PDA

View Full Version : 'Double Counter' idea, how to innovate combat in ACR



Conniving_Eagle
06-03-2011, 02:40 PM
Clarification: I made two threads. Both talked about the same thing. The first wasn't as well received, so I posted another one where I tried to make more sense, but I still linked them to the original thread I made. I expected people only to read it, but some of them commented on it, thus reviving it. The second one got locked, but it had a clearer explanation than the first one. This is the original first thread, but it contains the contents of the second, clearer thread.

Here's the link to the official trailer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...z&list=FL6R3z5b7K1fI

Now, if you didn't read the original thread, I will sum it up for you. In each game, they've renovated the combat system. In AC2, you could disarm enemies and you had alot of new weapons, along with the ability to strafe. AC2 had brought alot of new animations to combat thanks to the increased weapon variety and Ezio's versatility. I believe I can speak for most of us when I say the reason why combat is appealing in Assassin's Creed is because of the gory killing animations and overall fluidity of combat. In AC:B they added kill chains. Personally, I beleive that kill-chains were a step-back because the way they were programmed made the game's combat incredibly repetetive and easy. It also made the game cater less towards stealth and more to being a one man army(and that's not what AC is about). Here is how they can 'Innovate the Combat System'

This time around, we can revamp the combat system and make it new and exciting again by add a game-mechanic/ability where you will more often than not have to counter-kill more than one enemy. To do this, you would have to perform a counterkill while already in a counter-kill animation. Looking at it from a realistic persective, it makes sense because if an assassin was in a sword fight with multiple guards, and he so-to-say performed a counter-kill on one guard, the other guards wouldn't just stand there and watch their comrad die, they would try to intervien and save him by attacking the assassin.

Here's how the game-mechanic would function - When you performed a counter-kill, more often than not, the button config would appear. I'm talking about the same config that appeared in the cutscenes in AC2 that let you react during the cutscene. On the config, one or more of the buttons(A,B,X, maybe Y) would be highlighted. If you successfully hit the button before the config disappeared, Ezio would perform another counter or counter-kill on the [second]guard that tried to attack him. If you failed, Ezio would either just perform the counter-kill on the single gaurd, or get hit by the guard, interrupting his original counter-kill and thus you hadn't killed anyone in the counter-kill. The config wouldn't appear for a split second though, I'm thinking somewhere between 1 and 2 seconds, a good mix between difficult and easy.
This system in combat was used in a similar fashion in the Bourne Conspiracy video-game. If you're confused, watch this video and it will make more sense.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbk9nE7ztME

There are some examples in the Revelations premier trailer(the link on top), I will list them for you.

1:13 - 1:18 Ezio stops the first gaurd from attacking him, jumps over him, and disarms the second guard. On the config, pressing B would activate the animation of disarming the second guard.

1:18 - 1:20 Ezio disarms the first gaurd, then he evades and kills the second gaurd. After countering and disarming the first guard, pressing X on the config would activate the animation to kill the second guard.

1:20 - 1:25 Ezio grabs the first guard's hand and sword, he is about to disarm him, but then another gaurd attacks. He takes the first guard'ss sword, and directs it to parry the other gaurd's attack. Then he kicks the second gaurd away, and kills off the other gaurd with his own sword(if this was gameplay, Ezio would keep the sword because he performed a disarm counter-kill. This could be triggered by pressing X on the config to kill the original guard he was disarming. In this scenario, if the button wasn't pressed, the gaurd would have slashed Ezio, Ezio wouldn't have disarmed the first gaurd, and he would lose some health. Or, Ezio would have deflected the second guard's attack, but he wouldn't have killed the first guard, he would have just snatched away the sword since the guard's hand was in a vulnerable position. Also, unlike the Bourne Conspiracy and AC2, time won't slow down or freeze when the config appears.

1:25 - 1:32 After counter-killing the first gaurd(Ezio snapped his neck), a second gaurd comes up and grabs him from behind. As a third gaurd is about to attack Ezio, he breaks the gaurds hold of him and gets out of the away, the second gaurd gets killed by his own ally. To finish it off Ezio stuns the third guard with a headbutt and knee to this face. This animation could've been done by pressing B on the Config, as B is been used to break an enemy grabs. If the button wasn't pressed, Ezio would've taken ALOT of health, or maybe even died since that would've been a very fatal attack.

1:32 - 1:36 Ezio stuns a guard(punches him twice in the face) and then another guard tries to attack him. He grabs the guard's arm and redirects the sword into his body.


There's a couple more examples, but I think you get the idea. Those were just Ezio's unarmed attacks, I can give you a quick example for other weapons like swords. Ezio performs the counter-kill where he slashes a guard across the chest and then stabs him hard in the belly, as another guard tries to hack Ezio, he turns around, rips it out his blade from the first guard's chest and slices the gaurd who was about to attack him in the throat with the tip of his sword or hacks him in the neck.

Don't pay attention to what buttons I said you would have to press in the examples. This is how the config in Double Counters should work.

'X' which represents your armed hand, would mostly end up killing the second guard. 'A' which represents your legs, would either evade an attack, stun an enemy by performing a kicking attack, or parry an attack. Keep in mind that evading an attack might result in 'friendly fire' among the guards. 'B' which represents your empty hand, would break a gaurd's hold on you(again, possibly getting him killed), use a gaurd as a human shield, or throw a gaurd away. It could also be used to disarm guards or stun them with your fists.

The config won't always appear while performing a counter-kill, though and in my idea you would only have to press one button. 75% of the time it would appear, 50% of the time you would have to hit a high-lighted button to avoid being hit, and 25% of the time pressing it wouldn't be necesary to sustaining health. Sometimes, more than one highlighted button would appear. You could have the option to hit either A or B, or X and A, each would perform different animations. You would explore it just to see the cool new combat moves.

That is the main purpose of the thread, but I have other ideas to contribute to combat. The enemy AI should be smarter, similar to how they were in AC1. In AC1, Templar Knights could all counter/parry/dodge/taunt/grab/perform combos. Sine AC1, Ubisoft has introduced archetypes. Each archetype should be able to perform each of these, but remember that they are supposed to be easier to kill than templars. For example, a Seeker is more likely to block(parry) an attack and a Agile is more likely to taunt and dodge attacks. The guards should also able to perform a defense break, the same way Ezio does(by kicking them). The defense break cannot be countered, and it is meant to keep you from holding the parry/block button the whole time you're fighting someone. Guards cannot perform a defense break while they are attacking, though. If you can still block attacks, but if you're holding it down for like 8 seconds, a guard would perform a defense-break, followed by a combo. In AC1 a combo was when a Templar Knight attacked you about 3 times and you ended up on the ground, it wasted a good portion of your health, too. More skilled guards and Templars would perform defense breaks and combos quicker and more often. For example, if you're fighting a Templar, he can defense-break you if he notices you're holding the deflect button for 3 seconds. That being the highest, a standard guards would perform it after 8 and heavy guards would perorm it after around 5. Note: Some of these abilities for AI should be very uncommon for typical guards, only elite guards or Templars. Such as performing counters and combos.

One last important thing, something needs to be done about kill-chains. I think kill-chains should only allow you to get a max of 2-4 kills. They were very overpowered in ACB. All you had to do was counter a kill, and begin a kill-chain. If you were good, you could kill +10 gaurds because you were allowed to perform a counter-kill in the middle of a kill-chain animation. This is why Brotherhood got boring, it was exactly the same, and very easy. With this 'Double Counter' idea implemented, to begin a kill-chain you would have to kill an enemy offensively, in other words, with a combo. This was what kill-chains were intended for: to promote offensive combat. You shouldn't be allowed to counter in a kill-chain. You would be able to evade(RT+A) an attack if you were in the middle of a kill-chain, but you would not be able to perform a counter-attack, this way your kill-chain would be interrupted. This would work very will if you implemented the Double Counter idea, because you wouldn't be able to begin a kill-chain after performing a double-counter.

My 'Double Counter' idea is very good because it would be a great addition the combat system that Ubisoft tries to revamp each game, it would add tons, maybe hundreds of cool, gory, and badass animations, making combat very new and refreshing. Combat would even be more diverse because offensive and defensive combat would be so different, but both being effective ways to clear an area.

Thoughts? Other Ideas? And please, I am pushing for this because I love the AC sereies, it is my favorite franchise. I was let-down a little by AC:B and I don't want this franchise to become one of those repetetive, the same thing re-done each year type of games. I only ask that you comment on this discussion and come back to reply to other comments so that Ubisoft can notice this thread. They're read it if its one of the most discussed.

Here's the conclusion for what should be done to combat

-The Double Counter mechanic
-Nerfing of kill-chains
-Improving enemy AI

P.S. I don't want combat to be HARD in Revelations. It should take skill but your skills shouldn't be strained when fighting even 3-4 guards. An average amount of guards is between 3-6, consisting of mainly normal guards, and maybe one or two seekers/brutes. A skilled player who is adept with the combat system will kill an average group of guards quickly, losing minimal health. A novice player facing the same group will lose some or even a good amount of health, and he will take more time than the advanced player because he will have difficulty countering, starting kill-chains, etc. This skillset should escalate so that if you are up agains 15 guards, even though a skilled player might enjoy that challenge, a novice player would run away, because fleeing would be the more rational option.

kriegerdesgottes
06-03-2011, 02:57 PM
I don't know I like the chain mechanic and yes it can be easy but it's not like it doesn't take skill because you have to be constantly watching all the guards around you (assuming you by some miracle come across more than 4 at once) and sure, the likelyhood of you being killed in combat is small but who cares. I don't like being killed but I feel like you can get really good at the combat in ACB if you want to or you can stand there and just block but if the guard has a lance or axe then you have to rethink your strategy so I don't get why people don't like the combat. The combat in two was too annoying if anything because you could block or swing over and over and the guard would just deflect your swing and although I didn't have a problem at all with the combat in AC I or II I do like Brotherhood's combat a lot too.

daniel_gervide
06-03-2011, 03:06 PM
Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
I don't know I like the chain mechanic and yes it can be easy but it's not like it doesn't take skill because you have to be constantly watching all the guards around you (assuming you by some miracle come across more than 4 at once) and sure, the likelyhood of you being killed in combat is small but who cares. I don't like being killed but I feel like you can get really good at the combat in ACB if you want to or you can stand there and just block but if the guard has a lance or axe then you have to rethink your strategy so I don't get why people don't like the combat. The combat in two was too annoying if anything because you could block or swing over and over and the guard would just deflect your swing and although I didn't have a problem at all with the combat in AC I or II I do like Brotherhood's combat a lot too.

All u have to do is to attack and counter-attak if you see a guard attaking you... using guard down feature from ac1 you could be able to do killstreaks only if the guards are "distracted" which would force you to look for the guards arround you..

kriegerdesgottes
06-03-2011, 03:11 PM
Yeah but ACI still had no challenge to the combat whatsoever and don't get me wrong I still love that game but it's combat was annoying too where you hit the guy and he smacks you down then another guy hits you while you are on the ground and Altair had about 6 counter moves that he did over and over. It was def fun at the time but when I play that game now I get bored real fast and I used to sit and play it for hours daily.

daniel_gervide
06-03-2011, 03:22 PM
Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
Yeah but ACI still had no challenge to the combat whatsoever and don't get me wrong I still love that game but it's combat was annoying too where you hit the guy and he smacks you down then another guy hits you while you are on the ground and Altair had about 6 counter moves that he did over and over. It was def fun at the time but when I play that game now I get bored real fast and I used to sit and play it for hours daily.

Are you kidding me? LOOOL the guards smacking you down and another guy hitting you was the best part of the game, you had to play with ur mind not like now... I still play Ac1 and i'm less boring playing Ac1 instead of AcB...

Don't care for the animations... they are part of the looking but i prefer having a bad-looking game with good gameplay rather than having a wonderfull game with bad gameplay...

Exemple: Cs1.6 is better than CoD, however cod is more realistic and more enjoyable -> at pubs <-

__________________________________________

Maybe it had no challenge but the combat was time wasting (realistic) so you would prefer acomplish a mission thought stealthy ways instead of going thought agresive ways (like real assassins would prefer)

Even so, the roberto de sables battle (with those templars) was hard for me... I had to repeat it like 8 times (or more)... i don't remember any mission i had to do that in Ac2/AcB o.o maybe they were too easy no? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

ShaneO7K
06-03-2011, 03:28 PM
Originally posted by daniel_gervide:

Exemple: Cs1.6 is better than CoD, however cod is more realistic and more enjoyable -> at pubs <-


CoD and realisim....what?

daniel_gervide
06-03-2011, 04:19 PM
Originally posted by dead_gunner187:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by daniel_gervide:

Exemple: Cs1.6 is better than CoD, however cod is more realistic and more enjoyable -> at pubs <-


CoD and realisim....what? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Have you played Counter-Strike?... it's much more false than cod... learn to compare games?

kriegerdesgottes
06-03-2011, 04:36 PM
I'm sorry it sounded like you said ACI is more enjoyable than ACB and my head exploded so you are probably one of those people who thinks oh the game should be harder because we all know that difficulty is fun. lol You know what I hate most about Math? it's freaking hard. I don't play games to have try as hard as I can to kill a guy. I play AC to feel like a badass without trying too hard. And sure I will agree there should be some level of challenge and difficulty but I've said it before and I'll say it again AC does an ok job with it. You can play the game and just counter and kill or you can dodge attacks and hit them from the side and do an instant kill or you can just counter or jump on a lift and crush the guys underneath you can make it fun. It's just like people who complain about it being not stealthy enough, If you want to play the game stealthily, no one is stopping you from doing so.

ShaneO7K
06-03-2011, 04:58 PM
Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by dead_gunner187:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by daniel_gervide:

Exemple: Cs1.6 is better than CoD, however cod is more realistic and more enjoyable -> at pubs <-


CoD and realisim....what? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Have you played Counter-Strike?... it's much more false than cod... learn to compare games? </div></BLOCKQUOTE> It's a little stupid trying to compare a game which is around ten years old and a game which is much more modern.

Of course it won't be as realistic as CoD, try and pick something more fair for a game to be compared with rather than something thats age will let it down.

So i'll finish this from what you just said to me..."learn to compare games?"

Conniving_Eagle
06-03-2011, 05:07 PM
@kriegerdesgotte
I added a clarification to the post so you might better understand what I meant. Also, the chain mechanic really doesn't take skill. All you have to do is counter one gaurd(and the counter animation is longer than it was in AC1 and 2) and you can kill atleast 4 gaurds before you get hit again. A skilled player can counter gaurds while in a kill-chain so he can easily take on +10 gaurds, the same would apply for this. A skilled player, who could anylize the gaurd's movements would be very good at this combat system. The combat system is all about hand-eye coordination and reflexes.

phil.llllll
06-03-2011, 05:07 PM
Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
I'm sorry it sounded like you said ACI is more enjoyable than ACB and my head exploded

I know, right? I mean it's crazy to think there's people out there whose opinions are different from yours. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

daniel_gervide
06-03-2011, 05:19 PM
Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
I'm sorry it sounded like you said ACI is more enjoyable than ACB and my head exploded so you are probably one of those people who thinks oh the game should be harder because we all know that difficulty is fun. lol You know what I hate most about Math? it's freaking hard. I don't play games to have try as hard as I can to kill a guy. I play AC to feel like a badass without trying too hard. And sure I will agree there should be some level of challenge and difficulty but I've said it before and I'll say it again AC does an ok job with it. You can play the game and just counter and kill or you can dodge attacks and hit them from the side and do an instant kill or you can just counter or jump on a lift and crush the guys underneath you can make it fun. It's just like people who complain about it being not stealthy enough, If you want to play the game stealthily, no one is stopping you from doing so.

Why would i be stealthy if that don't makes me happy with such combat system?...

Have you ever finished an hard game? you more badass after finishing an hard game than after finishing a easy game... When i finished roberto de sables combat i felt like if i had an Adrenaline Shot, when i finished with cesare i was like, nothing?...

Also, maths are so easy for me o.o
Maybe you're ******ed and can't understand them, the same that happens when you try to understand why hard games are much more satisfing after beating than easy games...

ShaneO7K
06-03-2011, 05:25 PM
Originally posted by daniel_gervide:

Maybe you're ******ed and can't understand them, the same that happens when you try to understand why hard games are much more satisfing after beating than easy games... OR...it could be an OPINION?

cless711
06-03-2011, 05:35 PM
Originally posted by daniel_gervide:

When i finished roberto de sables combat i felt like if i had an Adrenaline Shot


Agreed XD

daniel_gervide
06-03-2011, 05:40 PM
Originally posted by dead_gunner187:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by daniel_gervide:

Maybe you're ******ed and can't understand them, the same that happens when you try to understand why hard games are much more satisfing after beating than easy games... OR...it could be an OPINION? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

that's why i've put Maybe in Bold http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

I'm sure he doesn't understand the diffrence from understanding maths and beating dificult games... it's 2 things completly diffrente, if you enjoy playing games than you will try the game over and over until you finish it, it can be frustating, but after beating it, you will be much more happier than with easy games...

With maths you are forced to learn them and that's because you don't understand them (well, i used to do maths operations with my father when i was 4 years old and that's why i can understand/enjoy hard maths :O)

@cless711 nice to meet you :P

ShaneO7K
06-03-2011, 05:44 PM
Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by dead_gunner187:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by daniel_gervide:

Maybe you're ******ed and can't understand them, the same that happens when you try to understand why hard games are much more satisfing after beating than easy games... OR...it could be an OPINION? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

that's why i've put Maybe in Bold http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

I'm sure he doesn't understand the diffrence from understanding maths and beating dificult games... it's 2 things completly diffrente, if you enjoy playing games than you will try the game over and over until you finish it, it can be frustating, but after beating it, you will be much more happier than with easy games...

