Why is 4 on 4 with no strikers a terrible idea???

[Sticks]

Many of you guys say it's bad because it takes too long. I don't see anything wrong with that. I look at it as a good idea because it gives a reason for old characters returning and you don't need any strikers.

 

[Kirk Foiden]

It's not really necessary to have 4 man teams if you want returning characters. It's not going to add any more fighters to the roster. You still have the same memory limitations and have to make do with what they have. The team number is not what's keeping the game from expanding its character list; it's the memory restrictions. They're pushing the Neo Geo as it is. Generally, 4 vs. 4 isn't favored in the arcade fighting community because the matches do end up lasting longer than normal. This is especially apparent in tournament.

 

[Sticks]

Originally posted by Kirk Foiden:
<strong>It's not really necessary to have 4 man teams if you want returning characters. It's not going to add any more fighters to the roster. You still have the same memory limitations and have to make do with what they have. The team number is not what's keeping the game from expanding its character list; it's the memory restrictions. They're pushing the Neo Geo as it is. Generally, 4 vs. 4 isn't favored in the arcade fighting community because the matches do end up lasting longer than normal. This is especially apparent in tournament.</strong><hr></blockquote>

What's wrong with the matches lasting longer in tournaments? Are competitors impatient or something?

 

[ShikiMikoto]

Originally posted by Sticks:
<strong>

What's wrong with the matches lasting longer in tournaments? Are competitors impatient or something?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Um, yeah. Who wants to wait in line for 240 seconds?

 

[ShikiMikoto]

Originally posted by Sticks:
<strong>

What's wrong with the matches lasting longer in tournaments? Are competitors impatient or something?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Um, yeah. Who wants to wait in line for 240 seconds?

 

[tsukaesugi]

The four player maximum system in KOF2001 was useful for giving a handicap to more experienced players. When I played against friends I'd sometimes use only one or two characters and let them have all four.

 

[Devil_Gans]

4 on 4 is OK but fighting Igniz can be a pain.Very pitiful damage...

 

[insaneben]

Quite frankly, I don't see it as such a bad thing. It only means more playtime, which, in turn, means more bang for the buck (or credit, in this instance). I wouldn't be surprised if 4-on-4 fighting became the norm for KOF 2K3 (as hinted by the Heroes Team's ending). The only problem with that would be the lack of good fighters to fill in the gaps for certain themed teams (that problem was apparent with the Psycho Soldier and Female Fighters teams from '99-'01).

 

[YeldellGW]

Considering that most Neo fighters give you 60 sec. to fight a round as opposed to 99 in Capcom ones, I fail to see the whole "matches take too long" arguement. And then there's the speed at which the clock runs down to factor.

I'd take 4 on 4 over Strikers/assist BS anyday.

 

[Spike Spiegel]

Originally posted by tsukaesugi:
<strong>The four player maximum system in KOF2001 was useful for giving a handicap to more experienced players. When I played against friends I'd sometimes use only one or two characters and let them have all four.</strong><hr></blockquote>

You do know that your two guys were twice as stong as his guys, right?

Spike

 

[EVIL NICK]

Originally posted by Sticks:
<strong>Many of you guys say it's bad because it takes too long. I don't see anything wrong with that. I look at it as a good idea because it gives a reason for old characters returning and you don't need any strikers.</strong><hr></blockquote>

The real reason why 4 on 4 won't work :

KOF is not CVS with all ratio 1 characters...

 

[Sticks]

Originally posted by EVIL NICK:
<strong>

The real reason why 4 on 4 won't work :

KOF is not CVS with all ratio 1 characters... </strong><hr></blockquote>

Um, without that god damn ratio BS, how would it play out. I never said 4 on 4 KoF would play exactly like the CvsS Ratio System. Think of the original KoF Format (3 on 3) and just add one extra fighter to the team.

 

[tsukaesugi]

Originally posted by Spike Spiegel:
<strong>

You do know that your two guys were twice as stong as his guys, right?

Spike</strong><hr></blockquote>

Are talking about the fact that my two characters could have a higher number of MAX bars? That I knew.

Do they also have a proportionally higher HEALTH bar, or give more damage? (This I wasn't aware of.)

 

[Spike Spiegel]

Originally posted by tsukaesugi:
<strong>

Are talking about the fact that my two characters could have a higher number of MAX bars? That I knew.

Do they also have a proportionally higher HEALTH bar, or give more damage? (This I wasn't aware of.)</strong><hr></blockquote>

If you had two against four, the two guys would deal out more damamge than the others as well. Not sure about taking damage, but it's not just two on four, so you know.

Say, did you ever get super cancels down?

