Reply
Treasure Hunter
Registered: 06/24/2011
Offline
4394 posts
 

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

Jan 1, 2013
I found a non-wall hit-confirm combo for Parappa. It has at least 60% chance of success. ... Is that really okay? Smiley Sad
Ho Ho Ha Ha
Message 21 of 162 (140 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Uncharted Territory
Registered: 08/26/2009
Offline
1696 posts
 

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

Jan 1, 2013
^^^ the old expression easier said than done is applicable
"Say Pam, ever hung from a ceiling fan while your partner sat on a paint mixer"
 photo lordvv-1.gifVegeta GIF photo vegeta.gif
Message 22 of 162 (139 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Last Guardian
Registered: 12/13/2012
Online
9942 posts
 

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

Jan 1, 2013
Hit confirms are deadly, but people act like they are game breaking entirely. If you know that the opponent is doing hit confirms, learn to avoid them.

Simple as that.
 photo Hammer Girl_zpsnrg29qur.jpg
Message 23 of 162 (136 Views)
Fender Bender
Registered: 03/09/2009
Offline
4120 posts
 

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

[ Edited ]
Jan 1, 2013

Aylas_Hero wrote:

So I ask this, if everyone had a discovered hit confirm for their level one, would they be okay then?

No, the game would be garbage. People who do kill confirms are garbage and make the game not fun.

 

Kill SET UPS( something where you have time to escape) are acceptable and fair, its what superbot intended for the game  have.

 

kill combos(combo=something you can't escape until it ends) is broken bs that makes the game repetitive and boring.

 

superbot never intended for the game to have this, it was accident and bad design on their part.

Message 24 of 162 (129 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
Surely though level 1 is a chance to get a kill, level 2 increases and level 3 is an almost definite that's why you work/play so good to get them. When you get a level 3 and use it because there awesome enough to have a small cinematic you want to feel like you have earned it and deserve those kills

But when people confirm kill it changes that about it suddenly becomes level 1 guarantee, level 2 decreases the chance but your more likely to get more then one and level 3 becomes slightly better.

Seriously how many evil.coles have you seen that aim for there level 3. This past week I think I've seen 2 maybe 3 same with raiden
Message 25 of 162 (126 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
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:

Your argument is fallacious because you're using terms that are innacurate to skew perception toward your point of view. (I really don't see how I am. Or what I said was inaccurate) "Spamming kill confirms" is called setting up kill combos (Sure. When you want to make it sound nice, it is. Still the same thing, though.) , it's no more "spam" than any tactic that becomes a bread and butter for the metagame. (While basically true, there's a significant difference between using PaRappa's burst combo or Radec's sniper and using Evil Cole's giga punch to land an easy super) If you took away the kill confirms into level 1, people would just do the confirms into level 2's. (Good. I'm pretty sure that's how it should be) 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. (Well, the crumple state makes literally all supers easy to land. I don't have much against Level 2s, though)

 

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". (Who's skewing perception into their point of view, now? Yes, you win the game by landing supers. No, being able to land a super just because you have a move that conveniently combos right into it when it shouldn't is broken and imbalanced. It's a legitimate flaw in design)

 

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". (I'm not being petulant. I just don't wish to deal with your stupidity. It ruins my mood)

 

(Also, saying my "idea" about how the game "should be played" is boring is absolutely subjective and shows your total bias towards a broken mechanic that logistically should not be in the game. It is also not guaranteed in any way whatsoever that removing the ablility to kill confirm supers will bring the game down or make it boring. That is nothing but speculation and should not be brought up in terms of argument)


 

Message 26 of 162 (122 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Fender Bender
Registered: 10/17/2012
Offline
3293 posts
 

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

Jan 1, 2013
Sorry OP.... no. Just... the answer is no. It's a rediculous loaded question, and it would he dumber of us to answer that.... so no.


this is me helping
Message 27 of 162 (115 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Wastelander
Registered: 01/03/2012
Offline
587 posts
 

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

Jan 1, 2013

FredFai wrote:
I found a non-wall hit-confirm combo for Parappa. It has at least 60% chance of success. ... Is that really okay? Smiley Sad

If it has a 60% instead of 100% (maybe more accurately, 90-95%) chance of success, then it's not a kill confirm and is perfectly fine.

Message 28 of 162 (113 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

Did you seriously attempt to state that my viewpoint is subjective and yours isn't?

Message 29 of 162 (107 Views)
Reply
0 Likes
Wastelander
Registered: 01/03/2012
Offline
587 posts
 

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

[ Edited ]
Jan 1, 2013

Samokoske wrote:
Sorry OP.... no. Just... the answer is no. It's a rediculous loaded question, and it would he dumber of us to answer that.... so no.

Such is your refusal to accept that it is a broken mechanic. Also, don't be ignoring the rest of everything else I've stated just to attempt to turn it around on me.

Message 30 of 162 (103 Views)
Reply
0 Likes