PDA

View Full Version : How customization may ruin the competitive scene



hshoncho
11-14-2016, 08:42 AM
Problem:
From what is known about the game it will not be new player friendly in competitive play. The loot you can receive varies by level and luck of the champion and even then the
loot can offer different attributes. While I do think that the wide variety of customization will be fantastic aesthetically speaking, the stat system will ruin the game in my opinion.
This will take away balance at all levels of play and will create an immense divide between those who have played since the game is released and those who start months later. It will take away from how skilled an individual is and make it more important how long you have played. Whether you are just getting into the game or just playing a hero that you haven't leveled, a player could be defeated not because they are less skilled, but instead that they have high stats from their loot. This will make the game unbalanced from a competitive stand point, whether it be online ranked play or professional, which would not only harm the chance of there being any sort of competitive following but also diminish the possibility of the game having a long lifespan. As unfortunate as it is to say no matter how good the game is, the longevity of games now online presence which is greatly dependent on its ability to be balanced and its accessibility.

Possible solutions:
1. In competitive play stats of items are null but aesthetically they are the same.
2. In stead of giving stat to the items, allow the players to allocate what their stats go into. Place a maximum number of points. Have one point for each level unlocked by a player (overall not just on a specific champion) and have the maximum level at reasonably ascertainable experience requirement. These points can go into any variety of attributes deemed necessary for any champion of battle.

Conclusion:
I know it may seem like I'm jumping the gun on this or that I'm bringing up a topic that may not be of any importance but from what I have seen happen in many good games is that with out a strong online presence the life span of the game will be short and will not live up to its potential. I make this post because I want to see this game to succeed and live up to its full potential instead of instead of burning out quickly because because players become disheartened by unfair advantages.

Dez_troi_aR
11-14-2016, 03:43 PM
Your scepticism is appropriate, there have been a lot of alpha players worrying about stats making too much of a difference.

However, if they turn out as they are intended to be then they will be an advanced form of customization and i think that would be great. I d rather would want them to make it work than to throw the concept overboard. It might take a little while, though. There will be wining about unfair items etc but i trust they can find a system that gives us the possibility to work towards rewards without breaking anything !

THAMONK5
11-14-2016, 11:49 PM
Could they just not put something in like from 1 to 10 you'll only play ppl 1 to 10 then 11 to 20 or something. Yes when you're lvl 1 playing a lvl 10 he might have some better gear but not that big of a gap that you wouldn't have a chance.

hshoncho
11-15-2016, 03:59 AM
Your scepticism is appropriate, there have been a lot of alpha players worrying about stats making too much of a difference.

However, if they turn out as they are intended to be then they will be an advanced form of customization and i think that would be great. I d rather would want them to make it work than to throw the concept overboard. It might take a little while, though. There will be wining about unfair items etc but i trust they can find a system that gives us the possibility to work towards rewards without breaking anything !

I hope my assumptions end up being wrong. I think that there is a chance that the customization could be a really cool feature but as of right now it seems like the system was made to resemble an MMO pvp instead of the MOBA style that they seemed to be aiming for originally. I plan on playing regardless but personally I have lost faith in ubisoft as a company. Whether it is putting out an unfinished game, putting out many DLC's that cost more than the content is worth, or not maintaining their games well, ubisoft has a poor track. Just look at how Rainbow Six: Siege and The Division are doing. Both are good games with great potential but how ubisoft handles their games the community around them are basically dead.

hshoncho
11-15-2016, 04:18 AM
Ubisoft has much experience in creating video games ... I don't think that it will be a problem for them to find a proper balance ^^

Yes they are very experienced in creating games but their overal quality of games has been pretty poor, aside from the farcry series, over the last decade. They put out games as fast as they can and it sometimes not even fished. I cant say every game but for the most part ubisoft puts out trailers for games that look great but when they come out they dont live up to the hype. Overall I just dont trust ubisoft because they seem more like they try to cash in on a quick buck, leave a game with a short life span, and then try to sell a sequel because it people think they may do things differently the next time around.

MisterWillow
11-21-2016, 09:56 AM
I like it the way it is with the stats :p

It is a great motivation to play if you know that can actively improve your character with better gear ... beside of your own skill progess!

I disagree.

The major reason I was so drawn to the game in the first place is that the combat system is all about skill. Adding stats that augment player's inherent power undermines this, since if I can increase my attack power enough to kill someone in two or three hits instead of the normal five or six, or increase my armour so that I can sustain more damage than normal, it does nothing to actually increase my skill at the game. If anything, it allows for sloppier play, since you know you have that inherent advantage over someone without gear, or with lower-tiered gear.


The Devs said multiple times, that the stats don't have drastically but noticably effects ;)

On the contrary. The last (non-NDA'd) alpha I could literally kill people in two hits with my Raider with the gear I had, and it wasn't even very high leveled.


That means, that you can still make kills as a Newby, but higher Players will have a technically advantage towards you ... as long as you don't work on your own gear.

Technically you could still make kills as a newby, but players with higher level gear who are also skilled at the game gain such an advantage over people simply because of their gear that they demolish players with lower level gear where it would otherwise be (nearly) an even match, because the player with higher level gear is afforded much more room for error. If they get hit once or twice, it might not be that bad, since they have high level defense gear, and because they have high level damage gear as well, their opponent can survive half as many hits as they otherwise would have.

Everything should be cosmetic.

PowerSenpai
11-21-2016, 10:15 AM
I disagree.

The major reason I was so drawn to the game in the first place is that the combat system is all about skill. Adding stats that augment player's inherent power undermines this, since if I can increase my attack power enough to kill someone in two or three hits instead of the normal five or six, or increase my armour so that I can sustain more damage than normal, it does nothing to actually increase my skill at the game. If anything, it allows for sloppier play, since you know you have that inherent advantage over someone without gear, or with lower-tiered gear.



On the contrary. The last (non-NDA'd) alpha I could literally kill people in two hits with my Raider with the gear I had, and it wasn't even very high leveled.



Technically you could still make kills as a newby, but players with higher level gear who are also skilled at the game gain such an advantage over people simply because of their gear that they demolish players with lower level gear where it would otherwise be (nearly) an even match, because the player with higher level gear is afforded much more room for error. If they get hit once or twice, it might not be that bad, since they have high level defense gear, and because they have high level damage gear as well, their opponent can survive half as many hits as they otherwise would have.

Everything should be cosmetic.

I love you

MisterWillow
11-21-2016, 09:08 PM
I love you

http://replygif.net/i/890.gif


The point is, if you already managed to get such superb gear just in 4 days within the Alpha, why do you make such a protest about how hardcore it is?! ^^

Because it makes fights boring for me. The tension is removed if I can shrug off more hits than normal, or take half an opponent's life in a single heavy attack, or am able to throw out twice as many attacks as them before my stamina runs out.

The fact that I gained such a marked advantage over people in 4 days also doesn't speak well of the game's longevity. If you take that advantage, presume it would only grow the more time I spend playing, and extend that time to a month, how much of an advantage would I have? Would I be able to kill a new player in a single light attack? Ignoring how boring it would be for me, how frustrating would it be for new people? Would they even keep playing long enough to get gear adequate enough to withstand the literal superhuman I had created?

And that's just the Raider. I fought Orochis with much higher level gear that me and they were able to kill me in 4 hits even with increased defense stats. The Orochi is already at an advantage with their speed, recovery time, and combo ability. If I were to enter the game a month or two into release and were getting destroyed by people who already have a handle on the mechanics and had all their stats augmented, I might just drop the game altogether.


Btw.: Level 20 is the max, so I don't know how far you did get ...

No it isn't. Once you reach rank 20, you gain a Renown level and reset to rank 1 (essentially COD's Prestige system), at which point, you start getting higher level gear. Blue gear at 1 renown, purple at 2 renown (if I recall correctly). This increases the amount you're augmented exponentially.


removing the stats would mean, that you just play to unlock new cosmetics and that's REALLY boring!

Progression based on cosmetics works perfectly well for Overwatch. You just have to make those cosmetics interesting enough for people to want them. They have enough potential between the three cultures and their imagination to have plenty of things for players to covet.


the way how it is, you don't stay long with a technically disatvantage and additionally you have a progress system, which fuels you to play further and makes it long-term exciting to make you character even more badass ^^

You're made artificially more badass. You don't become a better fighter by increasing your strength to the point that you can kill people in one hit. Your worth as a player should be determined by how well you grasp the mechanics and are able to utilise them properly, not overpower an opponent simply because you have a special sword.


Edit: Additionally you don't increase one single stat without sacrificing another to compensate, so it's more an exchange like in any other PvP game.

This isn't just any other PvP game. Mechanically, it's more like a fighting game. How many of those have augmenteable stats? The only one I can think of off the top of my head was the free to play Tekken Revolutions, and it had the same problem I'm identifying here. Within a week, I could kill people in two or three hits with my Kazuya, which defeats the entire purpose for me.

MisterWillow
11-21-2016, 10:46 PM
This is your point of view ... I am the opposite. It wouldn't be exciting anyhow to play in Multiplayer longer, than a few hours in total, if I didn't evolve in any single aspect, despite of my own skill.

Why not? It's an organic evolution.


I can also imagine, that they increased the effects of the stats for the Alpha, just to see the way it works ... and I repeat myself, that I would wish a difference between A high Player and Newby like 3-4 hits and 5-6 hits

So you want a player who's been playing longer, has more experience, know at least one character's every strength and limitation, and is presumably familiar enough with the combat mechanics that they're proficient at the game's advanced tactics, can feint effectively, can parry effectively, and knows the maps enough that they have inherently superior situational awareness to also have the advantage of being able to kill someone in roughly half the hits of someone without any of the listed experience or knowledge?


But you just said "with much higher level gear" - the Orochi is an offensive character! Much higher then you and still 4 hits neccessary is still okay with one eye closed! (I admit, evrything above would be unfair, so even I would disagree)

Orochi's rush attack>double light took half my health. They can recover and combo that in quick succession with almost no risk to them. That's six hits altogether. Raider also has second highest health. Anyone else except Conqueror is dead from the first combo.


I personally thought you just get new gear till level 20 and prestige is just prestige without anything new.

So what's the point, from your perspective, playing past rank 20, if the progression you want stops at that point?


It's also realistic, that a noble with finest equipment is stronger, than an armored servant!

While an argument might be made that one weapon or breastplate could be of a higher quality than another, in most respects a sword's a sword. If you want to look at it realistically, nobody would charge into battle with a poorly made weapon.

Even with this perspective, none of the warriors the player selects could possibly be construed as anything close to servants.


It would be a funny if every Warden for example was an exact copy of all the other Wardens on the battlefield (except of the cosmetics) ... without having someone, who is quicker, or stronger, or durates more ...

They wouldn't be copies, though, because the players controlling them all play the character differently, and utilise their skills differently. Some will be more skilled than others. That's the difference.


Most online games have a progress system in form of stats! Some are unfair (I also don't like them) ... but this one I hope to be balanced.

I'd rather them not follow what everyone else is doing.

I'd also rather not get bogged down in grinding out something that will just make fights easier for me. I'd rather beat somebody and know it was because I was a better fighter, not because I do inherently more damage than they do.

MisterWillow
11-23-2016, 03:02 AM
But not the one very special way ^^

You're advocating artificial augmentation through inherent power enhancement, not natural advancement through knowledge and experience.


And the combat system in general you also learn in the campaign or the intros ... all these complainings are all like "first few days-struggle"
Of course you won't master the controll in a few days, but enough to be at least on a moderate scale.

