Home

Was damage reduced?

This is a discussion on Was damage reduced? within the EA Sports UFC forums.

Go Back   Operation Sports Forums > Combat Sports > EA Sports UFC
Here's Your Chance to Win One of Two $100 PlayStation or Xbox Gift Cards
The Pain and Misery of Simulated Stats
EA Sports College Football 25 Guides, Explainers, and Tutorials
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-31-2020, 04:01 PM   #9
Banned
 
OVR: 0
Join Date: Apr 2012
Re: Was damage reduced?

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnmangala
Yeah but every fight can be like Edgar v Maynard. Getting hurt is fine, but it happens too much in UFC 3.

It should be more fighter uniqueness thing, fighters with high recovery should still be able to survive a lot of rocks but everyone else comebacks are rarer.
That depends on the skill of the fighters.

Go fight Kenetic and Romero in UFC 3 and tell me you can survive 3 rocks in one round.

There’s also the issue of lack of standing TKOs.

I just dont think the amount rocks was the problem. If smaller rocks were less noticeable and severe rocks more severe then we’d likely be in a good place.

Less rocks overall leads to more of a rock em sock em robot style of gameplay imo.’
Phillyboi207 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2020, 04:08 PM   #10
MVP
 
OVR: 0
Join Date: Apr 2016
Re: Was damage reduced?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phillyboi207
That depends on the skill of the fighters.

Go fight Kenetic and Romero in UFC 3 and tell me you can survive 3 rocks in one round.

There’s also the issue of lack of standing TKOs.

I just dont think the amount rocks was the problem. If smaller rocks were less noticeable and severe rocks more severe then we’d likely be in a good place.

Less rocks overall leads to more of a rock em sock em robot style of gameplay imo.’
Yeah but majority of the players aren’t Kenetic or Romero. They are the 1%.
Rocks should be rarer imo. If the average was 3 rocks per side a round before it should be 1 rock a round. Only fighters with high recovery should survive easier for more fighter uniqueness.
johnmangala is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 07-31-2020, 05:15 PM   #11
Banned
 
OVR: 0
Join Date: Apr 2012
Re: Was damage reduced?

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnmangala
Yeah but majority of the players aren’t Kenetic or Romero. They are the 1%.
Rocks should be rarer imo. If the average was 3 rocks per side a round before it should be 1 rock a round. Only fighters with high recovery should survive easier for more fighter uniqueness.
You can’t control the fact that average players like to brawl. It doesnt make sense to lower rocks based on that.

That’d be like increasing stamina for everyone because average players gas themselves out early.

Mechanics should be tuned to the ceiling of player skill not the floor
Phillyboi207 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisements - Register to remove
Old 07-31-2020, 07:49 PM   #12
Pro
 
Counter Punch's Arena
 
OVR: 0
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 952
Re: Was damage reduced?

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnmangala
That's surprising. You're okay with numerous rocks every fight?
So you’d rather there just be fewer rocks with the same amount of KOs? As if the game didn’t already feel too much like rock’em sock’em robots...
Counter Punch is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2020, 06:04 AM   #13
Rookie
 
OVR: 0
Join Date: May 2016
Re: Was damage reduced?

Definitely felt like damage was reduced in the beta. Stamina and damage could be doing with some tuning but not too much.

As for rocks in ufc 3, it’s really the vulnerability system that you should have the problem with. People can eat a 4 punch combo straight to the face and not be rocked as long as they are standing doing nothing. If you exchange punches then you’re almost guaranteed to be rocked or even dropped by that same combo.

I’m not saying you shouldn’t be more likely to be dropped in an exchange but it’s the fact you can eat a solid combo, head kick or even multiple head kicks as long as you stand idle.
ryangil23 is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2020, 07:10 AM   #14
Pro
 
OVR: 0
Join Date: Nov 2017
Re: Was damage reduced?

Id personally prefer more varieties of rock, ie sometimes when they get hurt fighters dont show it, having someone hurt doesnt have to mean concussed every time. Flash knockouts and more vulnerable states must also be a thing, i tested power based on characters not blocking and it took like 18 head kicks to ko someone
Lauriedr1ver is offline  
Reply With Quote
Old 08-01-2020, 01:45 PM   #15
Nogueira connoisseur
 
Find_the_Door's Arena
 
OVR: 5
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 4,065
Re: Was damage reduced?

I'd prefer a much higher damage output and more taxing stamina. This would condition players to throw less wrecklessly and in spurts.

It'd better emulate a fight and give you the constant fear and uncertainty that Undisputed 3 gave you.
__________________
Antonio Rodrigo "Minotauro" Nogueira - UFC Hall of Fame
Find_the_Door is offline  
Reply With Quote
Advertisements - Register to remove
Old 08-01-2020, 01:58 PM   #16
MVP
 
OVR: 0
Join Date: Apr 2016
Re: Was damage reduced?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Counter Punch
So you’d rather there just be fewer rocks with the same amount of KOs? As if the game didn’t already feel too much like rock’em sock’em robots...
I dont know what to tell you if you think rocks arent excessive.. I'm not saying remove rocks just reduce the amount of them to realistic levels.
johnmangala is offline  
Reply With Quote
Reply


« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

« Operation Sports Forums > Combat Sports > EA Sports UFC »



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:53 PM.
Top -