How is outside fighting considered OP?

[Solid_Altair]

Re: How is outside fighting considered OP?

That was beautiful

Aldo is really really good and moving away the whole time but maxs is still all over him.

But don't you think it's satisfactory that Aldo won quite decisevely?

[FCB x Finlay]

Re: How is outside fighting considered OP?

Found this high level fight:

http://xboxdvr.com/gamer/l-nextgen-mma-l/video/49149370

Great vid, wasnt able to get enough space at times. Thats the best high level clip ive seen of something akin to outside fighting, very realistic in terms of aldos style.

Did everything right but didnt have enought tools

[Phillyboi207]

Re: How is outside fighting considered OP?

Found this high level fight:

http://xboxdvr.com/gamer/l-nextgen-mma-l/video/49149370

You’re still proving our point for us

Max was able to close distance at will just by moving forward and striking

That is not how distance works in real life.

But don't you think it's satisfactory that Aldo won quite decisevely?

This issue is not whether or not walking forward is the most effective style. The issue is that you’re able to dictate the pace/style of the fight by simply holding forward.

You should be forced to cut off the cage(When the other person has very high footwork)

I get that the tracking needs work so we can actually move laterally but that doesnt change the fact that footwork in this game is a poor representation of MMA.

This discussion reminds me of all the head movement talks when you guys were saying it was fine because it was effective.

As far as the stamina thing I believe the evasion tax is likely too high. And the tax for throwing strikes (that land or get blocked) is too low. Feints also cost too much stamina

[Reinfarcements]

Re: How is outside fighting considered OP?

You’re still proving our point for us

Max was able to close distance at will just by moving forward and striking

That is not how distance works in real life.


This issue is not whether or not walking forward is the most effective style. The issue is that you’re able to dictate the pace/style of the fight by simply holding forward.

You should be forced to cut off the cage(When the other person has very high footwork)

I get that the tracking needs work so we can actually move laterally but that doesnt change the fact that footwork in this game is a poor representation of MMA.

This discussion reminds me of all the head movement talks when you guys were saying it was fine because it was effective.

As far as the stamina thing I believe the evasion tax is likely too high. And the tax for throwing strikes (that land or get blocked) is too low. Feints also cost too much stamina

These two points are critical IMO. Good post.

[NEWS]

Re: How is outside fighting considered OP?

And the tax for throwing strikes (that land or get blocked) is too low.

Couldn't they just do something similar to UD3 simulation mode? In that game you'd gass just for high striking output (whether you landed or not) and it worked pretty well in my opinion.

[aholbert32]

Re: How is outside fighting considered OP?

Couldn't they just do something similar to UD3 simulation mode? In that game you'd gass just for high striking output (whether you landed or not) and it worked pretty well in my opinion.

The could but I dont know if thats the direction they want to go in. Plus some will complain that this will split the player base and make it harder to find fights.

[FCB x Finlay]

Re: How is outside fighting considered OP?

Are we at the point where 1 side are arguing for parity for a viable style vs others whod rather keep it the same and the fear of it being OP. Tbh thats just sad.

[aholbert32]

Re: How is outside fighting considered OP?

You’re still proving our point for us

Max was able to close distance at will just by moving forward and striking

That is not how distance works in real life.


This issue is not whether or not walking forward is the most effective style. The issue is that you’re able to dictate the pace/style of the fight by simply holding forward.

You should be forced to cut off the cage(When the other person has very high footwork)

I get that the tracking needs work so we can actually move laterally but that doesnt change the fact that footwork in this game is a poor representation of MMA.

This discussion reminds me of all the head movement talks when you guys were saying it was fine because it was effective.

As far as the stamina thing I believe the evasion tax is likely too high. And the tax for throwing strikes (that land or get blocked) is too low. Feints also cost too much stamina

You guys are getting to see what I've been arguing about for a month plus. LOL.

Dont let the point of this thread get mucked up (I'm guilty of this) by focusing on other things. The point of this thread is "Should we be given tools to avoid basic pressure simply by using movement?"

In my opinion, there are only two answers that make sense. Yes or Yes if. Yes if they add movement counters to cut off the cage is also an acceptable answer.

