NEW Stand-up STRIKING mechanics for EA UFC 3 (concept, ideas, discussions)

[SUGATA]

Quote: Originally Posted by Solid_Altair

I understood analog crushing. It is a way to have exchanges in the game. You do not oppose exchanges on principle. That's good. However, why not take simultaneous hits as one way to have an exchange? Why cheat the physics in this case? Both fighters made contact. Why pretend one of them didn't? This is just a rule that might have applied well to VF, but would do quite the opposite ofr an MMA game.

No cheating physics in this situation.


1st step-The move with the higher damage wins (i.e. crushing the other strike).

> means more kinetic energy dominate over less kinetic energy. And as i said the crushed strike may be stopped at all or just misleading/weakened (Analog crushing), which plays for all 4 steps.
No cheating physics

2nd step-IF both moves have the same damage, THEN the slower move wins (larger startup)

> slower move means more wind up radius - i.e. more potentional energy.
No cheating physics

3rd step-IF both moves have same damage and same speed, THEN the player with less health wins (as a "last chance" gameplay help).

> very rare situation. yes cheating physics, but this is better for gameplay.

4th step-IF everything is the same, THEN both players are hit at the same time.

> purely exchange. No cheating physics.


Again, this situation is so rare, then it does not cost so much time to discuss i think. There are much more important and discussable details (for ex pros and cons properties between different footwork elements).

[SUGATA]

Even more, as I said, this new Striking mechanics is still not completely finished and balancing.
Now I am ending the NEW EXCHANGE Striking mechanics:
- what is one of the main differences between fight sim and arcade fightings? Yes, Striking exchange drama scenarious in fight sim. In arcade fighting early strike is fully crushing and stopping the opponent 's incoming strike
- with new ANALOG crushing mechanics the strikes exchange becomes truly awesome dramatic and ...conscious not blind random game, which require plan and knowledge!
But
There are so many details and aspects in this mini game to describe, it require time, I need to know that devs are interested now in this, that they are seriously interested in building stand up Striking close to this mechanics and they need details.
I don't want to loose so much time in useless discussions (that I am doing this not for myself only) which don't affect the next game...

[Solid_Altair]

As I said (again), I'm fine with Analog Crushing. And I don't think physics would explain very well how strikes landing at the same time should result in one of them not having any effect. We are not plastic toy soldiers without joints. The guy dealing more damage will already win for dealing more damage. There is no need to make the other strike not count.

As to your efforts into building more details to this model, I can't tell you much, unfortunately. I'll put my *** on the line and tell you that (hope this isn't inpolite towards GPD) we are watching it and that GPD asked me about this discussion, but I don't know if had (or will have) the time to read the details. And please do not take this as proof that they changing the striking a lot. GPD has taken interest in suggestions that were not scheduled at all for the next game (at the time).

I suppose I can also tell you that I have my own solution to this striking exchanges problem, which was actually developed in discussions with other GCs a long time ago (before EA UFC 2, before the first event). It was very detailed then and is even more now.

So, in summary, for the viability of your extra work:

* GPD has an interest in the discussion and in your view of it, but I dunno if he'll be able to read all the details, or when... the ideal would be for him to talk to you about it. The eyes of devs seem likely, but not guaranteed (that's mu interpretation, anyways).

* Even if he does and even if he likes your idea, they might not be doing that kind of change to the game. This is what happened to me in UFC2.

* And even if they read, discuss, like your idea; and are making this kind of changes to the game; they may still prefer another idea on the same topic, such as the one that's been circulating among GCs for a long time, or yet another one they come up with.

That's what I can tel you to try and inform you as much as I as I can, so you can make up your mind in regards to whether not not going into more detail for your model.

I wish I could tell you ours (GCs). Maybe you'd agree with it.

[SUGATA]

Quote: Originally Posted by Solid_Altair

* GPD has an interest in the discussion and in your view of it, but I dunno if he'll be able to read all the details, or when... the ideal would be for him to talk to you about it. The eyes of devs seem likely, but not guaranteed (that's mu interpretation, anyways).

Thank you for your response.
I think this is an ideal way because things which i am going to post are too specific and not clear and so interesting for the most of our community. So, w/o GPD demand/ineterest for this it will be an useless loose of time to describe things that are not needed to anyone.