Why do fighters in the game move backwards far slower than fighters moving forwards?

[tomitomitomi]

Quote: Originally Posted by ZHunter1990

What is "fighting smart" I see a lot of people say it, but if we are being honest here, all we are doing is pressing buttons and moving sticks around mixed in with timing and making correct reads. Smart by definition means having or showing a quick witted intelligence. More idle time = less skill and smarts involved. Edit: To be clear, I am not saying that you should have to punch 100 times a minute to play smart, you can still play like a braindead zombie(and lose) throwing a bajillion strikes. But interaction between the two players by the pressing of commands is what we have to work with here.

This makes absolutely no sense. Would chess become a "smarter" game if the players only had ten seconds to make their move because there's less "idle time"? Would boxing be smarter if they fought in a phone both instead of a bigass ring? Is Wanderlei Silva a "smarter" fighter than Jon Jones because he fights at a faster pace therefore has to make quicker decisions?

Idle time does not mean passivity. In traditional fighting games there is an actual term for being too active to a detriment ("pressing too many buttons") and it is very applicable to other games. Not doing anything is an action and a lot of times it is the best one.

What people clearly mean by "fighting/playing smart" is that there should be an emphasis on good, adaptive decision making. If anything, people are more likely to go on auto-pilot and rely on muscle memory when the pace becomes too fast for them to process.

I don't have much of an opinion on the rest of the thread but this particular statement irked me.

[Solid_Altair]

Quote: Originally Posted by tomitomitomi

This makes absolutely no sense. Would chess become a "smarter" game if the players only had ten seconds to make their move because there's less "idle time"? Would boxing be smarter if they fought in a phone both instead of a bigass ring? Is Wanderlei Silva a "smarter" fighter than Jon Jones because he fights at a faster pace therefore has to make quicker decisions? Idle time does not mean passivity. In traditional fighting games there is an actual term for being too active to a detriment ("pressing too many buttons") and it is very applicable to other games. Not doing anything is an action and a lot of times it is the best one. What people clearly mean by "fighting/playing smart" is that there should be an emphasis on good, adaptive decision making. If anything, people are more likely to go on auto-pilot and rely on muscle memory when the pace becomes too fast for them to process. I don't have much of an opinion on the rest of the thread but this particular statement irked me.

It's funny that mentioned chess. Noobs like me tend to play without time, whereas experts play with a time count.

[1212headkick]

Quote: Originally Posted by Solid_Altair

It's funny that mentioned chess. Noobs like me tend to play without time, whereas experts play with a time count.

The community is beyond the point of being told were wrong when we’ve been saying what we’ve wanted the last 4 patches. Who is really listening to us besides two game changers? One of them even came in here acting childish basically telling the community”sorry not sorry” he’s called this community bums casuals etc and I doubt that to be the case. The divide between us and those
who represent us is wide. The game should be made for us. As far as retracted monkey I never see the back sway used EVER or the push or the retreat because they’re useless and ineffective and keeping distance. Most ufc fighters don’t have to go to such great lengths to keep the distance. It’s much harder to get on the inside in boxing or kick boxing than it is to stay at the outside. Going inside is very telegraphable and high risk. That factor is not well represented.

[tomitomitomi]

Quote: Originally Posted by Solid_Altair

It's funny that mentioned chess. Noobs like me tend to play without time, whereas experts play with a time count.

Because otherwise they would take hours each turn considering every single option and it would make for an extremely spectator-unfriendly experience.

[ZHunter1990]

Quote: Originally Posted by tomitomitomi

This makes absolutely no sense. Would chess become a "smarter" game if the players only had ten seconds to make their move because there's less "idle time"? Would boxing be smarter if they fought in a phone both instead of a bigass ring? Is Wanderlei Silva a "smarter" fighter than Jon Jones because he fights at a faster pace therefore has to make quicker decisions? Idle time does not mean passivity. In traditional fighting games there is an actual term for being too active to a detriment ("pressing too many buttons") and it is very applicable to other games. Not doing anything is an action and a lot of times it is the best one. What people clearly mean by "fighting/playing smart" is that there should be an emphasis on good, adaptive decision making. If anything, people are more likely to go on auto-pilot and rely on muscle memory when the pace becomes too fast for them to process. I don't have much of an opinion on the rest of the thread but this particular statement irked me.

Did you read what I had said directly beneath that?

[i]"Edit: To be clear, I am not saying that you should have to punch 100 times a minute to play smart, you can still play like a braindead zombie(and lose) throwing a bajillion strikes.

But interaction between the two players by the pressing of commands is what we have to work with here."[/b]

[tomitomitomi]

Quote: Originally Posted by ZHunter1990

Did you read what I had said directly beneath that? [i]"Edit: To be clear, I am not saying that you should have to punch 100 times a minute to play smart, you can still play like a braindead zombie(and lose) throwing a bajillion strikes. But interaction between the two players by the pressing of commands is what we have to work with here."[/b]

Yep. I was addressing your statement that idle time equals less skill and smarts. What do you think would be the happy medium then?

[ZHunter1990]

Quote: Originally Posted by tomitomitomi

Yep. I was addressing your statement that idle time equals less skill and smarts. What do you think would be the happy medium then?

I think we would need more direct control of the tiny nuances that come along with elite movement. That way more there is more interaction between both fighters in regards to movement, other than moving the stick away from your opponent. Creating small openings to capitalize on over aggression by either creating space or counter opportunities derived from making correct reads and decisions.

Im afraid this wont matter though because I feel many people would rather claim to want to be an outside fighter, but really just want to only engage on their terms while sitting in their safe bubble the rest of the time and either aren't capable of making clutch reads or would refuse to learn.

Currently,
I get the chance to play 2 maybe 3 times a week and I can keep a player like Kenetic from stalking me down and force him into a poke war from outside of the pocket. Now he usually wins the poke wars, leading to aggression. But nonetheless, I can still easily punish unwarranted aggression by one of/if not the best player.

This is because the game rewards the fighter planted more than it rewards the fighter moving forward.

[Phillyboi207]

Quote: Originally Posted by ZHunter1990

I think we would need more direct control of the tiny nuances that come along with elite movement. That way more there is more interaction between both fighters in regards to movement, other than moving the stick away from your opponent. Creating small openings to capitalize on over aggression by either creating space or counter opportunities derived from making correct reads and decisions. Im afraid this wont matter though because I feel many people would rather claim to want to be an outside fighter, but really just want to only engage on their terms while sitting in their safe bubble the rest of the time and either aren't capable of making clutch reads or would refuse to learn. Currently, I get the chance to play 2 maybe 3 times a week and I can keep a player like Kenetic from stalking me down and force him into a poke war from outside of the pocket. Now he usually wins the poke wars, leading to aggression. But nonetheless, I can still easily punish unwarranted aggression by one of/if not the best player. This is because the game rewards the fighter planted more than it rewards the fighter moving forward.

If you have video please post it. I would love to learn from that matchup