If the answer is no, then you have to own that you want a fast paced, non stop action fight and arent really interested in a realistic game. You want an MMA video game with some realism but not enough to effect the style you want to see.

If youre answer is no, you dont care about realism and you dont want people to be able to play other styles. The way things are currently there are two striking styles: All in or In and Out.

I mostly see in and out when I watch high level fights. Let me be clear. That isnt outside fighting. So when people say outside fighting is OP, I say it cant be because it doesnt exist in this game.

[aholbert32]

Re: How is outside fighting considered OP?

Are we at the point where 1 side are arguing for parity for a viable style vs others whod rather keep it the same and the fear of it being OP. Tbh thats just sad.

We've been here for a while. This isnt a knock to my fellow gamechangers though.

People always argue for caution when it could affect the way you enjoy playing the game.

[ungorborongo]

Re: How is outside fighting considered OP?

You guys are getting to see what I've been arguing about for a month plus. LOL.

Dont let the point of this thread get mucked up (I'm guilty of this) by focusing on other things. The point of this thread is "Should we be given tools to avoid basic pressure simply by using movement?"

In my opinion, there are only two answers that make sense. Yes or Yes if. Yes if they add movement counters to cut off the cage is also an acceptable answer.

If the answer is no, then you have to own that you want a fast paced, non stop action fight and arent really interested in a realistic game. You want an MMA video game with some realism but not enough to effect the style you want to see.

If youre answer is no, you dont care about realism and you dont want people to be able to play other styles. The way things are currently there are two striking styles: All in or In and Out.

I mostly see in and out when I watch high level fights. Let me be clear. That isnt outside fighting. So when people say outside fighting is OP, I say it cant be because it doesnt exist in this game.

you know we've had a LOT of disagreements in the past, but this thread has shown me that you're one of the few gamechangers along with martial that i can trust.

Gained a lot of respect for you for taking a stand with this man. Some of the **** these other gamechangers are saying is downright ridiculous.

[FCB x Finlay]

Re: How is outside fighting considered OP?

We've been here for a while. This isnt a knock to my fellow gamechangers though.

People always argue for caution when it could affect the way you enjoy playing the game.

I know, once they have a product they are happy with it doesnt matter about others opinions it seems. But remeber this is a sports game, its first goal should to replicate the sport, as the sport has its own balancing measures and is fun in itself.

[Solid_Altair]

Re: How is outside fighting considered OP?

The issue is that you’re able to dictate the pace/style of the fight by simply holding forward.

Dictating the pace = getting your *** handed to you?

And do you want to dictate the pace simply by holding back? That would bottleneck the gameplay so much. There are bazilion of ways to counter a guy coming forward. Chasing someone constantly retreating is another story.

Are we at the point where 1 side are arguing for parity for a viable style vs others whod rather keep it the same and the fear of it being OP. Tbh thats just sad.

I wouldn't characterize the discussion as this at all.

There is much dispute about which style is the better one, right now. It seems you mean you want outside to be as viabel as inside, while we want to keep inside a bit stronger, just to be safe against OPness. However, we're actually claiming that outside is already stronger.

The crux of the discussion was already reached by ZHunter and aholbert: Should movement alone allow you to viably keep the distance, even without deterrence? Yall say yes and we say no.

[FCB x Finlay]

Re: How is outside fighting considered OP?

Dictating the pace = getting your *** handed to you?

What? Is this what you think, was wonderboy getting his arse handed to him, movement is key in fighting suck it up.

And do you want to dictate the pace simply by holding back? That would bottleneck the gameplay so much. There are bazilion of ways to counter a guy coming forward. Chasing someone constantly retreating is another story.

We are not talking about counter fighting, outside fighting is different, its not about being able to counter inside the pocket. And so what, people already say it changes after every patch.

I wouldn't characterize the discussion as this at all.

There is much dispute about which style is the better one, right now. It seems you mean you want outside to be as viabel as inside, while we want to keep inside a bit stronger, just to be safe against OPness. However, we're actually claiming that outside is already stronger.

Your mischaractizings outside fighting as pure counter fighting/using combos in the pocket. There is no debate in which is better as the shown mechanics favour inside fighting, ie the stamina drain on back dash, the magnetic punches that slide to stay in range, the flawed forward moving combos that dont reset when moving forward.

