PDA

View Full Version : How about this...



guest-dRAMM25U
03-29-2017, 01:21 PM
So I've complained about environmental kills quite a few times by now, and it surprises me how many players don't give a damn about them. So last night I thought of something that will make everyone happy:

A playlist without environmental kills.

Seems obvious. Leave the ones that hate throwing on clean maps, and the ones that like throwing with bridges and stuff :)

Until then, I'll keep quitting the matches against throwing players, cuz I'd rather not waste my time.

MassiveD.
03-29-2017, 01:29 PM
So I've complained about environmental kills quite a few times by now, and it surprises me how many players don't give a damn about them. So last night I thought of something that will make everyone happy:

A playlist without environmental kills.

Seems obvious. Leave the ones that hate throwing on clean maps, and the ones that like throwing with bridges and stuff :)

Until then, I'll keep quitting the matches against throwing players, cuz I'd rather not waste my time.

Environmental kills are countered by learning to CGB and having situational awareness, I don't see why it's the game that needs to change and not you?

Gray360UK
03-29-2017, 02:20 PM
It shouldn't surprise you how many people don't give a damn about them, they are a big part of the game.
You're doing it wrong if you play a game but don't like half of what's in that game. You can't just refuse to accept half the content of a game.
It would be like playing Battlefield 1 and refusing to accept that you can be killed by Grenades or Tanks.

NeoLocutus
03-29-2017, 03:27 PM
So last night I thought of something that will make everyone happy:

A playlist without environmental kills.


How about no. Man, I really can't understand why environmental kills are so hated!

Be aware of your surroundings and learn to counter guard break. That's all you need to do, really. :-)


Until then, I'll keep quitting the matches against throwing players, cuz I'd rather not waste my time.

This is not an honourable behaviour though. You may despise people who throw you into spikes, fire, down the hill ... but remember that by quitting you're damaging your teammates :-)

That_guy44
03-29-2017, 03:34 PM
I agree with op. I don't mind then in dominion or deathmatch. I can't stand them in duels though. Why the **** are we fighting on a skinny *** bridge. I can't even dodge properly and now I get to watch my player fall off because their heel landed on the edge. I don't like that duels come down to shoving matches and guaranteed guardbreaks equal instant loss.

suboptiml
03-29-2017, 03:37 PM
So I've complained about environmental kills quite a few times by now, and it surprises me how many players don't give a damn about them. So last night I thought of something that will make everyone happy:

A playlist without environmental kills.

Seems obvious. Leave the ones that hate throwing on clean maps, and the ones that like throwing with bridges and stuff :)

Until then, I'll keep quitting the matches against throwing players, cuz I'd rather not waste my time.

I'd far rather have a playlist without feats and gear stats, which badly undermine the entire fighting system in 4v4s. At least environmentals require players to stay aware of their surroundings. The stat buffs and super powers of the feats are mmo/moba type powers that wipe out what could of otherwise been great, tense fights.

Prophit618
03-29-2017, 03:45 PM
While i agree that environmental hazards are part of the game and don't need to be removed, it's a bit oversimplified to say that learning how to CGB will stop you.
Considering that almopst half of the classes (Warden, Warlord, Lawbringer, Warlord, Shugoki) all have unblockable shoves or charges that can be rather tough to consistently dodge on a narrow ledge, and if there's 2 of them around, you have almost no chance when they take turns with it.
Git gud? Sure. Just saying that gitting gud at CGB only covers about half of the dangers.

guest-dRAMM25U
03-30-2017, 02:52 PM
This is not an honourable behaviour though. You may despise people who throw you into spikes, fire, down the hill ... but remember that by quitting you're damaging your teammates :-)

I also noticed those ppl dont give a damn about honor either :) So why would I

To the others who say just counter gb and stay aware of surroundings, sure I do, but then I have to wait 5 minutes for the round to end cause *******es stand on the bridge all day. Seriously, that's all they wanna do. And I'm not going to waste my time on this.

Also, would you have a problem with such playlist existing? You don't want anyone to be free of your bs?

Gray360UK
03-30-2017, 03:06 PM
I also noticed those ppl dont give a damn about honor either :) So why would I

To the others who say just counter gb and stay aware of surroundings, sure I do, but then I have to wait 5 minutes for the round to end cause *******es stand on the bridge all day. Seriously, that's all they wanna do. And I'm not going to waste my time on this.

Also, would you have a problem with such playlist existing? You don't want anyone to be free of your bs?

The thing is, it's not his bs, it was put into the game by Ubisoft on purpose. They are the only ones who could take it out. I think there are at least a dozen ways of killing people using the environment and feats that could be considered dishonourable or cheap. But that is the game they made. You're asking them to see something wrong in what they created, and only because you personally don't like dying that way. It's not very realistic.

