e-mail and any attachments that do not relate to the official
> business of the firm are neither given nor endorsed by it.
>
> KPMG cannot guarantee that e-mail communications are secure or error-free,
> as information could be intercepted, corrupted, amended, lost, destroyed,
> arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses.
>
> This email is being sent out by KPMG International Cooperative ("KPMG
> International") on behalf of the local KPMG member firm providing services
> to you. KPMG International Cooperative ("KPMG International") is a Swiss
> entity that serves as a coordinating entity for a network of independent
> firms operating under the KPMG name. KPMG International provides no
> services to clients. Each member firm of KPMG International is a legally
> distinct and separate entity and each describes itself as such. Information
> about the structure and jurisdiction of your local KPMG member firm can be
> obtained from your KPMG representative.
>
> This footnote also confirms that this e-mail message has been swept by
> AntiVirus software.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> The information in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally
> privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this e-mail
> by anyone else is unauthorized. If you have received this communication in
> error, please address with the subject heading "Received in error," send to
> the original sender, then delete the e-mail and destroy any copies of it.
> If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying,
> distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it,
> is prohibited and may be unlawful. Any opinions or advice contained in this
> e-mail are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing
> KPMG client engagement letter. Opinions, conclusions and other information
> in this e-mail and any attachments that do not relate to the official
> business of the firm are neither given nor endorsed by it.
>
> KPMG cannot guarantee that e-mail communications are secure or error-free,
> as information could be intercepted, corrupted, amended, lost, destroyed,
> arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses.
>
> This email is being sent out by KPMG International Cooperative ("KPMG
> International") on behalf of the local KPMG member firm providing services
> to you. KPMG International Cooperative ("KPMG International") is a Swiss
> entity that serves as a coordinating entity for a network of independent
> firms operating under the KPMG name. KPMG International provides no
> services to clients. Each member firm of KPMG International is a legally
> distinct and separate entity and each describes itself as such. Information
> about the structure and jurisdiction of your local KPMG member firm can be
> obtained from your KPMG representative.
>
> This footnote also confirms that this e-mail message has been swept by
> AntiVirus software.
> ------------------------------
> The information in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally
> privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this e-mail
> by anyone else is unauthorized. If you have received this communication in
> error, please address with the subject heading "Received in error," send to
> the original sender, then delete the e-mail and destroy any copies of it.
> If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying,
> distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it,
> is prohibited and may be unlawful. Any opinions or advice contained in this
> e-mail are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing
> KPMG client engagement letter. Opinions, conclusions and other information
> in this e-mail and any attachments that do not relate to the official
> business of the firm are neither given nor endorsed by it.
>
> KPMG cannot guarantee that e-mail communications are secure or error-free,
> as information could be intercepted, corrupted, amended, lost, destroyed,
> arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses.
>
> This email is being sent out by KPMG International Cooperative ("KPMG
> International") on behalf of the local KPMG member firm providing services
> to you. KPMG International Cooperative ("KPMG International") is a Swiss
> entity that serves as a coordinating entity for a network of independent
> firms operating under the KPMG name. KPMG International provides no
> services to clients. Each member firm of KPMG International is a legally
> distinct and separate entity and each describes itself as such. Information
> about the structure and jurisdiction of your local KPMG member firm can be
> obtained from your KPMG representative.
>
> This footnote also confirms that this e-mail message has been swept by
> AntiVirus software.
>
>
> ------------------------------
> The information in this e-mail is confidential and may be legally
> privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this e-mail
> by anyone else is unauthorized. If you have received this communication in
> error, please address with the subject heading "Received in error," send to
> the original sender, then delete the e-mail and destroy any copies of it.
> If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying,
> distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it,
> is prohibited and may be unlawful. Any opinions or advice contained in this
> e-mail are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in the governing
> KPMG client engagement letter. Opinions, conclusions and other information
> in this e-mail and any attachments that do not relate to the official
> business of the firm are neither given nor endorsed by it.
>
> KPMG cannot guarantee that e-mail communications are secure or error-free,
> as information could be intercepted, corrupted, amended, lost, destroyed,
> arrive late or incomplete, or contain viruses.
>
> This email is being sent out by KPMG International Cooperative ("KPMG
> International") on behalf of the local KPMG member firm providing services
> to you. KPMG International Cooperative ("KPMG International") is a Swiss
> entity that serves as a coordinating entity for a network of independent
> firms operating under the KPMG name. KPMG International provides no
> services to clients. Each member firm of KPMG International is a legally
> distinct and separate entity and each describes itself as such. Information
> about the structure and jurisdiction of your local KPMG member firm can be
> obtained from your KPMG representative.
>
> This footnote also confirms that this e-mail message has been swept by
> AntiVirus software.
>
>
>
>
>
Other related posts:
