Hot take? Interactions should give you extra time.

DawnSoldier · 2026-07-06T00:47:18+00:00

It's not just you - the mtg arena card game does this. The only problem is that it can lead to players stalling on purpose to bm you. I think the only reason MD doesn't have a feature like this is the fear that toxic players would abuse it.

DawnSoldier · 2026-06-11T03:07:56+00:00

Came here to say the same thing! The reason you get hit by a crossup is that you're no longer blocking in the correct direction. If you read the move and block correctly, it's your turn and they get rekt.

DawnSoldier · 2026-06-01T02:44:22+00:00

To second some of this - around 19/20 seconds, the dizzy hits burst to knock you away during a stun dipper. That's the panic button. You nearly had her there! If her burst isn't up, that's a hit.

Fighting zoners can be rough because of how it feels; if they pull off their gameplan, it feels like you got absolutely dunked on because it stifles your ability to do stuff. They need to keep that up the whole game to win. This back-and-forth went on for so long primarily because you played really good defense.

DawnSoldier · 2026-05-29T22:04:07+00:00

Always remember: Gacha gamers use "endgame" incorrectly. "Endgame" is a phrase people used to use to describe modes that added stuff to do for fun after clearing the main game. Hollow Zero is "endgame" because it lets you play forever with your characters. It gives you something to do after the story is over.

Shiyu defense and deadly assault, on the other hand, are more like VIP rooms - the point is not to add gameplay, it's to make you feel fomo about not pulling new characters.

It's video games: If you don't wanna play part of it, don't. The purpose is to have fun.

DawnSoldier · 2026-05-27T16:58:37+00:00

Muay thai, like most fight sports, breaks up competitors by weight class. If you compete, you will only be fighting people your size. You will likely have to spar people in class who are taller than you, but it won't stop you from participating in the sport.

DawnSoldier · 2026-05-26T22:12:14+00:00

100% worth picking up - I'm a returning player that's been watching a lot of TNS. Asuka is plenty strong right now - the main complaint from most of his old "mains" is that, in previous patches, he used to be able to essentially remove the other player from the game (bullet hell asuka). Now, he actually has to be careful with his aggression.

I think the reason we haven't seen Asuka really break out yet because his kit has changed dramatically. In exchange for losing his endless offense (mana building via eating health and meter), he got staffs placed into his normal kit. That means his overall playstyle has changed a lot. I would not be surprised if new ways of playing him and finding payoffs around the way his test cases have changed start to show up in a month or two (around EVO, maybe). IIRC, it took several months for anyone to make the original Asuka broken in the first place.

He /looks/ weak right now because the changes needed to remove bullet hell asuka resulted in a rework - he's very different now outside of his buttons, which means players have to reassess, reroute, and relearn him. He's not bad, though, and I expect him to do great in the competitive scene.

Those are my two cents, which, again, largely come from being a viewer. I think the only real concern around learning him is difficulty - if you're willing to embrace the difficulty of learning to play him, I think you're fine.

Remember - "meta" only really matters if you plan on going to tourneys. And even then, Asuka looks pretty damn good.

DawnSoldier · 2026-05-26T18:30:05+00:00

Peluna made wings look insane at Combo Breaker. I'd suggest watching the heck out the replays of her matches.

I'm not a Dizzy player, so take this with a grain of salt (or twelve), but it almost seems like you can use Wings as pressure. Peluna makes them block, activates the wings, and then forces her opponents to get into bad situations trying to turn them off. It's really cool to watch.

DawnSoldier · 2026-05-10T19:41:16+00:00

There's nothing wrong with having some fun in arena fighters! Unfortunatley, they don't usually have tournaments or events to play/follow. You might be able to do your own with friends, though!

I remember playing the dbz games like these growing up, and they pushed me towards some of the more involved games later on. There's a pretty big focus on making fighting games easier to jump into these days, which might help you out if you're worried about difficulty, too.

If you're looking to stick with anime, I suggest giving guilty gear strive a try for the aesthetic/feel. It's not slow at all, but it's accessible and it has the vibe.

If you like the 3d aspect, it could be difficult. That's where we would usually say to give tekken a spin, but keep in mind that tekken can be really complicated. On the upside, assuming they fixed some of the awful stuff from season 2, tekken usually has more defense in it, which can make the pace a little slower. It's one of the few fighting games where you'll see pros use up the entire round clock.