Spike

 

[Phoenix Down]

3 on 3 has always been the norm for KoF, I don't think time is much of a factor. Even in 2001 I only use 1 striker most of the time. I'd be really surprised if they went 4-on-4 next year.

This is basically the same problem with every KoF though: how do you please the fans who want KoF to have a big change versus those who only want minor changes. 2001 is a big example, a lot of people on this forum don't like it because it's so different, but I love it BECAUSE it plays so different from other KoFs.

Don't get me wrong though, I think 2002 kicks ass as well.

 

[tsukaesugi]

Originally posted by Phoenix Down:
<strong>3 on 3 has always been the norm for KoF, I don't think time is much of a factor. Even in 2001 I only use 1 striker most of the time. I'd be really surprised if they went 4-on-4 next year.

This is basically the same problem with every KoF though: how do you please the fans who want KoF to have a big change versus those who only want minor changes.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Yeah, you're right, someone's always going to complain.

In that case it would make more sense for PLAYMORE to go ahead and make changes anyway, people who like KOFXX better than KOFYY can play more of KOFXX instead.

Same goes for the character rosters. The characters who didn't make it to the next series aren't retired for good... they're waiting to be played in the carts on your shelf.

 

[Valgar]

In Marvel vs Capcom 2, the timer set at 99 seconds is actually about 3 minutes!

 

[X-death]

I don't think it is a bad idea. In fact, Kof 2003 should have 5 on 5.

 

[hyde]

Originally posted by tsukaesugi:
<strong>

Are talking about the fact that my two characters could have a higher number of MAX bars? That I knew.

Do they also have a proportionally higher HEALTH bar, or give more damage? (This I wasn't aware of.)</strong><hr></blockquote>

you deal A WHOLE LOT MORE DAMAGE & got a HIGHER PROPORTION HEALTH BAR when you have less player.

in fact, i play handicapped players by letting them have 2 or 3 players and me 4..

 

[VinylBoy]

It's amazing how people sometimes forget the obvious...

Using a 4 person/no striker team leaves you unable to do any SDM attacks as they take up 2 super stocks and you only get one with this team configuration. Not only that, but your super meter is a lot longer than all of the other ones.

I guess if you have a team composed of really strong characters you could get away with it. However, using the standard 3 person/1 striker team allows you to play the game with SDMs. I play with this configuration and very rarely use strikers. If I know my opponent will use them, I replace the Bao Striker (which never gets used anyhow) with Mai.

 

[Sticks]

Originally posted by VinylBoy:
<strong>It's amazing how people sometimes forget the obvious...

Using a 4 person/no striker team leaves you unable to do any SDM attacks as they take up 2 super stocks and you only get one with this team configuration. Not only that, but your super meter is a lot longer than all of the other ones.

I guess if you have a team composed of really strong characters you could get away with it. However, using the standard 3 person/1 striker team allows you to play the game with SDMs. I play with this configuration and very rarely use strikers. If I know my opponent will use them, I replace the Bao Striker (which never gets used anyhow) with Mai.</strong><hr></blockquote>

I stated the idea the wrong way. Don't think about the ratio BS from 2001/CvsS. What if, the game would let you choose 4 characters from the get go. No ratio selection or damage/defense reduction. You just pick your 4 characters and just play straight up 4 on 4 with SDMs and all the other stuff, similar to playing the old KoFs 3 on 3 format with the exception of having an extra character on the team.

 

[OrochiEddie]

It's not a bad idea but it's also nothing that great either. I could also see KOF being dropped to 2 on 2's. It probably wont happen but it's a possibility. It'd probably work out very well too. Certain Characters match up with certain characters very well. and sometimes their other team members really don't fit.

 

[VinylBoy]

The system should stay 3 on 3, but also have some of the older features from the first KOFs which made the system so much fun:

Partners should be on the sidelines cheering you on if they haven't been used, and in a "state of dispair" if they lost. If you're in your own corner, you can call out one of your partners by pressing A+B+C+D to jump in and interrupt your opponent's attack plan or break holds. This is, of course, tied in with the character's mood and personality like in KOF '97 and '98. If a character is not in a good mood, even if you do call them out to help they won't. If you team up people that don't necessarily like each other (Kyo & Iori, Terry/Andy & Billy Kane, Mai & Joe, Kim and anybody bad) they won't assist each other as well. Also in KOF '98, if a character loses they can either help the next person in line by giving them an extra super stock, or by taking them all if they don't like who is next.

I loved how this system worked, for it did give characters some actual personality that went deeper than just storylines. The fourth player could be nice, but I'd rather have them as "substitutions" that you could use while making the line-up instead of actually having a 4 on 4 team.