PDA

View Full Version : Feat.



BabaJaga.
07-23-2018, 09:45 PM
Players should get feats when they are loosing , not winning, dont you think Ubisoft?

DefiledDragon
07-24-2018, 01:49 AM
I don't think feats should be a thing at all tbh, maybe passive ones like the stamina cost reduction feats and what have you but not those ridiculous airstrikes and firebombs that can kill an entire team and effectively win the match if the team happens to be breaking at the time.

Arekonator
07-24-2018, 01:58 AM
Reward people for bad play.
I cant see anything wrong with that at all :confused:

DefiledDragon
07-24-2018, 02:03 AM
Reward people for bad play.
I cant see anything wrong with that at all :confused:

Snowflake gamers...

Arekonator
07-24-2018, 02:06 AM
Snowflake gamers...

>wants to get rewarded for being bad
>call people snowflakes

How is that self awareness doing for you buddy?

DefiledDragon
07-24-2018, 03:43 AM
>wants to get rewarded for being bad
>call people snowflakes

How is that self awareness doing for you buddy?

Pretty good, thanks for asking.

HazelrahFirefly
07-24-2018, 12:16 PM
Reward people for bad play.
I cant see anything wrong with that at all :confused:

Feats are a crutch, not a reward. Winning is the reward. Nintendo figured this out a long, long time ago with the blue shell.

Vakris_One
07-24-2018, 02:24 PM
I've always thought of the ridiculous one shot kill feats in this game as a crutch for players who aren't good at fighting so they can contribute something to the team. It has never sat right with me that the winning team is gifted almost guarranteed win buttons. Makes very little sense when you think about it. If I am curb stomping my opponent shouldn't the game give him the powerful feat that can help him try to fight back? Instead it gives me the super powered feat, the guy who doesn't need it, so that it becomes absolute childs play to win blindfolded.

What other games do that I wonder?

DefiledDragon
07-24-2018, 02:31 PM
Feats are a crutch, not a reward. Winning is the reward. Nintendo figured this out a long, long time ago with the blue shell.

That's very true, but it's also the reason why Mario Kart is not considered to be a game that rewards skill. If you want to play a game where everybody has the same chance of winning, just sit there rolling dice to see who gets the highest number. Personally, I prefer games that reward the skillfull players. That doesn't mean I think current implementation of feats is good thing, but at the same time I don't believe that less skilled players should be artificially elevated by the games mechanics either.

HazelrahFirefly
07-24-2018, 03:27 PM
I've always thought of the ridiculous one shot kill feats in this game as a crutch for players who aren't good at fighting so they can contribute something to the team. It has never sat right with me that the winning team is gifted almost guarranteed win buttons. Makes very little sense when you think about it. If I am curb stomping my opponent shouldn't the game give him the powerful feat that can help him try to fight back? Instead it gives me the super powered feat, the guy who doesn't need it, so that it becomes absolute childs play to win blindfolded.

What other games do that I wonder?

Agreed, the feat progression in a match is as unbalanced as things get in FH.

Arekonator
07-24-2018, 03:34 PM
On the contraty, should the game handle the worse player a crutch that he earned just by being bad?

Vakris_One
07-24-2018, 05:04 PM
On the contraty, should the game handle the worse player a crutch that he earned just by being bad?
That is a good point. And no, I wouldn't want players awarded feats for being bad either. That would feel really sucky. Surely there must be a compromise between the two extremes though.

I liked ChampionRuby's idea in another thread whereby if a players dies to a gank then that player gets a bit of renown. The more people that ganked him at the time the more renown he gets as compensation but never as much renown as he would get if he were doing the killing. That feels like a more balanced way to treat both the deathball meta and the harsh snowball effect of the winning team getting tier 4 feats. At least it would put a bit of a stop gap on the extreme situations we can have currently whereby a deathballing team can get their T4 feats before their opponents even get their Tier 1 feats.

