Virtua Fighter 5 Location Test Videos MEGA THREAD!!

[Double post]

 

My interpretation is that + is no longer throw guaranteed (whatever the throw execution frame rate). Buru tried to throw and PE tried while PE tried to reverse nitaku, and thus, clash. This is a wonderful example of how the clash has been made to make throw attempts less risky. If Buru goes for the throw in that situation, he has no penalty if PE tries to attack because of the clash. Buru should probably go for attacks more often as a result.

Also, why is this stage called the roof top stage??

P.S. In the Aoi vs Kage clip on the raft stage both Aoi and Kage get wet!! Their costumes get shiny, seem to shrink/harden a little, and the colors are darker. Niiice. Did you guys also note that funny-looking Kage walk? About 30 seconds into the clip.

 

That walk is most likely hold back and tap G. Looks so funny, can't wait to do it in matches.

 

I was thinkning the same thing as Jeff: while the throw clash thing would initially seem to make throws weaker, it actually encourages people to throw more, since you'll get the clash whereas before you'd get hit, maybe even with a counter.

I'm still a little confused though. I'd read somewhere that the clash happened when someone who was trying to throw from Disadvantage got attacked, is that right? But in the case of this clip, we have someone who's probably at big disadvantage (++ guarded) attacking (we assume, watching the clip frame by frame I still can't tell exactly what PE did, because it snaps into the clash animation so quickly) and getting the clash against the thrower, who assumed back throw was still guaranteed here ala VF4. This is the opposite of what I'd read before.

So a Reverse Nitaku against a Throw Attempt (attacking out of big disadvantage against a throw) will only get you the "clash" now? No more ability to turn the tables with correct Yomi in this situation? Perhaps it only occurs with certain attacks? IF we can't beat non-guaranteed throws with Attacks anymore, I think it'll really damage the game. Reverse Nitaku is one of the deepest and most fun aspects of VF play, IMO. I hope they aren't striving to take it out.

anxious to hear the exact details

Bryan

 

I asked this question in another thread, but I'll ask again here:

I've heard three variations of the "Winner" track and wonder what are the determining factors for which one you hear? Anyone have a clue?

 

I believe it might be something you're able to earn and then set using VF.net.

 

I think the way you described it is what's intended.

Let's say throws still take 8 frames to execute, and taht any time you have +8 advantage a throw is guaranteed. In VF4, if you tried to throw at less than +8 and the opponent does reverse nitaku then you will get MCed regardless of whether you were at +7 or +3. Because reverse nitaku such as a knee can take so much damage, it really reduced the benefit of being at frame advantage. This was something that always bothered me about VF4...throws were just so risky that you need to delay attack a lot at <8 frames advantage. This punished characters who had good throws but did not have a good delay attack (i.e. <17 frame launchers) such as Goh.

If you think about it, the red/yellow counter introduced in FT was meant to reduce that risk. Doing a big reverse nitaku move such as a knee now carried more punishment than a small reverse nitaku move like a low punch. VF5 takes this one step further. Now, I'm guessing at some defined range on high advantage, a clash will occur if the defender does reverse nitaku against a throw attempt.

So maybe the frames might break down to something like:
>8 frame advantage -- throw guaranteed
5-7 frames advantage -- clash window
1-4 frame advantage -- clash not possible

Thus reverse nitaku still exists, just not at large frame advantages. This reduces the risk for throw attempts and IMO improves the risk-reward game: now the difference between being at +7 and +3 is crucial.

My only question is...at larger than 8 frames of advantage will reverse nitaku against a throw attempt result in a clash? My guess is yes, but I wouldn't be surprised if the answer is no. The reason is that if a clash does occur at >8 frames, then defenders will have no reason to do an attack and that might simplify the defense game more than the designers want. On the other hand, it'll seem strange that a clash occurs at +7 frames but not +9 frames.

 

Is maybe the clash happening only when you try a small move? In FT how does it work...you get red countered when you try something 30 damage or more? Maybe it's 20? Whatever the number, if a small move produces the clash but big move still beats throw, then we aren't losing RN...there's simply a further balancing making small moves from disadvantage yield less (or even give you disadvantage? is this what we're seeing in clips?) if throw is tried. A risk/reward refinement mirroring the red counters of FT.

Another question is what is the situation after the clash? It would be in keeping with am2's approach to make the situation specific to either the throw or attack which is attempted. I know that in the clips I saw, the throw animated the grip when the clash occured...too early to see which throw was tried...making the hypothetical situation specific advantage unlikely as each throw clash would result in exactly the same situation or else favor one player (who knew which throw/attack he was going for) over the other, which would make things kinda unfair to the blind player.

I'm for more refinement over being forced to throw break every time i'm -7.

