IGN's 12 Days of DOA5

[Omegan Eckhart]

It might be a glitch, or it's possible there is simply an animation missing. Eliot has only just been unveiled so it's likely he isn't finished yet.

 

[Doug Nguyen]

Yeah i hate low holds. The only thing you can do is mid attacks. Its just annoying when they keep interrupting your combos with low holds.

 

[UnD34D]

Yeah i hate low holds. The only thing you can do is mid attacks. Its just annoying when they keep interrupting your combos with low holds.

That's why you condition them to go low, and then make them pay for it so badly that they never want to go low again.

 

[RikWeaN]

Simple fix to the low hold issue :
Just make it so the hitbox of the character can still be hit by high attacks.
Voila. Problem fixed.
... I'm serious, this single fix would put an end to the problem without even having to tweak the recovery or whatever, I'm surprised they didn't think about it.
Actually, they probably did... I guess they just don't think low holds are such an issue (unfortunately).

 

[Zeo]

That "fix" would be a cop out and dumb. There is no reason why crouching should go under highs but low counters which visually put the character even lower than a crouch should get hit by high attacks, it would look amazingly sloppy as well.

In addition, it would make low holds the most unsafe counter of the bunch on top of already doing little damage on the off chance that you actually landed it. I've already posted my thoughts about this on the last page, if you want to dispute me look on page 28. I've already posted my idea of a "fix" there.

 

[Xion]

Hopefully today's batch of videos will be up soon.. I'm hoping its not a repeat of yesterday. Cmon Dogg!

 

[grap3fruitman]

Off topic: What if only grapplers could hold low?

On topic: We're getting more videos today, right? Looking forward to them.

 

[daman077c]

That "fix" would be a cop out and dumb. There is no reason why crouching should go under highs but low counters which visually put the character even lower than a crouch should get hit by high attacks, it would look amazingly sloppy as well.

In addition, it would make low holds the most unsafe counter of the bunch on top of already doing little damage on the off chance that you actually landed it. I've already posted my thoughts about this on the last page, if you want to dispute me look on page 28. I've already posted my idea of a "fix" there.

Or everyone can just low throw the hell out of people. Even if they escape they're at a disadvantage and you can press the issue. Holds in general are unsafe, in that with the amount of time you have to delay or cancel strings between imputs, you can easily cancel and throw when someone throws out a low hold to break a string.

 

[Doug Nguyen]

That's why you condition them to go low, and then make them pay for it so badly that they never want to go low again.

Yeah i always try doing that but i never fight the same person online enough to even condition them. People quit a lot in DOA4.

 

[Russian-chiropractic19]

Yeah i always try doing that but i never fight the same person online enough to even condition them. People quit a lot in DOA4.

You can do it in a single round.basically do a combo and end with a low keep doing this and they will eventually get smart and try to counter,hit delay attacks a bit to get him off rhythm then when he tries and gets nothing low throw.at least that's how it works in theory I believe.

 

[TRI Mike]

This is probably extremely wrong but after looking at that Brad video, he looks extremely unsafe and slow again, I didn't see any good stuns either so he could be the "worse than Lisa" character Bryan mentioned. I hope I'm wrong though. He deserves to be at least mid tier once.

I want to see someone use Eliot as he's supposed to now. A breakdown article on him and Tina is needed on my part.

 

[UnD34D]

Yeah i always try doing that but i never fight the same person online enough to even condition them. People quit a lot in DOA4.

What R-C19 said is pretty true. In T6, I constantly dash forward, using FF, then hit people with Jack-6's FC DB+1, a low punch that's really quick and gives you +9 on hit. People don't like to be hit with it. You do it a couple times and all of a sudden, they are at 1/2 health and don't want to get hit by it anymore. BAM! You dash forward, they are conditioned in the first round to keep trying to block it, they go low, you hit 'em with FF+1 instead, and get a free DB+2 while they are grounded, gg son.

 

[TRI Mike]

What's everyone's take here on the PB not being available more than once per round¿

 

[Raansu]

What's everyone's take here on the PB not being available more than once per round¿

You'd rarely get one off every round anyways so I don't really care about that. MASTER seems to be the only one who seems really miffed about it because he thinks step cancelling the charge is a good strategy lol.