But games with the sort of stat-enhancement progression systems you're talking about often see drop-offs from the playerbase after a couple of months because the people who have been playing since day one have such an advantage over new people that new people are discouraged from playing because they lack the in-game tools to compete.

The only way to 'balance' this is to allow people to buy those tools and enhancements.

I'd rather not have either happen in For Honor.


I admit, I don't know much about the single attacks of the Orochi, but I reat my stance ... 3-4 hit instead of 5-6 is welcome to me

And I repeat that it will only discourage new people from playing if they have to both learn the nuances of the control system and map layout while having to hit someone who is familiar with both twice as many times as said experienced player has to hit them. A month in and the playerbase will possibly stagnate the same way it does for CoD and Battlefield with every one of their installments.


A sword is by far not like any other swords ... just as an example: Japanese Warriors mostly weren't able to cut through leather armor, before inventing the high quality Katana

That's a distinction between one style of sword over another. It doesn't necessarily say anything about the quality of the weapon itself.


A sword can be a poorly made mass-product or a special crafting with a sharper, harder blade and other features! It's not just a difference in video games!

I understand that from a real-world perspective, but again, none of the warriors the player selects are peons with shoddy weapons and armour. Even the base-level stuff is visually of good quality. All that changes visually at higher levels is that they become more ornate. If you want to make an argument in terms of realism, most of the higher level gear look like implements that in the real world would be reserved for ceremonial purposes instead of being used for combat, and in fact would be less-well made as a result, since none of it is meant to save your life.


In my eyes not enough ... some people like these templates with different colours, but i definitely don't.

Well then it's a matter of opinion. :p


Polarization brings change and additional possibilities to individualize.

Cosmetically maybe. Polarization in terms of inherent player power brings frustration and the possibility that new people stop playing after a few matches because they literally cant's compete.


But you just talked about Overwatch and want For Honor following that ^^

Overwatch is one game, and far from the norm in terms of progression. If I wanted them to follow a trend, I'd want them to do what fighting games do: Characters are different in terms of inherent strengths and weaknesses, but those strengths and weaknesses are unchanged over time, and through fighting and progressing, you unlock various cosmetic pieces that lets you make a character your own.

For Honor has more in common mechanically with fighting games than anything else anyway.


This equality you talk about is something you have to fight for in almost every single game, and most of them function well!

Again, it exists in fighting games. That's how they should approach player progression and game longevity.

PowerSenpai
11-23-2016, 08:12 AM
I disagree that stat customization will be bad for competitive play.

Games like League of Legends are proving it. Extremely successful in the competitive scene and very item-driven.

The question is how they will handle the matchmaking and how big the stat differences will be, but after all it is just a game and everyone will have the best items they could want eventually, it is not like EVE online where skills advance infinitely.

When I get into a game like this I am just that much happier when I beat someone with better gear and imagine how much tougher of an opponent I will be once I get my own top gear.

Look at it this way. If you were one of these warriors in real life, you wouldn't be equipped with the best of the line gear either. You would have to work your way up with junk, becoming worth the better, more expensive sword and armor some smith put their life into.

League of legends does the opposite actually. You start the game with the same money as your opponents and you buy gear there and then. If you are a noob who is better than your opponent, you can outbuild them and outplay them. In For Honor that would not be possible, instead the noob would die from fewer hits than the higher leveled guy, and have to do more hits on the higher level guy than other people his level. This makes combat feel unfair, not fun.
The realism argument makes no sense either, if everything we did was to add more realism to a game, then games would not be all that fun. After all we are playing a game instead of indulging in reality to begin with, if i want utmost realism i'll go seek out a HEMA club.

MisterWillow
11-24-2016, 08:15 AM
"If you are a noob who is better than your opponent, you can outbuild them and outplay them."
If you are a noob in For Honor who is better than your opponent, you can outplay them too. They just retain the item advantage, which might be so marginal that it won't make enough of a difference to win a fight against a more skilled player, but rather just enough to tune the character more towards your play style.
We don't know yet. Stat numbers might even be hard-capped at base value so that all you can do is swap out one stat for another. That's something I might prefer TBH.

That wasn't his point.

LoL and MOBAs utilise in-match progression. You upgrade your abilities and become stronger over the course of a match, but the base stats of characters remain constant and reset at the start of the next match. For Honor's progression is constant. Progress carries over match-to-match.

If you're a noob in For Honor going up against a veteran who has the advantage of both experience and gear that amplifies their base stats, the fight is so imbalanced that the new player would need to grasp the controls and combat nuances so quickly that they'd be labelled savants in order to stand a chance, at least with how the stats are now. If they dial down their impact before release, then maybe you'd have an argument, but giving someone who's already skilled and boosting their inherent power to the degree the stats currently allow is going to cause major problems with player adoption and retention the longer the game is actually out.


You know, when a game is about grinding, some people look at the disadvantage they will have as they start off and dread it, and others will look at the advantage they will have as they reach max and look forward to it.
Maybe we get lucky and they find a way to strike a great balance.

Again, people in the fighting game community don't really worry about that because the core mechanics are compelling enough to hold players' attention regardless of the reward. Obviously this is not true of everyone, and that's probably a reason fighting games have implemented customisation options to visually augment and personalise your character, but it would be a mistake to allow players to increase the base stats of their fighters. The failure of Tekken Revolution bore that out.

I think the same is true of For Honor. It has more in common with a fighting game in regard to the core gameplay mechanics than anything else. That's how the customisation should be approached.


I personally prefer customization and progress over instant-fairness. Replay value over instant-satisfaction.

It's not instant-fairness. The more experienced and/or skilled player would still have an advantage by virtue of their experience and/or skill. The replay value comes from learning the mechanics, learning the maps, utilising that knowledge to become better.

I would characterize getting a weapon that instantly boosts your attack damage as 'instant-satisfaction' sooner than I would players becoming better by familiarising themselves with the game's mechanics, familiarising themselves with characters' movesets, and learning from their mistakes, as the former is an arbitrary alteration that does little to nothing to actually increase player skill. All it's doing is making sure people who play longer can muscle their way through opponents without much thought for the game's more advanced mechanics.

MisterWillow
11-26-2016, 11:52 PM
MOBA's don't only have temporary in-game progression, but also account-level-based progression. In the case of LoL that would be runes and masteries.

Maybe I was misinterpreting what PowerSenpai was saying, but I'm fairly certain his point was being made in regard to in-match progression. That's all I was saying.


If you are a noob and go up against a veteran you get destroyed in any game.

But in fighting games it's generally because they have more raw experience, and know the mechanics better, know character move sets better. All of this can be learned.

It's entirely different when players can augment their inherent power, so the veteran can destroy the noob on account of underlying damage numbers the noob cannot counter and presuming both players play for the same amount of time continually, can literally never catch up to. The veteran hardly even has to try, between their experience and their superior capabilities.


What are you trying to say? That the quick fix of a temporary low-level player is more important than the acknowledgement of a permanent high-level player who invested weeks and months into the game?

I'm saying that player's inherent power shouldn't fluctuate in terms of damage output, damage reduction, and stamina. Doing that imbalances the game beyond inherent player skill, so the good players become demi-gods and the rest become either fodder that eventually stop playing or frustrated people who complain on forums like these for nerfs and buffs to in-game stat models that have no business being there in the first place while laboriously throwing themselves at a meat grinder trying to get higher-level gear.

Again, the higher-level player would still have the advantage by virtue of their experience and skill.


You want fair fights, that's what match-making is for.

They could still do that through the renown system. But like I said, I didn't even reach renown 1 on my Raider, and I could kill people in 2 hits. That should not happen.


And players in fighting games have always wanted customization, like players in any other game. In the form of name tags, hats, emblems or skins, and if those weren't available then people would find ways to get custom skins and mods.

Name tags, hats, emblems, and skins don't increase the damage Siegfried in Soul Calibur, doesn't increase the speed of Law in Tekken, doesn't increase the defense of Shinnok in Mortal Kombat.

Customisation can exist independent of stats, and in the case of For Honor I think it would be better if they did.


Hell the biggest skin market was born out of a "fighting" game, CS:GO. And don't try to tell me competitively shooting at people is fundamentally different from competitively swinging at people. People loved their customization in GunZ, custom skins in Chivalry or custom 3rd party skins in JKA.

I'll just copy/paste what I said over here (http://forums.ubi.com/showthread.php/1294917-Suggestion-Increased-Player-Cap?).


Completely different circumstances, environments, and tactics are involved in something like Battlefront (or shooters in general).

For example, deaths in shooters occur far more quickly, and any firefight that you are involved in only lasts a couple of seconds even if you're a highly skilled player (in which case, you probably killed your opponent from across the room). You can find a position and slaughter five people in rapid succession, lob a grenade that kills multiple people bunched up. You yourself can be killed by someone you didn't see and you have no way of countering.

Melee necessitates being right in your opponent's face, and fights have the potential to be over a minute long. Incidentally, I can't wait for this to actually come out and for people to get really good, because then fight length will only go up, add to that the fact that being outnumbered can be countered and defended against. Aside from the level 4 Feats (Arrow Storm, Catapult Strike), there's no comparison between the two strategically (or even mechanically).


But you seem to miss the point that stat customization in this game is more about tweaking your character to your play-style than about an overall buff.

There are actually other stats present in the game that do that, though, which I think would be fine if they remained. Debuff resistance, sprint speed, revive speed, feat cooldown reduction, etc. etc.

Half of those were not used in the test, though, because they can easily be forgone in favour of the overall buffs to attack damage, damage reduction, max stamina/stamina cost reduction. That's the problem.


Let me ask you one thing, are you a console player? Because then I could understand your fright of customization and tweaking and anything else that has to do with individuality, creativity and theory-crafting.

First, I play on PC and on console.

Second, that sort of condescension is unwarranted and unwanted. Please refrain from resorting to it in the future.

MisterWillow
11-27-2016, 04:09 AM
Well excuse me, but I find the attitude of some people towards customization, creativity and individuality in general highly disturbing, and in my opinion the entire success of consoles is based on this whole sheep mentality.

Console players want just as much in-game customisation as anyone else, in my experience.


You told about, that half of the stats haven't been used ... in videos I saw other things.
Even regard, that in 4 days there is no real strategy how to use the other stats as much or more as the others like damage etc.
Of course all the Newbies take general stuff because it's the easiest thing for beginning!

Not every piece of gear is tied to damage, defense, and stamina. There's obviously more stats that are used, but for those specific pieces of gear there was very little reason to use anything else so that's what the vast majority of people used. The likelihood of this still being the case on launch if it stays the way it is is very high.


For my Conquerer I am going to enforce my Revenge, because it gives me infinite stamina --> autoblock from all directions all the time with extra life and damage

Revenge gear is tied to other pieces, so you could have that Revenge boost and still have high damage.


You mention this 2-hit thing all the time ... I never saw that or something similar in the videos, so you are telling me something that seems like out of the clouds.
I just saw little differences in gear ... as I love it!
The only way i can imagine that 2-hit stuff you tell about, is using the Super-Damage-Unblockable of the Raider ^^

That's what I said I did. With my Raider, I could kill people in 2 hits, that being the Heavy>Unblockable combo. There was very little point in doing anything else unless I was fighting someone good at blocking, which becomes boring. At least if everyone had their base attack/defense stagnant, I would have to pull that off twice at least (depending on class), which increases the chance of an opponent learning from the first time seeing the combo and adapting.