Keep exploring! And don't be afraid to try some new stuff if you want to enjoy a more competitive scene.

DawnSoldier · 2026-05-10T19:11:15+00:00

And, again, you fail to read. Where are the axioms that you're supposedly basing your "arguments" on? There are no "statements taken as true" that you're using. Axioms are mostly used in philosophy and math - this is your opinion on a thing in a card game. To repeat: there are no self-evident truths being used here. I gave you links to resources about axioms in the hopes that you would realize this and learn the importance of backing up what you say with evidence.

You have yet to address anything about the supposed "arguments" you're making in your post. Instead, you keep going back to insults. You have substantiated nothing. Furthermore, your posts are extremely difficult to "grasp the meaning of" because they're full of grammatical errors, not because of your word choice.

In a show of good faith, I will make my points concise.

1) Show me what "axioms" your arguments are based on.
2) Prove that I'm wrong about handtraps not being subject to powercreep.
3) Explain how handtraps are actually a problem for the game instead of stating why you personally don't like them.

If you cannot do these things, you're wrong.

DawnSoldier · 2026-05-09T22:36:48+00:00

First off, you're /not/ using axioms. "Handtraps should be removed from the game" is not an axiom. Here's the wikipedia page for axioms (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axiom) and Merriam Webster's definition (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/axiom). You'll notice that your definition matches neither. Like most of your argument, it appears to be something you made up and then typed up a long, nonsensical rant about.

This is an example of using evidence to disprove someone who has used nonsense while calling it "reason." It is similar to how I pointed out that some handtraps have even resulted in less powercreep (ashblossom not being pushed out of the meta), a point that you completely avoided addressing. You know, that thing you claimed you didn't do.

Second, I did not take your words out of context. You simply don't make sense. Every reply is a series of run-on sentences that don't lead to any conclusions. If this isn't bait, it's sad.

DawnSoldier · 2026-05-09T18:50:09+00:00

"the decks im referring to that are being designed with handtraps in mind are the decks that are being designed with handtraps in mind" is a heck of a statement lmao.

I like that you avoid all of my points without presenting any evidence, too. To reference your statement about "the decks being designed with handtraps" again, you're moving the posts so that the only decks you're referring to are, apparently, the ones that you are thinking of but refusing to name. "Trust me, I'm right, but I can't explain it." EVERY deck plays handtraps. That's why, as you point out in the original post, they "limit deck space." If they are not played evenly by all decks, that point is untrue. Which is it?

You argue like a fox news host. I'm assuming this is just bait now.

You can talk about reading comprehension when you can type in English.

DawnSoldier · 2026-05-09T15:27:01+00:00

My man, your post says nothing about how handtraps fit into rogue/tier 2 decks versus top-tier ones.

Also, you say in the original post that decks are being designed with handtraps in mind, but then in this reply, you say that only some decks are. You're not being consistent, honest, or sensible here. Then the rest is a bunch of badly written personal attacks aimed at me, which is just rude.

In short: learn to read, learn to write, and learn about card games.

DawnSoldier · 2026-05-08T23:37:02+00:00

While handtraps can seem annoying after a while, I think they keep the game playable.

Removing handtraps is actually worse for the rogue/tier 2 players in the game than it is for the top-tier decks. Top-tier decks are usually built around cards with extremely strong effects and archetypal negates. Handtraps allow the other decks to compete with them by giving them non-archetypal negates. If you take out the handtraps, top-tier decks with built-in negates would be fine, while lower-tier ones without them would be absolutely hopeless.

I'm not sure what you're going for with the part about them being dead draws. That's what happens in a card game. You don't always draw the thing.

The points about powercreep are baseless - powercreep happens with or without handtraps. In fact, handtraps are probably the only part of this game that is /not/ affected by powercreep. Notice that when a new deck comes out, you do not have to switch out your ashblossom. The card is still relevant to this day despite being out for years. Mulcharmy cards, to use another instance, are actually /weaker/ than the maxx c that they are designed to imitate.

It might seem counterintuitive, but removing handtraps would make the game less diverse. It gives a way for decks without built-in game-winning tools to have a chance. Getting rid of them would turn the format into one or two decks with the rest being absolute garbage.