With maths you are forced to learn them and that's because you don't understand them (well, i used to do maths operations with my father when i was 4 years old and that's why i can understand/enjoy hard maths :O)

@cless711 nice to meet you :P </div></BLOCKQUOTE> No reason to call him ******ed just because you don't agree with what he is saying though.

Conniving_Eagle
06-03-2011, 05:46 PM
It's great that instead of people giving feedback for my post they just use it as an excuse to troll eachother.

dxsxhxcx
06-03-2011, 05:57 PM
Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
A skilled player, who could anylize the gaurd's movements would be very good at this combat system. The combat system is all about hand-eye coordination and reflexes.

you don't even need to pay attention to the guards around you, on PC, the only thing you need to do (when you're using the sword or the knife) is keep the defense button pressed (right mouse button if I'm not wrong) and keep pressing the attack button fast (left mouse button), you'll kill everyone around you in a matter of seconds... on a console, this should be easier than on PC.. if they plan to make the combat system easier than already is, the only thing we'll need to do in the game is run from a point to another to watch cutscenes... xD

daniel_gervide
06-03-2011, 06:00 PM
Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
It's great that instead of people giving feedback for my post they just use it as an excuse to troll eachother.

Man, what you said have been suggested by crash3 and by me (not the samr things but similars) but with diffrent goals...

@dead_gunner187 I said maybe, end of subject.
I'm trying to explain him why beating hard games could be nice to him while maths are not funny to learn. I feel the gaming is changing so much with the new genetarion of gamers :S

I can handle his opinion but i would like to see him explaining me better why he don't want an hard game.. i mean, for mean easy game is bull****, i prefer seeing a film rather playing an easy game o.o

Pdavis3
06-04-2011, 12:02 AM
u have some good ideas and i mean everyone can agree that the game has gotten to easy, so idk how they plan to make the game harder (combat wise). but they can make it more interesting haha.

About your double counter idea, it would be something similar to the new batman, which would be good. If u watch the CGI teaser u can see Ezio grab a guard's arm and at the same time kick another gaurd and then kill the guard he orignally grabbed. so maybe they do have the double counter or attack thing

Conniving_Eagle
06-04-2011, 05:29 AM
[/QUOTE]you don't even need to pay attention to the guards around you, on PC, the only thing you need to do (when you're using the sword or the knife) is keep the defense button pressed (right mouse button if I'm not wrong) and keep pressing the attack button fast (left mouse button), you'll kill everyone around you in a matter of seconds... on a console, this should be easier than on PC.. if they plan to make the combat system easier than already is, the only thing we'll need to do in the game is run from a point to another to watch cutscenes... xD[/QUOTE]

On console you have to perform the counter-kill action as the gaurds are about to kill you. However, they've made the time you're allowed to have to do the counter animation before the guard attacks you longer. That's proof right there that they've made combat easier. If you go back to Assassin's Creed 1 you will notice the difference, especially with the hidden blade.

Ass4ssin8me
06-04-2011, 07:15 AM
Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
I'm sorry it sounded like you said ACI is more enjoyable than ACB and my head exploded so you are probably one of those people who thinks oh the game should be harder because we all know that difficulty is fun. lol You know what I hate most about Math? it's freaking hard. I don't play games to have try as hard as I can to kill a guy. I play AC to feel like a badass without trying too hard. And sure I will agreAe there should be some level of challenge and difficulty but I've said it before and I'll say it again AC does an ok job with it. You can play the game and just counter and kill or you can dodge attacks and hit them from the side and do an instant kill or you can just counter or jump on a lift and crush the guys underneath you can make it fun. It's just like people who complain about it being not stealthy enough, If you want to play the game stealthily, no one is stopping you from doing so.

Acctually the game is stopiing us from playing it stealth. Take the mission were you rescue Caterina. You blow up a part of the Castello, and then fight of half a Freaking Army! I mean WTF!!

I think AC one had the best graphics and gameplay. But Ubisoft keeps adding feature after feature, that we just don't need and are Plain ridiculous - thus the easy games...

(cough) hookblade. (cough) bombs (cough) Eagle Sensec(cough)

donngold
06-04-2011, 07:25 AM
Originally posted by Ass4ssin8me:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
I'm sorry it sounded like you said ACI is more enjoyable than ACB and my head exploded so you are probably one of those people who thinks oh the game should be harder because we all know that difficulty is fun. lol You know what I hate most about Math? it's freaking hard. I don't play games to have try as hard as I can to kill a guy. I play AC to feel like a badass without trying too hard. And sure I will agreAe there should be some level of challenge and difficulty but I've said it before and I'll say it again AC does an ok job with it. You can play the game and just counter and kill or you can dodge attacks and hit them from the side and do an instant kill or you can just counter or jump on a lift and crush the guys underneath you can make it fun. It's just like people who complain about it being not stealthy enough, If you want to play the game stealthily, no one is stopping you from doing so.

Acctually the game is stopiing us from playing it stealth. Take the mission were you rescue Cate
rina. You blow up a part of the Castello, and then fight of half a Freaking Army! I mean WTF!!

I think AC one had the best graphics and gameplay. But Ubisoft keeps adding feature after feature, that we just don't need and are Plain ridiculous - thus the easy games...

(cough) hookblade. (cough) bombs (cough) Eagle Sensec(cough) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

(Cough)Kill chains(cough)not just bombs 300 frickin kinds of them smoke bombs are enough we dont need random bombs(cough)lack of difficulty(cough)enemies dont counter you combo u or even stand a chance(cough)guards are also mentally ******ed

daniel_gervide
06-04-2011, 08:02 AM
Originally posted by donngold:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ass4ssin8me:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
I'm sorry it sounded like you said ACI is more enjoyable than ACB and my head exploded so you are probably one of those people who thinks oh the game should be harder because we all know that difficulty is fun. lol You know what I hate most about Math? it's freaking hard. I don't play games to have try as hard as I can to kill a guy. I play AC to feel like a badass without trying too hard. And sure I will agreAe there should be some level of challenge and difficulty but I've said it before and I'll say it again AC does an ok job with it. You can play the game and just counter and kill or you can dodge attacks and hit them from the side and do an instant kill or you can just counter or jump on a lift and crush the guys underneath you can make it fun. It's just like people who complain about it being not stealthy enough, If you want to play the game stealthily, no one is stopping you from doing so.

Acctually the game is stopiing us from playing it stealth. Take the mission were you rescue Cate
rina. You blow up a part of the Castello, and then fight of half a Freaking Army! I mean WTF!!

I think AC one had the best graphics and gameplay. But Ubisoft keeps adding feature after feature, that we just don't need and are Plain ridiculous - thus the easy games...

(cough) hookblade. (cough) bombs (cough) Eagle Sensec(cough) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

(Cough)Kill chains(cough)not just bombs 300 frickin kinds of them smoke bombs are enough we dont need random bombs(cough)lack of difficulty(cough)enemies dont counter you combo u or even stand a chance(cough)guards are also mentally ******ed </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

(cough) overpowered hidden blade (cough) fast aim gun (cough) cartonish HUD (cough) http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

PhiIs1618033
06-04-2011, 08:21 AM
Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
I'm sorry it sounded like you said ACI is more enjoyable than ACB and my head exploded so you are probably one of those people who thinks oh the game should be harder because we all know that difficulty is fun.
I like AC1 better than AC:B, but that's not entirely due to the difficulty. Also, AC:B is ****-easy. I never actually died, only desynced due to getting detected and so forth on my first playthrough. This makes playing the game less fun. Have you ever used god mode in a game? It really becomes boring after the first 10 minutes of excitement.


lol You know what I hate most about Math? it's freaking hard.
You know what I love most about math? It's freaking hard. But if you work for it, and practice, you get really good at it.


I play AC to feel like a badass without trying too hard.
I play AC because it makes me feel like a badass as well, but I don't feel badass if it takes no skill.


You can play the game and just counter and kill or you can dodge attacks and hit them from the side and do an instant kill or you can just counter or jump on a lift and crush the guys underneath you can make it fun. It's just like people who complain about it being not stealthy enough, If you want to play the game stealthily, no one is stopping you from doing so.
1. Difficulty has nothing to do with the amount of options available.
2. There are too much out in the open missions, as well as scripted assassinations. The game has gotten so ridiculous that a desync system needs to be employed to make you play stealthy, which takes away from the freedom.

daniel_gervide
06-04-2011, 09:58 AM
Originally posted by PhiIs1618033...:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
I'm sorry it sounded like you said ACI is more enjoyable than ACB and my head exploded so you are probably one of those people who thinks oh the game should be harder because we all know that difficulty is fun.
I like AC1 better than AC:B, but that's not entirely due to the difficulty. Also, AC:B is ****-easy. I never actually died, only desynced due to getting detected and so forth on my first playthrough. This makes playing the game less fun. Have you ever used god mode in a game? It really becomes boring after the first 10 minutes of excitement.


lol You know what I hate most about Math? it's freaking hard.
You know what I love most about math? It's freaking hard. But if you work for it, and practice, you get really good at it.


I play AC to feel like a badass without trying too hard.
I play AC because it makes me feel like a badass as well, but I don't feel badass if it takes no skill.


You can play the game and just counter and kill or you can dodge attacks and hit them from the side and do an instant kill or you can just counter or jump on a lift and crush the guys underneath you can make it fun. It's just like people who complain about it being not stealthy enough, If you want to play the game stealthily, no one is stopping you from doing so.
1. Difficulty has nothing to do with the amount of options available.
2. There are too much out in the open missions, as well as scripted assassinations. The game has gotten so ridiculous that a desync system needs to be employed to make you play stealthy, which takes away from the freedom. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

nice answer http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

RzaRecta357
06-04-2011, 11:00 AM
I just hope they fix the kill cams and make them as good as AC1s.

crash3
06-04-2011, 01:00 PM
we need more defensive moves, we should have to time our parry moves by tapping R1 as the guards attack instead of just holding R1 to deflect

sassinscreed
06-04-2011, 04:15 PM
Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
I'm sorry it sounded like you said ACI is more enjoyable than ACB and my head exploded so you are probably one of those people who thinks oh the game should be harder because we all know that difficulty is fun. lol You know what I hate most about Math? it's freaking hard. I don't play games to have try as hard as I can to kill a guy. I play AC to feel like a badass without trying too hard. And sure I will agree there should be some level of challenge and difficulty but I've said it before and I'll say it again AC does an ok job with it. You can play the game and just counter and kill or you can dodge attacks and hit them from the side and do an instant kill or you can just counter or jump on a lift and crush the guys underneath you can make it fun. It's just like people who complain about it being not stealthy enough, If you want to play the game stealthily, no one is stopping you from doing so.

Why would i be stealthy if that don't makes me happy with such combat system?...

Have you ever finished an hard game? you more badass after finishing an hard game than after finishing a easy game... When i finished roberto de sables combat i felt like if i had an Adrenaline Shot, when i finished with cesare i was like, nothing?...

Also, maths are so easy for me o.o
Maybe you're ******ed and can't understand them, the same that happens when you try to understand why hard games are much more satisfing after beating than easy games... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


ac1 isn't really that hard you can kill 10 guys with only using counter attack brotherhood is just easier
hard game would be when you die 10 times trying to complete one short part of the game no matter how good are you in it at least if you play it for first time and i wouldn't find that enjoyable

ac1 has some challenge in it but you don't get killed really easy so its just how it should be
but brotherhood combat isn't fun because there isn't any challenge in it

if ubisoft adds different difficulty choice in revelation everyone would be happy

daniel_gervide
06-04-2011, 06:02 PM
Originally posted by sassinscreed:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by kriegerdesgotte:
I'm sorry it sounded like you said ACI is more enjoyable than ACB and my head exploded so you are probably one of those people who thinks oh the game should be harder because we all know that difficulty is fun. lol You know what I hate most about Math? it's freaking hard. I don't play games to have try as hard as I can to kill a guy. I play AC to feel like a badass without trying too hard. And sure I will agree there should be some level of challenge and difficulty but I've said it before and I'll say it again AC does an ok job with it. You can play the game and just counter and kill or you can dodge attacks and hit them from the side and do an instant kill or you can just counter or jump on a lift and crush the guys underneath you can make it fun. It's just like people who complain about it being not stealthy enough, If you want to play the game stealthily, no one is stopping you from doing so.

Why would i be stealthy if that don't makes me happy with such combat system?...

Have you ever finished an hard game? you more badass after finishing an hard game than after finishing a easy game... When i finished roberto de sables combat i felt like if i had an Adrenaline Shot, when i finished with cesare i was like, nothing?...

Also, maths are so easy for me o.o
Maybe you're ******ed and can't understand them, the same that happens when you try to understand why hard games are much more satisfing after beating than easy games... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


ac1 isn't really that hard you can kill 10 guys with only using counter attack brotherhood is just easier
hard game would be when you die 10 times trying to complete one short part of the game no matter how good are you in it at least if you play it for first time and i wouldn't find that enjoyable

ac1 has some challenge in it but you don't get killed really easy so its just how it should be
but brotherhood combat isn't fun because there isn't any challenge in it

if ubisoft adds different difficulty choice in revelation everyone would be happy </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

again samething? I don't want the game to be extremetly hard, for me it would be ok, but for someppl i understand not... I want the game to have easier stealthy than combat so unskilled ppl would go though stealthy ways (to don't lose time) and skilled thought agresive ways.

Ac1 was perfet, it's hard to get the combat as time consumtion as before but at least balance all new features of ac2 and acB to get a properly, balanced, combat system.

Conniving_Eagle
06-04-2011, 07:31 PM
Maybe some of you aren't understanding. The idea isn't to make combat sluggish and ultra-hard. Combat should expand to be more interactive, requiring you to pay more attention and press more buttons, BUT, making it cooler and more fun because of the extra interactions and animations. As for difficulty, it shouldn't be ultra-easy like in ACB, but it should be difficult enough that an idiot would have a hard time and a better player would excel in it. To do that, besides adding the interactions I suggested, counter-attack times should go back to the way they were in AC1(Brotherhood made the amount of time before a gaurd attacks where you can press the counter button and get a counter-kill successfully longer), they need to make it so that gaurds can break your block, so you can't be blocking the whole time, and you shouldn't be able to regain health when you're almost about to die until you've killed the enemies, or ran away. That's how you make it harder. Well, not hard, just more skill-oriented. Try getting a counter-kill with the hidden blade in AC1 compared to Brotherhood, then you'll know what I mean. My post is how you can make it cooler with more interactions.

crash3
06-05-2011, 10:58 AM
all guards should be able to at least counter, dodge and grab. the more elite/skilled a guard is, the more effectively he carries out these moves e.g. his counters will take health off you or knock you over levaing you open to other attacks

we should fight defnsively first, parrying multiple atacks from many directions, we do this until guards get tired or over-confident where they start taunting you, then you surprise them by fighting offensively, then you can begin a combat streak (not a kill streak) where guards hve a % chance of blocking your attacks

Elite: 75%
Regular: 50%
Militia: 25% chance of blocking ezios attacks during a combat streak

ezio should only be able to heal while not in combat, get rid of medicine that heals you immediately during combat. ezio should lose more abilities as he gets more and more wounded, at his most wounded before he dies he should only be able to parry attacks

this will force us to flee more and visit doctors more, medicine should only heal us gradually not immediately to make it more realistic

PhiIs1618033
06-05-2011, 11:01 AM
Originally posted by sassinscreed:
ac1 isn't really that hard you can kill 10 guys with only using counter attack brotherhood is just easier
Easier=less hard.



hard game would be when you die 10 times trying to complete one short part of the game no matter how good are you in it at least if you play it for first time and i wouldn't find that enjoyable
That would be an extremely hard game. There are different levels of difficulty, you know.


ac1 has some challenge in it but you don't get killed really easy so its just how it should be
but brotherhood combat isn't fun because there isn't any challenge in it
Agreed.


if ubisoft adds different difficulty choice in revelation everyone would be happy
Yeah, a difficulty mode would suit me. As long as they make the 'hard' mode actually really hard. Really, really hard. One hit kills by guards, that kind of stuff. Then a two steps later normal difficulty (AC1) and from thereonout to Brotherhood difficulty.

daniel_gervide
06-05-2011, 11:18 AM
Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
Maybe some of you aren't understanding. The idea isn't to make combat sluggish and ultra-hard. Combat should expand to be more interactive, requiring you to pay more attention and press more buttons, BUT, making it cooler and more fun because of the extra interactions and animations. As for difficulty, it shouldn't be ultra-easy like in ACB, but it should be difficult enough that an idiot would have a hard time and a better player would excel in it. To do that, besides adding the interactions I suggested, counter-attack times should go back to the way they were in AC1(Brotherhood made the amount of time before a gaurd attacks where you can press the counter button and get a counter-kill successfully longer), they need to make it so that gaurds can break your block, so you can't be blocking the whole time, and you shouldn't be able to regain health when you're almost about to die until you've killed the enemies, or ran away. That's how you make it harder. Well, not hard, just more skill-oriented. Try getting a counter-kill with the hidden blade in AC1 compared to Brotherhood, then you'll know what I mean. My post is how you can make it cooler with more interactions.

Agree...

@PhiIs1618033. instead of having only those options we should be able to chose everything since your sword damage until guard's gun damage..

PhiIs1618033
06-05-2011, 01:36 PM
Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
Maybe some of you aren't understanding. The idea isn't to make combat sluggish and ultra-hard. Combat should expand to be more interactive, requiring you to pay more attention and press more buttons, BUT, making it cooler and more fun because of the extra interactions and animations. As for difficulty, it shouldn't be ultra-easy like in ACB, but it should be difficult enough that an idiot would have a hard time and a better player would excel in it. To do that, besides adding the interactions I suggested, counter-attack times should go back to the way they were in AC1(Brotherhood made the amount of time before a gaurd attacks where you can press the counter button and get a counter-kill successfully longer), they need to make it so that gaurds can break your block, so you can't be blocking the whole time, and you shouldn't be able to regain health when you're almost about to die until you've killed the enemies, or ran away. That's how you make it harder. Well, not hard, just more skill-oriented. Try getting a counter-kill with the hidden blade in AC1 compared to Brotherhood, then you'll know what I mean. My post is how you can make it cooler with more interactions.