I've not seen it be a thing before where players can tell a games company to remove the parts of the game that they don't like. Okay I know people do this, all the time, remove tanks, remove grenades, remove stealth, remove remove remove ...

If you quit whenever someone plays the game the way it was made to be played, you have the problem. You are failing to comprehend some very basic facts about the nature of For Honor: what the game is, what tactics are available, what mechanics it has.

You may as well quit when someone melee kills you in Battlefield 1 because you believe you should only die to bullets fired from guns.

Herbstlicht
03-30-2017, 03:23 PM
Well, it is very situational. Like there are those matches with those bridges where a Shugoki wanders to one end of it and waits for my approach. I didn't like it, but i do not like sitting idle either. So approached and got knocked down. Guess you can't dodge there. Dunno how to stop his charge anyway, would attacking have helped?

Doesn't matter though for me. The good matches are against those people that needn't rely on those kinda kills. The best matches are against those who really want to see you die by their sword. Or Axe. Or the like.

So a playlist without enviromental kills .. nah, would take a little bit of fun and frustration out of the game ;)

Not that i like all maps. Sometimes there are too many hazards. Oftentimes even. I even hope for the first new maps to be less "deadly" and more "battlefieldy". I mean where are my grassy hills, my plains, muddy fields and so on. Not all battles were fought for castles.

So taking those out completely and probably splitting the playerbase? I really don't think that would be the best solution. Implementing less hazardous maps though would be pretty fine i guess. And when people really like those way better .. well, Ubi could in theory always revamp some of the existing maps too.

Gray360UK
03-30-2017, 03:38 PM
Not that i like all maps. Sometimes there are too many hazards. Oftentimes even. I even hope for the first new maps to be less "deadly" and more "battlefieldy". I mean where are my grassy hills, my plains, muddy fields and so on. Not all battles were fought for castles.

So taking those out completely and probably splitting the playerbase? I really don't think that would be the best solution. Implementing less hazardous maps though would be pretty fine i guess. And when people really like those way better .. well, Ubi could in theory always revamp some of the existing maps too.

Very good points :)

It wouldn't surprise me if future maps do this anyway. I am sure they are aware that there is a portion of the playerbase that don't like environmental kills, and perhaps they might just be starting to appreciate that they have overdone it on some maps, like you say. When you think about the maps, the holes in the long bridges that connect A and C for example, they really have added an instant death option every few steps across most maps. Citadel Gate has a good balance. Other maps not so much.

Fighting at C on Overwatch, for example, is just not a thing I will do. Everyone just ends up going down the holes. I will capture C when no one else is there, or lure my opponent away from the holes, but I won't fight in the middle where there's a 75% chance that the outcome will be a quick trip down a long hole.

There are ways around all of the environmental hazards (except for maybe in Duel matches) so I don't think they need to be removed. The maps should just make them a secondary option rather than the primary option, which is sadly the case on some of them.

darksavior1977
03-30-2017, 04:06 PM
I wouldn't be opposed to some duel maps without them to accommodate players like you who dislike them. Also an option in custom games maybe, but I personally like them, and find it breaks up gameplay and is a nice feature that adds to For Honor's uniqueness that other fighting games don't have.

Herbstlicht
03-30-2017, 04:08 PM
Well, at least with more maps in the pool, possibly an option to mark favorite or mark most disliked maps could help too.
Besides, if like 99% of the community would filter out one specific map always - you know there is something wrong with it. So this could help evaluating some quality aspects as well.

Gray360UK
03-30-2017, 04:15 PM
Well, at least with more maps in the pool, possibly an option to mark favorite or mark most disliked maps could help too.
Besides, if like 99% of the community would filter out one specific map always - you know there is something wrong with it. So this could help evaluating some quality aspects as well.

The maps they took out were less environemental kill based as well. High Fort was one of my favourites and most of the fighting took place on very open ground with little environmental threat. Okay there are the two rope bridges over to C with could be a problem, but once over there you could have a clean fight, and the central area of B was one of the biggest. The tower at A was pretty safe too.

CubanCreature
03-30-2017, 04:24 PM
Many of the environmental hazards such as spikes are not present in duel and brawl game modes.

Regardless, when you are fighting on a bridge or close to a ledge, the entire point is to change the dynamics of the fight. You don't fight the same near a ledge or hazard as you would out in the open (or at least, you shouldn't if you don't want to die). Instead of playing out they normally play, both fighters will usually become a great deal more cautious and avoid abilities that are risky and may lead into getting guard broken.

For honor is very strategic for a fighting game. There are a lot of mind games that go into fighting successfully, and things like positioning are very important. This is not Mortal Kombat where you spam the same combos over and over and react to your opponent as fast as you can.

Your approach to fighting should vary depending on who you are fighting, what you are fighting, and of course where you are fighting.