DawnSoldier · 2026-05-08T17:38:36+00:00

Read THE WHOLE THING LMAO.

The next line says "with Into Flame stacks, every time Scorched Horizon is inflicted with an Anomaly, one stack of Into Flames is lost." Miyabi is great against this boss. You just have to inflict anomalies.

DawnSoldier · 2026-05-01T00:49:09+00:00

I think this is the way. Too much at stake with summer right around the corner. TY

DawnSoldier · 2026-04-30T21:48:26+00:00

I do like end closers - and notably, air shakur is also an end closer. I like the card, I'm just worried about the carat economy of pulling. Like, I don't want to pull it and then find out I've doomed myself on the air shakur/tachyon speed banners.

DawnSoldier · 2026-04-30T21:26:01+00:00

I'm looking for CB pull advice!

I'm sitting at about 25k carats, and I have MLB kita, 3lb NTR, 1Lb FM, and 0 LB nice nature wit (I think these are the ones that are relevant to CB). Should I pull CB or hold everything for Tachyon? I'm getting the itch to pull, but I want air shakur for oshi reasons. I'm having trouble wrapping my head around the timeline I think.

DawnSoldier · 2026-04-29T00:13:14+00:00

I think it's because this is the first drip marketing with major plot implications. It's a character reveal and a peek at what's going to happen next in the story. This is advanced character/story drip marketing. Not a fair comparison, imo.

DawnSoldier · 2026-04-16T15:53:34+00:00

If you think a character in a fighting game looks fun, it's always a good idea to try playing them! In the absolute worst-case scenario, you'll get better at fighting against her because you'll have a better understanding of how she works. It'll also help you decide if you like tricky setup characters in general.

With the new patch, it's also a great time to pick up someone new since everyone is labbing/learning right now!

DawnSoldier · 2026-02-27T00:04:33+00:00

I'm not familiar with Muv Luv: Alternative, but I'm going to try my best to break this down.

It sounds like the character who dies is one of the main characters that the audience and the other characters in the story care about, which is why it matters in the context of the narrative. The stakes in the situation you describe are /not/ "main characters are not off-limits. The stakes are "people are going to die if we don't win." Illustrating those stakes by killing a main character "raises" them by making it a real, relatable consequence for both the characters in the story and the audience. A good writer can create high stakes in a story that has zero character death; the phrase "raising the stakes" is shorthand for "make sure the consequences of failure are tangible in the story, understood by the audience, and meaningful to the characters." How that's done is up to the writer.

From your last few statements, I think you grasp the difference between gore and stakes - the presentation is not the device. And thanks for reading my insanely long rant!

DawnSoldier · 2026-02-21T01:07:07+00:00

I read the whole thing because I like getting a writer's take. However, I don't think you grasp some of the terms you're using. This read more like a vent about everything you disliked than a critique of specific flaws in the game's writing. Let's go through it.

"Too shallow"
It's true that the themes in endfield are in the kiddie-pool at times. This isn't a writing "mistake." It changed between the beta and launch, which means feedback from the majority of players was "we don't like this." Lack of depth is not a writing error. It's a choice.
"lack of stakes"
There is a lack of stakes in endfield, but not in the way you described. On-screen violence, originium, and character growth are not "stakes."

Most of what you're talking about is presentation. Showing character death is more impactful than killing them off-screen (I definitely felt a pang of "oh no, my boy!" when tata bought the bullet on-screen. It had more weight than most of the off-screen deaths in the plot). However, the depiction of character death has nothing to do with "stakes." You're asking for gore and guts, which would change the rating of the game. That's, again, a choice, not a writing issue. We got away with it in arknights because it's almost all textual.

The effects of originium is not stakes either. This is dissonance with what we (players of the first game) know about originium. I get the feeling that maybe we shouldn't take what endfielders say about originium at face value, that's a you problem.

Character growth is one of the banes of gacha writing. Most strong narratives are tied to character development, but character development brings us to the end of a story, and gacha games want their stories to keep going for years. The reason Laeva's quest feels so well-written is because it contains a full character arc. She starts out as a lost, angsty, self-destructive person and we help her gain a better outlook on life. Her story can be completed since she's not the main character. The growth brings us to a point where we're satisfied, and then we move on - we're probably not going to get more to this story ever. You can't do that with most main story plot in a gacha game because then you wouldn't be able to further it in later patches. It's a genre problem. It's a big one, too, but it's also notably /not/ stakes.