Agree...

@PhiIs1618033. instead of having only those options we should be able to chose everything since your sword damage until guard's gun damage.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
No. I don't want to go through all the trouble of setting every little thing exactly the way I want it. I hate this kind of cluttering which makes no real difference. Just give us a few options. Enough to make us feel we have a fair number of choices, but not too much.

crash3
06-05-2011, 02:20 PM
there should simply be easy, medium, hard and we get told what features each level of difficulty has.

Igor1903
06-05-2011, 02:24 PM
I play AC to feel like a badass without trying too hard.

I don't feel badass if I don't try hard.

@topic

AC1 may have sucked in some aspects, like being forced to watch every cinematic even if I wanted to replay the mission, lots of bugs and stuff like that. But I MUST say its combat system was BY THE FAR better than AC2's and ACB's. Why? It was a lot harder, no way I could face 15 guards at once, I had to run for my life. To assassinate a target, I had to think. And after assassinating a main target, it was madness, the whole town after me, sometimes I took almost 30 minutes to go back to the Bureau, being as stelthy as possible to not get caught. We couldn't swim, so water wasn't an option to hide from guards. Even if I hid from them in a haystack, they were going to search for me anywhere. There was no smoke bomb sh*t, only my sword, knife and hidden blade. Oh, also, it required a lot of skill to use the hidden blade in combat. No chains. No weapon-steal. Counter-attacks were very hard. Had to walk with caution looking after templar guards...

Okay, enough of that, AC1 combat system was better. So, I would really appreciate changes in the actual fighting system. If it gets as good as AC1, this game is going to be amazing.

daniel_gervide
06-05-2011, 02:29 PM
Originally posted by crash3:
there should simply be easy, medium, hard and we get told what features each level of difficulty has.

For those who like to have the game dificult adapted to their likes they should be able to have an Advanced tab (like in games like nfs:**** and in the video options of most the games)

Conniving_Eagle
06-05-2011, 04:15 PM
Originally posted by PhiIs1618033...:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
Maybe some of you aren't understanding. The idea isn't to make combat sluggish and ultra-hard. Combat should expand to be more interactive, requiring you to pay more attention and press more buttons, BUT, making it cooler and more fun because of the extra interactions and animations. As for difficulty, it shouldn't be ultra-easy like in ACB, but it should be difficult enough that an idiot would have a hard time and a better player would excel in it. To do that, besides adding the interactions I suggested, counter-attack times should go back to the way they were in AC1(Brotherhood made the amount of time before a gaurd attacks where you can press the counter button and get a counter-kill successfully longer), they need to make it so that gaurds can break your block, so you can't be blocking the whole time, and you shouldn't be able to regain health when you're almost about to die until you've killed the enemies, or ran away. That's how you make it harder. Well, not hard, just more skill-oriented. Try getting a counter-kill with the hidden blade in AC1 compared to Brotherhood, then you'll know what I mean. My post is how you can make it cooler with more interactions.

Agree...

@PhiIs1618033. instead of having only those options we should be able to chose everything since your sword damage until guard's gun damage.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
No. I don't want to go through all the trouble of setting every little thing exactly the way I want it. I hate this kind of cluttering which makes no real difference. Just give us a few options. Enough to make us feel we have a fair number of choices, but not too much. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You disagree with his idea? Or do you disagree with mine that you should be able to perform double counter-kills, killchains should be nerfed and enemy AI should be smarter?

daniel_gervide
06-05-2011, 04:25 PM
Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PhiIs1618033...:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
Maybe some of you aren't understanding. The idea isn't to make combat sluggish and ultra-hard. Combat should expand to be more interactive, requiring you to pay more attention and press more buttons, BUT, making it cooler and more fun because of the extra interactions and animations. As for difficulty, it shouldn't be ultra-easy like in ACB, but it should be difficult enough that an idiot would have a hard time and a better player would excel in it. To do that, besides adding the interactions I suggested, counter-attack times should go back to the way they were in AC1(Brotherhood made the amount of time before a gaurd attacks where you can press the counter button and get a counter-kill successfully longer), they need to make it so that gaurds can break your block, so you can't be blocking the whole time, and you shouldn't be able to regain health when you're almost about to die until you've killed the enemies, or ran away. That's how you make it harder. Well, not hard, just more skill-oriented. Try getting a counter-kill with the hidden blade in AC1 compared to Brotherhood, then you'll know what I mean. My post is how you can make it cooler with more interactions.

Agree...

@PhiIs1618033. instead of having only those options we should be able to chose everything since your sword damage until guard's gun damage.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
No. I don't want to go through all the trouble of setting every little thing exactly the way I want it. I hate this kind of cluttering which makes no real difference. Just give us a few options. Enough to make us feel we have a fair number of choices, but not too much. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You disagree with his idea? Or do you disagree with mine that you should be able to perform double counter-kills, killchains should be nerfed and enemy AI should be smarter? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not sure about double counter-kills :x But the killchains (killstreaks) should be only availiable when any enemy got his guards down (when they are not paying attention to the combat or don't have their weapon well posisionated)... Also the enemies should have REAL AI and not Standart Moves... i mean:

Now:
-Normal: Only attack, you can attack them, you can block their attacks.
-Capitains: Attack and Blocks, you can attack them with you feet, you can block their attacks.
-Agile: Attack and Flee, you can't attack them, you can block their attacks.
-Brutos/Spear: Attack and Blocks, you can attack them with your feet, you can't block their attacks.
-Papal: Attack and Block, you can attack them with your feet, you can block their attacks.

How it should be:
Every guard should be able to do anything...
Agile should have higher chance to flee your attacks (75%), others 10% and papal-like guards 25%.
Agile shouldn't be able to counter-strike you but the other yes, normals should have poor 5% chance of counter-strike and papal-like guards should have like 60%...
Everyguard should have a chance of getting "tired" or "taunt"... the stronger they are the less the chance is... when you are doing combo/counter that chance would increanse and the killstreaks would only be availiable to do against those guards that are not paying REAL atention to the combat...

Hope you understand what i mean with Real AI and not Standart Moves http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

_______________________________________________

I agree with what you said of how should combat be (in theory) but i'm not sure your suggestions are the ones that would do it...

Conniving_Eagle
06-05-2011, 04:48 PM
Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by PhiIs1618033...:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
Maybe some of you aren't understanding. The idea isn't to make combat sluggish and ultra-hard. Combat should expand to be more interactive, requiring you to pay more attention and press more buttons, BUT, making it cooler and more fun because of the extra interactions and animations. As for difficulty, it shouldn't be ultra-easy like in ACB, but it should be difficult enough that an idiot would have a hard time and a better player would excel in it. To do that, besides adding the interactions I suggested, counter-attack times should go back to the way they were in AC1(Brotherhood made the amount of time before a gaurd attacks where you can press the counter button and get a counter-kill successfully longer), they need to make it so that gaurds can break your block, so you can't be blocking the whole time, and you shouldn't be able to regain health when you're almost about to die until you've killed the enemies, or ran away. That's how you make it harder. Well, not hard, just more skill-oriented. Try getting a counter-kill with the hidden blade in AC1 compared to Brotherhood, then you'll know what I mean. My post is how you can make it cooler with more interactions.

Agree...

@PhiIs1618033. instead of having only those options we should be able to chose everything since your sword damage until guard's gun damage.. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
No. I don't want to go through all the trouble of setting every little thing exactly the way I want it. I hate this kind of cluttering which makes no real difference. Just give us a few options. Enough to make us feel we have a fair number of choices, but not too much. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You disagree with his idea? Or do you disagree with mine that you should be able to perform double counter-kills, killchains should be nerfed and enemy AI should be smarter? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not sure about double counter-kills :x But the killchains (killstreaks) should be only availiable when any enemy got his guards down (when they are not paying attention to the combat or don't have their weapon well posisionated)... Also the enemies should have REAL AI and not Standart Moves... i mean:

Now:
-Normal: Only attack, you can attack them, you can block their attacks.
-Capitains: Attack and Blocks, you can attack them with you feet, you can block their attacks.
-Agile: Attack and Flee, you can't attack them, you can block their attacks.
-Brutos/Spear: Attack and Blocks, you can attack them with your feet, you can't block their attacks.
-Papal: Attack and Block, you can attack them with your feet, you can block their attacks.

How it should be:
Every guard should be able to do anything...
Agile should have higher chance to flee your attacks (75%), others 10% and papal-like guards 25%.
Agile shouldn't be able to counter-strike you but the other yes, normals should have poor 5% chance of counter-strike and papal-like guards should have like 60%...
Everyguard should have a chance of getting "tired" or "taunt"... the stronger they are the less the chance is... when you are doing combo/counter that chance would increanse and the killstreaks would only be availiable to do against those guards that are not paying REAL atention to the combat...

Hope you understand what i mean with Real AI and not Standart Moves http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

_______________________________________________

I agree with what you said of how should combat be (in theory) but i'm not sure your suggestions are the ones that would do it... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I understand what you mean, and I do agree with you on some parts. I'm going to defend my idea by clarifing what it basically means. Once, you counter-kill a gaurd, and while you're doing the animation, sometimes a buttong will appear, and if you click it(similar to how the buttons were in the AC2 cutscenes, but the screen wouldn't freeze), you would perform another counter-attack, dodge another gaurds attack, or throw the gaurd you killed at the other gaurds to dis-orient them. This would work well if you wanted to distract the heavier tier guards like brutes and seekers, giving you a little time to kill some of the weaker gaurds so you could better focus on the stronger gaurds. Also, gaurds should have a very small chance to counter-kill you as well, but you would be able to evade it. Like, 2% with agile gaurds and normal gaurds, and then 10-20% with Brutes/Seekers/Papal Guards. They had something similar an AC1 with the Templars and Crusaders.

I like you're idea, they should be actual AI. Based on the archetype, they all should have a certain chance to block, counter-kill, counter, dodge, and defense-break you. You shouldn't have the ability to hold down the block button the whole time you're fighting gaurds. If you do it for too long they should be able to defense-break you. You for higher tier gaurds you should only be allowed to hold it for 1 or 2 seconds before they're about to attack.

I like your idea for killchains, but I think they should be limited, and you should have to offensively kill a gaurd before you could start one. If you did start one, you wouldn't be able to counter an attack while in an animation, and gaurds would have a small chance to evade it. That way, if you did work up to a kill-chain, you would only be able to kill 2-4 gaurds with it.

daniel_gervide
06-10-2011, 01:33 PM
@ConnivingEagle

Ac1's Hidden blade was offensive too if you knew how to work with it... anyway.. Do you think the hidden blade as meele weapon was a good feature of Ac2? I mean, at Ac1 it was the best weapon but u needed skill to get it to be more efficient than a sword but in Ac2 it's the best weapon and u don't need any skill to make it more efficient than a sword... also, if in real life you get an hidden blade and you try to use it as a meele weapon against a sword it(hidden blade) or ur arm would break...

crash3
06-10-2011, 01:45 PM
Tap R1 to parry each attack instead of holding down R1 to deflect everything, makes us time things more

get rid of obvious archetypes with only one or two specific moves, this makes the guards less predictable as we will then have to test for weaknesses as we dont know how tough or skilled each guard is

more damage from guards, i mean realistically it only takes one or two hits from a sword/dagger to kill someone

every guard should be able to block, counter, dodge and grab as a minimum. More elite guards should be able to break your defense, counter grab and counter you trying to disarm them also they carry out more lethal counters in general that actually take life off you like the templars in AC1

daniel_gervide
06-10-2011, 02:00 PM
Originally posted by crash3:
Tap R1 to parry each attack instead of holding down R1 to deflect everything, makes us time things more

get rid of obvious archetypes with only one or two specific moves, this makes the guards less predictable as we will then have to test for weaknesses as we dont know how tough or skilled each guard is

more damage from guards, i mean realistically it only takes one or two hits from a sword/dagger to kill someone

every guard should be able to block, counter, dodge and grab as a minimum. More elite guards should be able to break your defense, counter grab and counter you trying to disarm them also they carry out more lethal counters in general that actually take life off you like the templars in AC1

Well i'm not sure about the tapping R1 for each attack... maybe to do a counter-attack it should be TAP R1 + Square but for normal parry it could be Hold R1 without anyproblem...

Also, i think R1 should be at L1 and that L1 should be at R3.... (i've played today AcB at Ps3 and it sucks a lot... i'm not a big fan of controllers but when i played with them to make a review on which is better for Ac i used that keys) Or at least make them able to be changed like in Pc....

Conniving_Eagle
06-10-2011, 02:18 PM
@Daniel_Gervide, How about this, since gaurds can defense break, the higher ones should be able to do it more often. I don't like that you can hold RT the whole time your fighting a group anyways. If you hold it for too long, a gaurd should be able to defense break you. The more powerful a gaurd is, the less time you're allowed to hold it. For exmaple, if you're fighting against the equivalent of Papal guards, you should only be able to hold RT maybe 2 seconds before they attack. Otherwise, they break it.

Conniving_Eagle
06-10-2011, 02:24 PM
Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
@ConnivingEagle

Ac1's Hidden blade was offensive too if you knew how to work with it... anyway.. Do you think the hidden blade as meele weapon was a good feature of Ac2? I mean, at Ac1 it was the best weapon but u needed skill to get it to be more efficient than a sword but in Ac2 it's the best weapon and u don't need any skill to make it more efficient than a sword... also, if in real life you get an hidden blade and you try to use it as a meele weapon against a sword it(hidden blade) or ur arm would break...

When I said you couldn't use the hidden blade in AC1 offensively, I meant that you couldn't actually attack people with it, you could only counter with it. I didn't mind that it had the shortest counter time, but I preferred it if it was a little longer. The Sword should have the longest counter time, followed by unarmed and the dagger. Than the hidden blade. Although it would have the shortest counter time, it would be un-counterable. The counter time for it should be the shortest, but it should the a little longer than it was in AC1. By the way, you don't have to reply to everything with '@' just don't quote something that has 3 other quotes in it already. For example, we shouldn't be doing what I did at the top of the comments on this page.

daniel_gervide
06-10-2011, 02:32 PM
Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
@ConnivingEagle

Ac1's Hidden blade was offensive too if you knew how to work with it... anyway.. Do you think the hidden blade as meele weapon was a good feature of Ac2? I mean, at Ac1 it was the best weapon but u needed skill to get it to be more efficient than a sword but in Ac2 it's the best weapon and u don't need any skill to make it more efficient than a sword... also, if in real life you get an hidden blade and you try to use it as a meele weapon against a sword it(hidden blade) or ur arm would break...

When I said you couldn't use the hidden blade in AC1 offensively, I meant that you couldn't actually attack people with it, you could only counter with it. I didn't mind that it had the shortest counter time, but I preferred it if it was a little longer. The Sword should have the longest counter time, followed by unarmed and the dagger. Than the hidden blade. Although it would have the shortest counter time, it would be un-counterable. The counter time for it should be the shortest, but it should the a little longer than it was in AC1. By the way, you don't have to reply to everything with '@' just don't quote something that has 3 other quotes in it already. For example, we shouldn't be doing what I did at the top of the comments on this page. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

actually yes you could... You could attack enemies with their guards down in middle of a combat....

Conniving_Eagle
06-10-2011, 02:40 PM
@Daniel_Gervide

Oh, yeah, I remember, you could assassinate them if they fell to the ground or weren't paying attention. Yes, you could, but I meant more on the lines of actually striking them with it. But I see why you think kill-chains should be started that way now.

daniel_gervide
06-10-2011, 02:53 PM
Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
@Daniel_Gervide

Oh, yeah, I remember, you could assassinate them if they fell to the ground or weren't paying attention. Yes, you could, but I meant more on the lines of actually striking them with it. But I see why you think kill-chains should be started that way now.

Striking with hidden blade is the same as say Hidden Blade as MEELE weapon xD

I'm not saying starting... i think it's really stupid and unrealistic to be able to kill with one hit guards that are paying attention... i want to be able to kill guards with one hit only if they are not paying attention and the chance for them to taunt or cough should be less for higher ranked guards, also the taunt would only pop-ups more usually (doubled chance) if you are playing defensivly and cough if you are assassinating any guard either from combo, from counter or thought one hit to those who were taunting or coughing before the guy coughing now... kill chains would stop to be called killstreak but instead it would be combat streak, it would be like the amount of guards you killed without being hitted (and counter-strikes should be tap high profile + tap attack button *where tapping high profile should have the timming to tap attack button while holding high profile of Ac2 and tapping attack button should be right after tapping high profile* instead of hold high profile + attack button)

Plus to introduce my idea of being able to kill with one hit taunting and coughing guards would only be introduced if hidden blade isn't anymore used as a meele weapon so it would be only for assassinating (which seems more reasonable)

Conniving_Eagle
06-10-2011, 03:15 PM
@Daniel Gervide

Well, I don't think they'll take out the hidden blades as a weapon. The hidden blades are essentially dual wielding daggers. And they are kind of realistic about them, when you see Ezio counter-killing an enemy with the hidden-blades he isn't deflecting their swords, he is usually out-maneuvering them or dodging their attacks in the animaion. I don't think that they'll make the hidden blade only for assassination, that's why they gave you two. So, tell me what you think about this proposal for the combat system.

-The Double Counter idea
-The counter times for weapons would be slightly lowered. Longest to quickest counter times would be Sword, Dagger, Unarmed, Hidden Blades. The counter time for the hidden-blades would be slightly longer than they were for AC1, and they always killed the target, not just took away some of their health. This is how they worked in AC1.
- The only way begin a kill-chain you have to attack and kill a guard who is either distracted or taunting you. You cannot perform a counter-kill while in a kill-chain. The only way to exit a kill-chain without taking damage is to stop or to evade(RT+A) a guards attack.
- All archetypes can dodge, parry, counter(deals damage),grab, defense-break, and taunt; just as the Crusaders could in AC1. Each archetype would have a percentage chance of performing each ability.