And even with my high-ish level defense gear, a Warden with high attack could kill me in three hits (instead of six), an Orochi with four (instead of six or seven), and another Raider in 2 (same combo). Again, all this does is shorten fights, which shortens people's patience, which has the potential of them quitting the game prematurely because they're dying quicker than they can even grasp the mechanics and they have lower room for error to learn from their mistakes than they otherwise would have.


You complain, that people are frustrated, if the get killed a few times in the very beginnning ... almost every game offers progress through gear. Also in these games experience, knowing the mechanics, ect. is getting combined with better gear.
There are better equiped soldiers and there are worse equiped soldiers and they also had to deserve their gear!
Actuallly people get even more angry in shooters because the don't play well and get killed with less shots, but somehow they continue playing and have really huge player-bases ... suprise suprise :cool:
In For Honor you even see you opponent and can kick his ace even with weaker gear, insead of getting shot in the back with a single bullet.

For Honor is not a shooter. It shouldn't be compared to a shooter. It has more in common with fighting games, and those almost never have progress tied to increasing a character's health, damage, defense, or any other stat over time, and the one that I can think of off the top of my head that tried that was a failure (Tekken Revolution).


Further on, the people love to move on in progress and unlock new stronger stuff and it's an old and well-functional principe, that almost everybody loves.
Just learning the mechanics isn't the end of development, but also building up your character.

Again. Fighting games. Getting new stronger stuff has never been a part of those, and everyone is perfectly satisfied with them because the mechanics are satisfying enough that the only fluff they need are wacky outfits.


You like equalty in the game, and I respect your opinion, but with all the respect: this equalty is a thing that more or less will be displayed very soon and only the very best ones will have a slightly bit more advantage compared to the others and that's alright for me (even I don't play games over-exageratingly to achieve that level)

The 'equality' you're talking about will be shared by the people who start playing day one, but the potential exists that after a month that could be all that's still playing because of the power curve that exists.


I also wanted to discuss: Also these kind of people, who get easily frustrated (which you mention all the time) in common don't play games for long, so better game the game for people who stay and give them the chance to shape the character a bit more the way they want, except of forcing them to stay on 1 of 12 ready templates.

It's not about being easily frustrated. It's about lacking the tools to adequately compete with people who have unlocked inherently stronger tools.

Like I said above, there are other stats that could change your character in other ways that don't screw with the inherent game balance.


You said: "That's a distinction between one style of sword over another. It doesn't necessarily say anything about the quality of the weapon itself."
That's all wrong!
A sowrd's quality depends of the material (iron, steel or alloys), the quality of blacksmithing (experience of the blacksmith), the way how the raw-material is treated (just forged straight out or first folded the metall), sharpened or not that much, etc.
A longsword for example isn't just a longsword
I also heared, that very rich people also put diamond powder (which is sharp as f*ck) on their blades, just to make it even sharper and cut through thicker armor.
So don't tell that every weapon is equal!

A weapon is only as good as the person wielding it. Unfortunately, with the limited control limitations on the Art of Battle---and video games in general---you have to account for the fact that everyone has the same (limited) basic set of motions they can perform, and help to retain balance through not creating a power curve tied to stat adjustments.

MisterWillow
11-27-2016, 09:10 PM
I am sure, that people will early discover strategies how to use the other perks ... but 4 within 4 days in an Alpha you can't expect too much.

You're putting yourself at such a disadvantage if you don't equip attack, defense, and stamina in those three slots that it's pointless to do otherwise. There's absolutely no incentive to do so.


Heavy Unblockable as I said ^^
But the Unblockable is meant to kick *** ... I saw Newbies kill people with 3 Unblockables instead of 2, so the gap isn't huge.
If that annoys you, you should better open a thread about damage adjustment of Unblockables.

It wasn't two unblockables. It was one heavy attack and one unblockable. If all I have to do to kill someone is that combo, there's very little incentive to do otherwise, stagnating the combat, frustrating my opponents, boring me.


But they also kill enemies faster --> balance
Who says that everybody wants long fights?!
I personally wouldn't like to stop a minute per enemy.

Then farm minions. You take those out in a hit. Just sit in the mob and farm away. Players should be a challenge, and they become less so when they die in max four hits.

Again, in the context of fighting games, I don't want to watch a fight that lasts a few moments. I want a tense trading of hits that takes advantage of the combat mechanics. If Ryu could kill Ken in four hits, the margin for error is so low that either it becomes really aggressive players winning every single fight because all they have to do is wail and eventually a hit will get through, or two people dancing around each other for five minutes because they're waiting for their opponent to make the first move.


Well I can't see how high-ish you defense was, but again I expect you are mainly talking about heavy strikes, which are meant to deal damage!
I watched almost every single video existing about the Alpha and I didn't see much difference in gear.
And I really looked about how much gear effects the gameplay.

That much damage almost undermines the whole combat system. All it does is reward overly aggressive players and it doesn't give newer players time enough to learn the mechanics before they're dead. That's terrible for player retention or player adoption later in the game's life cycle.


Actually you didn't get the sense of my comparison.
I was talking about the point, that other games (talking about shooters) offer the same progress system (that everybody seems to love), which is even more unfair (because a good camper can take out a whole team and additionally when he is allowed to kill peope with 1 bullet instead of 2), than the one you are mentioning.

Yes, and after a couple months the playerbase stagnates for CoD and Battlefield because people have unlocked stronger weapons, better sights, more perks, and people who don't play as much find themselves at such a disadvantage that they find playing a chore and they eventually stop playing altogether.


In For Honor you see your opponent at least and if you play well you can take him out with not that much effort!

I want the effort. I want the challenge. That's diminished if either of us can die in just a few hits.


Boring!
Not for me!
After a while you get well into the mechanics and what then? Honestly, I would leave at thet point, because there is nothing more I can achieve!

I'm sorry if this is rude (and I'm quite sure it is), but I can't help but think you don't actually enjoy games very much from this statement, because you ostensibly don't enjoy the mechanics enough to play anything for that reason alone. You don't enjoy becoming a better fighter through learning the nuances of a fighting system, you don't enjoy learning to control recoil or finding spots on the map that take advantage of your visibility vs your concealment, you don't enjoy learning the proper strategy for controlling a map or anything. All you want is the reward to show people, or something to prove to yourself that your time was well spent.

I happen to think that games like Battlefield should drop progression and give you everything from the start, because frankly I'm tired of starting with a lousy weapon and having to grind my way through levels to get something I want or am comfortable with.

In my opinion, it's a lazy way of keeping players engaged with a game. Rather than craft compelling mechanics, they promise people a long list of things to unlock in hopes they want all of those things.


That enhancement of gear was never a part of fighting games is a huge nonsense!

If stat enhancement were part of fighting games, people would stop playing them altogether. Again, Tekken Revolution tried this and was a massive failure.


Again, I bet that in the final game the defferences won't be dramatic.
Ubi would know that pretty well if people, who join a month later would be outmatched in some situations in the case you are talking about.

Maybe. No evidence exists to support that supposition, though. I'm approaching this argument on what exists, and not what I think, or hope, will exist sometime in the future.


I would definitely be for a bonus for kinnling a high level Player.

I'll admit to this being the one benefit.

This can still be attained by killing a player with highly ornate armour, though---since that would indicate they've at least been playing for a good long while, and so would have more experience---and for all of the potential downsides, I'd rather everything be cosmetic.


Which lack in tools? As long as you don't have to pay real money to become stronger, you don't lack in tools. You play and you gain currency (steel I think).

I was going off your shooter example. New players lack the perks, guns, gun attachments, killstreaks, sometimes usable items like claymores or certain kinds of grenades (depends on the game) that people who have been playing longer have access to, and on top of all of these disadvantages, they lack map awareness, where choke-points exist, etc. etc. This lack of tools has always led to player stagnation in CoD and Battlefield with every installment.

On the other hand, people have been playing Team Fortress 2 for ten years straight and all you can unlock in there are cosmetic items.


This is playing with words ^^
A weapon is as good as the wielder AND as good as the weapon itself! A good warrior with the old rusty blade of his grandfather can easily lose against a well armored warrior with a high-quality blade.

A good warrior with a rusty sword would know to stab the (presumably less experienced, given this line of conversation) armoured warrior in the armpit, under the helmet in the neck, or in the groin. He would know that he can flip his sword around and bash the armoured warrior with the pommel, he can use the crossguard to sweep a leg, he could also use the crossguard to hook an arm, a weapon, a shield.

There's a reason Musashi could kill an nodachi wielding samurai with a wooden sword he carved from an oar. He was the better fighter. A good fighter could kill someone with a plastic fork.

Sakinahz
11-27-2016, 09:49 PM
You and i think very alike Masterwillow and wish i could keep the discussion going but i am on mobile so i wont type a long post.

Anyone interested in the subject could go here https://m.reddit.com/r/forhonor/comments/53cj70/heroic_gear_lv_5_renowed_gear_needs_to_be_changed/?ref=search_posts .

Where both side of the argument are discussed and also showing what some renown 5 gear might look like in term of stats.

His main renown 5 sword actually triple his block attack damage while very sligthly lowering basic attack and lowering revenge stage damage by a lot.

A sword like that would be a huge advantage in 1v1 where revenge state is basicly useless no?

MisterWillow
11-28-2016, 02:10 AM
It feels like you are not reading my post ^^
I said about 5 times, that it is very likely that the stats will be nerfed in the final game. I don't have an evidence or source for this, but it's kinda like logical to me.

And I said at least once that my criticism is aimed at how things currently are, not at how they might be in the future.


You fight all the time, and i really doubt that people want to stop 1min per enemy after a while. Additionally in duells or brawl you just focus on one enemy (in brawl more or less), where people concentrate more on you and the duell will endure longer, because there is no need to hurry.

I'll admit an entire minute for a fight in Dominion would be pretty long, but currently you can kill people in a matter of seconds. That isn't satisfying either.


Again: Players learn the mechanics by campaign and by intros, you just perfectionate it in the Multiplayer.

But the multiplayer is where you'd actually get to put into practice. That's where the game really shines, and I think that is undermined by the current stat system.


And you have to earn your equalty, like in reality.
You don't start with the best of the best. You work your way up to the sunlight!

You earn that by being more skillful, not by being given something that makes you better by virtue of that item existing.


And a good proverb says, that the path is the real goal.
And just perfectionating you own skills is a short path ...

That is the path. Continual self-improvement. That's the meaning of the proverb.


You are complaining all the time about having too much challenge and now you complain about having no challenge ^^
The reality is, that one opponent is weaker than you and the other is stronger then you and not everybody is as strong as you ... that's refreshing!
There will also be many people as strong as you will be ... here is your effort, here is you challenge

It depends on what you mean by strength. In context of For Honor, strength should equate with the skill of the fighter, not some arbitrary amplification of damage models.


No no don't worry it brings it up to the point more or less.
I like to learn the mechanics, but I don't want to consist the whole game of that (talking about Multiplayer).
I like to build up the character, to shape him, to make strategy with gear and celebrate if it turns out to be a good idea or if the item is good, because I use it!

Sounds like you should play more straight RPGs.


I also don't like it, when stats dominate the game!
Actually in many games i played a friends High-End build, and terribly f*cked up, because I wasn't able to play ... and that's the way how it should be in my eyes.

In certain games, maybe. In this sort of game I think it does more harm than good.


But this way you get your weapon in the end, and people have there development. Everybody is lucky in the end.

I'd rather not depend on luck to get a piece of gear that might improve my character in a way that's beneficial. Remember, all gear drops are random.


