1: Do you want CFtP back?
2: Would you be willing to test it in a beta?
3: Hours played
You know my reasons by now.
Maybe, but what if I told you I already had a tried and thoroughly tested solution that works and doesn’t involve adding a load of over-complicated special case rules and restrictions? What if I told you that this solution is simultaneously beautifully simple but simultaneously adds tremendous depth to the game?
I would ask what the price is, and then decide whether it’s worth it.
This is pure opinion and you can have all you want of it!
That’s true. I’m just hoping TB at least acknowledges that there is a cost to reverting to CTFP.
There’s no need for the defensive option unless there’s no time to get that riposte out (in which case the attack would probably end up hitting my already raised parry anyway).
What if they come close enough together that you can’t riposte in time, but far enough apart that one parry doesn’t block both?
I don’t know what more I can say to stop you from deliberately mis-interpreting my arguments.
I didn’t mean to say that you are missing attacks. But lots of people do, and this game is going to suck if I have to tiptoe around nails every time it happens. I don’t have time to hit tab and check my opponents rank as he is charging me. The mere fact that CFTP exists means an extra, unnecessary layer of mindgames that could possibly get me killed if I play it wrong. Not that I couldn’t handle the extra difficulty, just that it shouldn’t be difficult.
I’d just like TB to keep that humble opinion in mind when they consider this. This thread made it seem like the whole world wanted CFTP to come back, and that is not true.
And in what kind of games are we playing here? I certainly do not feel powerless in public games, of course.
If you are feeling powerless in scrims, maybe PiP, less stamina cost on combo/recovery parry, and riposte on recovery parry will help you out. No one really knows because we haven’t tried these things yet.
NO! You are completely wrong on this. If I see someone is going to miss, I can be near the end of my windup the moment he goes to CFTP. From this position I can easily and safetly feint out his parry.
You can, but you aren’t assured to. If he has a faster weapon, there’s really no way around the CFTP shenanigans. Besides, couldn’t two enemy players achieve the same effect much more easily? You can’t really argue that CFTP helps tremendously against two players but can also be suitably countered by one player.
AGAIN you’re interpreting this completely the wrong way. Hexen was talking about missing on purpose AT A PRECISE DISTANCE to draw in the enemy. You know the appropriate, correct action for the enemy in this case? Stand there and watch that fool Hexen swing at air well out of range, or ensure that you can feint him right at the start of his combo. If you time your attack poorly and end up “on even terms” then that’s your fault.
It still rubs me the wrong way. The intuitive thing to do when seeing someone miss is to attack. But here you say that I still have to be cautious and precise in approaching a missed swing. Do you know how much that happens in the game I play? Every time someone misses a swing in front of me, I would have to still approach him with extreme caution and precision. No. Just no. I will not be playing this game anymore if that’s the case. If people want me to be cautious and precise, then they should stop missing swings.
Actually, you’re right this time. Why? Because Dolo and Ninja Cub probably wouldn’t make the mistakes that enable CFTP to be effective. All CFTP does in 1vX situations is force the enemy to be a bit more careful and methodical rather than spamming attacks because you have more people (which works in live now, FYI), or punish the enemy if they aren’t careful.
I’m hoping PiP and such will have this same effect.
2. You are too inexperienced to effectively counter CFTPs, and thus cannot give an informed opinion on the matter of its strength. You can, however, make the argument that it is too difficult to learn how to counter a CFTP. (This isn’t an insult, and is actually one of the strongest points against CFTP.)
I’m saying it shouldn’t even demand a counter in the first place. If you want me to have to work for every hit, then don’t miss.
There’s no need to make every player feel powerless individually.
I don’t feel powerless individually. I would never have stuck around this long if I did. When PiP is added, I will feel even more powerful individually. I don’t see the issue.
Can you give me an example of when CFTP would allow a player to make up for an avoidable mistake?
It’s the exact same reason for which you want CFTP for fighting multiple people; after a strike, you can combo to continue aggression while still having the option to cancel out into a parry. This allows the player to miss and then combo while the enemy attacks him. Now, with CFTP, both players are attacking each other simultaneously. Both have the option of feinting or canceling to parry. They are basically on even terms, after one person missed his strike, and the other is trying to punish. That is what I hated about CFTP. That is what I want to never return, even if it means 1vX is harder.
In pre-patch, if you missed your enemy could hit you because you weren’t able to parry.
I’m afraid you are misinformed. After a miss, you could attack->combo->feint and now you were back at idle and could parry at any time. If you did it fast enough, it was pretty much equivalent to combo-parry as we have it now. The only difference is that it was activated through a combo, which put undue pressure on the opponent that is trying to punish the missed strike, because of the threat of simply going through with the combo instead of canceling it at all.
If you read Crushed’s post (which is clear you haven’t) he made a full paragraph detailing why CFtP never, ever rewarded careless play.
He is wrong. CFTP allowed more control of your actions after a miss. This is an indisputable fact, and no amount of paragraphs or details will change that. Hell, Nabster and Hexen even talk strategy about how you can utilize missing with CFTP!