P.S. I edited the thread, I'm not sure if you read this one, but you should check if you did or not. It's more specific than the orignal one.

daniel_gervide
06-10-2011, 03:30 PM
Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
@Daniel Gervide

Well, I don't think they'll take out the hidden blades as a weapon. The hidden blades are essentially dual wielding daggers. And they are kind of realistic about them, when you see Ezio counter-killing an enemy with the hidden-blades he isn't deflecting their swords, he is usually out-maneuvering them or dodging their attacks in the animaion. I don't think that they'll make the hidden blade only for assassination, that's why they gave you two. So, tell me what you think about this proposal for the combat system.

-The Double Counter idea
-The counter times for weapons would be slightly lowered. Longest to quickest counter times would be Sword, Dagger, Unarmed, Hidden Blades. The counter time for the hidden-blades would be slightly longer than they were for AC1, and they always killed the target, not just took away some of their health. This is how they worked in AC1.
- The only way begin a kill-chain you have to attack and kill a guard who is either distracted or taunting you. You cannot perform a counter-kill while in a kill-chain. The only way to exit a kill-chain without taking damage is to stop or to evade(RT+A) a guards attack.
- All archetypes can dodge, parry, counter(deals damage),grab, defense-break, and taunt; just as the Crusaders could in AC1. Each archetype would have a percentage chance of performing each ability.

P.S. I edited the thread, I'm not sure if you read this one, but you should check if you did or not. It's more specific than the orignal one.

Did you study Physic? Compare the size and thickness of the hidden blade to the size and thickness of the sword (also take in account the weight of both)... Thought Physic it can be proven that the sword would rape off the hidden blade... so it's not realistic... for the counter-strike i'm in but for the meele offensive ways i'm really off...

I will repeat it once again, hidden blade is the most powerfull weapon, it's fastest and deals more damage than altair's sword... It makes the whole combat system unfair cuz hidden blade is the basic equipment that every assasin has so it would be pointless to buy sword or short blade if you can get rid of every guard with hidden blade WITHOUT SKILL...

So, in Ac2 and Brotherhood hidden blade is unrealistic and umbalanced... do you think an unrealistic + umbalanced feature if good for the game?
______________________________________

- Double idea? Yes
- Yes, also i think you are talking about parry the counter when refering to take away some health.
- No, i want killstreaks off, instead of it i want the Combat Streaks as i described... it would be more realistic and more skill rewarding.
- Don't forget to include coughing and that Tauting chance should be doubled if you are pressing R1 (high profile) and the Coughin change should be doubled if you are doing a prenetation with your weapon (those 3 ways i've said before)
__________________________________________

Idea:

- Keep parry just as pressing only R1 but make Counter-Strike force you to tap R1 and than Square where the timming to press R1 should be the same for pressing Square while holding R1 at Ac2.

Conniving_Eagle
06-10-2011, 03:46 PM
@Daneil_Gervide

Okay, I think I understand you now. So, hidden blades should not be able to attack guards, but they can be used to counter-kill guards and kill distracted guards or guards that are taunting you. Parrying is the most common thing the guards can do. Parrying is just blocking an attack. Countering is when they parry/dodge and attack you back, causing you to lose some health. It's less common than Parrying. Could you explain your reasoning for the parrying idea? I think you want that because you can just hold the parry button all the time and not take any damage. I think defense-breaking is enough, and the harder guards would be able to do it alot more of course.

I like your idea with the hidden-blade where you can't attack with it, but I think Assassin's Creed has become too mainstream for that at this point.

Pdavis3
06-10-2011, 04:18 PM
IMO u should never strike with the hidden blade, it seems kinda dumb. the blade is not as strong as a dagger or sword and is more likely to break in real life. (As seen in the ACR trailer). Ezio didnít really strike with it but instead did counters, and when he actually does try to block with it the blade breaks.

So hopefully they will add something like that in the end product of ACR, and not allow us to strike like wild dogs with the hidden blade without some penalty.

daniel_gervide
06-10-2011, 05:09 PM
Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
@Daneil_Gervide

Okay, I think I understand you now. So, hidden blades should not be able to attack guards, but they can be used to counter-kill guards and kill distracted guards or guards that are taunting you. Parrying is the most common thing the guards can do. Parrying is just blocking an attack. Countering is when they parry/dodge and attack you back, causing you to lose some health. It's less common than Parrying. Could you explain your reasoning for the parrying idea? I think you want that because you can just hold the parry button all the time and not take any damage. I think defense-breaking is enough, and the harder guards would be able to do it alot more of course.

I like your idea with the hidden-blade where you can't attack with it, but I think Assassin's Creed has become too mainstream for that at this point.

Well, since guards would be able to break your defense, defend could be made thought holding R1.

But, if the counter attack is made thought Hold R1 + Tap Squre, defenders would have it easier which is against my ideas...

That's how my idea comes in, defenders would need to stop holding R1, tap it again and than tap square and agresive guys would need to react faster to press 2 buttons (when i'm doing any execution animation thought one of the 3 ways i've listened some posts ago, i press R1 so i can be faster countering but with my idea i would need to get a little more skill http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif)

Also, i think that depending on the guard we are facing, the timming we have pressing R1 and how fast are we to press square after R1, the counter attack would be more effective or less so if you are skilled you would be able to rape the strongest guard with only one counter attack but if you have no skill your counter attack would only damage him like 10%....

@Pdavis I see you agree with me... in the trailer the combat with hidden blade seems reasonable cuz when he tries to block a sword with it, it breaks.... but in the game when you strike a sword, your hidden blade doesn't break... WHY?...

I hope the trailer is an hint for me and all that ppl that thinks like me http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif (also the music hints that the game will be harder)

Conniving_Eagle
06-10-2011, 05:27 PM
@Daniel_Gervide

How does the music make the gameplay seem harder? BTW I was impressed alot more with the trailer than the demo, I guess that's why we're having this conversation. But no, a defense-break can't be countered. It would be almost automatic, the same Ezio's defense break animation - a kick to the gut. You can't counter it. The way it works is the easy normal guards who wear berets will defense break after a very long time, if you're holding Parry for 5 seconds. The armored guards with swords could do it in 4-3, and the Seekers and Brutes could do it in 3-2 seconds of you holding parry. However, you can't counter a seeker or brute's attack with your weapon anyways. You have to either dodge it or unarm them. So they could defense break your unarm too.

I think that's what they were showing in the trailer. Ezio tried using his hidden blades to parry an attack from a heavy sword(it looked very thick), that's why one of his blades broke. But anyways, you could block and counter the weaker guards normally for the most part, but when you ran into the heavier guards you would be like "Oh crap," because it would be basically like your idea, where you would have to parry and counter almost simultaneously.

daniel_gervide
06-10-2011, 05:41 PM
Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
@Daniel_Gervide

How does the music make the gameplay seem harder? BTW I was impressed alot more with the trailer than the demo, I guess that's why we're having this conversation. But no, a defense-break can't be countered. It would be almost automatic, the same Ezio's defense break animation - a kick to the gut. You can't counter it. The way it works is the easy normal guards who wear berets will defense break after a very long time, if you're holding Parry for 5 seconds. The armored guards with swords could do it in 4-3, and the Seekers and Brutes could do it in 3-2 seconds of you holding parry. However, you can't counter a seeker or brute's attack with your weapon anyways. You have to either dodge it or unarm them. So they could defense break your unarm too.

I think that's what they were showing in the trailer. Ezio tried using his hidden blades to parry an attack from a heavy sword(it looked very thick), that's why one of his blades broke. But anyways, you could block and counter the weaker guards normally for the most part, but when you ran into the heavier guards you would be like "Oh crap," because it would be basically like your idea, where you would have to parry and counter almost simultaneously.

I see your point xD maybe ur is better than mine haha xD

well, for the music, there is the part of the lyrics that make me think about the dificult:



From the dawn of time to the end of days
I will have to run, away
I want to feel the pain and the bitter taste
Of the blood on my lips, again

Those 4 lines reminds me a lot Ac1 and the first sequence of Ac2... Also, the whole lyrics really fit the trailer:

Deep in the ocean, dead and cast away
Where innocence is burned in flames
A million mile from home, I'm walking ahead
I'm frozen to the bones, I am...

A soldier on my own, I don't know the way
I'm riding up the heights of shame
I'm waiting for the call, the hand on the chest
I'm ready for the fight, and fate

The sound of iron shocks is stuck in my head,
The thunder of the drums dictates
The rhythm of the falls, the number of deaths
The rising of the hordes, ahead

From the dawn of time to the end of days
I will have to run, away
I want to feel the pain and the bitter taste
Of the blood on my lips, again

This steady burst of snow is burning my hands,
I'm frozen to the bones, I am
A million mile from home, I'm walking away
I can't remind your eyes, your face

Well, i'm going to sleep, tomorrow is going to be a busy day so CyA http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

theassassin1693
06-10-2011, 07:33 PM
I'm indifferent to the combat because AC1 is just as easy as AC:B for me.

CRUDFACE
06-10-2011, 07:37 PM
@Daniel, the hidden blades were NOT as strong as actual weapons, they were the weakest. fight Cesare with the hidden blades, then use altair's sword as you said or a heavy weapon. Much, much stronger.

I already saw the gameplay of combat played differently, they kept the kill chains and added some more counter kill animations for the hidden blade...

Conniving_Eagle
06-10-2011, 08:45 PM
Originally posted by t260z:
@Daniel, the hidden blades were NOT as strong as actual weapons, they were the weakest. fight Cesare with the hidden blades, then use altair's sword as you said or a heavy weapon. Much, much stronger.

I already saw the gameplay of combat played differently, they kept the kill chains and added some more counter kill animations for the hidden blade...

That was the hooked blade, complete different weapon. We're hoping Ubisoft will read this thread and put it in their game. 5 more months till the game releases, so....

Super_Sausage
06-11-2011, 03:52 AM
Whilst I agree that AC1 had much harder combat, and that it was the right difficulty, I will remind you all that on the way to the fight with Robert de Sable, you get an achievement for beating 100 guards in one fight.

Conniving_Eagle
06-11-2011, 12:05 PM
Originally posted by Super_Sausage:
Whilst I agree that AC1 had much harder combat, and that it was the right difficulty, I will remind you all that on the way to the fight with Robert de Sable, you get an achievement for beating 100 guards in one fight.
It wasn't 100 guards, it was like twenty. I'll identify the acheivement if you really want me to.

daniel_gervide
06-11-2011, 02:11 PM
Originally posted by t260z:
@Daniel, the hidden blades were NOT as strong as actual weapons, they were the weakest. fight Cesare with the hidden blades, then use altair's sword as you said or a heavy weapon. Much, much stronger.

I already saw the gameplay of combat played differently, they kept the kill chains and added some more counter kill animations for the hidden blade...

Err... i'm talking about fight against normal guards... for normal guards u just need to press Square (or X) in the perfect timming to kill the guards... Hidden blade is the fastest weapon so you can archive to get the perfect timming faster...

Also, in Ac2 it's more powerfull than altair's sword (i've not tested it in AcB cuz i didn't want the game to be easy)...

Conniving_Eagle
06-11-2011, 07:14 PM
Originally posted by Pdavis3:
IMO u should never strike with the hidden blade, it seems kinda dumb. the blade is not as strong as a dagger or sword and is more likely to break in real life. (As seen in the ACR trailer). Ezio didnít really strike with it but instead did counters, and when he actually does try to block with it the blade breaks.

So hopefully they will add something like that in the end product of ACR, and not allow us to strike like wild dogs with the hidden blade without some penalty.

Just saying, the guard that broke Ezio's hidden blade was using a very thick sword. It reminded me of the one that brutes carried in ACB. You couldn't deflect attacks from a Brute.

daniel_gervide
06-11-2011, 07:16 PM
Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pdavis3:
IMO u should never strike with the hidden blade, it seems kinda dumb. the blade is not as strong as a dagger or sword and is more likely to break in real life. (As seen in the ACR trailer). Ezio didnít really strike with it but instead did counters, and when he actually does try to block with it the blade breaks.

So hopefully they will add something like that in the end product of ACR, and not allow us to strike like wild dogs with the hidden blade without some penalty.

Just saying, the guard that broke Ezio's hidden blade was using a very thick sword. It reminded me of the one that brutes carried in ACB. You couldn't deflect attacks from a Brute. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

even against a normal sword it would break in real-life...

Conniving_Eagle
06-11-2011, 07:21 PM
Depends, If you hold it straight and a guard rams his sword down on it with all his might then yeah. If you use the blade to push the sword out of it's path than no.

daniel_gervide
06-11-2011, 07:27 PM
Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
Depends, If you hold it straight and a guard rams his sword down on it with all his might then yeah. If you use the blade to push the sword out of it's path than no.

If you strike another sword it breaks too... The mecanic energy that the sword has even resting is bigger than the hidden blade moving (also we must consider that the sword is longer and that as long it is it will have more or less energy aplied by a guard on it)... it's more likely that if the hidden blade don't breaks with that strike than your arm would be hardly damaged due to the amount of streng aplied to it...

Also, remember this values depends on the streng of the hidden sword carrier and of the sword carrier...

CRUDFACE
06-11-2011, 07:40 PM
Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by t260z:
@Daniel, the hidden blades were NOT as strong as actual weapons, they were the weakest. fight Cesare with the hidden blades, then use altair's sword as you said or a heavy weapon. Much, much stronger.

I already saw the gameplay of combat played differently, they kept the kill chains and added some more counter kill animations for the hidden blade...

Err... i'm talking about fight against normal guards... for normal guards u just need to press Square (or X) in the perfect timming to kill the guards... Hidden blade is the fastest weapon so you can archive to get the perfect timming faster...

Also, in Ac2 it's more powerfull than altair's sword (i've not tested it in AcB cuz i didn't want the game to be easy)... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oops, thought you were talking about raw power. you're decribing skill more than that. In ACB, it's hampered (kinda better) that is has no sub weapon to supplement it. But once you kick a guy in the crouch, he's basically ready for the slaughter.

Oh, Conniving Eagle, I think the sword the guard used to break Ezio's hidden blade was a standard sword. He still holds it high in the air with just one hand when Ezio is being surrounded by soldiers.

Conniving_Eagle
06-11-2011, 07:43 PM
@t260z Maybe, in that case look two posts above yours.

Super_Sausage
06-12-2011, 06:39 AM
Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Super_Sausage:
Whilst I agree that AC1 had much harder combat, and that it was the right difficulty, I will remind you all that on the way to the fight with Robert de Sable, you get an achievement for beating 100 guards in one fight.
It wasn't 100 guards, it was like twenty. I'll identify the acheivement if you really want me to. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ah yes. Sorry. I have gotten two of them mixed up, it was in fact twenty five. But still, even in Brotherhood you don't often fight 25 guards in one fight (although it would be much easier than in AC1), so atleast Ubi are not going too crazy with massive fights, even if they're easy.

daniel_gervide
06-12-2011, 07:00 AM
Originally posted by Super_Sausage:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Super_Sausage:
Whilst I agree that AC1 had much harder combat, and that it was the right difficulty, I will remind you all that on the way to the fight with Robert de Sable, you get an achievement for beating 100 guards in one fight.
It wasn't 100 guards, it was like twenty. I'll identify the acheivement if you really want me to. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ah yes. Sorry. I have gotten two of them mixed up, it was in fact twenty five. But still, even in Brotherhood you don't often fight 25 guards in one fight (although it would be much easier than in AC1), so atleast Ubi are not going too crazy with massive fights, even if they're easy. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

even if u fight against 100 papal guards it would be easier than 25 templars -.- SADLY!

Pdavis3
06-12-2011, 09:19 AM
well with all the ďimprovementsĒ ubisoft is adding the the AC games, i would highly doubt it would ever become a difficult game. Mainly because they added the kill streak and now the bombs. Donít get me wrong i like using them, but in terms of making the game harder it does the opposite.

The AI in the game is extremely lacking as well, i an kill a guard in front of another one and if iím 3 yards or so away they wonít notice me. Iíve done it, that and the fact if ur wearing all that armor and weapons why donít the guards watch u seeing how u donít blend in with the crowd at all.

If there are ways to make the game more difficult however the kill streak would be hard to change. The more armor or weapons u carry the higher the chance that guards will randomly follow u or something and citizens will walk away from u. if ur clothing doesnít match the area ur in then guards will be able to chase u and find u even if ur blending on a bench with two random npcs wearing nothing that looks like u.

We all love the idea of improving combat, at least the fundamental idea. However Ubisoft needs to focus more on the blending concept of the game, and if they donít why call it the same name. Seeing how originally the game was made with that fundamental concept.

Conniving_Eagle
06-12-2011, 11:42 AM
Originally posted by Pdavis3:
well with all the ďimprovementsĒ ubisoft is adding the the AC games, i would highly doubt it would ever become a difficult game. Mainly because they added the kill streak and now the bombs. Donít get me wrong i like using them, but in terms of making the game harder it does the opposite.

The AI in the game is extremely lacking as well, i an kill a guard in front of another one and if iím 3 yards or so away they wonít notice me. Iíve done it, that and the fact if ur wearing all that armor and weapons why donít the guards watch u seeing how u donít blend in with the crowd at all.

If there are ways to make the game more difficult however the kill streak would be hard to change. The more armor or weapons u carry the higher the chance that guards will randomly follow u or something and citizens will walk away from u. if ur clothing doesnít match the area ur in then guards will be able to chase u and find u even if ur blending on a bench with two random npcs wearing nothing that looks like u.

We all love the idea of improving combat, at least the fundamental idea. However Ubisoft needs to focus more on the blending concept of the game, and if they donít why call it the same name. Seeing how originally the game was made with that fundamental concept.