I didn't play Tekken Revolution ... just the other games ^^
But tekken revolution can't be a general proof that stats are evil ... stats and Arcade Games don't go well together ... but For Honor is far away from Arcade!

It indicates that in a multiplayer melee game stats do nothing but create unnecessary imbalances that cause large swathes of people to stop playing after a couple months.

I know that fighting games are associated with arcades, with good reason, but they've existed in the same environment as CoD for years now on consoles

Aside from that, I'd actually call For Honor a fairly arcade-y game. It's certainly not a simulation, and there's enough complexity in the mechanics to allow for strategy, but in terms of actual gameplay, it's pretty good arcade action game.


But after all still a huge player-base with many many contended players!

Team Fortress (with it's just cosmetic stuff) has a much lower player-base, which doesn't speak for it ...

On the contrary. Today alone (http://store.steampowered.com/stats/), TF2 had a peak playerbase of 63,000 people, compared to Infinite Warfare's peak of 7000 (on PC).

Admittedly, Battlefield 1 (https://battlefieldtracker.com/bf1/insights/population) is in the same ballpark, averaging anywhere between 50-80,000 over the past few days (again, on PC), but that can be blamed on it being new and the hype associated with it. Give it a few months and I bet it will drop to half that.


Again playing with words ...
In many cases the better equiped one will win and in many others the more experienced guy!
Experience doesn't mean an auto-win.

I'm not playing with words. I'm providing ways in which experience alone gives you an advantage. Gear shouldn't mean an auto-win either.


Not if the opponent knows how to use his weapon even a bit ...

The man Musashi killed was Sasaki Kojiro (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sasaki_Kojir%C5%8D) and was considered a master swordsman.

Dez_troi_aR
11-28-2016, 11:58 AM
I want to remind you all that unlike us, MisterWillow has played the games for many hours, not only during the alpha test. While i do not think that this makes critique on his statements obsolete, it is still important to keep in mind. Especially because we all have to make up our statements based on feelings about the random footage we saw.

Personally, i like the idea of a stat system that allows for some fine tuning, but if it affects the gameplay as heavyly as is seems it does, than i would rather have it removed. I also am an achiever and want stuff to work towards, but that could be cosmetics as well as reaching a higher league. The goal of entering the master league kept me on my toes for years in SC2!

Dez_troi_aR
11-28-2016, 12:13 PM
Anyone interested in the subject could go here https://m.reddit.com/r/forhonor/comments/53cj70/heroic_gear_lv_5_renowed_gear_needs_to_be_changed/?ref=search_posts .

Where both side of the argument are discussed and also showing what some renown 5 gear might look like in term of stats.

His main renown 5 sword actually triple his block attack damage while very sligthly lowering basic attack and lowering revenge stage damage by a lot.

A sword like that would be a huge advantage in 1v1 where revenge state is basicly useless no?

Thank you for the link, really interesting!

I read through most of it and the impressions given made me reconsider my position. I think the game would definately be better off without stat system. If its only for the finetuning aspect, as they said it would be, its not that important anyway but holds a lot of dangers. The temptation for pushing the game a little bit into the pay-to-win direction is very high and frustration and unblanced fights might become very common until you reach that high stat-gear and start grinding gamers who have a disadvantage yourself.

Dez_troi_aR
11-28-2016, 05:28 PM
"Sounds like you should play more straight RPGs."

This isn't matter of the topic ^^
There actually is a point to that. If leveling up and developing your character is your main interest in a game, then you will definately be more happy while playing an RPG or MMORPG than you would be figuring out street fighter combos. If the game is skillbased and esport orientated, you will never have that much character progress. I dont want to exclude anyone, i hope to see as many of you guys from the forums in the game as possible and if you are more the rpg type of guy i encourage you to try out games were your skill is the main subject to progress. It is more satisfying in my opinion. But you should not expect all the role play elements to be carried over to the skillbased approach.



Tekken is also a game 1vs1
I played Tekken very often and I wouldn't like to have it with stats ... but For Honor isn't really 1vs1 (just sometimes)

People seem to have divided opinions about that. I for one am much more looking forward to the duel mode, where the game comes very close to the fighting genre. Others seem to be more exited about the "hughe battle simulation" that they see in dominion. There is no point in arguing about which mode is closer to the core of the game but in defense of my personal perspective and considering the threads topic i'd like to mention that dominion itself is also more or less built about the 1v1 encounter. If a player vs player encounter is unfair than dominion breaks down, too. Arguing that there could always be a second guy jumping into the back of a player who has superior gear and "evening" the odds that way isn't really a satisfying argument.



Please I don't know who they are and just because of the anime characters you can't say that in reality always skill totally dominates.

These are of course not fictional characters but historical figures and 10 seconds of google can provide you with that knowledge.

Sakinahz
11-28-2016, 09:49 PM
Let's not forget that the game is about 3 month from release.Within that time they not only have to finish/polish the whole game, but try to balance the unreleased 6 additional class that we havent seen in action yet.Balancing a game that rely so much on player skill is allready hard enough but when you add gear to the equation it becomes that much harder to balance and that much easier to abuse for players.

Also many people say they want to use gear to fine tune thier character to their playstyle wich is entirely possible to do without relying on a drop system.Just make every piece of gear available to everyone right from the start so you can pick how to equip you character, that way no one gets left behind.

I see the argument "matchmaking will match you with equaly geared opponent anyway"but a lot but people seems to forget that matchmaking is just not that great in general.Not only does the matchmaking system as to be very solid but as soon a player count start to drop guess whats gonna happen? The matchmaking will be forced to match new players with players way above them just so they can play and every newcomer will get destroyed by fully geared players.Hell battleborn tryed to sell thier game for 10$ to get a surge of new players in and every lvl 1 players were being matched vs lvl 100 fully geared pre mades because the player count was so low.Every newcomer just left and the game is now as good as dead.(player peak of 427..)Even with a good player base you will occasionly get the over geared dude in a match.Not to mention a newbie that brings his fully geared friend into his matches.

I feel like a big part of todays gamer got suckered into the "a game can't be enjoyable unless it has some form of gear progression''. Hell i still remember before Overwatch release so many were saying the game would flop because they could not see a reason to play a game if everything is unlokced right from the start(in my head all i could think was "what the hell...How about playing for fun?!").The game mechanic of For Honor do feel like they would good be enough to stand on its own just like a fighting game would.You get better at the game by learning combos,counters,spacing,blocking,good timing,feints and that is how you would beat other players.Not trough gearing up.

I am very scared gear will affect the game balance too much and actualy mess up the competitive aspect of it but at the same time removing it completly would mean some player might not enjoy the game as much? hmmm.


options to consider maybe?

1) Make every piece of gear available right from the start so everyone can fine tune thier character how they see fit.

or

2)Make the gear only matter in dominion mode and leave 1v1 and 2v2 gearless. (bit of both world)

or

3)At least get rid of the random loot nature and replace it with a currency system so you can buy any piece you want directly.(it at least lessen the fustration of not being lucky)

or

4)have 2 different matchmaking. 1 that allows gear and one that does not.(won't work unless you have a big player base).or in the same alley make it so ranked match have no gear in them.

If gear stay in game in its current form i could only hope that any set of gear you equip would never give you any more that a 10% advantage in a stat total.

You should never be able to kill someone in only 2 heavy hits instead of 3 because by then your allready 33% stronger than your opponent and yes i know that if you boost your attack some other stats get reduced but not every stats is equal.Just like if you dont have that sword for 1v1 in the link i provided you would be severly gimped because revenge state as no use in that mode.

Sorry my tought are all over the place i have a hard time explaning myself coherently in english :P

Pandaego
11-28-2016, 09:56 PM
I had my opinions changed on stats after my trip to Montreal. I was very worried they would ruin the game but after seeing the balance done on them already I have hope. The most important thing regardless of how Ubisoft handles it is that they will continue to support the game post launch. Stats can work as long as they are not afraid to nerf/change them if they are too influential on the gameplay.

MisterWillow
11-29-2016, 07:29 AM
You said: "You earn that by being more skillful, not by being given something that makes you better by virtue of that item existing."

You are speaking in a perspective like you are deciding ^^
In many games it's you own skill combined with technical advantage ... and it's a successfully modell with many many people speaking for it.

Okay? There's also plenty of games that rely on player skill alone that are just as successful.


"That is the path. Continual self-improvement. That's the meaning of the proverb."

Please don't explain me my own proverb.
The meaning is self-improvement OR trying to achieve a certain goal, which doesn't requiere skill always. (So doesn't always mean self-improvement)
In this case it means an increase of skill, but also to build up a characters power.

I didn't know you were Mahatma Ghandi... interesting.

I mean, I suppose with it being a spiritual quote that requires some introspection, it could be open to interpretation, so I'd rather not belabor the point too much, but generally the quote/proverb is taken to mean that there is no goal to life, that the experience of living should be your purpose, but that's in its original context.

Adopting it for a warrior's path, I would take it to mean continual self-improvement is its own reward. It has a vein in Bushido philosophy especially, in that improving sword skills is a meditative act that improves you as a person, and that improvement is the goal. Therefore, the path is the goal.


"It depends on what you mean by strength. In context of For Honor, strength should equate with the skill of the fighter, not some arbitrary amplification of damage models."

Should equate only with skill in your eyes, but in mine this is boring after a short while ... because there is no space to tune you character even a bit (not speaking of my own skill)

This is more a philosophical disagreement, so there's not really much to argue.


"Sounds like you should play more straight RPGs."

This isn't matter of the topic ^^

As Dez_troi_aR said, if your primary interest in playing games is power progression, you'd probably enjoy RPGs much more than a game like For Honor, which inherently relies more on player skill, even if there is some sort of progression system.

Still, for the type of game this is, I think it would benefit more from having players be equal in terms of stats (and by that I mean have characters with different base stats but have those stats remain static).


Tekken is also a game 1vs1
I played Tekken very often and I wouldn't like to have it with stats ... but For Honor isn't really 1vs1 (just sometimes)

In my eyes For Honor is much more comparable to this games, then to Tekken, because Tekken is 1vs1 and shooters play in an open map where you just have to survive and make kills and bring in the stuff that gives you a higher chance of survival.
Reminding in Tekken it's duell all the time ... in For Honor just sometimes!

The point I'm making with the fighting game comparison is that they have more in common mechanically than any other genre, and as such should be approaching in a similar way. It's ranged vs melee.

Obviously there's room for tweaks to things more unique to For Honor like revive speed or debuff resistance, but in terms of raw damage numbers and whatnot, I don't think those sorts of augmentation should be applicable.


Infinite Warfare also was a flop ...
But MW, CoD, etc. build the total majority and have a stat system.
Nobody complains.

Plenty of people have been complaining since MW3 at least because if you aren't there on day 1 and play 20 hours a week, you can't compete after a couple of months because the players that play at least that much have more gear than you, and therefore have more options than you, plus they have all the natural skill from playing that long.

I know a lot of people who don't even bother picking up a game like Battlefield if they can't get it day 1, because they know they'll never catch up.


Please I don't know who they are and just because of the anime characters you can't say that in reality always skill totally dominates.

Miyamoto Musashi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miyamoto_Musashi) is widely regarded as the greatest swordsman in Japapanese history, and wrote the Book of Five Rings, a series of scrolls on sword fighting.

Sasaki Kojiro, who I linked in the last post, was also considered a master swordsman, but is mostly known for being killed by Musashi.