It’s not doable at all against good players. Try to 1v2 Dolo and Ninja Cub. You’ll cry.
I doubt the difficulty in that will change much with CFTP reverted.
No, no, no!!! This has nothing at all to do with missing!
You can say that all day and my argument will still be valid. Reverting to CFTP makes missing a viable thing to do, regardless of whether you intended it or not. It will skew the game toward a more careless and aggressive style of play. I don’t want that, and perhaps you don’t want that either.
Again, aggression is the important aspect of CFTP. How can I stop a player simply and easily feinting me out without being able to put pressure on them to not risk feinting? Keep in mind that I can only really pressure them if they have timed their counter attack too late (after I swing and miss or hit their team-mate) or I have made good use of footwork and spacial awareness to make sure that I will be a good way through my combo before I need to parry.
You’re falling in the same hole as Tibbs when it comes to understanding how CFTP was used in 1vX play. The utility of it doesn’t just come from skipping recovery to block, but in using it in the exact same way as you would a normal FTP to not just recover from a poorly timed swing, but to prevent effective/safe feints so you can force them to hit your parry and give you back the initiative.
I admit that 1vX will never be as doable as it was when CFTP was in the game. CFTP gave us a very useful tool in staying aggressive with a combo to threaten players into playing a certain way, which helped a bit in 1vX. This doesn’t mean we should revert to CFTP. Even if we do all want 1vX to be a little easier, it comes at the price of skewing the game toward one where missing is a-ok, or even part of the strategy (as evidenced by you and Hexen’s next post). This, in my opinion, is so wrong that it is worth leaving 1vX a little difficult, just to keep CFTP away.
It seems that you think otherwise; you argue that it’s worth skewing the meta to give more options in 1vX. This will warp all duels and all tactical fights where you sought out one person at a time, just to give a slight advantage when you find yourself out of position and outnumbered. It will be abused after a mistake far more than it will be utilized as a threat, as you say. If you don’t care about that, then there really isn’t any factual evidence I can say to convince you. I can only hope that TB shares my point of view, or even just acknowledges it.
Their posts cover a lot more than just that.
Then maybe they should make that more obvious.
But that’s exactly what panic parry is. You miss, and you’re able to parry. You lose no control after a miss. You just said that’s silly. You’re contradicting yourself. You defend panic parry, yet you say losing control after a miss is silly.
Clearly you are the one who needs to take a look back at Nabster’s posts. He is arguing that CFTP allows better control after a miss. I’m saying that isn’t justified because of the miss.
In the older version, with CFTP, you could only FtP during your windup, before you committed to an attack. You couldn’t just miss and then parry to cover your mistake like you can in live.
Yes you could, in a roundabout way. As long as you did a combo after a miss, you can feint->parry at any time to quickly defend after a miss (intentional or otherwise). You seem to think I didn’t play the game back then. I played since release. It’s getting pretty clear that I know far more about this issue than you do.
You’re literally asking for panic parry to be removed right here, because that’s what panic parry does.
That’s going too far the other way. Currently, missing puts you in a hole, but it’s a hole you can get yourself out of if you predict right. With CFTP, missing is a minor inconvenience. With no CFTP or recovery parry, missing (or being attack by multiple players) is nearly a death-sentence because you are vulnerable for so long (and that is a big reason why I did not buy CDW). Recovery parry is a great middle ground between these two extremes.
Not against good players you can’t [use combo-parry].
If that’s true, TB can fix it. Like I said, they can lower the stamina cost and allow ripostes after a recovery-parry to make it usable against good players. With those changes, I can go through the entirety of Crushed’s post and replace “CFTP” with “combo/recovery parry” and the entire thing remains true. Every argument he made for CFTP you can also make for combo and recovery parry, and he has not posted any evidence otherwise.
Also, this new PiP thing is going to make fighting multiple people much easier anyway. Even if CFTP is better for 1vN, that alone is not a reason to bring it back.
But here you’re assuming that your enemy doesn’t parry your attacks so of course it works. But in competitive play, in a 2v1 it goes something more like this. Attack Player 1 -> Player 1 parries -> Player 2 hits you with an attack -> You get flinched -> Player 1 hits you with an attack and from then on out you’re stuck in an indefinite flinch with no control and no possibility to win unless one of the two players mess up. Yeah a lot of fun.
Same thing can happen with CFTP.
With panic parry, this window doesn’t exist, you miss, smash right mouse button and you get a perfect CFTP with absolutely no window in between or anything. It’s Bad.
Sure, that is less than optimal, but TB could just add a 0.1 minimum delay to combo-parry and you get the slight opening you want. There’s no need to revert when some minor tweaks can make the game far better than it was with CFTP.
Also, everything RushSecond said is completely moot when you look at Crushed and Nabster’s posts. They’ve completely disproved any arguments anyone has/can come up with.