1st thing, yeah. Did you notice how many people even wore white in AC2 and ACB? Almost no one. I kind of question why the Assassin's even wore white. I like what they did in AC1 where after a certain part of the game, guards have been alerted to your actions throughout the area, and they knew to look for the white-hooded man. Plus, DOES NO ONE NOTICE THE HUGE 'A' ASSASSIN EMBLEM ON YOUR BELT?!? The Saracen and Crusader patrols were always suspicous of who you were, and if they got closer enough to you, you would be spotted. I think that's what needs to be done. Not necesarily for the whole game though, but definitley in certain parts, or add certain patrols to avoid. For example, we know that the Byzantines are the aggresive templar faction unlike the Ottomans. I think they should have Byzantine patrols who functioned the same way that the Saracen and Crusader patrols in AC1 did. It would be better than something like limiting your armor and weapons. Ezio does his best to conceal most of it, that's why he wears a cape and his throwing knives are on the side of his chest.

As for combat. I think my double counter idea would make it fun and exciting again. The endless kill-chains in ACB made the game really boring after a while. That's why they need to be nerfed. A kill-chain should be something that you should have to work a little harder for, or wait for a certain opportunity to do it.

As for the difficulty of combat, I'll reiterate something similar to the P.S. note. AC isn't meant to be ultra-hard skill-requiring like I see alot of people wanting it. But it shouldn't be so damn easy that a fricking 6-year old could kill 10 guards by just randomly pressing buttons, which is basically how it was in ACB. The arsenals of ACB and AC2, with the skillset of AC1 would be great if they could do that somehow.

Conniving_Eagle
06-12-2011, 05:32 PM
Originally posted by Pdavis3:
well with all the ďimprovementsĒ ubisoft is adding the the AC games, i would highly doubt it would ever become a difficult game. Mainly because they added the kill streak and now the bombs. Donít get me wrong i like using them, but in terms of making the game harder it does the opposite.

What's the kill-streak? Or do you mean kill-chains? They didn't add just more bombs, they added over 300 bombs. That sounds like they're getting rid of the whole concept of AC. Now we can just use bombs to do everything. Improvements are always good, but not when they make something easy to the point where it's not fun anymore.

The AI in the game is extremely lacking as well, i an kill a guard in front of another one and if iím 3 yards or so away they wonít notice me. Iíve done it, that and the fact if ur wearing all that armor and weapons why donít the guards watch u seeing how u donít blend in with the crowd at all.

If there are ways to make the game more difficult however the kill streak would be hard to change. The more armor or weapons u carry the higher the chance that guards will randomly follow u or something and citizens will walk away from u. if ur clothing doesnít match the area ur in then guards will be able to chase u and find u even if ur blending on a bench with two random npcs wearing nothing that looks like u.

We all love the idea of improving combat, at least the fundamental idea. However Ubisoft needs to focus more on the blending concept of the game, and if they donít why call it the same name. Seeing how originally the game was made with that fundamental concept.

bakerrossera
06-12-2011, 09:26 PM
interesting ideas i think it could work if they implement it right

mrbrandonette
06-12-2011, 09:29 PM
I would just like to say to the OP that this is quite a good idea and I hope they see it and utilize it in some way. They would have to tweak it a little but I could see it happening. That is, if we keep this up front and in their face before they're done with the game http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Dimension3500
06-12-2011, 10:31 PM
I remember watching an interview where Patrice said they payed special atention to the forums to get to know the community's thoughts... but as we all know he left Ubisoft.
I wonder if they still care as much as he did...

IBYCFOTA
06-12-2011, 10:48 PM
Anybody here play Batman Arkham Asylum? While the combat is generally pretty easy, it flows well and does a great job of selling you on the idea that you're Batman. Obviously Ezio is not Batman, but they are both badasses who take on dozens of baddies with ease. Personally, I would love to see a combat system similar to Arkham Asylum where combos and counters are paramount to success. Right now the combat just feels too static and isn't particularly fun or challenging. Then again it's never been a strong suit of the AC series, so there's no sense in complaining about it now. Still, a re-vamped combat system would do wonders for this game. It's not difficult, it's not enjoyable, it's not engaging, and worst of all it's extremely repetitive. That's not a good combination.

k20ml
06-13-2011, 07:43 AM
Anybody here play Batman Arkham Asylum?
Yeah. I liked how, as you have said it, its combat system is so easy but fluid.

who take on dozens of baddies with ease
Probably not. People here would like to have a harder AIs to kick butts so that there is challenge.
combos and counters are paramount to success
Turn opponent's attack against him is very interesting. Not only does it justify the creed, it could also be an opportunity for great animations.
What I meant about the "justify the creed" was If an assassin is aggressive with his/her attacks, he only harbors hate against his enemies and thus clouds hos judgement or simply put it this way, creates bad decisions.
I remember one time when I was so aggressive with my kill streak that I overlooked a guard that attacked me. That ended my kill streak so vainly.

Then again it's never been a strong suit of the AC series
Yes, I agree with you about that one. Although no one said that combat for AC should not be fun. And I agree with your last statements. But combat should not be the priority of an assassin. Still no one said that combat for AC should not be fun and engaging.

Pdavis3
06-13-2011, 08:23 AM
Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
1st thing, yeah. Did you notice how many people even wore white in AC2 and ACB? Almost no one. I kind of question why the Assassin's even wore white. I like what they did in AC1 where after a certain part of the game, guards have been alerted to your actions throughout the area, and they knew to look for the white-hooded man. Plus, DOES NO ONE NOTICE THE HUGE 'A' ASSASSIN EMBLEM ON YOUR BELT?!? The Saracen and Crusader patrols were always suspicous of who you were, and if they got closer enough to you, you would be spotted. I think that's what needs to be done. Not necesarily for the whole game though, but definitley in certain parts, or add certain patrols to avoid. For example, we know that the Byzantines are the aggresive templar faction unlike the Ottomans. I think they should have Byzantine patrols who functioned the same way that the Saracen and Crusader patrols in AC1 did. It would be better than something like limiting your armor and weapons. Ezio does his best to conceal most of it, that's why he wears a cape and his throwing knives are on the side of his chest.

As for combat. I think my double counter idea would make it fun and exciting again. The endless kill-chains in ACB made the game really boring after a while. That's why they need to be nerfed. A kill-chain should be something that you should have to work a little harder for, or wait for a certain opportunity to do it.

As for the difficulty of combat, I'll reiterate something similar to the P.S. note. AC isn't meant to be ultra-hard skill-requiring like I see alot of people wanting it. But it shouldn't be so damn easy that a fricking 6-year old could kill 10 guards by just randomly pressing buttons, which is basically how it was in ACB. The arsenals of ACB and AC2, with the skillset of AC1 would be great if they could do that somehow.

In AC1 the blending was acceptable, we wore the same colors as the monks. And those were the only ppl we could blend with because we looked similar to them. With AC2 and ACB are clothing was completely different from other NPCs in the game. which was kinda sad and disappointing. I think in AC1 the only assassin logo that was shown was on the chest piece altair wore and now itís the same with ezio in revelations.

What looks good now is that from the npcs iíve seen in the demo a lot of ppl have more head gear so a hood is acceptable now. and for the concealed weapons in AC2 the knives were vissable next to the belt haha, but the cape did a little to conceal. it would be nice in ACR u could have some weapons that are meant to be hidden. like a sword that can coil around a arm or have the dagger hidden in his outfit or on his back like altair (just cuz i like that haha). honestly even a bow can be concealed better then the crossbow they have.

As for the double counter, iíd rather have that idea then the killstreak. I loved the kill streak but in terms of difficulty it went the wrong way. the double counter would be something fast and exciting.

yea i donít expect AC to be a super hard game, but it would be nice for it to be somewhat difficult at times. I think the reason AC became so easy is because Ubisoft is trying to allow easy access to ppl who havenít played it and pretty much hold our hands while playing the game.

But Iíd rather have them make the game fun and hopefully in AC3 the game will be difficult and fun

wraith_05
06-13-2011, 12:03 PM
bump

the3rdbrownie
06-13-2011, 12:16 PM
There is actually a simple solution to this combo-problem. Ubisoft should give the player the option to change the difficulty level of the whole game http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif . So hard equals to a) more guards b) more brutes/seekers/papal guards c)a reduction of the amount of kills one can chaine! Normal would jsut stay the same, but I say all this, because, I agree with many of you, the combat system in AC B is fun... to begin with. After having played the game half way through, i was killing 15 guards in 20 second with the hidden blades !. this is a major issue for me, because there is literally absolutely no use for swords/knives because the combos aren't one-hit-kills.
I liked the combat sytem in AC, because it was exactly the opposite : difficult (ish), but the best out of all of the three Assassin's Creeds is probably AC 2 and would in my opinion be better with a less-good hidden blade.

That is all http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

daniel_gervide
06-13-2011, 12:31 PM
Originally posted by the3rdbrownie:
There is actually a simple solution to this combo-problem. Ubisoft should give the player the option to change the difficulty level of the whole game http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif . So hard equals to a) more guards b) more brutes/seekers/papal guards c)a reduction of the amount of kills one can chaine! Normal would jsut stay the same, but I say all this, because, I agree with many of you, the combat system in AC B is fun... to begin with. After having played the game half way through, i was killing 15 guards in 20 second with the hidden blades !. this is a major issue for me, because there is literally absolutely no use for swords/knives because the combos aren't one-hit-kills.
I liked the combat sytem in AC, because it was exactly the opposite : difficult (ish), but the best out of all of the three Assassin's Creeds is probably AC 2 and would in my opinion be better with a less-good hidden blade.

That is all http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

your solution is just a fast press solution... if ubisoft do it i will just stop buying ubisoft games... it would be the lazziest and stupidiest change...

And about the hidden blade, i'm always talking about downgrading it to Ac1 again -.-'

Ulicies
06-13-2011, 12:32 PM
I fully agree about the double counter. I hate that Ubisoft has this habit of presenting us with amazing CGI trailers, and then presenting something different in the actual game (the very first CGI trailer showing us crossbows, and then with the E3 2011 trailer showing us fast combat and counters, with multiple guards attacking at once, and at a constant rate).

the3rdbrownie
06-13-2011, 12:38 PM
Originally posted by Ulicies:
I fully agree about the double counter. I hate that Ubisoft has this habit of presenting us with amazing CGI trailers, and then presenting something different in the actual game (the very first CGI trailer showing us crossbows, and then with the E3 2011 trailer showing us fast combat and counters, with multiple guards attacking at once, and at a constant rate).
Come on, it's a trailer :O did it ever say anywhere that this is actual in-game footage? Obviously trailers don't always correspond to the actual game and well the crossbow was historicaly inacurrate, which they notice after they made the trailer. but agan, i agree the kill-chain system needs to be nerfed http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/shady.gif

Dimension3500
06-13-2011, 04:39 PM
I think it's already too late to see some of these ideas in AC:R... but I hope they make it to AC3

Conniving_Eagle
06-13-2011, 07:15 PM
Originally posted by Dimension3500:
I think it's already too late to see some of these ideas in AC:R... but I hope they make it to AC3

It's not too late, the game comes out in almost exactly 5 months from now. They can change so much in even a day. Just because they showed a demo doesn't mean that they can't change anything, and the demo didn't even show that much, they talked about alot of stuff that would be coming into the game.

Ulicies
06-14-2011, 12:40 AM
The fact that they are going to make this game in 12 months speaks volumes on how easy it would be to make or change something in a matter of months. It really just depends on how many people actually want the change.

ILLusioNaire
06-14-2011, 08:52 AM
Practically everyone wants to see it changed, I'm sure. Can any true AC fan think otherwise? Combat is way too easy. Guards are more of an annoyance now than an obstacle to overcome. I enjoyed the balance AC1 had, at least for most of the game. If they combined this balance in combat with ACR and AC3, then things would all be gravy.

I'm not here to voice HOW AC combat should be changed. I think that no matter what we say here they will just come up with their own way of doing it. However, I am here to voice my opinion on WHY it should be changed. I think that if they were to listen to us to some degree, the 'why' instead of the 'how' would be more likely to be heard since it deals with the general ideas rather than the minutiae of those ideas.

Conniving_Eagle
06-14-2011, 01:10 PM
@Daniel_Gervide

Hey I just realized something. Remember when we were arguing about how the hidden blades were unrealistic and couldn't be used to deflect swords or that type of way in combat. I just realized that Ezio deflected sword attacks when using the hidden blades with his vambraces. That's why one of them broke in the trailer. It also explains why they made it so that Altair couldn't deflect attacks while using the hidden blades, he had leather vambraces. While on the other hand, Ezio's hidden blade was plated with metal on top. So technically it was realistic.

Pdavis3
06-14-2011, 01:36 PM
they should not only improve gameplay but other small things too, now that i think about it the customization on the main assassin kinda sucks haha. it would be cool if we could tweak the design or something for AC3. hopefully in that one we start of as a novice like Ezio and not a master

daniel_gervide
06-14-2011, 01:53 PM
Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
@Daniel_Gervide

Hey I just realized something. Remember when we were arguing about how the hidden blades were unrealistic and couldn't be used to deflect swords or that type of way in combat. I just realized that Ezio deflected sword attacks when using the hidden blades with his vambraces. That's why one of them broke in the trailer. It also explains why they made it so that Altair couldn't deflect attacks while using the hidden blades, he had leather vambraces. While on the other hand, Ezio's hidden blade was plated with metal on top. So technically it was realistic.

Well, now try to attack with the hidden blade, you will notice ezio strikes it diretly into the oppunent sword... even if the sword is standing, if ezio's strengh applied to the hidden blade is the same as the strengh of the guard applied to the sword, the sword is 1,5m long and he hidden blade 0,25m and that the sword weight is like 15kg while hidden blade is like 3kg (those numbers might not be real), ezio would damage his arm (the arm would gain cinetic energy and try to go further after hitting the other guards sword but the hidden blade would have not the necesary mecanic energy to push the sword back)...

Also, altair does defend with the vambraces too while with hidden blade.

When i'm saying saying the hidden blade is unrealistic it'ss for the attacks... Also, if my idea for killstreaks is implemented and the hidden blade is downgraded to ac1 again i would like to do "combat streaks" too with (but would only start with counter attacks cuz combos would not be availiable for it).

@pdavis3 i just wish we play a character like altair, a character that was born in the brotherhood. Ezio's character was well done and developed (just didn't like the way he trusted everyone) but, as many ppl may agree with me, he doesn't follow the creed (and if he did, ppl don't do so cuz the combat is too easy and the missions too scripted).

Pdavis3
06-14-2011, 02:22 PM
@daniel_gervide, honestly idk why ubisoft doesn't let us play as Altair's sons. one it's set up for co-op, u really finish altair and his sons' stories. and we are born in the brotherhood and it is right after the original game and hopefully Ubisoft will stay true to the creed.

we would even go to a new are, east (china). but personally i would like to see Egypt or something different.

daniel_gervide
06-14-2011, 02:27 PM
Originally posted by Pdavis3:
@daniel_gervide, honestly idk why ubisoft doesn't let us play as Altair's sons. one it's set up for co-op, u really finish altair and his sons' stories. and we are born in the brotherhood and it is right after the original game and hopefully Ubisoft will stay true to the creed.

we would even go to a new are, east (china). but personally i would like to see Egypt or something different.

Nice idea. but it would be for AcR and not for Ac3... Also the only way you could revive the memories of altair's sons would be if one is male and the other is female and they had concived the child that would follow desmond's ancestors.

Have you read the article saying there will be more scripted missions and that there will be more missions like the war-machines?

I was joking when saying to them make assassin's creed revelations genre as Modern Warfare but it seems they listned to me on a bad idea -.-''

Pdavis3
06-14-2011, 02:38 PM
Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pdavis3:
@daniel_gervide, honestly idk why ubisoft doesn't let us play as Altair's sons. one it's set up for co-op, u really finish altair and his sons' stories. and we are born in the brotherhood and it is right after the original game and hopefully Ubisoft will stay true to the creed.

we would even go to a new are, east (china). but personally i would like to see Egypt or something different.

Nice idea. but it would be for AcR and not for Ac3... Also the only way you could revive the memories of altair's sons would be if one is male and the other is female and they had concived the child that would follow desmond's ancestors.

Have you read the article saying there will be more scripted missions and that there will be more missions like the war-machines?

I was joking when saying to them make assassin's creed revelations genre as Modern Warfare but it seems they listned to me on a bad idea -.-'' </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

yea i mean it works perfectly for ACR, and i remember way back there was a question poll saying do u want upgraded eagle vision, new hidden blade design. pretty much all the stuff they're doing in ACR now and one of them was coop offine or coop online.

yea i'm reading it now, and i stated my opinion on that topic u saw it from haha.

daniel_gervide
06-14-2011, 02:42 PM
Originally posted by Pdavis3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pdavis3:
@daniel_gervide, honestly idk why ubisoft doesn't let us play as Altair's sons. one it's set up for co-op, u really finish altair and his sons' stories. and we are born in the brotherhood and it is right after the original game and hopefully Ubisoft will stay true to the creed.

we would even go to a new are, east (china). but personally i would like to see Egypt or something different.

Nice idea. but it would be for AcR and not for Ac3... Also the only way you could revive the memories of altair's sons would be if one is male and the other is female and they had concived the child that would follow desmond's ancestors.

Have you read the article saying there will be more scripted missions and that there will be more missions like the war-machines?

I was joking when saying to them make assassin's creed revelations genre as Modern Warfare but it seems they listned to me on a bad idea -.-'' </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

yea i mean it works perfectly for ACR, and i remember way back there was a question poll saying do u want upgraded eagle vision, new hidden blade design. pretty much all the stuff they're doing in ACR now and one of them was coop offine or coop online.

yea i'm reading it now, and i stated my opinion on that topic u saw it from haha. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

They should do a poll about game dificult too then...