Both were real people.

mpettit24
12-04-2016, 08:39 PM
I haven't read all of the articles so I don't know what all everyone has said. But one possible solution that I could see is making a difference between competitive and quick play. The difference being that you can use whatever gear you want in competitive, but you're limited to specific gear or no gear in quick play. Just a thought.

whovie
12-05-2016, 07:35 PM
I really don't understand why this thread has so many replies and why it's viewed as such a major issue. The odds of them not making a ranked and casual playlist like RB6S is really small. If everyone on this forum is aware of the skill and competitive potential the devs are more than aware already. The solution is simple by making the gear you get purely cosmetic in competitive. If your worried about gear stats ruining casual, I really don't see that being an issue and without it you would lose another level of customization and immersion this game has to offer. When I played the alpha I primarily played the berserker, to the point that at the end. mine was renown 2 lvl 5. I used my gear stats to sure up my weakness, defense and to boost my offensive play style with stamina and attack. Towards the end of the alpha i could tell my stats were definitely giving me an advantage on the battlefield. But that was only a weekend of play and I don't imagine many people played with one character so much like i did. When the game releases or even the beta for that matter with more options to choose from and more time to play it will make stats far less relevant because your time on characters will be more spread out and everybody will have time to adjust their own stats. From what i could tell by the way my stats were increasing, by renown 5 i imagine whatever stat you are trying to boost will be maxed out. It will only be a matter of time then when stats are pretty much irrelevant since everyone will have the stats to support their play style. With a proper skill based matchmaking you wont have new players facing geared out experienced players. So this whole stats argument in my opinion is pretty unfounded. Not trying to piss anyone off. Its just my observations.

MisterWillow
12-06-2016, 05:35 AM
When I played the alpha I primarily played the berserker, to the point that at the end. mine was renown 2 lvl 5. I used my gear stats to sure up my weakness, defense and to boost my offensive play style with stamina and attack. Towards the end of the alpha i could tell my stats were definitely giving me an advantage on the battlefield.

If you extrapolate the advantage you were able to gain in only a weekend into a month of play or more, how much of an advantage do you think you'd have over a new player?


But that was only a weekend of play and I don't imagine many people played with one character so much like i did.

Why not? People have mains in games like this all the time. I'm sure there are people who are so jazzed for one character or another---to the point that the others look uninteresting to them(if they even looked interesting in the first place)---that they don't plan on playing anything else.


It will only be a matter of time then when stats are pretty much irrelevant since everyone will have the stats to support their play style.

Unless the random drops don't give them the stats they want. I know that given a long enough timeline this becomes less and less likely, but what happens if a renown 3 player can't keep up because they simply aren't getting the attack blade they need to compete?


With a proper skill based matchmaking you wont have new players facing geared out experienced players. So this whole stats argument in my opinion is pretty unfounded.

Maybe that will mitigate it, but once again, I wasn't even Renown 1, and I had such an advantage over newer players that the only time I feared dying was when I was outnumbered. The problem will probably still exist once you rank up, and could actually be compounded because of the stat increases of the later gear.

For example, you ranked up to Renown 3 and have all your gear, but now your facing lvl 15-18 Renown 3 players who all have blue gear that doubles the power of the lower tier stuff. And it might get worse once you reach Renown 4 (or 5 I forget), when you start getting purple gear, because you're still using your blue stuff. The likelihood of you keeping pace with them---especially because at that point they have more experience than you, and are therefore theoretically more skilled---decreases.

Natural skill could also mitigate the stat system, but that player has such a small margin for error at that point that it's like them fighting a boss in a Souls game. It's technically doable, but it's unnecessarily difficult.

Rainbowsix876
12-06-2016, 05:21 PM
Ubisoft has much experience in creating video games ... I don't think that it will be a problem for them to find a proper balance ^^

Ubisoft has never done any successfull competitive / Esport game and anything regarding balance the game worries me.
Cloest to a successful esport games is probably Rainbow Six , before it was realsed.
Now it's obvious that it will never be a big esport game even though there are tournaments in it. They release maps and operators every 3 month or so. terrible servers and low tickets

whovie
12-06-2016, 06:06 PM
Unless the random drops don't give them the stats they want. I know that given a long enough timeline this becomes less and less likely, but what happens if a renown 3 player can't keep up because they simply aren't getting the attack blade they need to compete?


That is why you can break any gear down and have it go towards the stats of a certain piece of gear. You played the alpha did you miss this feature completely? Because you would know the gear that whose stats your are increasing has a lvl cap and you can no longer increase its stats untill you find a piece of gear that has higher base stats than the one you increased. You won't find that piece of gear until you get to a much higher level or achieve renown. Is this even an issue after the first two weeks of release or are you wanting to cater to every new person who puts in the game? You're talking about hampering or removing a system over something that will only impact the beginning of the game if at all. Like I said in my op the amount you can contribute to your stats will probably cap at renown 4 or 5 if you build the stats you want and if people cant figure out the stats that benefit their play style that is their problem. The advantage the stats give you are noticeable but not overpowering. I wasn't unstoppable with my increased stats, I still died, but i knew how to use them to my advantage which is the whole point of them being there.

MisterWillow
12-07-2016, 08:49 AM
That is why you can break any gear down and have it go towards the stats of a certain piece of gear. You played the alpha did you miss this feature completely? Because you would know the gear that whose stats your are increasing has a lvl cap and you can no longer increase its stats untill you find a piece of gear that has higher base stats than the one you increased. You won't find that piece of gear until you get to a much higher level or achieve renown. Is this even an issue after the first two weeks of release or are you wanting to cater to every new person who puts in the game?

You can only break down pieces to improve other pieces already in your possession, not change (for example) a Revenge chest piece into a Defense chest piece. What happens if you never get a Defense chest piece one renown, so you're either stuck with with the chest piece from the previous renown (which, as you point out, has a max level, so it couldn't compete with the others), or you sacrifice defense altogether to put it toward a piece of blue gear that isn't defense-centric. Either puts you at a disadvantage. Same for attack, should you never happen to loot a piece of gear.

Interestingly, one of the tests I never got a Defense chest piece for one of my characters, and was dying more often than the other tests because of it, because I had a smaller margin for error than I otherwise would have if those stats specifically (attack, defense, stamina) didn't exist.


You're talking about hampering or removing a system over something that will only impact the beginning of the game if at all.

That affects later adoption rates. If people who pick the game up a month or two months after launch feel like they are being thrown into an environment where they are already at a disadvantage (and they would be, and not just on a skill level), they are more likely to quit playing because they feel like they can't compete effectively and can't catch up. It happens every single cycle with CoD and Battlefield. One, three, six months out, and the playerbase for those games has either stagnated or decreased because people who picked the game up day one have more tools at their disposal---more perks, more weapons, better weapons, etc. as well as the experience, map knowledge, etc.

I'd rather have an environment where players can pick the game up a year from now and won't immediately feel intimidated by people with both experience and physical augmentations. Veteran player skill should speak for itself.


Like I said in my op the amount you can contribute to your stats will probably cap at renown 4 or 5 if you build the stats you want and if people cant figure out the stats that benefit their play style that is their problem.

There's absolutely no evidence that's the case. There's an entire rainbow of colours they can go through for increasing levels of stat boosting.

And once again, I am not arguing against the entirety of the stat system, just the three stats (technically four) that I keep mentioning---attack, defense, max stamina, stamina cost reduction---because if you equipped Sprint Speed instead of one of those (I believe it was on the same piece as Max Stamina), you'd be achieving almost nothing except sprinting faster to your own death, because (in this case), you could only swing your weapon half as often as an opponent with the stamina gear equipped.

I also don't think stats in this game have too much of anything to do with adjusting a character to a playstyle. The playstyle is very much tied to the characters themselves, and you being comfortable with a character depends on your own preexisting playstyle. A Warden does not play like a Berserker, and no amount of stat adjustment is going to make them. So while you can be pretty aggressive with, say, the Conqueror, if you prefer being a damage dealer and revel in DPS, then you'd probably be more comfortable with one of the Assassins (that we have gameplay of).


The advantage the stats give you are noticeable but not overpowering. I wasn't unstoppable with my increased stats, I still died, but i knew how to use them to my advantage which is the whole point of them being there.

You being a better fighter than your opponent should be all the advantage you need.

Dez_troi_aR
12-07-2016, 02:36 PM
Whenever i read a good article about ForHonor which goes beyond explaining the what/who/when/how and was written by an journalist who did some serious alpha testing, the stat system gets a lot of critic.
(Example here: http://www.gamepro.de/artikel/for-honor-fazit-zur-alpha-viel-spielspass-doch-ein-fragezeichen-bleibt,3302796.html the article is written in german: Very short summary: The game is great and innovative but the loot system has some very alarming aspects and could ruin all the games strengths)

We have discussed this for a while and i am increasingly shure that this might be the greatest danger to the games success.
MAYBE the gear was just not properly finetuned during the alpha. Maybe it will turn out fine and there will be a cool feature making the game more complex and rewarding.
But at the moment it looks more like they can't make it properly work but insist on having it in the game because it is a way to get Money out of it.
And undermine the games core-principle in the process...

It will need some very convincing positive experiences during the Beta to hush my fears.

whovie
12-08-2016, 11:42 PM
You can only break down pieces to improve other pieces already in your possession, not change (for example) a Revenge chest piece into a Defense chest piece. What happens if you never get a Defense chest piece one renown, so you're either stuck with with the chest piece from the previous renown (which, as you point out, has a max level, so it couldn't compete with the others), or you sacrifice defense altogether to put it toward a piece of blue gear that isn't defense-centric. Either puts you at a disadvantage. Same for attack, should you never happen to loot a piece of gear.

Interestingly, one of the tests I never got a Defense chest piece for one of my characters, and was dying more often than the other tests because of it, because I had a smaller margin for error than I otherwise would have if those stats specifically (attack, defense, stamina) didn't exist.


That affects later adoption rates. If people who pick the game up a month or two months after launch feel like they are being thrown into an environment where they are already at a disadvantage (and they would be, and not just on a skill level), they are more likely to quit playing because they feel like they can't compete effectively and can't catch up. It happens every single cycle with CoD and Battlefield. One, three, six months out, and the playerbase for those games has either stagnated or decreased because people who picked the game up day one have more tools at their disposal---more perks, more weapons, better weapons, etc. as well as the experience, map knowledge, etc.

I'd rather have an environment where players can pick the game up a year from now and won't immediately feel intimidated by people with both experience and physical augmentations. Veteran player skill should speak for itself.

There's absolutely no evidence that's the case. There's an entire rainbow of colours they can go through for increasing levels of stat boosting.



Like I said, you had a limited time to play the game and the more you play the more chances at gear you will get. To say you didn't get a certain piece of gear and that caused you to die more is kind of a narrow way to look at it. Maybe people were getting more accustomed to the game and you weren't varying your fights enough to account for the different level of understanding people were achieving with the game.

All you're really talking about is lowering the skill gap which is exactly what those games have been doing since they became popular. At what point do you take the training wheels off and make people work and compete to do better instead of just limiting everybody else so they don't feel bad about how they play? This gear system allows more depth and more customization and gives people a reason to keep playing so they do get better gear and I think you're kind of wrong about gear stats don't affect play style. Sure each character has their own play style to a degree. But ultimately it comes down to how the player uses that play style and that's what seperates one warden from another and that is where the gear comes in. It allows you to use your character in ways that is different from the standard and lets each fight be similar but not the same. Whether its an aggressive conqueror or a defensive berserker, that type of change the gear gives your is what will make this game even more unique. Again like I said earlier skill or level based matchmaking would largely take care of this problem.