But then there's the defensive evade, offensive evade stuff. Can you throw offensive evade? It's kinda counter intuitive to think you can't but I can't figure out a way, without RN, to use yomi vs a throw attempt when I'm in the disadvantage where strike & throw clash and get rewarded. I mean...SPoD beats throw, right?

So many questions...

 

Hmm, good point...I never thought about it that way. I thought the clash only worked in terms of relative frame advantage, but no reason it doesn't extend to how much damage the reverse nitaku attack inflicts.

 

[ QUOTE ]
My only question is...at larger than 8 frames of advantage will reverse nitaku against a throw attempt result in a clash?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure what you're trying to get at here Jeff. I mean if someone is <8 they have to escape throw. So I don't think this applies to guaranteed situations. Then again I don't know the frames for VF5. /versus/images/graemlins/deadpan.gif

 

I know technically it's not, but come on, how many times have you seen an opponent attempt a reverse nitaku attack anyway even in a throw guaranteed situation? I have played against defenders who would reverse nitaku attack (usually with a TE) at -8 or -10 frame disadvantage situations (such as Akira's SDE or Lei Fei's +) or attacks that push opponents to the edge of the throw range anyway in anticipation of opponents 1) inputting late, 2) just missing the opportunity as a result of brain freeze, or 3) delay attacking/throwing.

In any case, it could happen and therefore AM2 must explicitly decide whether or not a clash would occur and program it in.

 

[ QUOTE ]
I know technically it's not, but come on, how many times have you seen an opponent attempt a reverse nitaku attack anyway even in a throw guaranteed situation?

[/ QUOTE ]


Me. /versus/images/graemlins/crazy.gif

 

Actually, from what I've read the clash only occurs at smaller advantages and stops happening at around +3, +4

 

Ahh OK I got it now--yeah you and Jerky are right!

I'll go practice my TFT knee combo now. /versus/images/graemlins/blush.gif

 

[ QUOTE ]
ice-9 said:

I know technically it's not, but come on, how many times have you seen an opponent attempt a reverse nitaku attack anyway even in a throw guaranteed situation? I have played against defenders who would reverse nitaku attack (usually with a TE) at -8 or -10 frame disadvantage situations (such as Akira's SDE or Lei Fei's +) or attacks that push opponents to the edge of the throw range anyway in anticipation of opponents 1) inputting late, 2) just missing the opportunity as a result of brain freeze, or 3) delay attacking/throwing.

In any case, it could happen and therefore AM2 must explicitly decide whether or not a clash would occur and program it in.

[/ QUOTE ]

...did anybody else find this funny to read? /versus/images/graemlins/laugh.gif


...no?

ok... /versus/images/graemlins/tear.gif

 

more confused if anything /versus/images/graemlins/shocked.gif

 

[ QUOTE ]
ice-9 said:

I know technically it's not, but come on, how many times have you seen an opponent attempt a reverse nitaku attack anyway even in a throw guaranteed situation? I have played against defenders who would reverse nitaku attack (usually with a TE) at -8 or -10 frame disadvantage situations (such as Akira's SDE or Lei Fei's +) or attacks that push opponents to the edge of the throw range anyway in anticipation of opponents 1) inputting late, 2) just missing the opportunity as a result of brain freeze, or 3) delay attacking/throwing.

In any case, it could happen and therefore AM2 must explicitly decide whether or not a clash would occur and program it in.

[/ QUOTE ]

The thing is, if what you said occurred, it would still fall into the same clash window. So the fact that it's possible to clash in -8 situations would mean it would clash in those situations you listed as well.

 

[ QUOTE ]
akiralove said:

I was thinkning the same thing as Jeff: while the throw clash thing would initially seem to make throws weaker, it actually encourages people to throw more, since you'll get the clash whereas before you'd get hit, maybe even with a counter.

I'm still a little confused though. I'd read somewhere that the clash happened when someone who was trying to throw from Disadvantage got attacked, is that right? But in the case of this clip, we have someone who's probably at big disadvantage (++ guarded) attacking (we assume, watching the clip frame by frame I still can't tell exactly what PE did, because it snaps into the clash animation so quickly) and getting the clash against the thrower, who assumed back throw was still guaranteed here ala VF4. This is the opposite of what I'd read before.

So a Reverse Nitaku against a Throw Attempt (attacking out of big disadvantage against a throw) will only get you the "clash" now? No more ability to turn the tables with correct Yomi in this situation? Perhaps it only occurs with certain attacks? IF we can't beat non-guaranteed throws with Attacks anymore, I think it'll really damage the game. Reverse Nitaku is one of the deepest and most fun aspects of VF play, IMO. I hope they aren't striving to take it out.

anxious to hear the exact details

Bryan

[/ QUOTE ]

I wrote the following a few days ago and was gonna post this later but I guess it's a good time now. Some of the things I see people have already gathered in previous posts, but it's explored a bit more here.