Agrh, maybe i wont by AcR at all. Ur idea of renting will be more worth the money...

Pdavis3
06-14-2011, 02:50 PM
Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pdavis3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pdavis3:
@daniel_gervide, honestly idk why ubisoft doesn't let us play as Altair's sons. one it's set up for co-op, u really finish altair and his sons' stories. and we are born in the brotherhood and it is right after the original game and hopefully Ubisoft will stay true to the creed.

we would even go to a new are, east (china). but personally i would like to see Egypt or something different.

Nice idea. but it would be for AcR and not for Ac3... Also the only way you could revive the memories of altair's sons would be if one is male and the other is female and they had concived the child that would follow desmond's ancestors.

Have you read the article saying there will be more scripted missions and that there will be more missions like the war-machines?

I was joking when saying to them make assassin's creed revelations genre as Modern Warfare but it seems they listned to me on a bad idea -.-'' </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

yea i mean it works perfectly for ACR, and i remember way back there was a question poll saying do u want upgraded eagle vision, new hidden blade design. pretty much all the stuff they're doing in ACR now and one of them was coop offine or coop online.

yea i'm reading it now, and i stated my opinion on that topic u saw it from haha. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

They should do a poll about game dificult too then...

Agrh, maybe i wont by AcR at all. Ur idea of renting will be more worth the money... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

yea the idea of buying the game or not will depend on the scripted missions they are trying to do. if they are adding more then that better mean that they are adding more hours to the game so we still have more unscripted missions.

but i highly doubt it, we'll see some more stuff tomorrow and the coming months. we have a while a few months b4 we have to say we're not buying or we are buying the game.

hopefully they don't screw us and make it prince of the creed and remove everything that makes it Assassin's Creed.

daniel_gervide
06-14-2011, 03:44 PM
@pdavis The most important thing was removed from ac1 to ac2 (incentivation of stealth methods over agresive methods due to combat time consumption if not skilled)... Other many things that made Ac1 unique were also removed and that's why i'm always saying Ac1 was better.

But the point for me now is: Will they do the altair's missions (sequences hopefully) really good or a piece of **** like ac2/b gameplay?

If ubisoft ****s up with altair's missions/sequences it means they don't really care about their true fans and will incetivate me stop buying any Ac (or maybe any ubisoft game). well, the new rayman looks good :P

xx-pyro
06-14-2011, 03:50 PM
Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
@pdavis The most important thing was removed from ac1 to ac2 (incentivation of stealth methods over agresive methods due to combat time consumption if not skilled)... Other many things that made Ac1 unique were also removed and that's why i'm always saying Ac1 was better.

But the point for me now is: Will they do the altair's missions (sequences hopefully) really good or a piece of **** like ac2/b gameplay?

If ubisoft ****s up with altair's missions/sequences it means they don't really care about their true fans and will incetivate me stop buying any Ac (or maybe any ubisoft game). well, the new rayman looks good :P

I'm guessing true fans are only those with the same opinion as you on how those sequences should be developed?

daniel_gervide
06-14-2011, 04:13 PM
Originally posted by xx-pyro:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
@pdavis The most important thing was removed from ac1 to ac2 (incentivation of stealth methods over agresive methods due to combat time consumption if not skilled)... Other many things that made Ac1 unique were also removed and that's why i'm always saying Ac1 was better.

But the point for me now is: Will they do the altair's missions (sequences hopefully) really good or a piece of **** like ac2/b gameplay?

If ubisoft ****s up with altair's missions/sequences it means they don't really care about their true fans and will incetivate me stop buying any Ac (or maybe any ubisoft game). well, the new rayman looks good :P

I'm guessing true fans are only those with the same opinion as you on how those sequences should be developed? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Their true fans are those who see the full potential of Ac1... and don't take me wrong, i've enjoyed playing Ac2 and AcB but not as much as Ac1. I think that those that prefer AcB over Ac1 also prefer others games of the same type over AcB.

True fans are those who can see why Ac1 was good, but can see what was bad there. Are those who like Ac for what it Can be.

At least that's how i see the true fans of the franchise. But these is a subjective opinion http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

CRUDFACE
06-14-2011, 05:42 PM
Originally posted by xx-pyro:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
@pdavis The most important thing was removed from ac1 to ac2 (incentivation of stealth methods over agresive methods due to combat time consumption if not skilled)... Other many things that made Ac1 unique were also removed and that's why i'm always saying Ac1 was better.

But the point for me now is: Will they do the altair's missions (sequences hopefully) really good or a piece of **** like ac2/b gameplay?

If ubisoft ****s up with altair's missions/sequences it means they don't really care about their true fans and will incetivate me stop buying any Ac (or maybe any ubisoft game). well, the new rayman looks good :P

I'm guessing true fans are only those with the same opinion as you on how those sequences should be developed? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Amazing how you pick out that true fan thing out of everything he said. It's just a different outlook anyway.

Lol, Ac has problems and cool stuff:

-Repetetive
-altair's personality was made for that plot with the whole reckless thing he had going on
-Sometimes free running didn't let you "free run" over every obstacle. Example: when something loomed over you, Altair would not climb it
-Eagle vision was only useful on like two missions
-Bodies took to long to dissappear so it was hard doing a mission with all the gods on constant alert

Good things:
-guards got stronger, templar guards saw you nomatter what you did...loved those red helmet guys
-guards actually thought you looked weird, instead of the later gaurds who never gave you a weird look unless you were in a danger zone
-DEsmond did stuff like pickpocket and hack into computers
-assassinations were hard
-you earned those abilities and didn't use the broken money system that we now have in place

Honestly, I think that Altair's mission structure will be dumbed down to Ezio's gameplay. Like when you played as ltair during the sequence where Desmond had that whole bleeding effect dream sequence. He fought like Ezio over well, himself.

But Assassins, were...Not sure how to say it without sounding stupid. Their more elite warriors and stealthy if need be. altair was totally assassiny, and knew how to handle himself in a fight. Ezio...is a walking tank, but he was sneakey sometimes. Like when he infiltrated the the pope's apartments and Lucrezia's house in the DLC. Hell,even Altair screwed with it and charged into a battlefield. I killed like over thirty people doing that, and it was hard to.

AC2 and up started doing that thing to, like when you get caught during an assassination, you'll desynchronize. Guess that adds some skill to it.

Conniving_Eagle
06-14-2011, 07:16 PM
@Daniel,
I like them all, but I was disappointed in Brotherhood and AC2 was my favorite, so where does that leave me?

daniel_gervide
06-15-2011, 09:14 AM
Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
@Daniel,
I like them all, but I was disappointed in Brotherhood and AC2 was my favorite, so where does that leave me?

Do you think a mixture of Ac1 and Ac2 is better than Ac2? Or you think Ac1 was a good concept bad executed and that Ac2 fixed all the problems of Ac1?

Ac2 was my favorite too but it removed the feel of reality that Ac1 had and that's why i say Ac1 is the best...

Ac1 was a well executed game, and Ac2 was just a improvement bad executed... when i saw AcB i just saw that ubisoft executed Ac2 that bad for their own intentions ...

Oh and the hidden blade stuff:


Original posted by daniel_gervide:
Well, now try to attack with the hidden blade, you will notice ezio strikes it diretly into the oppunent sword... even if the sword is standing, if ezio's strengh applied to the hidden blade is the same as the strengh of the guard applied to the sword, the sword is 1,5m long and he hidden blade 0,25m and that the sword weight is like 15kg while hidden blade is like 3kg (those numbers might not be real), ezio would damage his arm (the arm would gain cinetic energy and try to go further after hitting the other guards sword but the hidden blade would have not the necesary mecanic energy to push the sword back)...

Also, altair does defend with the vambraces too while with hidden blade.

When i'm saying saying the hidden blade is unrealistic it'ss for the attacks... Also, if my idea for killstreaks is implemented and the hidden blade is downgraded to ac1 again i would like to do "combat streaks" too with (but would only start with counter attacks cuz combos would not be availiable for it).

Conniving_Eagle
06-15-2011, 02:02 PM
Well, I like some parts of both games. I like that AC2 had a completely new story and way of doing missions, but sometimes I missed gathering information on your on. Doing it all the time is repetetive, but doing it sometimes could've still been fun. I like that they really diversified combat and made free-running flow better. I didn't mind that combat was a little easier, but when Brotherhood came out that was when I said "Ok, that's enough." I also miss the death-dialogues from AC1, they were still good in AC2 but not as good in AC1. And in ACB, which had 1 true assassination(Juan Borgia) barely had any dialogue.

As for the hidden blade. It wouldn't break that easy. Especially if it's being struck against a normal sword. Although I do think that the spinning hidden blade tornado-strike that Ezio does is kind of stupid, he shouldn't be attacking like that.

daniel_gervide
06-15-2011, 02:57 PM
As i've said, if it doesn't break, your arm will be damaged (bones are weeker than metal objects). <- damaged not broken.

I'm going to do a list to say what would make Ac2 the perfect game:

- Double hidden blade without posibility of meele attack.
- Ezio being supicious for everyone knowing his name and giving him job without him knowing them.
- The guards AI like in Ac1 (in Ac2 there are archtypes and i'm not against them, each guard would have diffrent AI values, those values should be set in percentages and not as static answers like in AcB.+++
-- Don't make us able to assasinate more than twice with the hidden blade before the combat start(failing with hidden blade). (in ac2 i could assassinate up to 4 times and it wasn't 2+2 it was 1+1+1+1)...
-- When guards are searching you (when you are in hidden spots) guards should not search for u diretly, they should start looking at nearest hidden spots.
- Short Blade + Throwing knife combo (like in ac1 and not like acb)+++
- A more philosifical meaning in the whole story (like in ac1)*
- Some investigations apart from the "scripted" main-story that would make your assasinations easier.*
- Remove of smoke bomb

* no important
+++ really important

I think that it's not asking so much for such changes...

The better thing i've found in AcB was the same kind of storyline as Ac1... First your enemies attacks your home (ac1 = masyaf, acb = monterrigoni). You are "downgraded" and you start to get every "gadget" you had again. You make your enemy weak. You kill your enemy.

The better thing i've found in Ac1 was the face animation of altair while in combat http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

The only thing i disagree with u is about not minding that the combat was a little easier, it's what forced unskilled players to be stealthy (you could go to a combat and stay alive buy you would take more time cuz u would only play with counter-attack, but, if you were skilled you would be agresive and finish the mission faster than if you were stealthy).
The AI was completly removed in Ac2 and Ezio was, in fact, fighting better than Altair which made the combat too easy. The combat in AcB was harder than Ac2 but the killstreaks made the combat very easy.

You're a fan :P

oOAltairOo
06-15-2011, 03:02 PM
Yes. Harder combat, please!

daniel_gervide
06-15-2011, 03:09 PM
Originally posted by oOAltairOo:
Yes. Harder combat, please!

Do u play PS3, xBox360 or PC? (Which number must i put in PC? 7 for windows seven? :P)

oOAltairOo
06-15-2011, 04:22 PM
Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by oOAltairOo:
Yes. Harder combat, please!

Do u play PS3, xBox360 or PC? (Which number must i put in PC? 7 for windows seven? :P) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've played all three games on both Xbox and PC.
If you're wondering what operating system i use,
it's Vista http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

daniel_gervide
06-15-2011, 04:36 PM
Originally posted by oOAltairOo:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by oOAltairOo:
Yes. Harder combat, please!

Do u play PS3, xBox360 or PC? (Which number must i put in PC? 7 for windows seven? :P) </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've played all three games on both Xbox and PC.
If you're wondering what operating system i use,
it's Vista http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hmmm... if you can play Ac than your system can use 64x... why don't u instal seven 64x? it's better than vista 64x/86x or XP 64x/86x http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

7 64x > XP 86x > Vista 64x > XP 64x = Vista 86x

(64x = 64 bits, 86x = 32 bits)
________________________________________________

Do you have steam? I don't log in into MSN often so steam would be better :P I would like to be albe to talk to you without having to use these froum :P

Systems65
06-15-2011, 11:47 PM
Too bad what everyone said in this thread wont be applied in the game. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Noble6
06-16-2011, 12:04 AM
Originally posted by Systems65:
Too bad what everyone said in this thread wont be applied in the game. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif
Maybe ideas won't get to this game but I hope that some of suggestions will be applied to AC3.

bberry9100
06-16-2011, 12:03 PM
this 'double counter' idea might just fix the easy fights in ac

Conniving_Eagle
06-16-2011, 12:59 PM
Originally posted by Systems65:
Too bad what everyone said in this thread wont be applied in the game. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Why not? The comments or the thread itself? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

daniel_gervide
06-17-2011, 07:04 AM
Originally posted by Systems65:
Too bad what everyone said in this thread wont be applied in the game. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

Well, as long as they don't up the altair gameplay i believe they are going to improve the game. If they up altair it means they are looking for an action-full game, if they try to make it better than in Ac1 but not as easy (combat incetivating) as in Ac2/B than it means they just made all those things in Ac2/B to increanse the fan base and that in Ac3 they will do a great work.

I'm really waiting to see some advances in Altair's Information :X

<span class="ev_code_RED">Please do not bypass the Language Filter.</span>

Conniving_Eagle
06-17-2011, 05:18 PM
You know, you would think that they want to take the game in the direction that the community wants it too. You would think that they'd listen to the hardcore fans telling them to stop before they destroy the franchise. But you can only hope...

NewBlade200
06-17-2011, 06:33 PM
Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
You know, you would think that they want to take the game in the direction that the community wants it too. You would think that they'd listen to the hardcore fans telling them to stop before they destroy the franchise. But you can only hope... They are listening to the community, just not our community. They are attempting to appeal to a new, casual audience. The casual gamer will play anything just as long as it is linear and cinematic. Lets use Brotherhood's Leonardo missions for example. They receved praise from the casual and the non-fans, but not from the hardcore-fans, for their linearity, scriptedness and when they weren't stupidly easy they were screen breakingly annoying. They really were everything wrong with the ACB in a nutshell. We sung our displeasure, and they responded, by telling us that we get more. They wont listen to you unless you can manipulate the casual somewhere that Ubi will see them.
Hmm... I make good plans...
*Plots*

Conniving_Eagle
06-17-2011, 07:15 PM
@NewBlade200

Very good point, actually. I hated the DaVinci warmachine missions. They're seriously making more of them? Is that what they mean by prince of persia gameplay? It's not even ASSASSIN'S CREED anymore...

daniel_gervide
06-18-2011, 04:32 PM
Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
@NewBlade200

Very good point, actually. I hated the DaVinci warmachine missions. They're seriously making more of them? Is that what they mean by prince of persia gameplay? It's not even ASSASSIN'S CREED anymore...

Only Rayman: Origins is still Rayman in Ubisoft's 2011 games.

NewBlade200
06-18-2011, 05:47 PM
So, hypothetically (I'm not great at spelling (or grammer (or much to do with languages))), if we could get enough casual gamers to agree with us on the this, and get enough to say they need to take a step back to AC1 (while not going back to the problems, only the good parts), could we sway Ubi's decisions?
With an advanced effort, could we manipulate an entire online community?
Perhaps with a petition on the fourum, we could make an Illuminaty/Templar group based on controlling the popular votes of the casual?
If we use these methods, we could turn the AC series into somthing we (the fourum community, not the manipulators) wan't.
So, what do you think (this Q is aimed at all here)?

daniel_gervide
06-18-2011, 06:17 PM
Originally posted by NewBlade200:
So, hypothetically (I'm not great at spelling (or grammer (or much to do with languages))), if we could get enough casual gamers to agree with us on the this, and get enough to say they need to take a step back to AC1 (while not going back to the problems, only the good parts), could we sway Ubi's decisions?
With an advanced effort, could we manipulate an entire online community?
Perhaps with a petition on the fourum, we could make an Illuminaty/Templar group based on controlling the popular votes of the casual?
If we use these methods, we could turn the AC series into somthing we (the fourum community, not the manipulators) wan't.
So, what do you think (this Q is aimed at all here)?

Actually, i think that we must change the mode that the reviewers analise the games so Ac1 should have almost the same score as Ac2 and AcB should have like 10 less in metascore (ac1 88, ac2 90 and acB 78 for exemple)

NewBlade200
06-18-2011, 06:53 PM
Originally posted by daniel_gervide:

Actually, i think that we must change the mode that the reviewers analise the games so Ac1 should have almost the same score as Ac2 and AcB should have like 10 less in metascore (ac1 88, ac2 90 and acB 78 for exemple) There needs to be more points earned for keeping intrest throughout the game http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif
I think it may be possible to manipulate reviews if we get a strong enough workforce to bend the reviewers opinions. In the end, We would be aiming to improve the Games, and in extension, the Community.
And who says we should stop with AC? Why not expand, and branch out?
CoD,
Halo,
SC,
Splinter C,
If you could solve all these games problems, would you? The idea is simple, use whatever means you can to convince others online to support your goals.
For example: Go on Youtube to thumb up your own comment on how to improve Assassins Creed 3 as soon as you fin ACR. This will convince people to thumb up your comment. As you talk start slowley replacing words reffering to yourself with words reffering to the community.
ie. I to We.
If enough people on the fourums used this and other methods, we could control how AC3 pans out.
Its an intresting idea, right?

daniel_gervide
06-18-2011, 08:53 PM
Originally posted by NewBlade200:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by daniel_gervide:

Actually, i think that we must change the mode that the reviewers analise the games so Ac1 should have almost the same score as Ac2 and AcB should have like 10 less in metascore (ac1 88, ac2 90 and acB 78 for exemple) There needs to be more points earned for keeping intrest throughout the game http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif
I think it may be possible to manipulate reviews if we get a strong enough workforce to bend the reviewers opinions. In the end, We would be aiming to improve the Games, and in extension, the Community.
And who says we should stop with AC? Why not expand, and branch out?
CoD,
Halo,
SC,
Splinter C,
If you could solve all these games problems, would you? The idea is simple, use whatever means you can to convince others online to support your goals.
For example: Go on Youtube to thumb up your own comment on how to improve Assassins Creed 3 as soon as you fin ACR. This will convince people to thumb up your comment. As you talk start slowley replacing words reffering to yourself with words reffering to the community.
ie. I to We.
If enough people on the fourums used this and other methods, we could control how AC3 pans out.
Its an intresting idea, right? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Anything talking about making the combat harder (making stealthy ways the only option to noobs) is allowed to say WE :P

Conniving_Eagle
06-19-2011, 11:52 AM
Originally posted by NewBlade200:
So, hypothetically (I'm not great at spelling (or grammer (or much to do with languages))), if we could get enough casual gamers to agree with us on the this, and get enough to say they need to take a step back to AC1 (while not going back to the problems, only the good parts), could we sway Ubi's decisions?
With an advanced effort, could we manipulate an entire online community?
Perhaps with a petition on the fourum, we could make an Illuminaty/Templar group based on controlling the popular votes of the casual?
If we use these methods, we could turn the AC series into somthing we (the fourum community, not the manipulators) wan't.
So, what do you think (this Q is aimed at all here)?