My claim is based off my first hand experience, which is some of the best evidence you can get. How I came to this conclusion is after I hit renown I received a blue piece of gear that I then boosted till I maxed it. This got me almost if not a little more than half the bar available for max stamina which I accomplished just before renown 2. If my memory serves me correctly, It was awhile ago. But that is only after a lot of playing and gear breaking down. So if I can get a Blue that high after that much work I think its fair to access that with purple and if it exist orange. That maxing out a given stat is achievable by renown 4 or 5. Also take into account that I put a ton of time into this alpha since i was waiting for it since E3 2015.

Now if you want to present an argument that the speed at which you level up gear or the bonus you get for leveling up gear needs to be lowered then you would have more weight to your claim. But this was the alpha and this option was available, I imagine, to test what i just stated. But like you said you didn't reach renown meaning your experience with gear stat system wasn't the same as mine and from what i've read in this thread hardly anybody did. Which is why it worries me to see so many people bantering about how this system will break the competitive aspect of the game. I haven't seen what the cap on renown is so if it is 5 then having the stats max out around there makes sense. If the cap is 10, then yeah it probably needs nerfed a bit to make it more challenging and rewarding for grinding to get gear.

MisterWillow
12-09-2016, 03:28 AM
Like I said, you had a limited time to play the game and the more you play the more chances at gear you will get. To say you didn't get a certain piece of gear and that caused you to die more is kind of a narrow way to look at it. Maybe people were getting more accustomed to the game and you weren't varying your fights enough to account for the different level of understanding people were achieving with the game.

I played in every test minus the one in 2015 (which, from what I've heard, didn't have gear stats in it to worry about).

In one of those tests I didn't get Defense gear and I died more often in that test than the others. It was easy to notice that it was because people were doing more damage than otherwise, meaning I had a lower margin for error. If everyone were on a level playing field (as in, characters had varying base power stats---attack, defense, and stamina---that never moved), that issue would never arise.


All you're really talking about is lowering the skill gap which is exactly what those games have been doing since they became popular.

I'm talking about making skill be the determining factor in any given fight, with the understanding that this isn't like a traditional fighting game with a hundred combos to memorise or juggling mechanics. Everyone has the same basic move set, with a few little tricks unique to them to differentiate them from the others, and what should matter is who utilises the tools at their disposal (meaning their move set) most effectively, not whether one person has a weapon that can do twice the damage of their opponent.


At what point do you take the training wheels off and make people work and compete to do better instead of just limiting everybody else so they don't feel bad about how they play?

At what point do you make people work and compete to learn the mechanical nuances of the game's fighting system instead of just giving them more power so they can overpower someone who might be more skilled?


This gear system allows more depth and more customization and gives people a reason to keep playing so they do get better gear

In certain respects, sure. Do you want Debuff Resistance so when an assassin activates Fear Itself, you can counteract its affects, or Throw Distance, so you can push someone further from you (possibly into hazards) to more effectively control space? Do you want Sprint Speed so you can more quickly reach a zone to contest it, or Revive Speed, so you can keep your team alive?

Attack, defense, and stamina stats being altered does nothing but reward people being aggressive. It does very little to encourage smart fighting.


and I think you're kind of wrong about gear stats don't affect play style. Sure each character has their own play style to a degree. But ultimately it comes down to how the player uses that play style and that's what seperates one warden from another and that is where the gear comes in. It allows you to use your character in ways that is different from the standard and lets each fight be similar but not the same. Whether its an aggressive conqueror or a defensive berserker, that type of change the gear gives your is what will make this game even more unique.

What separates one Warden from another is how they utilise their skill set. It has nothing to do with how much damage one's sword does over another or how much more stamina one has than another


Again like I said earlier skill or level based matchmaking would largely take care of this problem.

Maybe. Until you reach that Renown level where you don't get the piece of gear that you really need because of RNG.


My claim is based off my first hand experience, which is some of the best evidence you can get.

So is mine.


How I came to this conclusion is after I hit renown I received a blue piece of gear that I then boosted till I maxed it. This got me almost if not a little more than half the bar available for max stamina which I accomplished just before renown 2. If my memory serves me correctly, It was awhile ago. But that is only after a lot of playing and gear breaking down. So if I can get a Blue that high after that much work I think its fair to access that with purple and if it exist orange. That maxing out a given stat is achievable by renown 4 or 5. Also take into account that I put a ton of time into this alpha since i was waiting for it since E3 2015.

That's speculation.

I came to my conclusion because if I did get the gear piece I wanted, I could destroy people even within my own renown level. Even if it is divided and mitigated, the problem would still exist.


Now if you want to present an argument that the speed at which you level up gear or the bonus you get for leveling up gear needs to be lowered then you would have more weight to your claim. But this was the alpha and this option was available, I imagine, to test what i just stated. But like you said you didn't reach renown meaning your experience with gear stat system wasn't the same as mine and from what i've read in this thread hardly anybody did. Which is why it worries me to see so many people bantering about how this system will break the competitive aspect of the game. I haven't seen what the cap on renown is so if it is 5 then having the stats max out around there makes sense. If the cap is 10, then yeah it probably needs nerfed a bit to make it more challenging and rewarding for grinding to get gear.

I didn't reach renown in the past test, specifically, but I did in others, and the problem gets worse the higher up in levels you go. There were a few people in our discord (https://discord.gg/vzqMAyf) that got purple gear, and they'll tell you how broken it was.

Dez_troi_aR
12-09-2016, 01:18 PM
Sorry doublepost.

P.P.S. My point is not that there can't be motivation in visual-gear, i think there is, but that the status-boost itself is only interesting as long as it makes an actual difference.

Dez_troi_aR
12-09-2016, 01:40 PM
If we want to find common ground, it might be helpful to remember the personal experiences we had with gear farming in various games.

My point here is, that gear(not visual) will only feel rewarding and satisfying if you can actually feel a serious difference (which would be problematic in FH)
I am sure you all know that rewarding moment when you finally get that famous piece of equipment you've been looking for in a game like WoW or Diablo and suddenly you are two times as strong, feel empowered etc.

You might have also experienced that there is much less satisfaction in getting "generic Breastplate of the Dragon XY No. 112353". It is a little different from what your character might be wearing but not necessarily better nor worse. You read through the stats for some time and maybe you can make a decision based on them. But after finding 100 of these, each of them a little different then the last, you decide that the effective amount of power you gain by figuring out which one serves you a teeny-tiny bit better is so small that it is close to nonexistent and not even worth the brainpower you would have to invest. So you stick with what you think looks better. And you are happy with that until you find the Super-sword mentioned above.

If you agree with that, think about what that means for For Honor:
If the growth of power via grear is very small and can be regarded as "fine tuning" or "customization" of a character, as they have announced it to be (and which it clearly isn't as we have seen in the beta) --> You wouldn't really care <---- . If the differences would be marginal, most players would go for visual appeal in that case and thats fine.

If you want to get motivation out of gear, you have to make it matter (Think about random dragonscale breastplate no.11123342, do you go out and farm for that? No, you dont). And if it matters, it is already too strong for a game that wants to be competitive. Sad thing is that Ubi is unlikly to resist the temptation of wanting to make gear as important as possible, because the steel system seems to be a good way to get more money out of the gamers.

P.S. if you are looking for customisation you should be the last person who wants gear to make a difference. The only option for you will be to farm towards that OP sword to be able to compete with others who found it

whovie
12-10-2016, 07:17 AM
In one of those tests I didn't get Defense gear and I died more often in that test than the others. It was easy to notice that it was because people were doing more damage than otherwise, meaning I had a lower margin for error. If everyone were on a level playing field (as in, characters had varying base power stats---attack, defense, and stamina---that never moved), that issue would never arise.

Sounds like you're blaming your gear instead of looking at the match up and your approach to it. I imagine other people played the alphas with you. Is it out of the realm of possibility that they got better with or at a faster rate than you and that is why you were less successful? I mean did you see the actual percentage each strike did to your health and compare it to your prior play time and the percentage those strikes took out of your health? Or are you just saying it felt like they were doing more damage?


I'm talking about making skill be the determining factor in any given fight, with the understanding that this isn't like a traditional fighting game with a hundred combos to memorise or juggling mechanics. Everyone has the same basic move set, with a few little tricks unique to them to differentiate them from the others, and what should matter is who utilises the tools at their disposal (meaning their move set) most effectively, not whether one person has a weapon that can do twice the damage of their opponent.

What separates one Warden from another is how they utilise their skill set. It has nothing to do with how much damage one's sword does over another or how much more stamina one has than another.

I moved these closer to see if you might catch where you contradict yourself, if you can't we've reached the root of this problem. Based on your argument it seems like the warden should be the only character in this game since its the most balanced of them all. That would put every player on an equal field and really show how skillful a player is.


At what point do you make people work and compete to learn the mechanical nuances of the game's fighting system instead of just giving them more power so they can overpower someone who might be more skilled?

I guess they would do that as they play the game, if they're truly skillful and we follow your prior statement of it not mattering if a weapon does more damage but how a character utilizes their skill set then a truly skillful player will defeat his opponent regardless of his gear. I haven't seen you post a single thing about how to adjust the stats of gear to make it more balanced just constant claims its going to ruin the skill level of play. Making the gear drop only visual is boring and a complete waste. Should the impact of stat modifications out way a players skill? Of course not, but just going on and on about that without offering any real input on how to adjust the level of influence of the stats and just saying its bad doesn't help the devs at all. It was in the alphas so we could work with it and so we could inform them on how it could be better. Just repeating that its bad isn't input.


That's speculation. There were a few people in our discord (https://discord.gg/vzqMAyf).
Almost everything on that discord is speculation. The hall of heroes is on the same level as those live wire guys. Just people with the same information we all have discussing it to the point were they think they have become experts on the game. When really they only explored every what if scenario in this game. Doesn't make them an expert on for honor it makes them an expert on speculation. So until the beta comes out or someone from Ubisoft comes and discusses this issue in detail then there is no reason to have this conversation since the amount of people who have played the game and monitor these forums is relatively small. This whole argument is just a few people talking about something that can't be corroborated by a wide and diverse audience. I'm going to speculate more and bet that the gear stats and contributions will be different in the beta than they were in the alpha and with more people playing we might be able to work something out with the level of influence those stats have on the game.

CaptainPwnet
12-10-2016, 07:39 AM
Regardless of whether the stats on gear make a large difference or not matters very little for the health of the game. If there is even a hint that better gear makes a difference in how strong you are, then new players may see that and immediately be turned off since they came into the game 3 months late and won't want to spend the time to grind the gear while the top lvl players are getting stronger yet(depending on when th egear caps out I guess). Those players will see that there is a difference and may not even realize or care that it's a small or large difference and blame the fact they aren't doing well on their lack of gear compared to other players and leave.

TLDR; If Ubi doesn't want a ded game scenario a few months after release they better make sure stats have a very minimal, or IMO 0, effect on your overall strength.

Also to those saying matchmaking could be based on gear lvl. Even in this case what happens if you and your friends have main characters and one of you wants to switch it up and try something new? Is he not allowed to play with his friends playing higher lvled/geared classes, or is he forced to play with a noticable handicap just because he wants to play a new character with his friends? Gear should be primarily cosmetic only, other than that I think it'd be ok to have your stats customizable in a minor way like how one sword does higher attack damage at the cost of some other stat. But gear should not give an overall increase in power as you progress.

