Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Do you mean 
Reply
Wastelander
Registered: 01/03/2012
Offline
587 posts
 

Re: My last argument for those who defend the use of kill confirms.

Jan 1, 2013

khknight wrote:

If you actually learned how to use  your character's super properly, you wouldn't need to rely on skilless kill confirms.

As a jak main, i have to use my level 1s wisely and activate them at the best possible moment. Like when my oppenent leaves an opening or when they try to attack me from the air.

you cant expect a kill by activating them at random moments just because someone is next to you.


Hey there, Knight. Thanks for your support. Sorry for leaving so abruptly yesterday and not playing today. I got kinda turned off after whoever it was (I forgot who) became Raiden and spammed his kill comfirms to victory. I lose respect for people who do that. :/

Message 11 of 162 (216 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Hekseville Citizen
Registered: 07/27/2012
Offline
240 posts
 

Re: My last argument for those who defend the use of kill confirms.

Jan 1, 2013

It's simple, if you want a game that grants people no benefit for aggression and requires stray moves to land kills, play brawl.

Message 12 of 162 (214 Views)
I Only Post Everything
Registered: 10/07/2010
Offline
1169 posts
 

Re: My last argument for those who defend the use of kill confirms.

[ Edited ]
Jan 1, 2013

@GaleDaWindMasta Because sometimes characters need hitconfirms to make up for a bad super.

Imagine everyone in the cast had ZERO hit confirms. That means poor Heihachi is left with a very short range, slow starting, short and easily stopped level 1 while Ratchet has this incredibly good longer range harder to stop level 1 that lasts longer with a lot more use. Heihachi needs to have a hit confirm to make up for the fact his level 1 is bad in general while Ratchet needs to have as few as possible because his level 1 is already very good.

Problems arise when characters have both a GOOD super and GOOD Hit confirms like Raiden while others have a BAD super with BAD hit confirms like Big Daddy. They need to balance it more so it's more like Heihachi and Ratchets.

Message 13 of 162 (210 Views)
Wastelander
Registered: 01/03/2012
Offline
587 posts
 

Re: My last argument for those who defend the use of kill confirms.

Jan 1, 2013

Red_Ring_Ryko wrote:

It's simple, if you want a game that grants people no benefit for aggression and requires stray moves to land kills, play brawl.


This is just stupid. Please, leave.

Message 14 of 162 (209 Views)
Survivor
Registered: 09/17/2012
Offline
2454 posts
 

Re: My last argument for those who defend the use of kill confirms.

Jan 1, 2013
To be fair I am slightly against confirm kills, its slightly over the top and easier with other characters then the rest its like by the time sir dan can get on average 1 kill for level 1, 2 for level 2 (maybe 3 in ffa) and 3-6 with level 3 (again in ffa) but E.cole can get around 5-6 level 1's with confirm kill with his giga punch.

Its like some characters to get the most kills have to/want to aim for level 3 and others its best to aim for level 1 and get a guaranteed kill.

In stock it makes it even worse as you could die 3 times by confirm kills before you even get your level 3 especially when you go against 2 evils coles (which happens more then you think)

Am just saying every character should have them or no characters not mix and match or there will be a division of players who wish to be cheap or players that are skilled.

E.cole and sir dan was just examples fan boys who defend the character
Message 15 of 162 (207 Views)
Uncharted Territory
Registered: 02/06/2009
Offline
1868 posts
 

Re: My last argument for those who defend the use of kill confirms.

Jan 1, 2013
Lol this whole hit confirm argument is dividing the community I think I liked it when everyone was whining about buffs and nerfs.
Message 16 of 162 (205 Views)
Hekseville Citizen
Registered: 07/27/2012
Offline
240 posts
 

Re: My last argument for those who defend the use of kill confirms.

[ Edited ]
Jan 1, 2013

Your argument is fallacious because you're using terms that are innacurate to skew perception toward your point of view. "Spamming kill confirms" is called setting up kill combos, it's no more "spam" than any tactic that becomes a bread and butter for the metagame. If you took away the kill confirms into level 1, people would just do the confirms into level 2's. Incidentally every character you're bellyaching about can just as easily do the same thing with their level 2's, and you in turn keep the exact same metagame but slow it down.

 

Your concept of design is weak at best and if you don't want to play a game where a single move could spell your death, you shouldn't be playing a game where the whole design is "a single move kills you".

 

And straight up lol at "please leave". You don't get to be petulant because all of two people agree with your boring idea for how the game "should be played".

Message 17 of 162 (202 Views)
Survivor
Registered: 12/09/2012
Offline
2365 posts
 

Re: My last argument for those who defend the use of kill confirms.

Jan 1, 2013
"Too bad it is. Kill Confirms skew the leaderboards with people who spam kill confirms to win. People didn't use skill to climb their way to the top (I'm speaking in general terms here, of course). They used the cheapest way because, of course, it works. "

Same for Kratos spammers and what not, yet those wont disappear. I don't know where to stand on hit confirms yet. If I was playing competitively for money for for fame and whatnot, I'd use them. People want to win. And if they exist, they'll be used.

You see how we've had less "OMG SPAMMERS" threads lately? Not none mind you, but less. People are dealing with them better. If people only use ONE kill confirm against you all match, spamming it, people will eventually get better and avoid them too.

Now characters that use LOTS of the different ones, those would be MUCH harder I concede.

Now, I'm not saying that some shouldn't be toned down for sure, but eliminating them all would change the game radically. Many combos themselves would be ruined or at least tainted in some way.

And many characters that "don't have a real hit confirm" do. Sir Dan actually has an unavoidable one (though everyone says he doesn't).

So I ask this, if everyone had a discovered hit confirm for their level one, would they be okay then?
Message 18 of 162 (184 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Lombax Warrior
Registered: 06/18/2010
Offline
239 posts
 

Re: My last argument for those who defend the use of kill confirms.

Jan 1, 2013

     I'm not going to go into detail again because most of that has been covered in two other threads concerning this. Kill confirms are only a problem if you let them be a problem. If you know how the characters do it then you shouldn't have too many problems working around them. Besides, ranked FFA is a poor representation of actual skill due to the randomness involved with them. Even so, is there actually any evidence that the guys/ gals on top of the leaderboards are there because of confirms? 2 v 2, although not perfect, does a better job at showing actual skill due to less randomness and that mode is meant for allowing you and your partner to create "cheap" or effective methods to get easy super kills.

 

     However, I will agree with you on Raiden because of the sheer amount of ways that he can confirm into his super. The rest are fine imo.

Message 19 of 162 (168 Views)
Hekseville Citizen
Registered: 07/27/2012
Offline
240 posts
 

Re: My last argument for those who defend the use of kill confirms.

[ Edited ]
Jan 1, 2013

I know for **bleep** sure that of the top 20 on the 2v2 leaderboard, about 18 of us do setups and otherwise find ways to pick people up into level 1's.

 

And I wouldnt have it any other way.

Message 20 of 162 (163 Views)