Their points all go along the lines of “removing control from the player is bad” which is generally true. But in this case, all these recovery/combo options are after a miss. Having no control loss after a miss is just silly. There has to be some repercussion that isn’t just a loss of stamina that may or may not matter.
Also, Crushed has a fair point about CFTP being used to fight multiple players, but I have done the exact same thing with combo-parry to nearly the same effect (and is the primary reason why having that is better than having no post-miss option). Attack player 1 -> combo parry player 2 -> riposte him -> combo parry player 1 -> etc. The only reason it doesn’t work as well is because the stamina cost is too high, and you can’t riposte after a recovery parry. Those things can be changed to make the multiple-opponent fighting of combo/recovery parries much more usable; you don’t have to revert entire mechanics when some little tuning is all that is necessary.
Yes, parry -> parry is a great idea. In fact, when I first played the game, I thought it already worked that way. The fact that it didn’t was a huge disappointment.
Parrying two people back-to-back sounds like a great time and would be very rewarding for skillful play. The opponents obviously would still have many ways to overcome one person, but this evens the odds in a very intuitive manner. This can’t be implemented fast enough.
Now, about CFTP…
Don’t bring it back. The current recovery parry is better; it’s more intuitive and it properly gets the player “out of balance” as a result of missing an attack. It attaches proper risk to missing attacks.
What Nabster, CRUSHED and co. are asking for is to have complete control of defensive operations after missing an attack. The miss can be intentional or not; doesn’t matter in my eyes. With CFTP, missed swings will be part of the norm. Not to say people will intentionally miss all the time, but it will be okay to do so once in a while.
I don’t like that at all. Missing should never be a viable thing. It should never be a wanted thing. It’s bad because it’s confusing and doesn’t allow interaction from the opponent that a would-be hit does. Yes, the tutorial does teach players that it is a thing; please remove that from the tutorial.
I’m all for smart aggression, but you have to draw the line somewhere. With CFTP, the game was sprinting at your opponent and comboing away, and that was less satisfying, no matter how much intentional missing or mindgames is going on within it. I much prefer more the calculated and timed strikes that came post-patch. I had more interesting fights more often because footwork and properly aimed strikes became more important. Also, more people knew how to parry in recovery, so fights became even more challenging more often than before.
You made the right decision months ago. Don’t go back on it now. Keep CFTP out. All that really needs to be done is allow recovery parry to riposte, since that’s currently a very arbitrary restriction.
We’ll have to agree to disagree on the topic of miss punishment. I’ve personally found CFTP harder to punish than panic parries, and it seems like TB’s policy is that more punishment for misses is better. Besides, having a major part of the punishment being stamina costs seems like the most annoying type of punishment you can get. Are you sure you want to return to fighting against that yellow bar instead of that red one?
are you saying that comboing is optimal in a greater breadth of situations than single strikes or that even in the scenarios I just listed that myself and others say comboing is sub-optimal/equally viable that comboing is actually always the preferred option?
I agree with the former completely and the latter somewhat. Unless your weapon is unusually fast, going to recovery as a “fakeout” tactic seems strictly worse than a combo-drag or combo-feint, and usually just gives your opponent a chance to get back in the fight.
I did overstate when I said that going to recovery was never useful; all along I really just mean it’s less useful than a combo.
The chance for missing is unduly higher when an individual actually has the ability to skillfully sidestep you while you’re limited by horizontal turn speed cap while comboing.
I have not found this to be true. Even in DW I have found that my highest chances of hitting is when I’ve already hit someone (which cancels their sprint temporarily), and then combo into them. It might be harder to combo-hit than in CMW, but that’s not an important comparison; the important comparison is whether post-hit combos are easier to hit than single strikes, and in both games it is, so if you just single strike over and over, each one is more likely to miss.
I’d be interested then in how you would, while viewing the game as chiefly immersive, justify:
- Flying kick- requires multiple inputs in a certain time frame to be optimal.
That is an entirely intuitive technique. It’s obvious that sprint+w+jump+kick will do all of those. It’s also less annoying if the inputs are wrong because even if you miss a command like sprint or jump, the kick still goes off, unlike CFTP which breaks completely if you miss something.
- Feint windows/unfeintable releases- .001s is the difference between a perfect feint and absolutely no feint at all, which happens quite a bit especially with unfamiliar/fast weapons.
The feint windows didn’t change this behavior; it just brought it 0.2 seconds earlier. Before feint windows, the cutoff point was at the end of windup/beginning of release, and that was the difference between a perfect feint and no feint.
- Bodkins exploding heads- challenge to aesthetic immersion
This should be fixed. I had said so during the beta patch that it was accidentally introduced.
- Daggers blocking mauls- challenge to intuitive combat immersion
The problem with this one is that it’s difficult to draw the line somewhere. If daggers can’t block mauls, then what about short swords and the cudgel? If they can’t, what about MAA primaries? No matter what you do with this, it’s always going to seem weird that one weapon can block it but another can’t, so it’s just simplest and fairest if every weapon can block every other weapon.