In duels, I constantly run into people that begin the fights away from a ledge right off the bat, and we apologize back and forth every time someone accidentally falls off. I just recently started saying at the start of duels that we should both just agree to go for ledge kills when we can, and just assume the other player will too.

I find the fights to be much more tense that way, and fun.

Gray360UK
03-30-2017, 04:27 PM
Many of the environmental hazards such as spikes are not present in duel and brawl game modes.

Regardless, when you are fighting on a bridge or close to a ledge, the entire point is to change the dynamics of the fight. You don't fight the same near a ledge or hazard as you would out in the open (or at least, you shouldn't if you don't want to die). Instead of playing out they normally play, both fighters will usually become a great deal more cautious and avoid abilities that are risky and may lead into getting guard broken.

For honor is very strategic for a fighting game. There are a lot of mind games that go into fighting successfully, and things like positioning are very important. This is not Mortal Kombat where you spam the same combos over and over and react to your opponent as fast as you can.

Your approach to fighting should vary depending on who you are fighting, what you are fighting, and of course where you are fighting.

In duels, I constantly run into people that begin the fights away from a ledge right off the bat, and we apologize back and forth every time someone accidentally falls off. I just recently started saying at the start of duels that we should both just agree to go for ledge kills when we can, and just assume the other player will too.

I find the fights to be much more tense that way, and fun.

Exactly, this is why I would never agree that they need to be removed completely, they are an integral part of the gameplay and add another layer to the combat that is important. You have to think about so much more than just what buttons you are going to press, and that is a good thing.

AzureSky.
03-30-2017, 05:50 PM
In some maps in 1vs1 mode the ammount of enviromental kills is excesive..... (the bridge map and the samurai tower one) in other modes idk, in 2vs2 i just run to the part of no cliffs and thats all.

Delectable_Sin
03-30-2017, 07:18 PM
Environmental kills are hated because they cater specifically to character like the Shugoki and Conqueror. Learning to GB counter isn't the issue when you're fighting against multiple opponents and one ganks you and charges you off of a cliff without GB'ing you at all.

It requires no skill at all and caters specifically to certain characters. Most of the roster doesn't even have a way to get an environmental kill without GB, while a handful of other characters get to run around spamming charges to get free kills on people they aren't even fighting.

The reason half of the people that play this game like environmental kills is because it allows low skill players to still get kills, without having to really engage in combat. That's actually the very reason the environmental kills were created in the first place -- to appeal to the causal players who aren't good at reflexive game play. Which is also why they're here to stay.

CubanCreature
03-30-2017, 07:57 PM
Environmental kills are hated because they cater specifically to character like the Shugoki and Conqueror. Learning to GB counter isn't the issue when you're fighting against multiple opponents and one ganks you and charges you off of a cliff without GB'ing you at all.

It requires no skill at all and caters specifically to certain characters. Most of the roster doesn't even have a way to get an environmental kill without GB, while a handful of other characters get to run around spamming charges to get free kills on people they aren't even fighting.

The reason half of the people that play this game like environmental kills is because it allows low skill players to still get kills, without having to really engage in combat. That's actually the very reason the environmental kills were created in the first place -- to appeal to the causal players who aren't good at reflexive game play. Which is also why they're here to stay.

While I agree that some characters have a huge advantage, especially on maps with low floor space like the bridge map or the samurai tower map, I do not buy the "low skill" argument. Sure, it takes less skill to get a kill off of a shield crush or shove or something when there is a ledge nearby, but your opponent can kill you will an equally low amount of effort by doing the same thing.

This is the point I was making before. Environmental hazards basically make it VERY EASY to die when they are nearby, so your defense has to be on point, but so does your opponent's. I have gotten PLENTY of kills by knocking someone over a ledge or into spikes with a counter GB when my opponent was going for a throw. I've dodged shield crushes and followed up with hits that topple my opponent over. Sure, it takes very little effort to knock me off when I am near a ledge, but it is also very risky for my opponent because one wrong step could get them thrown off instead.

You are supposed to die very easily near hazards, and you opponent is at risk too. You are supposed to feel tense and on edge near these hazards. They are supposed to force you to play more cautiously than out in the open.

But yea, fighting a shugoki on the bridge map is a bit lame, because other characters don't have the same knockback potential of a shugoki, lawbringer, warlord, or conqueror. All I would suggest is that they move the one fighting area on some maps that has almost no floor space and vast sections of knock-off areas to other areas of the map with fewer ledge kill areas.

RunnerRunner22
03-30-2017, 08:53 PM
While I Sure, it takes less skill to get a kill off of a shield crush or shove or something when there is a ledge nearby, but your opponent can kill you will an equally low amount of effort by doing the same thing.


That's not really true though. A Warlord can carry you halfway across the map to throw you over a ledge. So all he needs to win the match is one. single. guardbreak. Whereas you cannot possibly push him over unless he would be dumb enough to stand right next to the ledge. How is that fair?