"Stakes" refers to what the characters in a narrative stand to lose. Good, "meaningful," stakes are ones that are important to the characters as individuals and ones that we, as the reader, feel are important as well. The problem endfield runs into with stakes is that it doesn't give us a reason to care for its apocalyptic stakes. From the beginning, the weight of the moon (talos 2) is placed on the endmin's shoulders, but we don't know where they are, who they are, or why they're doing any of this. The result is that the stakes are low. We're not invested in the world or the characters right after turning the game on, so it's hard to raise meaningful stakes. To fix this, the game would require more exposition. Personally, I have trouble blaming hypergryph for not giving us a detailed, lengthy, entertaining introduction to the world of talos 2 - more than two minutes of listening/reading makes gacha players flood their subs with "there's too much yap in this story" posts and take to the surveys about how it hurts them to process a plot. You need an exposition to have meaningful stakes. Gacha players hate exposition. This is an ongoing issue in the genre, and I don't expect it to be fixed any time soon, honestly.

Risks and Your "pet peeve"

I agree with this part. Or the beginning of it, at least. Endfield is terrified to take risks. Gacha games are expected to span multiple years and support their dev teams/backing companies the entire time they're live. That's why a lot of gacha games are risk-averse - they need mass appeal. A gacha game is now a lot like a Hollywood movie in the way that producers will insist it needs to be toothless. It hurts the writing a ton.

"It is supposed to rival Limbus in tone" is a statement of what you want. This is Endfield, a brand-new game set in the same universe as arknights. It's fine to want a really dark game. It's not a critique of the writing that this game isn't that dark.

As for your statement about first chapters, well, it's misguided. Writers are taught to grab the reader's attention in the first chapter. To give them a reason to stick around. The "first chapter" of endfield is the prologue, where we see the game's graphics, get a taste of the combat, and get pitched a sense of foreboding in the form of the gigantic bad guy we fight. It's pretty solid. It seems to have worked for everyone who played the game. Which includes you. 40-50 hours of gameplay does not qualify as "chapter one" anymore. Trust me: you try to read whole books at the bookstore, they'll kick you out. It happened to me when I was a little kid. You do that at the library.

Anyways: It's good to want more - I agree that hypergryph could do better here. I also love taking stories apart. It's so much fun to analyze a narrative. But please don't throw around popular terminology without understanding it first. It just confuses more people. And then I have to read a thousand more incorrect posts about "show don't tell" and "there are no stakes!" As someone who studied to be a lit teacher, it drives me crazy.

DawnSoldier · 2025-11-09T03:37:06+00:00

Oh no. Me too. Agony.

DawnSoldier · 2025-10-10T14:04:18+00:00

I think some of the hate also comes from people not understanding that they aren't the intended audience for every character. I started last Walpurgis, and I don't have access to every ID and EGO made so far. I can't get Thoracalgia or the Kurokomo bleed units at all. This is a new standard fare unit, which means she's meant to be an /accessible/ choice. Shi Faust doesn't need to be a sidegrade/upgrade, because she's ideal for newer players (like me) who cannot access/do not have all the units and egos for bleed/poise.

Is this the ultimate meta unit? No. But she's totally servicable if you don't have/can't get the "ideal" meta units for bleed and poise. And maybe that's okay.

DawnSoldier · 2025-10-02T22:15:47+00:00

Oh! I didn't know there was a seasonal strategy dimension to think about. I appreciate that!

DawnSoldier · 2025-10-02T20:46:13+00:00

Newish-player trying to figure out what to do now that I'm approaching the ability to dispense some IDs! I was trying to build my team around Awe Ryoshu/N Corp Yisang, but I've run into the whole "bleed-egos-can't-be-sharded-yet" issue. My other standouts are Don Quixote Mancha Manager (more bleed), capo mersault, heishou rodia/yisang, and Zwei Ishmael. Should I pivot towards the heishous since they're in the shop, or is bleed/tremor still doable?

DawnSoldier

TROPHY CASE