It wasn't for no reason at all, I just don't want wildly incorrect statements being thrown around as truth on the forums. Considering that the devs can only spare time for very little fixes on PvP currently, such incorrect statements could lead to the developers focusing on "exploits" which aren't even exploits in the first place. No, I wasn't. I simply described why what Kara was saying was incorrect. It was you who actually came in here looking for an argument and the first to post a childish comment, contributing nothing to the discussion we were having. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black eh? The devs have specifically adjusted and "nerfed" dodge in the past, it's most certainly intended. Then don't go around labelling things as "exploits" when they aren't, because it doesn't help anything. All it achieves is cause more confusion and makes it more difficult to identify what is and isn't intended and can have a very negative effect on feedback.
Brice said you were assuming because he, at the very least, has the decency to admit he doesn't know everything. Kara can't be incorrect calling something we have no formal confirmation is intended - an exploit. That is a fact. I suggest we leave it to the Devs to decide what feedback is valuable and what isn't. If you're honestly not aware of how you're starting arguments for no reason, like right here.. I guess I overestimated you.
Sigh. OK, first of all intent has nothing to do with the definition of "exploit". To "exploit" means to take unfair advantage of. I didn't make this up, this is right in any dictionary. Clutch made his own definition up. It is vastly easier to blockbreak someone who just taps block and nothing else versus someone who blocks then immediately dodges. This is fact, just watch the videos. Tunso has stated in the past that block has a small extra window of time where you can be blockbroken. The extra time, he said, was to account for latency. This is fact and the quote is available on the forums. No dev has ever stated publicly that Dodge is meant to remove that extra window of time. This is fact. Intent can change. Being able to block in the middle of a roll went from being intended to work (according to Loche) to intended NOT to work (according to Mepps). This is fact, though it's cute how Clutch always likes to pretend he's a dev. Therefore, any method, trick, or glitch that lets you bypass some or all of the counter system and is not explicitly stated as "working as intended" is taking unfair advantage of the counter system and is by definition an exploit. Thank you Clutch and Brice for making me waste my time explaining semantics. I don't kno what planet you come from but usually starting off by calling someone wrong for stupid, arrogant, or no reason tends to mean aggression. Yes, you can still get immunity from 2 of the 3 methods used to avoid being blockbroken, but all 3 methods still allow you to avoid being blockbroken.
"In video games, an exploit is the use of a bug or glitches, game system, rates, hit boxes, or speed, etc. by a player to their advantage in a manner not intended by the game's designers." Mulligan, Jessica; Bridgette Patrovsky (2003). "Appendix F". Developing online games. New Riders. p. 474. ISBN 9781592730001. Didn't make anything up sunshine, included the reference just for you xo
Oxford Dictionaries (English) Exploit - "Make use of (a Situation) in a way considered unfair of underhand." = But since we're already bringing up random quotes made by figures of no real authority over the English language or coining terms: "Can we fix it? Yes we can!" Hot Animation, Bob the Builder, Animated Children's Show (1998-Present). Wiki. Some people just want to argue, and they succeed because we entertain it.. I'm sorry about your thread Kody. I should've just ignored his petty attempts, I ended up doing the same and making things worse. I'm done..
Not my fault that I try to clear up that dodge doesn't remove counter windows, but they can't accept that.
It's been a while since we've had a little skirmish, so I'd like to request we get back on topic and learn the lessons from our past mistakes in collaborative discourse. In other words, let's give it a rest about who's right and who's wrong. I don't see anyobody arguing the change the Devs have put in is heading in the wrong direction, so that's a good thing. What I am seeing is feedback that says it's not comprehensive enough to address the entirety of the problem. What other things need to be changed? So far we have... Remove the ability to chat window cancel Remove the double tap space bar cancel (might be the same as above but not sure) What else needs attention?