Yeah, that would be very nice. But the forums are for the true AC fans who care about the future of the franchise. The real people who Ubisoft are working for people like some idiot journalist from IGN who's never even picked up a controller before. That's not everyone, but that's a stereo-type of someone who goes to E3 and doesn't know anything about video games. And they are also listening to the casual gamers and AC noobs new to the franchise who could care less if Ezio becomes like Neo from the matrix, or if he can destroy the Hagia Sophia sinlge-handedly, most of them would think that would be awesome.

k20ml
06-19-2011, 11:32 PM
And while doing all that guards will actually take civilians and use them as shields or throw them at you to prevent you from attacking them. How's that?

daniel_gervide
06-20-2011, 11:35 AM
Originally posted by k20ml:
And while doing all that guards will actually take civilians and use them as shields or throw them at you to prevent you from attacking them. How's that?

Nice idea :O and if you kill them you would lose sync... maybe you would need to press high profile + feet (dodge) to flee it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_redface.gif

Conniving_Eagle
06-20-2011, 11:58 AM
Originally posted by k20ml:
And while doing all that guards will actually take civilians and use them as shields or throw them at you to prevent you from attacking them. How's that?

Ermm. Good idea, but wrong way of going about it. They're called Guards for a reason. Unless they're corrupt like they were in AC1, they're sworn to protect citizens. Maybe a certain archetype, though. Agiles are usually associated with being cowards. Or maybe if there is one guard left, instead of running, he might grab a civillian. But I doubt it, citizens usually run away when there is a sword fight. Maybe an Assassination target could do it, though. Remember the mission in ACB where you had to assassinate Baron de Valois? Maybe some assassination sequences should be like that but a bit more harder.

Ulicies
06-20-2011, 12:24 PM
This idea is amazing, but there's one bad apple that spoils the bunch: in that CGI trailer, the guards are constantly attacking Ezio. Ezio wasn't deciding when to attack from the past games' AI laziness; he only has time to counter. The AI's aggressiveness would practically have to be tripled in order to make this mechanic viable. This CGI trailer is what the combat should have been like in the past games, instead of guards simply standing around, waiting for you to attack.

I completely agree with this mechanic. Then, perhaps we'll finally get faster-paced combat without the unrealistic behavior of the guards.

daniel_gervide
06-20-2011, 01:35 PM
Originally posted by Ulicies:
This idea is amazing, but there's one bad apple that spoils the bunch: in that CGI trailer, the guards are constantly attacking Ezio. Ezio wasn't deciding when to attack from the past games' AI laziness; he only has time to counter. The AI's aggressiveness would practically have to be tripled in order to make this mechanic viable. This CGI trailer is what the combat should have been like in the past games, instead of guards simply standing around, waiting for you to attack.

I completely agree with this mechanic. Then, perhaps we'll finally get faster-paced combat without the unrealistic behavior of the guards.

In Ac1 they were a lot more agresive than now... i remember when 2 guards were arround me, if one of them archived to hit me they would start combo, 1st guards hits me, 2nd guard hits me, 1st hits, 2nd hit, etc... each guard usually gave me 3 hits in that cases :P

k20ml
06-20-2011, 03:48 PM
Maybe an Assassination target

Yes, everybody knows who the assassin is right? Ezio! I mean. After Vierri Di Pazzi, everybody knows who is after them right? So it was illogical for them not to kidnap one of Ezio's beloved and use them as hostage or ransom.

Ok maybe that idea is too rough around the edges and isn't quiet cut out to be in the game or even in the blueprints. I don't know how to expand on that. Probably stronger and more assertive guards like the higher ranking guards will grab and throw the lower ranking guards at you causing you lose your balance and fall down then the guards will have a chance to consecutively attack you until death. But that can be prevented if you dodge the oncoming guards, redirect their direction towards a group of guards causing them to lose their balance instead, or simply stabbing them.

Conniving_Eagle
06-20-2011, 06:25 PM
Originally posted by Ulicies:
This idea is amazing, but there's one bad apple that spoils the bunch: in that CGI trailer, the guards are constantly attacking Ezio. Ezio wasn't deciding when to attack from the past games' AI laziness; he only has time to counter. The AI's aggressiveness would practically have to be tripled in order to make this mechanic viable. This CGI trailer is what the combat should have been like in the past games, instead of guards simply standing around, waiting for you to attack.

I completely agree with this mechanic. Then, perhaps we'll finally get faster-paced combat without the unrealistic behavior of the guards.

Well, it doesn't have to be made so that you ONLY have time to counter. The mechanic only works while you are performing a conter. I do agree with you though, yes they need to make guards atleast twice as aggresive, sometimes it will be 10 seconds before someone even does something. Not to mention, it would be alot more realistic too. I mean, if you're in a sword fight, and someone's killing your comrad, you're not just going to stand there and watch, you're going to try and stop them. And Ezio will use this to his advantage, even by using some guards as shields(I listed a 1 or two of those types of counters in the thread). But don't forget, kill-chains still exist, only they're not nearly as OP as they were in Brotherhood. The Counter-kills wouldn't be OP either, because you still have a chance to miss the button sequence and screw up. This way, combat becomes alot more diverse as there are two completely different ways to use combat, and in a way it also adds more replayability.

Conniving_Eagle
06-23-2011, 10:47 PM
Originally posted by k20ml:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Maybe an Assassination target

Yes, everybody knows who the assassin is right? Ezio! I mean. After Vierri Di Pazzi, everybody knows who is after them right? So it was illogical for them not to kidnap one of Ezio's beloved and use them as hostage or ransom.

Ok maybe that idea is too rough around the edges and isn't quiet cut out to be in the game or even in the blueprints. I don't know how to expand on that. Probably stronger and more assertive guards like the higher ranking guards will grab and throw the lower ranking guards at you causing you lose your balance and fall down then the guards will have a chance to consecutively attack you until death. But that can be prevented if you dodge the oncoming guards, redirect their direction towards a group of guards causing them to lose their balance instead, or simply stabbing them. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Come to think of it. I don't think it would work. And no one has even really known who Ezio is close to other than his family members(3/4ths of which are dead). When Ezio ends up saving someone, it's usually someone in power(Caterina Sforza) or his friends got unlucky(Batrolomeo's wife)

k20ml
06-24-2011, 09:37 AM
Yeah, I guess so too. Sorry, but combat is not really my strong suite or in my deepest concerns. But yeah, I really hope the devs would see this thread and hopefully take the idea and integrate in in their future game because their so much potential in your idea.

Animuses
06-24-2011, 04:33 PM
@ConnivingEagle
This is a brilliant idea and it's definitely something Revelations needs to have in it's combat. I actually posted this idea on the Assassin's Creed YouTube channel not that long ago (not taking credit for it) to give it more recognition.

Conniving_Eagle
06-24-2011, 08:45 PM
Originally posted by Animuses:
@ConnivingEagle
This is a brilliant idea and it's definitely something Revelations needs to have in it's combat. I actually posted this idea on the Assassin's Creed YouTube channel not that long ago (not taking credit for it) to give it more recognition.


Hey thanks, man. I too am really trying to promote this thread in hopes that Ubisoft read it and like it. Really we just need to keep the thread alive.

Pdavis3
06-25-2011, 05:14 PM
since Ubisoft has made it known (in a way) that they are trying to do co-op. iím interested in how they would create it, hopefully a lot more customization. of course the double counter idea, but since it would be a co-op game i would like to see some actual co-op gameplay.

only question is how would they do that, only way i see it happening is making 3 or so classes in the game each using different weapons (archery, bombs, poison, etc.) and then combining the weapons.

Also with all the improvements theyíre doing to ACR, i wonder what else they could do for AC3?

Conniving_Eagle
06-25-2011, 11:16 PM
Originally posted by Pdavis3:
since Ubisoft has made it known (in a way) that they are trying to do co-op. iím interested in how they would create it, hopefully a lot more customization. of course the double counter idea, but since it would be a co-op game i would like to see some actual co-op gameplay.

only question is how would they do that, only way i see it happening is making 3 or so classes in the game each using different weapons (archery, bombs, poison, etc.) and then combining the weapons.

Also with all the improvements theyíre doing to ACR, i wonder what else they could do for AC3?

They could do alot of things for Co-op. But I think that they would most likely make it something like Spec Ops from MW2. Selected missions where you would have to assassinate Target(s) in various different ways and scenarios. It would take alot of maps, though.

Pdavis3
06-26-2011, 10:42 AM
Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pdavis3:
since Ubisoft has made it known (in a way) that they are trying to do co-op. iím interested in how they would create it, hopefully a lot more customization. of course the double counter idea, but since it would be a co-op game i would like to see some actual co-op gameplay.

only question is how would they do that, only way i see it happening is making 3 or so classes in the game each using different weapons (archery, bombs, poison, etc.) and then combining the weapons.

Also with all the improvements theyíre doing to ACR, i wonder what else they could do for AC3?

They could do alot of things for Co-op. But I think that they would most likely make it something like Spec Ops from MW2. Selected missions where you would have to assassinate Target(s) in various different ways and scenarios. It would take alot of maps, though. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

i donít think they would do that, since they are the same company that did convictions coop story so iíd expect them to have coop story for AC

Conniving_Eagle
06-26-2011, 02:06 PM
Originally posted by Pdavis3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pdavis3:
since Ubisoft has made it known (in a way) that they are trying to do co-op. iím interested in how they would create it, hopefully a lot more customization. of course the double counter idea, but since it would be a co-op game i would like to see some actual co-op gameplay.

only question is how would they do that, only way i see it happening is making 3 or so classes in the game each using different weapons (archery, bombs, poison, etc.) and then combining the weapons.

Also with all the improvements theyíre doing to ACR, i wonder what else they could do for AC3?

They could do alot of things for Co-op. But I think that they would most likely make it something like Spec Ops from MW2. Selected missions where you would have to assassinate Target(s) in various different ways and scenarios. It would take alot of maps, though. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

i donít think they would do that, since they are the same company that did convictions coop story so iíd expect them to have coop story for AC </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ubisoft Montreal made splinter cell?

Pdavis3
06-26-2011, 11:54 PM
Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pdavis3:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pdavis3:
since Ubisoft has made it known (in a way) that they are trying to do co-op. iím interested in how they would create it, hopefully a lot more customization. of course the double counter idea, but since it would be a co-op game i would like to see some actual co-op gameplay.

only question is how would they do that, only way i see it happening is making 3 or so classes in the game each using different weapons (archery, bombs, poison, etc.) and then combining the weapons.

Also with all the improvements theyíre doing to ACR, i wonder what else they could do for AC3?

They could do alot of things for Co-op. But I think that they would most likely make it something like Spec Ops from MW2. Selected missions where you would have to assassinate Target(s) in various different ways and scenarios. It would take alot of maps, though. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

i donít think they would do that, since they are the same company that did convictions coop story so iíd expect them to have coop story for AC </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ubisoft Montreal made splinter cell? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

yea they did

daniel_gervide
06-27-2011, 07:50 AM
For the guy saying what would they add for Ac3 i will just tell you to think about how to balance all the features since Ac1 instead of what umbalanced features can ubisoft bring...

I won't need more features for Ac3, i want it to be perfect, and try new features that are more likely to be umbalanced like the ones from Ac2 and AcB would make the game not perfect...

For the co-op, dificult is needed to make it work well...

Pdavis3
06-27-2011, 08:30 AM
Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
For the guy saying what would they add for Ac3 i will just tell you to think about how to balance all the features since Ac1 instead of what umbalanced features can ubisoft bring...

I won't need more features for Ac3, i want it to be perfect, and try new features that are more likely to be umbalanced like the ones from Ac2 and AcB would make the game not perfect...

For the co-op, dificult is needed to make it work well...

they are going to have to add new features, thatís just what new games do haha. i see ur point, iíd rather them try to perfect and balance what they have first, but it wonít be like that.

and for the coop, all they would have to do is add a class based enemy system, and remove the kill streak (it makes everything too easy). remove medicine and uses bandages instead, so the bleeding will stop (keeping u from losing more life, to be completely healed u need to go to the doctor). Since there is a poison class (in my idea), iíd like there to be iíd like the guards set traps that have poison and the non poison class assassin can be affected by it. small stuff like that can help the game be harder in coop

however that doesnít mean ubisoft will make the coop harder, they havenít been successful with the single player at all on that aspect but continue to make it. if they want it (meaning we continue asking for it a lot, and they can do it) then it will be in the game wether itís hard or not.

daniel_gervide
06-27-2011, 08:40 AM
Originally posted by Pdavis3:
they are going to have to add new features, thatís just what new games do haha. i see ur point, iíd rather them try to perfect and balance what they have first, but it wonít be like that.

let me correct you in the last sentence:

but, SADLY, it won't be like that.

hehe xD

Conniving_Eagle
06-27-2011, 04:45 PM
Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pdavis3:
they are going to have to add new features, thatís just what new games do haha. i see ur point, iíd rather them try to perfect and balance what they have first, but it wonít be like that.

let me correct you in the last sentence:

but, SADLY, it won't be like that.

hehe xD </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You don't think that they're getting the idea that AC is going in the wrong direction from these forums?

daniel_gervide
06-27-2011, 05:20 PM
Originally posted by ConnivingEagle:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by daniel_gervide:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Pdavis3:
they are going to have to add new features, thatís just what new games do haha. i see ur point, iíd rather them try to perfect and balance what they have first, but it wonít be like that.

let me correct you in the last sentence:

but, SADLY, it won't be like that.

hehe xD </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You don't think that they're getting the idea that AC is going in the wrong direction from these forums? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

it's never too much when we really want it :P

Pdavis3
06-27-2011, 05:44 PM
haha yes sadly is a word i should have added. but no i don't, i mean we've been asking for certain things since AC2, small things at that. and they have yet to even add any of it. I think they listen more to the critics then the fans, but i hope they will at some point read what we say. if they honestly were getting that idea, then why add more scripted moments when most ppl ask for less. idk, we'll have to see what they haven't revealed yet, and i can actually give a better statement hah

Conniving_Eagle
06-28-2011, 12:15 AM
Originally posted by Pdavis3:
haha yes sadly is a word i should have added. but no i don't, i mean we've been asking for certain things since AC2, small things at that. and they have yet to even add any of it. I think they listen more to the critics then the fans, but i hope they will at some point read what we say. if they honestly were getting that idea, then why add more scripted moments when most ppl ask for less. idk, we'll have to see what they haven't revealed yet, and i can actually give a better statement hah

Yeah, you're right. They care more about some random IGN journalist who's never played AC before's opinion over the true hardcore fans. It makes me question the purpose of the forums and my own. Maybe forums have been designed for people to vent off their frustrastions at a game all along.

luckyto
06-29-2011, 09:06 AM
To be fair, 1) critics tend to be more realistic about their wishlist. And 2) catering to fan wants can destroy a game. I've seen franchises that do that and the end result is a disaster. Too many tweaks for critics or for fans, and the game stops being the same game in a new place and becomes a different game --- and often for the worse. It's "new Coke" syndrome.

That said, I don't think it is too much to ask for a greater challenge in combat. I think it is too much to ask for radical changes. AC1 - even the deSable sequences - was ridiculously easy and repetitive. Fun, but easy. AC2 and ACB fixed the repetitive issue, but became even easier. And the notoriety system somehow became less effective.

I put these thoughts in my original thread on thoughts on the franchise - so I'll reiterate them:

In my mind, I like the chain kills, AND I do agree that it should be a little more difficult. I think if the guards were a little more aggressive, forcing you to counter their attacks in the middle of a series of chain attacks more often - would suffice. Guards with spears should sweep you, etc. Force you to move your feet with dodges and position yourself well.

To be fair, if you didn't have 15 bottles of medicine and be able to take ridiculous levels of damage, it would make combat more challenging as well.

And some fans have said that only a few guards join in during a fight. I agree. That is more true in Brotherhood than AC1. Once a brawl breaks out, more guards should gradually come - just as in a real "police" situation. You either win quickly or are forced to run away.

To me, these are minor tweaks to an existing system.

Conniving_Eagle
06-29-2011, 10:16 AM
Originally posted by luckyto:
To be fair, 1) critics tend to be more realistic about their wishlist. And 2) catering to fan wants can destroy a game. I've seen franchises that do that and the end result is a disaster. Too many tweaks for critics or for fans, and the game stops being the same game in a new place and becomes a different game --- and often for the worse. It's "new Coke" syndrome.

That said, I don't think it is too much to ask for a greater challenge in combat. I think it is too much to ask for radical changes. AC1 - even the deSable sequences - was ridiculously easy and repetitive. Fun, but easy. AC2 and ACB fixed the repetitive issue, but became even easier. And the notoriety system somehow became less effective.