In my opinion a more balanced system would allow for the losing team to at least offer a decent fight until the very end, if they can get organised. Something which doesn't really happen currently in Dominion once one team goes far enough ahead of the other in terms of feats unlocked.

DefiledDragon
07-24-2018, 06:10 PM
The deathball meta could be countered by changing the way renown is awarded. So for example.

Capture a zone = 40 renown shared between players. 1 player captures and gets 40 renown, 4 players capture, 10 each.
Holding a zone = 4 renown per sec, shared between players. So 4 players holding a zone get 1 renown per sec each, 3 get 2, 2 get 3, 1 gets 4.
Kills = 5 renown * number of adversaries, so getting ganked by 4 people and manage to kill one = 20 renown. Conversely, if you're ganking 4 v 1 and you kill them, you get 5 renown - the number in the gank, so for a 4 man gank, 1 renown.

The numbers are just off the top of my head, but I think that general approach would encourage people to at lest pair up and go for zones, if not split up entirely and try to take and hold a zone each.

As for feats, the best way to balance them and make them fair is to remove them entirely, or to make them passive only and put powerful passive feats in tier 1, with them getting weaker as you unlock them, so the players who aren't doing so well get a decent helping hand early on to enable them to unlock more feats. Maybe have the top tier feats in tier 4 still, to give players a reason to care about unlocking them.

Just my thoughts.

CRIMS0NM0NKEY
07-24-2018, 11:07 PM
They should just take out feats and give revenge like a turbo button where you only get to use it once per life and u have it when u spawn not as a reward for parry and blocks. If you use it at the wrong time it's your own fault. I don't disagree that a team that is hopelessly behind needs something. It's not fun joining a game that the original crew backed out on...it a kd killer but I don't like having out either. I've noticed that the loosing team 's minions seem to become more prevalent so that is something

MorneValinoreva
08-12-2018, 05:13 PM
This is a fighting game and as many other fighting games it does have a system to even out the playing field when a player is outnumbered (i.e. revenge, which reminds you of the Street Fighter IV Ultra system which rewarded you for receiving damage). Street Fighter IV also has the Super System that rewards a player for successful attacks, which looks to me like the Feats system in For Honor. Only For Honor is a team fighter, and some feats affect the team performance as a whole so I agree the game should at least include a parallel feat system that would enter in action when the team is being beaten up. Something like, 1 powerful feat that could help make a comeback for a team that is losing, and that should be available when losing by a great difference. Off course, it should be balanced not to encourage a team to purposefully start losing.

By the way, I found this thread looking for documentation about the renown system. Is there a table or a list or anything official from Ubisoft that tells me how much renown each in-game action earns me?

dinosaurlicker
08-12-2018, 06:10 PM
The deathball meta could be countered by changing the way renown is awarded. So for example.

Capture a zone = 40 renown shared between players. 1 player captures and gets 40 renown, 4 players capture, 10 each.
Holding a zone = 4 renown per sec, shared between players. So 4 players holding a zone get 1 renown per sec each, 3 get 2, 2 get 3, 1 gets 4.
Kills = 5 renown * number of adversaries, so getting ganked by 4 people and manage to kill one = 20 renown. Conversely, if you're ganking 4 v 1 and you kill them, you get 5 renown - the number in the gank, so for a 4 man gank, 1 renown.

The numbers are just off the top of my head, but I think that general approach would encourage people to at lest pair up and go for zones, if not split up entirely and try to take and hold a zone each.

As for feats, the best way to balance them and make them fair is to remove them entirely, or to make them passive only and put powerful passive feats in tier 1, with them getting weaker as you unlock them, so the players who aren't doing so well get a decent helping hand early on to enable them to unlock more feats. Maybe have the top tier feats in tier 4 still, to give players a reason to care about unlocking them.

Just my thoughts.

Perfect.

Sweaty_Sock
08-12-2018, 07:10 PM
Feats are one of those things, I long ago learnt they are here to stay (like cliffs). Both arguments above are valid - why give tools to a winning side to win more. Why reward bad play instead?