MisterWillow
12-11-2016, 02:16 AM
Sounds like you're blaming your gear instead of looking at the match up and your approach to it. I imagine other people played the alphas with you. Is it out of the realm of possibility that they got better with or at a faster rate than you and that is why you were less successful? I mean did you see the actual percentage each strike did to your health and compare it to your prior play time and the percentage those strikes took out of your health? Or are you just saying it felt like they were doing more damage?

No, I mean I can count the number of hits it took to kill someone with gear and without gear, and if I didn't have gear and they did, it was half the hits at least (depending on the character/exact gear level).

If a fighting game implemented that, it would imbalance the game to the point of breaking. Tekken Revolution did this and it failed because of it (my Kazuya, for example, could kill people in 2 hits).


I moved these closer to see if you might catch where you contradict yourself, if you can't we've reached the root of this problem. Based on your argument it seems like the warden should be the only character in this game since its the most balanced of them all. That would put every player on an equal field and really show how skillful a player is.

But the Warden's skill set doesn't appeal to everyone. Some people do better with Berserker's skill set, or the Conqueror's skill set. None of that has anything to do with the gear.


I guess they would do that as they play the game, if they're truly skillful and we follow your prior statement of it not mattering if a weapon does more damage but how a character utilizes their skill set then a truly skillful player will defeat his opponent regardless of his gear.

Maybe, but the person without gear is put at a massive disadvantage because their opponent is able to deal more damage to them, can take more hits than them, and can swing more times than them. It's turning a player into a boss character.


I haven't seen you post a single thing about how to adjust the stats of gear to make it more balanced just constant claims its going to ruin the skill level of play. Making the gear drop only visual is boring and a complete waste.

I'm advocating for the removal of Attack, Defense, and Stamina stats. That's it. The other stats are fine and actually do offer means of customising how you help your team in Dominion.


Should the impact of stat modifications out way a players skill? Of course not, but just going on and on about that without offering any real input on how to adjust the level of influence of the stats and just saying its bad doesn't help the devs at all. It was in the alphas so we could work with it and so we could inform them on how it could be better. Just repeating that its bad isn't input.

Of course it, because I'm explaining WHY it's bad. It imbalances the game; it puts more emphasis on the quality of gear over player skill; people who are naturally skilled at the game become demi-gods (a problem that will only be compounded the longer the game is out). That's feedback.

You want input on how to adjust them? Make them do no more than 5 percent of you base stat when maxed out. That sort of augmentation might put one player at a disadvantage, but not to the degree of what I experienced in the alpha (s).


Almost everything on that discord is speculation. The hall of heroes is on the same level as those live wire guys. Just people with the same information we all have discussing it to the point were they think they have become experts on the game. When really they only explored every what if scenario in this game. Doesn't make them an expert on for honor it makes them an expert on speculation. So until the beta comes out or someone from Ubisoft comes and discusses this issue in detail then there is no reason to have this conversation since the amount of people who have played the game and monitor these forums is relatively small. This whole argument is just a few people talking about something that can't be corroborated by a wide and diverse audience.

That makes me think you never even talked to one of the mods. We have more experience with the game than anyone outside the dev team.

All of us have been in multiple tests, and while we were in them, we tested things like this as extensively as we could---meaning we were only limited by the time the alpha lasted (and DC issues). We could already see the cracks.

There is very little speculation in there when it comes to the alpha build from us.


Also to those saying matchmaking could be based on gear lvl. Even in this case what happens if you and your friends have main characters and one of you wants to switch it up and try something new? Is he not allowed to play with his friends playing higher lvled/geared classes, or is he forced to play with a noticable handicap just because he wants to play a new character with his friends?

This is also a valid point, and not only the point of view of having to build a separate character up.

If a group of friends play together, and some lag behind a bit because of work, school, life issues, or whatever, you risk potentially not being able to play together after a while, despite all being of comparable skill.

That shouldn't happen.

CaptainPwnet
12-11-2016, 02:40 AM
I think people need to realize this is more of an arena fighting game than anything. If you want gear progression there is any number of mmo's out there with your name on it. A game like this should have balance in mind above everything else except game breaking bugs. Class variety already adds a degree of issues with balance which is fine the same way it's fine in fighting games for the sake of variety in playable characters and playstyles. But if you add progressively increasing power from gear it's just a whole new level pointless imbalance. If you were to add anything like that in a competitive atmosphere like any of the FPS or Fighting games out there you would watch that competitive scene die pretty quickly(although not really a competitive game just look at The Division, like a shooter game with rpg gear and lvls? Can see how that worked out). That's exactly why those games don't have something like that otherwise I'm sure the companies behind the games would love to monetize the **** out of it. Like cash for random loot boxes of gear. But they don't cause they know better than to risk killing their game with something like gear for power.

I really don't understand why you would want an advantage due to gear in a game like this either. Like seriously, what is the fun of wrecking some new players ****, not because you are better then him, but because he can't even touch you stat wise. Would be so boring and trivialize the whole point of getting better at the game.

MathiasCB
12-12-2016, 02:32 AM
Almost everything on that discord is speculation. The hall of heroes is on the same level as those live wire guys. Just people with the same information we all have discussing it to the point were they think they have become experts on the game. When really they only explored every what if scenario in this game. Doesn't make them an expert on for honor it makes them an expert on speculation. So until the beta comes out or someone from Ubisoft comes and discusses this issue in detail then there is no reason to have this conversation since the amount of people who have played the game and monitor these forums is relatively small. This whole argument is just a few people talking about something that can't be corroborated by a wide and diverse audience. I'm going to speculate more and bet that the gear stats and contributions will be different in the beta than they were in the alpha and with more people playing we might be able to work something out with the level of influence those stats have on the game.


I've been lurking around for the most part but I would just like to add some weight to what Willow is trying to say, atleast what I would like to believe that he's trying to put out on the table. So, to start off i would just like to put some weight onto how much experience some of us in HoH has. If we go specifically with the mods, almost all of us has been sticking around the forums, reddit and on and on since the reveal of the game. Five of us played durig the very first test they had and have continually participated in tests, all while also staying pretty active in the forums and whatnot. I understand what you're trying to say when you're saying most of the things might be speculations, yea, to some extent. But I would also like to remind you that we've got oh so many hours of playing the game, múch more than most. We've never gone as far as to see ourselves as experts on the game, however, if I were to compare our knowledge about the game I wouldn't feel it being all that wrong thinking of some of us as 'experts' comparing to the average player.

Onto the issue that Willow was trying to relay when it came to how strong gear got in the higher levels. He referred to other people in the discord which had more knowledge about being at a higher renown level and dealing with Purple gear. I'd love to add some weight on it by letting you know how ridiculous it became. Ever since the berserker was made playable in the tests, I've been on that character ever since. Every hour I played, every test, berserker all the way. During one of the tests reached a very high renown level and had a full Purple set which included an axe focused towards attack damage and about fully upgraded. Things got way out of hand, example being when i fought Orochis, there was not a single Orochi which would take more than one overhead Heavy and one light attack, everyone would die after that. In some cases I slapped away full Health bars on some Orochis with just ONE overhead heavy. That's nothing but BS. There are videos on Youtube of who I Believe would be 'Draxel' who does one storm rush combo and annihilates his enemy with that one combo. Gear stats as it has been up till now is a bad bad bad bad idea.

--

So, to add a Little bit more to the topic. With the gear stats we've seens o far they would make the competetive scene harder, ranked modes would be dominated by the people with the highest gear and the ones with gear would be able to climb that ranked ladder with barely anyone being able to stop them. Progression is nice and I do enjoy it a lot, but gear stats has been a mess, especially playing on the higher levels.

Dez_troi_aR
12-12-2016, 11:54 AM
"If you want gear progression there is any number of mmo's out there with your name on it."
If you want no gear progression, there is any number of shooters out there with your name on it.
Don't be foolish, this argument was brought forth from a skill-based-competitive point of view and turning it around only demonstrates that you do not even think about the point that he is making.
Would you tell a street fighter player to play shooters now because you want the next SF to gear progression?



People who are against performance customization in skill-based games are just too lazy, or incapable, to use their brains for fixing their own builds. They want them handed to them perfectly and so they come with the excuse of all those poor beginners who will not be able to beat max lvl players during their first 2 weeks of playing, against which they won't get matched up anyway.

"I really don't understand why you would want an advantage due to gear in a game like this either. Like seriously, what is the fun of wrecking some new players ****, not because you are better then him, but because he can't even touch you stat wise. Would be so boring and trivialize the whole point of getting better at the game."

You still don't get that it's not about max lvl players bashing beginners, whom they won't even meet due to matchmaking. It's about a feeling of progression in the equipment-department ON TOP of the progression in the skill/experience department, coupled with the motivation to look forward to enhance certain stats in the future and the additional build options it might add.

You seem to completly ignore everything we know about the stats system at this point, no matter how many starplayers tell you (see post above). See, i liked the idea of getting new shiny sword, too. But after the alpha i changed my mind based on the facts.
I have a question: Have you ever played a game that was not constantly throwing candies your way but was focused on player progression? You seem to be convinced that a game is not worth playing if you do not get permanent rewards.

CaptainPwnet
12-13-2016, 06:31 AM
"If you want gear progression there is any number of mmo's out there with your name on it."
If you want no gear progression, there is any number of shooters out there with your name on it.

People who are against performance customization in skill-based games are just too lazy, or incapable, to use their brains for fixing their own builds. They want them handed to them perfectly and so they come with the excuse of all those poor beginners who will not be able to beat max lvl players during their first 2 weeks of playing, against which they won't get matched up anyway.

"I really don't understand why you would want an advantage due to gear in a game like this either. Like seriously, what is the fun of wrecking some new players ****, not because you are better then him, but because he can't even touch you stat wise. Would be so boring and trivialize the whole point of getting better at the game."

You still don't get that it's not about max lvl players bashing beginners, whom they won't even meet due to matchmaking. It's about a feeling of progression in the equipment-department ON TOP of the progression in the skill/experience department, coupled with the motivation to look forward to enhance certain stats in the future and the additional build options it might add.

You seem to have also missed th epoint I made earlier so I'll repost for you. "Also to those saying matchmaking could be based on gear lvl. Even in this case what happens if you and your friends have main characters and one of you wants to switch it up and try something new? Is he not allowed to play with his friends playing higher lvled/geared classes, or is he forced to play with a noticable handicap just because he wants to play a new character with his friends?"

Also to add to that if you and your friends all have different schedules and thus varying degrees of time to play then you will never be on the same level either again leading back to the problem I outlined above. Not to mention I also said it would be just fine to have a degree of customization with the stats as they are. All the low lvl gear has the option to have Higher stat A for lower stat B, or Higher stat B for lower stat C and so forth allowing for minor customization of your build. But what we don't need is this taken into the extreme for no reason.

I would also like to point out that your hopes for customization with higher lvl gear is also most likely dead from the start anyways. If you are at a high lvl and you are fighting others with maxed out attack do you really think you have any other option with your gear other than to max defense? Now that same player also has maxed out defense. Think you're gonna keep up with him if you have anything other than maxed out attack?

Not to mention if matchmaking was based purely on gear lvl or lvl in general and you only ever fight people at your same lvl. Then the whole idea of more powerful gear is 100% pointless because you are all the same level anyways. All you have done is segregated the playerbase and possibly disallowed friends to group together based on how much time each player has put in.

Kovuh
12-13-2016, 10:49 AM
In all honesty the gear doesn't make all that much of a difference, but I like it just the way it is. it gives more options to play each character a different way. and it doesn't even take long to get the stats up alpha one I had maxed out offensive gear in like a day maybe two and this was after carelessly wasting all the iron I had started with if your having difficulty with getting stats up then you should look at how your managing your money and loot.