I put these thoughts in my original thread on thoughts on the franchise - so I'll reiterate them:

In my mind, I like the chain kills, AND I do agree that it should be a little more difficult. I think if the guards were a little more aggressive, forcing you to counter their attacks in the middle of a series of chain attacks more often - would suffice. Guards with spears should sweep you, etc. Force you to move your feet with dodges and position yourself well.

To be fair, if you didn't have 15 bottles of medicine and be able to take ridiculous levels of damage, it would make combat more challenging as well.

And some fans have said that only a few guards join in during a fight. I agree. That is more true in Brotherhood than AC1. Once a brawl breaks out, more guards should gradually come - just as in a real "police" situation. You either win quickly or are forced to run away.

To me, these are minor tweaks to an existing system.

So you don't agree with the main idea? Or do you disagree with the fact that to nerf killstreaks you shouldn't be to perform counter-kills while doing one, meaning you can only dodge, which limits the amount of kills you can get to 2-5. I can already get +10 kill-chains pretty easily in ACB, so I hope you have a better suggestion.

Pdavis3
06-29-2011, 12:44 PM
Originally posted by luckyto:
To be fair, 1) critics tend to be more realistic about their wishlist. And 2) catering to fan wants can destroy a game. I've seen franchises that do that and the end result is a disaster. Too many tweaks for critics or for fans, and the game stops being the same game in a new place and becomes a different game --- and often for the worse. It's "new Coke" syndrome.

That said, I don't think it is too much to ask for a greater challenge in combat. I think it is too much to ask for radical changes. AC1 - even the deSable sequences - was ridiculously easy and repetitive. Fun, but easy. AC2 and ACB fixed the repetitive issue, but became even easier. And the notoriety system somehow became less effective.

I put these thoughts in my original thread on thoughts on the franchise - so I'll reiterate them:

In my mind, I like the chain kills, AND I do agree that it should be a little more difficult. I think if the guards were a little more aggressive, forcing you to counter their attacks in the middle of a series of chain attacks more often - would suffice. Guards with spears should sweep you, etc. Force you to move your feet with dodges and position yourself well.

To be fair, if you didn't have 15 bottles of medicine and be able to take ridiculous levels of damage, it would make combat more challenging as well.

And some fans have said that only a few guards join in during a fight. I agree. That is more true in Brotherhood than AC1. Once a brawl breaks out, more guards should gradually come - just as in a real "police" situation. You either win quickly or are forced to run away.

To me, these are minor tweaks to an existing system.

I understand what u mean but it appears that listening to the critics for Assassins creed has actually changed the game into something else. Originally it was a game about finding ur targets, and killing them then escaping. However, in ACB it became more about becoming a unstoppable killing machine and try to get more killing machines on ur side.

Don't get me wrong, I like the new improvements to the game. To an extent, but it appears that ubisoft is too focused on combat and killing everyone and is abandoning the stealth gameplay. And the stealth in ACB was horrible so it wasn't really stealth.

I see more ppl on here that have great ideas that would make AC into a game of the year contester but ubisoft doesn't listen to them. It's quite disappointing.

luckyto
06-29-2011, 01:29 PM
I understand what u mean but it appears that listening to the critics for Assassins creed has actually changed the game into something else.

Oh definitely, that's my biggest fear. I think Brotherhood suffers woefully for those changes, where AC2 benefited greatly (at the expense of some fun mechanics like pickpocketing.)

The E3 demo is more worrisome. If Ubisoft insists on following the path of Uncharted to get great reviews, the linear storyboard inherent in cinematic gameplay will change AC for the worse. I love Uncharted games, but I play them once, maybe twice. I don't spend weeks going back through every portion of them like I did AC -- and I do it because I like the formula. Everyone here does, which is why we are here.

---- but to combat, I do AGREE that it should be more difficult. It is too easy. But I disagree in that chain-kills are a bad move for the series. To me, chain-killing is a natural extension of the combat in AC1 and AC2. They look and feel great.

With minor modifications, that system could be made more challenging. In other words, do not overhaul or scrap that system. Refine that system.

Make the AI slightly more aggressive. Make soldiers with spears swipe your legs, forcing you to dodge and move. Have guards attack more than one at a time more often.

Refine the handicaps. 15 bottles of medicine. A dozen health bars. Even a 30% reduction of your overall health and how you progress would force players to use more skill and stealth.

Plus, add in smoke bombs and assassins at your disposal, killing a large group is way too easy.

AC1 combat was ridiculously easy. Getting an execution kill from timing took only a little effort and you could counter-kill an entire army. Brotherhood's bare combat is much more balanced. But in AC1, you didn't have an entire hospital in your pocket and insides of steel. You didn't carry an arsenal under your cloak either.

To me, it isn't chain-kills that has unbalanced the combat. It's that you can kill a few guards in broad daylight in the middle of town and no one shows up. You can take a million crossbow bolts and just suck up some medicine. And if you ever do feel a pinch, one or two smoke bombs and a whistle to your buddies will eliminate two dozen guards.

Conniving_Eagle
06-29-2011, 07:44 PM
Originally posted by luckyto:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I understand what u mean but it appears that listening to the critics for Assassins creed has actually changed the game into something else.

Oh definitely, that's my biggest fear. I think Brotherhood suffers woefully for those changes, where AC2 benefited greatly (at the expense of some fun mechanics like pickpocketing.)

The E3 demo is more worrisome. If Ubisoft insists on following the path of Uncharted to get great reviews, the linear storyboard inherent in cinematic gameplay will change AC for the worse. I love Uncharted games, but I play them once, maybe twice. I don't spend weeks going back through every portion of them like I did AC -- and I do it because I like the formula. Everyone here does, which is why we are here.

---- but to combat, I do AGREE that it should be more difficult. It is too easy. But I disagree in that chain-kills are a bad move for the series. To me, chain-killing is a natural extension of the combat in AC1 and AC2. They look and feel great.

With minor modifications, that system could be made more challenging. In other words, do not overhaul or scrap that system. Refine that system.

Make the AI slightly more aggressive. Make soldiers with spears swipe your legs, forcing you to dodge and move. Have guards attack more than one at a time more often.

Refine the handicaps. 15 bottles of medicine. A dozen health bars. Even a 30% reduction of your overall health and how you progress would force players to use more skill and stealth.

Plus, add in smoke bombs and assassins at your disposal, killing a large group is way too easy.

AC1 combat was ridiculously easy. Getting an execution kill from timing took only a little effort and you could counter-kill an entire army. Brotherhood's bare combat is much more balanced. But in AC1, you didn't have an entire hospital in your pocket and insides of steel. You didn't carry an arsenal under your cloak either.

To me, it isn't chain-kills that has unbalanced the combat. It's that you can kill a few guards in broad daylight in the middle of town and no one shows up. You can take a million crossbow bolts and just suck up some medicine. And if you ever do feel a pinch, one or two smoke bombs and a whistle to your buddies will eliminate two dozen guards. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Alright, well, I don't have a problem with kill-chains. Kill-chains are a good idea, but executed incorrectly(kind of like AC1, alot of things were executed the wrong way). What are kill-chains. Kill-chains are a great idea that brought one part of combat to the next step. But Kill-chains are seriously OP. Here is my beef with kill-chains. Ubisoft said that they made them to try to promote offensive combat gameplay. That being said, I think to start a kill-chain you need to kill an enemy offensively or perform a combo(same thing). But if you do this, than defensive gameplay is not promoted anymore. That's where the Double-Counter idea comes in, not only is it a cool idea, because it would add alot of new gory animations and allow for a deeper level of interaction in combat with the button sequences, but it would take defensive gameplay up to the next level as well.

Here's the conclusion of my thread - The Double counter idea is a cool implementation, that will bring defensive combat up a notch(just like kill-chains make offensive combat more exciting), and it will simultaneously balance kill-chains, because to start one you will have to kill an enemy offensively(which is what they were intended for), and two, you won't be able to counter while performing a kill-chain as you could in ACB. You will only be able to deflect or dodge. This also creates two different stles for combat. You can play defensively which will only let you kill 1-3 enemies at a time, but it is safer and easier to do than kill-chains. While on the otherhand, you can play offensively and kill 2-6 players at a time, but it would be harder to pull off. Or if you are somewhat skilled at the game, you can do both.

daniel_gervide
06-30-2011, 01:49 PM
Originally posted by luckyto:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I understand what u mean but it appears that listening to the critics for Assassins creed has actually changed the game into something else.

Oh definitely, that's my biggest fear. I think Brotherhood suffers woefully for those changes, where AC2 benefited greatly (at the expense of some fun mechanics like pickpocketing.)

The E3 demo is more worrisome. If Ubisoft insists on following the path of Uncharted to get great reviews, the linear storyboard inherent in cinematic gameplay will change AC for the worse. I love Uncharted games, but I play them once, maybe twice. I don't spend weeks going back through every portion of them like I did AC -- and I do it because I like the formula. Everyone here does, which is why we are here.

---- but to combat, I do AGREE that it should be more difficult. It is too easy. But I disagree in that chain-kills are a bad move for the series. To me, chain-killing is a natural extension of the combat in AC1 and AC2. They look and feel great.

With minor modifications, that system could be made more challenging. In other words, do not overhaul or scrap that system. Refine that system.

Make the AI slightly more aggressive. Make soldiers with spears swipe your legs, forcing you to dodge and move. Have guards attack more than one at a time more often.

Refine the handicaps. 15 bottles of medicine. A dozen health bars. Even a 30% reduction of your overall health and how you progress would force players to use more skill and stealth.

Plus, add in smoke bombs and assassins at your disposal, killing a large group is way too easy.

AC1 combat was ridiculously easy. Getting an execution kill from timing took only a little effort and you could counter-kill an entire army. Brotherhood's bare combat is much more balanced. But in AC1, you didn't have an entire hospital in your pocket and insides of steel. You didn't carry an arsenal under your cloak either.

To me, it isn't chain-kills that has unbalanced the combat. It's that you can kill a few guards in broad daylight in the middle of town and no one shows up. You can take a million crossbow bolts and just suck up some medicine. And if you ever do feel a pinch, one or two smoke bombs and a whistle to your buddies will eliminate two dozen guards. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

There is no AI in ac2 and acB... the AI emulates real persons while ac2 and acB guards always do the same move against your moves (agile always dodge, spearmans always blocks)... maybe agile should dodge more often but not always and, depending on health, the block change of a spearman should get lower (as the dodge for an agile would discreanse, the less health, the less far they got incentivating u to use spears against agile)...

Killstreaks are no sence, they are nice but not realistic cuz u can kill everyguard even if they are paying attention or if they are elite guards that's why i did my porpuse to nerf it in a way where it could keep usefull and nice but would require skill and be more realistic...

Animuses
07-01-2011, 10:29 AM
My mind has been changed. I have excepted the kill streak. It was the next step for Assassin's Creed but it suffers because of the stupid enemy AI.
Just think about it...
Assassins are supposed to do their killings in a stealthy manner, but if they get detected they must fight and dispatch of the guards in the quickest way possible. You could use the smoke bombs to buy yourself some time or you could fight. That's where the kill streak comes in. You must kill these guards the quickest way possible.
The kill streak did not kill Brotherhood's combat, other things did.
-Weak and Stupid Enemy AI
-The grabbing was too out of place and would ruin the flow of the fight. It was a billion times better in AC.
-Too Much health you heal almost automatically
-The WORST of all. There is no more timing!
Does the hidden blade have precise timing like in AC and AC2? Nope! It has the same timing as a sword... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Ubisoft has learned from their mistakes before and definitely learned from Brotherhood. They will give us something great with Revelations.
NOW! Let's hope they add in double countering because it's something the combat should have.

daniel_gervide
07-01-2011, 12:49 PM
Originally posted by Animuses:
My mind has been changed. I have excepted the kill streak. It was the next step for Assassin's Creed but it suffers because of the stupid enemy AI.
Just think about it...
Assassins are supposed to do their killings in a stealthy manner, but if they get detected they must fight and dispatch of the guards in the quickest way possible. You could use the smoke bombs to buy yourself some time or you could fight. That's where the kill streak comes in. You must kill these guards the quickest way possible.
The kill streak did not kill Brotherhood's combat, other things did.
-Weak and Stupid Enemy AI
-The grabbing was too out of place and would ruin the flow of the fight. It was a billion times better in AC.
-Too Much health you heal almost automatically
-The WORST of all. There is no more timing!
Does the hidden blade have precise timing like in AC and AC2? Nope! It has the same timing as a sword... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Ubisoft has learned from their mistakes before and definitely learned from Brotherhood. They will give us something great with Revelations.
NOW! Let's hope they add in double countering because it's something the combat should have.

Almost every suggestion i've made was to change the strongness and improve the guards AI (making real AI would be the best solution, ac1 had it, why wouldn't ac2 and acB had?)

Conniving_Eagle
07-02-2011, 01:00 AM
Originally posted by Animuses:
My mind has been changed. I have excepted the kill streak. It was the next step for Assassin's Creed but it suffers because of the stupid enemy AI.
Just think about it...
Assassins are supposed to do their killings in a stealthy manner, but if they get detected they must fight and dispatch of the guards in the quickest way possible. You could use the smoke bombs to buy yourself some time or you could fight. That's where the kill streak comes in. You must kill these guards the quickest way possible.
The kill streak did not kill Brotherhood's combat, other things did.
-Weak and Stupid Enemy AI
-The grabbing was too out of place and would ruin the flow of the fight. It was a billion times better in AC.
-Too Much health you heal almost automatically
-The WORST of all. There is no more timing!
Does the hidden blade have precise timing like in AC and AC2? Nope! It has the same timing as a sword... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Ubisoft has learned from their mistakes before and definitely learned from Brotherhood. They will give us something great with Revelations.
NOW! Let's hope they add in double countering because it's something the combat should have.

That's another thing. People always complain that the game should have a weight factor, which technically it does, because Ezio already runs pretty slow. But they seriously need to tone down the amount of equipment you can carry. Atleast a little, I mean, 25 Crossbow Bolts, 15 salt containers(medicine), 15 throwing knives, 15 poison vials. Ezio is practically a merchant himself. ATLEAST lower it down to 10 bolts, 10 medicine, 10 knives, 5 vials, and 3 bullets. Armor/Health is a problem, too. I wouldn't even mind have only 10 healthsquares, let alone 30. Atleast tone it down to 15. To do that, they just need to make the benefits of armor smaller, and no Codex crap.

Conniving_Eagle
07-02-2011, 01:00 AM
Originally posted by Animuses:
My mind has been changed. I have excepted the kill streak. It was the next step for Assassin's Creed but it suffers because of the stupid enemy AI.
Just think about it...
Assassins are supposed to do their killings in a stealthy manner, but if they get detected they must fight and dispatch of the guards in the quickest way possible. You could use the smoke bombs to buy yourself some time or you could fight. That's where the kill streak comes in. You must kill these guards the quickest way possible.
The kill streak did not kill Brotherhood's combat, other things did.
-Weak and Stupid Enemy AI
-The grabbing was too out of place and would ruin the flow of the fight. It was a billion times better in AC.
-Too Much health you heal almost automatically
-The WORST of all. There is no more timing!
Does the hidden blade have precise timing like in AC and AC2? Nope! It has the same timing as a sword... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Ubisoft has learned from their mistakes before and definitely learned from Brotherhood. They will give us something great with Revelations.
NOW! Let's hope they add in double countering because it's something the combat should have.


Originally posted by Animuses:
My mind has been changed. I have excepted the kill streak. It was the next step for Assassin's Creed but it suffers because of the stupid enemy AI.
Just think about it...
Assassins are supposed to do their killings in a stealthy manner, but if they get detected they must fight and dispatch of the guards in the quickest way possible. You could use the smoke bombs to buy yourself some time or you could fight. That's where the kill streak comes in. You must kill these guards the quickest way possible.
The kill streak did not kill Brotherhood's combat, other things did.
-Weak and Stupid Enemy AI
-The grabbing was too out of place and would ruin the flow of the fight. It was a billion times better in AC.
-Too Much health you heal almost automatically
-The WORST of all. There is no more timing!
Does the hidden blade have precise timing like in AC and AC2? Nope! It has the same timing as a sword... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/51.gif

Ubisoft has learned from their mistakes before and definitely learned from Brotherhood. They will give us something great with Revelations.
NOW! Let's hope they add in double countering because it's something the combat should have.

That's another thing. People always complain that the game should have a weight factor, which technically it does, because Ezio already runs pretty slow. But they seriously need to tone down the amount of equipment you can carry. Atleast a little, I mean, 25 Crossbow Bolts, 15 salt containers(medicine), 15 throwing knives, 15 poison vials. Ezio is practically a merchant himself. ATLEAST lower it down to 10 bolts, 10 medicine, 10 knives, 5 vials, and 3 bullets. Armor/Health is a problem, too. I wouldn't even mind have only 10 healthsquares, let alone 30. Atleast tone it down to 15. To do that, they just need to make the benefits of armor smaller, and no Codex crap.

edzilla_551
01-14-2012, 12:46 AM
i think a double counter move would be awesome, and maybe even a ducking move, it would add alot more variety and excitement to the fighting.

mattahleen
01-20-2012, 04:39 AM
Hmmm interesting, perhaps different buttons could do different things. For example, action for medium weapon kill, secondary for... secondary weapons, empty hand for disarms and such, and legs for knee to the arrow.

naran6142
01-20-2012, 06:07 AM
secondary weapon counters
primary / secondary combos

and maybe being able to streak a disarm, like the E3 trailer for ACR. Say if we hold the empty hand button, the character does a move where he/she loses the weapon in the enemy(like the heavy weapon moves in AC2). then we could perform a disarm or streak a disarm and use a new weapon.

dunno if thats clear :p

but ever since the ACR E3 trailer, I really want that kind of fighting