A clear definition of intentions alongside the changes.. So we know what's working how, and is it supposed to/intended to work the way it does. To begin with It's hard to give feedback when 99% of the time people argue about what was the original goal. For godsake the game is 6 years old almost? Isn't it time we get a completely clear statement about these things?
This change was implemented mainly to tackle roll glitching, which it has succeeded in doing. The only issue is that block will be underpowered after this change, as well as the fact that rifle is going to be at a big disadvantage to other weapons as it's block break can't be instantly cancelled like the other weapons. Unfortunately, the roll duration won't be increased to help rifle due to PvE needing a shorter roll so that players can react to telegraphed attacks. Making rifle's block break work the same as the other's would help. As far as block being underpowered, I'd probably vote for the block window being reduced ever so slightly. At least make it harder to catch tap blocks on reaction by lowering the overall window of block by 0.05-0.1 seconds.
Eh, Roll glitching wasn't such a big of an issue in the first place because all good players (EUPC) never exploit it. Fixing it, of course, would be good, if it would not come with additional "good stuff". Now you do full roll or you don't roll at all, which will remove variety from PvP as there will be less options available how a player can act during the roll. Regarding previously addressed issue with inability to block break opponent while he lunges. Well. It's not really an issue, because both players get immunities - the one block breaking and the one, who's lunging, because they are doing it at the same time, and it would be unfair for one player to get counter and for other not. If you regard that as an issue you should consider block breaking while blocking - when two players are blocking at the same time, one players block breaks while his block counter window is still open and other player, for example, does tap attack while his block window is still open. The tapping player will be countered, because his counter window is still open. But that is unfair because block breaking player does his block breaking attack while his counter block window is still open and ultimately has two counter windows open at the same time. If both players block, one block breaks and other player lunges, both players will get immunities (without hard stun). Regarding rifle, yes, you cannot jump cancel it's block break. But there is a catch. Again, If both players are in blocking state, rifle wielding player block breaks and his opponent lunges - in this case both players won't get immunities, rifle holding guy will win the counter, his opponent will be hard stunned. Only option to escape rifle block break is to roll, and with this change, rifle wielding player will be aware of that and prepared for an opponent's roll. I still hope they won't implement this change
Well, I doubt we'll suddenly get a completely detailed game map right now.. So a good place to start is this change. What is the intended goal? : - How is dodge intended to function now? - How long is the window? (Different weapons have different Dodge windows based on the Lunge animation..) - Is it supposed to cancel other vulnerability elements? * If so, is it supposed to affect the Immunity System differently than it does the actual Knockdown/Damage administered by a successful counter?
You can't cancel any of them can you? I haven't seen someone jump cancel the flip forward or backwards bb from rifle either. Those are bb's as well aren't they?
Hold forward while close, hold forward while far, and hold away while close are the 3 versions of Rifle's hold range that can be jump canceled. No directional input and hold away while far cannot be jump canceled.
Block is overpowered because it can't be countered if you dodge. Lunge is overpowered because it can't be countered if you clip it with a beneficial power. Fix the exploits before messing with anything else.
Infinite tap is just something that is down to poor implementation on the 5 tap change. I'd rather see huge-AoE taps changed and 3 tap come back. However infinite tap will not be as huge of an advantage as being able to jump cancel your block breaks will in the new system. As for HB 3 tap, all final taps should be blockable if they're dealing more damage than a regular tap (like rifle's for example). Bow's BB is at least fast enough to counter rolls in the test build, rifle's isn't. That's the big difference between the two. However if they could change both to be typical jump cancels and maintain the combo aspect of the weapons, that'd be ideal. This is why IF the window is reduced, it should be a very small amount so that it is still very possible to catch them on reaction. As long as this is the case, tap blocks will always have a counter and won't be viable against top players. It would never be a dominant strategy unless people couldn't block break well. I don't think we need to shorten the windows on the block breaks as long as it's still possible to catch tap blocks on reaction. I really want to emphasise that the change should be really, really small. When it comes to reacting to things, such small changes can make huge differences. 0.1 should really be more than enough