 

[DR2K]

Off topic: What if only grapplers could hold low?

On topic: We're getting more videos today, right? Looking forward to them.

Eh, I'd rather they just give low holds double the recovery frames.

 

[Zeo]

That would still be horrible, that would mean if you low held and the opponent whiffed a high attack, they could still hit you with whatever they wanted after they already failed the initial attack, that's in no way "balancing" low holds.

 

[Raansu]

That would still be horrible, that would mean if you low held and the opponent whiffed a high attack, they could still hit you with whatever they wanted after they already failed the initial attack, that's in no way "balancing" low holds.

Sounds to me like you just enjoy have multiple second chances. Sorry but no, if you do a low hold in stun you should have a long ass recovery time. In fact all holds in stuns should of a long ass recovery time. You throwing out a random low hold and then recovering before the attack is beyond stupid. You were already put into the stun, you should be considered lucky that you even get ONE chance to escape. A failed hold should have SEVERE consequences.

 

[Zeo]

Sounds to me like you just enjoy have multiple second chances. Sorry but no, if you do a low hold in stun you should have a long ass recovery time. In fact all holds in stuns should of a long ass recovery time. You throwing out a random low hold and then recovering before the attack is beyond stupid. You were already put into the stun, you should be considered lucky that you even get ONE chance to escape. A failed hold should have SEVERE consequences.

Way to jump to conclusions on what I enjoy and what kind of player I am, friend.

If you can crouch high attacks there should be no reason why low holds are somehow the exception to this rule, In addition to that with the new recovery high holds have a much higher risk of either a juggle or a grab doing massive damage. On top of that counter damage was so nerfed there's hardly a payout. At that point the risk of countering outweighs the reward. I understand people's hatred for countering at this point but it doesn't need to go from overpowered to underpowered.

Wouldn't the solution simply for low countering to be un-optional for the first few frames instead of adding a million recovery frames to INSURE you'll be punished if you happen to fail it? The mid attack after the high SHOULD be blocked if the opponent low countered and you did a high attack, that means you missed your punish. The recovery shouldn't be so long that you can just throw out anything and it'll hit anyway.

Some of your issues I agree with, there should be a delay before you're able to counter in overall stuns and the overall recovery on counters should be increased slightly but not to the extent you and others are asking for. If everyone got what they wanted there would be 0 reason to use counters aside from guessing certain strings which 90% of high level players don't even actually finish.

 

[Raansu]

If you can crouch high attacks there should be no reason why low holds are somehow the exception to this rule.
Reading the opponent correctly in neutral by properly blocking/fuzzy guarding is completely different from throwing out random low holds to immediately get out of a stun. You are punishing the attacker who has already succeeded in getting past your defense. That is just straight up asinine.

You're already given the chance to hold out of a stun...Why should the player on offense have to continually deal with said situations? He already had to deal with the holds/sitesteps/freesteps/fuzzy guarding/spacing when trying to break past your defense. Now you want to be rewarded for failing on defense with holds in stun?

The fact that you can already hold out of stun is asinine. If you hold out of stun and miss, that should be it, that should be your one and only chance.

On top of that counter damage was so nerfed there's hardly a payout. At that point the risk of countering outweighs the reward.

Your payout was stopping the opponents offensive...That's MORE than enough of a payout for a tool that gives you multiple second chances.

Wouldn't the solution simply for low countering to be un-optional for the first few frames instead of adding a million recovery frames to INSURE you'll be punished if you happen to fail it?

I'd prefer you didn't have the option period after a stun, but that's not going to happen. Either way all holds in stun should have a long recovery time, simply as that. A missed hold should guarantee a free follow up, period. None of this "holding within the first few frames and being able to block the next attack." BS

The mid attack after the high SHOULD be blocked if the opponent low countered and you did a high attack.

No it shouldn't, that is just asinine.

That means you missed your punish. The recovery shouldn't be so long that you can just throw out anything and it'll hit anyway.

No it means YOU failed on defense an then threw out a random low hold to escape the stun thus punishing the attacker who shouldn't have to deal with that situation to begin with.

 

[Lobo]

snip

Haha, bravo sir. Your use of the word asinine brought a smile to my face. And 3 times nonetheless