Dez_troi_aR
12-13-2016, 11:55 AM
In all honesty the gear doesn't make all that much of a difference, but I like it just the way it is. it gives more options to play each character a different way. and it doesn't even take long to get the stats up alpha one I had maxed out offensive gear in like a day maybe two and this was after carelessly wasting all the iron I had started with if your having difficulty with getting stats up then you should look at how your managing your money and loot.

That contradicts everything that the hall of heroes guys say : (

Are you sure your attack was maxed ? How am i supposed to make sense of this? Mathias statement totally contradics yours:


.
Had a full Purple set which included an axe focused towards attack damage and about fully upgraded. Things got way out of hand, example being when i fought Orochis, there was not a single Orochi which would take more than one overhead Heavy and one light attack, everyone would die after that. In some cases I slapped away full Health bars on some Orochis with just ONE overhead heavy. That's nothing but BS. There are videos on Youtube of who I Believe would be 'Draxel' who does one storm rush combo and annihilates his enemy with that one combo. Gear stats as it has been up till now is a bad bad bad bad idea.

Is it possible that gear has different caps for status and a low level axe is maxed out at a lower damage than purple gear?

MathiasCB
12-13-2016, 02:45 PM
That contradicts everything that the hall of heroes guys say : (

Are you sure your attack was maxed ? How am i supposed to make sense of this? Mathias statement totally contradics yours:



To add some weight to this, I'll throw in a video which involves an attack blade which isn't even on the heroic level.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upN4drFrGEQ

Dez_troi_aR
12-13-2016, 03:33 PM
I watched the same video. There are even more extreme examples on his channel where he rips out about a quarter of a health-bar with a light attack.

bertrammm
12-15-2016, 02:06 PM
P

Possible solutions:
1. In competitive play stats of items are null but aesthetically they are the same.
2. In stead of giving stat to the items, allow the players to allocate what their stats go into. Place a maximum number of points. Have one point for each level unlocked by a player (overall not just on a specific champion) and have the maximum level at reasonably ascertainable experience requirement. These points can go into any variety of attributes deemed necessary for any champion of battle.

.

nope. see here is the thing. you get enough scrap metal by just playing and doing your daily bounties. playing pve and pvp will get you more loot. by that, even if you only play 10 matches a day or such, youll be having levek 3-4 gear very quickly given that you get a **** ton of lower levek gear, which you can use to upgrade other gear.
during every play test up now i got most of my gear pieces to about level 7-9 and played about 14 hours total. upon that, i fought against peopel with better gear, and still was able to win.

the competativeness is not harmed in any way. this is a game mostly about skill. and if you do the right dogde, do the right block and jump attack you can easily win.

however i am sure that there will be people complaining an whining again because they will make that level of gear system responisble for their inability to play, and it will give a ****storm because of frustration, but eh. if i as a level 11 guy can easily win against a freaking level 19 samurai then you really cant blame his better gear :D you know what i am saying ?

Dez_troi_aR
12-18-2016, 05:05 AM
Well i fought someone yesterday with 36 item power while i had only 24 and i won all the duel... Gear wont make you win but your skill
Yes, because it was changed. And i am very happy about it ! But my comment was from before we knew that.

Grxoo
12-18-2016, 04:18 PM
Yes, because it was changed. And i am very happy about it ! But my comment was from before we knew that.

Wait, how do we know this? Where is the announcement?

So you're saying upgrading and customizing weapons doesn't matter now im duel/brawl? I'm relieved.

Dez_troi_aR
12-19-2016, 10:21 PM
Wait, how do we know this? Where is the announcement?

So you're saying upgrading and customizing weapons doesn't matter now im duel/brawl? I'm relieved.

I did not say they will not matter in duel/brawl. I was refering to the hall of heroes guys' information that the boni you can get out of gear are a lot smaller than they used to be. Also you cant max out all the stats but have to accept a trade-off.

GewaltSam
12-20-2016, 04:53 AM
The gear doesn't seem to influence your stats in an all-too-extreme way, it's more subtle I think.

Has anyone played League of Legend (duh)? If they get it right, the gear should work kinda like the runes in LoL. It will give your hero a chance to set a specific focus while not making him all too powerful, because it's only a few percentage points in one direction or the other, and skill is still much more important. Of course would the highest gear score have a noticeable advantage against the lowest, but that would be the extremes, after all.

XxKILLASEEDxX
01-23-2017, 12:20 AM
Some of the best points made over the past 8 pages of post regarding this matter


Problem:
From what is known about the game it will not be new player friendly in competitive play. The loot you can receive varies by level and luck of the champion and even then the loot can offer different attributes.


Your scepticism is appropriate, there have been a lot of alpha players worrying about stats making too much of a difference. There will be wining about unfair items etc but i trust they can find a system that gives us the possibility to work towards rewards without breaking anything !


It wouldn't be exciting anyhow to play in Multiplayer longer, than a few hours in total, if I didn't evolve in any single aspect, despite of my own skill. I am not for huge gaps, but I want to see the result of my work at least noticably


Name tags, hats, emblems, and skins don't increase the damage Siegfried in Soul Calibur, doesn't increase the speed of Law in Tekken, doesn't increase the defense of Shinnok in Mortal Kombat. Customisation can exist independent of stats, and in the case of For Honor I think it would be better if they did.


In my opinion, it's a lazy way of keeping players engaged with a game. Rather than craft compelling mechanics, they promise people a long list of things to unlock in hopes they want all of those things.


I'd rather not depend on luck to get a piece of gear that might improve my character in a way that's beneficial. Remember, all gear drops are random.


Ubisoft has never done any successfull competitive / Esport game and anything regarding balance the game worries me. This valid point worries me more than all others btw.


You being a better fighter than your opponent should be all the advantage you need.


If a group of friends play together, and some lag behind a bit because of work, school, life issues, or whatever, you risk potentially not being able to play together after a while, despite all being of comparable skill. That shouldn't happen.


To add some weight to this, I'll throw in a video which involves an attack blade which isn't even on the heroic level.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upN4drFrGEQ

I just want to lend some constructive criticism here. I've already decided I'm gonna buy the game, mostly because it resembles the multiplayer style game I've always dreamed of making if I had the team and resources to do so. So to that point here are a few things I would do if player progression was a "must have" within the development team. "BTW just my ideas, nothing to get hostile about guys"

1. Make gear droppable, similar to Battlefield, this way your rewarded if you kill a higher level player. So if u decide to pickup and equip there gear you receive those added bonuses until you are killed.
2. Give 2-3x as much steel/loot at end of match for killing higher level players, effectively making them a target for farm if your a newer player "just throw all objectives out the window and triple team these guys for farm, punks shouldn't have the OP gear to begin with in my opinion LOL"
3. Make more combos become unlocked as you gain renown. This would reward those who want to put in 100+ hours with a larger variety of moves/animations as they level. I wouldn't make the moves more powerful at the core, just add more swings to the combo which in turn would take more stamina to execute making the use of them a double edged sword.

In conclusion I detest the idea of player progression in a fighting game, it immediately destroys any Esport potential in my opinion, which ultimately equals monetary rewards for those of us who want to put in the time it takes to become pros at the game and be paid for it. But if Ubisoft must add this type of crap "stat/weapon player progression" as a feature then at least consider the points above from your concerned consumer base.

Demoraliz3
01-23-2017, 01:50 PM
i dont care so much for the stats , its the fact that you can change colors that really frustrate me , especially when characters are covered in blood it can be very confusing to find an ally/enemy when in combat with multiple poeple . You start to focus on the healthbar instead of the character model it self ,, simply dont give the option to change colors and problem would be solved . this is medieval combat not superhero game were customization is very important

MusCanus
01-24-2017, 05:54 AM
Another solution could be equipment that has both pluses and minuses. For example, higher damage but lower defense, higher revenge gain, but lower revenge time, and vice versa. With higher level gear having more serious advantages and disadvantages at the same time.

xLeapingLizardx
01-24-2017, 06:13 AM
Another solution could be equipment that has both pluses and minuses. For example, higher damage but lower defense, higher revenge gain, but lower revenge time, and vice versa. With higher level gear having more serious advantages and disadvantages at the same time.

Yeah, that's exactly what the equipment does. You can even see that in the new "battle tips" thing. The guy starts upgrading his piece of equipment and one stat was going up while another kept going down.

MusCanus
01-24-2017, 06:54 AM
Yeah, that's exactly what the equipment does. You can even see that in the new "battle tips" thing. The guy starts upgrading his piece of equipment and one stat was going up while another kept going down.

Then that's absolutely cool ) Not plain upgrading but fine-tuning the character.

USAFman88
01-24-2017, 07:52 AM
Peer to peer matchmaking is going to ruin competitive play first and foremost. Then there's the boosts in 4v4 elimination. Imo that kinda reeks of casual.

Dez_troi_aR
01-24-2017, 01:58 PM
Peer to peer matchmaking is going to ruin competitive play first and foremost. Then there's the boosts in 4v4 elimination. Imo that kinda reeks of casual.

P2P is neither the topic nor is there any evidence for their online-architecture beeing flawed. People are concerned because of some technical issues during a techtest. Let us wait for the beta before we judge.

But 4v4 will definatly be for casuals, agree :D

DrExtrem
01-24-2017, 04:59 PM
First:
There is not one game in the world, that is competitive and forgiving to fresh players. At least not, when they play in the same league. Every new player eats dirt - every time. The only way to "cushion the blow", is to introduce leagues, ranging from bronze to "platinum-diamond with oak leaves and eagle wings". This is the only way to have nearly fair matchups.

Second:
If people are playing within their league, equipment is reduced to a supporting role, that marely enhances your style of play. The only possible problem might come up with really good equipment vs. Starter equipment but this can be handled with proper matchmaking, that takes equipment level into account.

We have to wait and see, how the game is received and what game types are fun to watch. 4vs.4 might look "casual" but a 1vs.1 might as well be poor - it purely depends on the people playing.

XxKILLASEEDxX
01-24-2017, 06:21 PM
To those of you all fortunate enough to have been given Beta keys, please post some video results of how the customization works here in this thread. We're anxious to see how they've tuned it up to this point.

cmaxibal
01-29-2017, 01:00 PM
I don't really look at stats I look on how it looks but that will be my downfall. I know some people are skeptic about the customization but it helps better you're character. Skills and how you play will change and be better. Don't think one dimension, don't continue you're way of fighting adapt. I had to, I played maybe 8 hours in 3 days and at first I faught mostly attacking not really guarding, but then I learn patience and strategy then I got better there is still to learn and remember this is just a beta there will be more to come in the full version.

BARBAK.
01-29-2017, 01:20 PM
A better matchmaking could solve the problem, better experience.
a system where player lv & item total value would be close, giving a iron/xp bonus to the team who got lower stats, this should push experienced player to play "naked" to get more reward.

slim147
01-29-2017, 03:00 PM
1v1 and 2v2 don't use the gear stats everyone is stock only 4v4 use it so play 1v1 or 2v2 to get gear but it's fine the way it is I wish they would make 1v1 usee the gear stats or have playlist for both one with an one without the stats

XxKILLASEEDxX
02-05-2017, 03:06 AM
I think a really cool thing that isn't mentioned enough here in the forums is the ability to setup custom games for practice. You can even enable all your customization's and feats to be unlocked at the start of the match, while also choosing the AI difficulty. I practiced 1v2 scenarios with all feats and customization's and put the AI on the most difficult level. Soooooo much fun, please do try it in the open beta next week.