Personally I think feats either need to;

1 - have a minimum timer before everyone gets level 1 feat, then level 2 feat etc. If you go well you get to access them as usual. Falling behind can become too crushing at the moment. Breaking = all feats unlocked. This also helps with getting dumped into a losing game with 0 renown while catapults are flying

OR

2 - all feats are available from the start of the game, with limited uses (this also helps balance out some of the weaker feats, give them more uses). You'd feel less salty going down during breaking knowing your opponent held their catapult all game for that moment. This adds alot more thought to the use of feats - i.e. do you really want to throw your last bomb at minions halfway into the game?

dinosaurlicker
08-12-2018, 11:39 PM
Feats are one of those things, I long ago learnt they are here to stay (like cliffs). Both arguments above are valid - why give tools to a winning side to win more. Why reward bad play instead?

Personally I think feats either need to;

1 - have a minimum timer before everyone gets level 1 feat, then level 2 feat etc. If you go well you get to access them as usual. Falling behind can become too crushing at the moment. Breaking = all feats unlocked. This also helps with getting dumped into a losing game with 0 renown while catapults are flying

OR

2 - all feats are available from the start of the game, with limited uses (this also helps balance out some of the weaker feats, give them more uses). You'd feel less salty going down during breaking knowing your opponent held their catapult all game for that moment. This adds alot more thought to the use of feats - i.e. do you really want to throw your last bomb at minions halfway into the game?

I like the first idea. That teams should gain access to all their feats while breaking. The feats should simply be given to them for the duration of their breaking, and if they get out of breaking, access to those feats goes away, but the cooldowns remain.

AzureSky.
08-13-2018, 12:30 AM
To fix this the real way to do it would be changing the things that make you able to unlock them, instead of just kills make it based on damage done, damage blocked, parry, conquering zones and defending from multiple opponents (this one would be a points bonus based on the time you survive a 2-4 man gank alone)

The actual way of getting points it's the problem, the system should favor the most skilled players regardless of if they are winning or losing, that way bad players will not get feats that easily and good players would have a comeback option even if their team is losing.

JadeBosson.
08-13-2018, 09:45 AM
I'd hate to be doing better than some one then they get a feat for losing then proceed to kill me with said feat when they weren't good enough to earn the feat in the first place if we start giving feats to the losing players I'd like a x3 XP / Steel bonus for losing as well

Sweaty_Sock
08-13-2018, 02:38 PM
I'd hate to be doing better than some one then they get a feat for losing then proceed to kill me with said feat when they weren't good enough to earn the feat in the first place if we start giving feats to the losing players I'd like a x3 XP / Steel bonus for losing as well

I can only speak from experience but often i'll have highest score in game on the losing side, my team will be at a low feat level & the enemy will start hoarding every catapult, firebomb, pugio etc. they have just for me. At that point not only do I have to fight 2-3 v 1 but also while standing in a firebomb, or orochi screamed OOS, or get shaman dagger into gank pounced, or while holding off unblockable spam someone puts a nailbomb at your feet.. worse players who out number me but are better than my team will simply feat me to death, again, and again (4x the cool downs, 4 x the feats).

In the interest of balancing out the game such a powerful tool cant be locked behind being ahead, otherwise by all rights when im on 1,200-1,500 renown I should get to drop 7 catapults (NOT a goo idea but inline with your logic)

MorneValinoreva
08-13-2018, 04:58 PM
My suggestion of awarding a feat to a losing team was misinterpreted. Other games already do it. I repeat street fighter awards the player an ultra meter for getting hit. The player can then continue to be bad and misuse his meter but it's there in the off chance that he is good and just made a couple of bad decisions. Revenge is similar, it is awarded for blocking but also for getting hit, and some character build ups focus so much on revenge that they cannot be killed without giving them revenge. My point is: give the team trailing behind one chance to comeback. And make it balanced so that they really have to make the most of it for it to work. And if they are bad, they will misuse it, and if they are good, but just had a bad start, it could help them catch up.