The crux of the discussion was already reached by ZHunter and aholbert: Should movement alone allow you to viably keep the distance, even without deterrence? Yall say yes and we say no.

And yall are wrong, we have shown you examples where it happens irl, im not to sure how you can dispute that, there are no mechanics that support this.

[ungorborongo]

Re: How is outside fighting considered OP?

Dictating the pace = getting your *** handed to you?

And do you want to dictate the pace simply by holding back? That would bottleneck the gameplay so much. There are bazilion of ways to counter a guy coming forward. Chasing someone constantly retreating is another story.


I wouldn't characterize the discussion as this at all.

There is much dispute about which style is the better one, right now. It seems you mean you want outside to be as viabel as inside, while we want to keep inside a bit stronger, just to be safe against OPness. However, we're actually claiming that outside is already stronger.

The crux of the discussion was already reached by ZHunter and aholbert: Should movement alone allow you to viably keep the distance, even without deterrence? Yall say yes and we say no.

you're missing crucial, fundamental ideas in the discussion. What you're identifying as outside fighting, by almost anyone's metric IRL is NOT outside fighting. It's a guy backing up for a little while, and then winning an inside fight under good circumstances. That isn't outside fighting. It's just SMART inside fighting.

Dictating the pace and getting your *** handed to you ARE COMPLETELY SEPERATE. You can dictate the pace AND be getting your *** kicked, yes. If I move forward constantly and you beat my *** as I do it, you're still not choosing the pace that we fight at. You're just getting the best of it.

We want fighters to be able to actually say "well, I'm not going to engage at this range. I'm going to fight at a different range, and I have X Y and Z tools to do so. Then, Fighting INSIDE will actually have way more depth as well, because you'll have better mechanics to deal with people who fight outside.

pace has NOTHING to do with who's winning. They're completely seperate

The person who's on the outside in a fight won't necessarily be dictating the pace either. that's not what we're saying. What we're saying is that the person who's better with their footwork OVERALL will dictate the pace, whether they're inside or outside fighters.

I mean, really, look at ronda rousey vs holly holm. Ronda fought like a UFC 3 online player. Holly fought on the outside, and in MANY instances Holly did generate distance simply by using her footwork.

Your argument fundamentally is nonsensical because it's completely counter to the reality of fighting. Watch some classic inside vs outside fights in UFC, TUF, PRIDE or whatever organization suits you. The most important coaching advice people give the outside fighter is NOT to get caught at all in the brawl with the other fighter, its to use their footwork to disengage until they're at the range they want.

Im sorry, but you guys are just incorrect when it comes to what Mixed martial arts fighting looks like.

[Phillyboi207]

Re: How is outside fighting considered OP?

Dictating the pace = getting your *** handed to you?

And do you want to dictate the pace simply by holding back? That would bottleneck the gameplay so much. There are bazilion of ways to counter a guy coming forward. Chasing someone constantly retreating is another story.


I wouldn't characterize the discussion as this at all.

There is much dispute about which style is the better one, right now. It seems you mean you want outside to be as viabel as inside, while we want to keep inside a bit stronger, just to be safe against OPness. However, we're actually claiming that outside is already stronger.

The crux of the discussion was already reached by ZHunter and aholbert: Should movement alone allow you to viably keep the distance, even without deterrence? Yall say yes and we say no.

In what world does pace have anything to do with winning?

What sense does it make that you want inside fighting be “stronger”(aka OP) in relation to outside fighting? We should all want BALANCE. I dont want Derrick Lewis to be able to walk backwards as fast Stipe can come forward. But Stephen Thompson should be able to move backwards out of range without an issue.

I think this is a lunge/tracking issue. Lunges dont work the way they should(meaning how they do in real life). I want everyone to have the ability to cut the cage off effectively if the user is skilled. I also want guys with high footwork to be able to create and maintain space if the user is skilled.

And can we try to keep the arguments clear? I am not referring to counter striking or striking off of your back foot. They are both effective. I am referring to creating and maintaining space with footwork. I think movement speed is actually okay. The issue lies with the magnetic striking and the fact that lunges follow your opponent closely.Which dont really make sense because usually the point of lunging is to create space.