From what I've gathered, throw speed has been slowed. In addition, from people's testing, many moves that were throw guaranteed in VF4 can now be clashed if you mash P. This highly suggests that throws have been slowed, most likely in the 11 frames to 13 frames range. (Similar to tekken?) If we look at the situation with Lion, + blocked puts him at -10. It's clear that Lion does the back turned and this clashes with the back throw. The same has been said about Jeffry's even.

So what implication does this have on the game? Like Ice-9 said, the most apparent change is that throwing in small advantage is now much much safer. You don't have to worry about mid or high attacks beating your throws when you have the frame advantage. This also makes for an easy way out for the player in disadvantage. You are no longer required to take the usual defensive techs to defend yourself. At the surface, this seems like an overly simplified game. While it can be played that way, this change actually opens up a whole different guessing game in those situations.

Let A be the player in advantage and B be the player in disadvantage.

Let's look at the guessing game B can do.
1. B can always do DM (Defensive Move) with TE for the traditional guessing game.
2. In VF5, B may be encouraged to attack to get the clash.
3. B may do a low attack.
4. B can also choose to guard.

Now we look at the result.
/versus/images/graemlins/smile.gif = Successfully defended
/versus/images/graemlins/confused.gif = Maybe defended
/versus/images/graemlins/frown.gif = Not successfully defended


If A throws.
1. /versus/images/graemlins/confused.gif Depends on how many TE's done.
2. /versus/images/graemlins/smile.gif Nothing happens.
3. /versus/images/graemlins/smile.gif B hits A.
4. /versus/images/graemlins/frown.gif B gets thrown.

If A attacks with mid.
1. /versus/images/graemlins/smile.gif B dodges; but in VF5, successful DM doesn't get much advantage.
2. /versus/images/graemlins/frown.gif B gets counter hit or launched.
3. /versus/images/graemlins/frown.gif B gets counter hit or launched.
4. /versus/images/graemlins/smile.gif B guards.

If A does OM attack
1. /versus/images/graemlins/confused.gif Not much is known at this point, but I'm guessing B will be hit out of the failed DM.
2. /versus/images/graemlins/frown.gif B gets counter hit and side stunned.
3. /versus/images/graemlins/confused.gif B will most likely get hit.
4. /versus/images/graemlins/smile.gif B guards.


There are obviously more possibilities than the ones I've listed. If you look at the outcomes, it is still possible to out guess your opponent. The primary way of doing so involves low attacks, also the most dangerous thing you can do in this situation. So in essence, what this change implies is that the person in disadvantage really is at a disadvantage. Even when B guesses right, nothing much can be gained, unlike VF4 where you can possibly launch with a good reverse nitaku guess.

The interesting things to look at with VF5 is the changes to the old evades, or DM; and the new evades, OM. DM is now shorter compared to VF4, this means less TE's can be done. This means that ETEG will be much less effective in terms of risk reward, since you can only enter one or two commands, and in VF5, almost nothing besides a dodge attack will hit on a successful evade if the opponent doesn't do a big move. This small change effectively evens the risk/reward ratio for all the defensive techs listed above, which makes yomi much more important compared to VF4, since there is no 'best option' anymore. It might even encourage people to take more risks, which is where OM comes into play.

The new evade, called offensive move, can move your characters to the side or even the back of the opponent. While it's still not clear exactly how this is used, we know right now that it's not exactly a substitute for DM. This means that it's not something that should be done at an disadvantage, since moves easily track; whether or not you can TE during OM is also questionable. Many Japanese sources have theorized (me as well), that OM is something that should be done in advantage. If we look at the situation used above with A and B, that B is at at least -8 frames, then it would be very advantageous for A to use OM since A will be able to move to B's side at least 8 frames faster. (This also explains why OM shouldn't be used in a disadvantaged situation since it's that much slower.) If B attacks, A's OM attack should be able to counter hit B and leave him side stunned. This makes for a much more dynamic play than VF4 where the nitaku game mainly consisted of mid and throw. What needs to be determined is what will happen if B does DM and it comes out as a failed evade, will A's OM attack still hit it? It's clear to see that being in disadvantage is a much more dangerous situation, and the guessing game involved is more multi-dimensional than VF4.

For conservative/traditional players, this is their dream come true. For abare players, they will be encourage to always use big attacks. For the former, the game is now very very yomi based; for the later, big hits and big damages will take place from relatively small disadvantage situations. In some ways, the game seems to go the direction towards tekken a bit. I wouldn't be surprised if people will be able to clash with throws purely based on visual reaction under certain circumstances. Did anyone notice the tekken style wall stun in the latest Lau vs Akira clip as well? It looks like really big damage is possible from there.

Much of what I said is purely an interpolation from what's available info thus far, if anyone actually playing the location test can correct any mistakes made, please do so.