PDA

View Full Version : Open discussion: Art of battle system.



Knight_Raime
11-20-2018, 07:29 AM
This is mostly going to be a ramble. But I want to start a dialogue that could maybe lead to some rough ideas on how to turn the game around. But before we can really get to that we have to briefly touch on the problem that effects every single player. And what makes for honor unique. Feel free to leave your own comments about what you think on this post or potential ideas for change. Keep in mind these changes need to be big. Bandaid changes will not do it anymore. So what makes for honor Unique?

The art of battle system:

So what is the art of battle system? It's the specific way blocking, parrying, guard breaking, and feinting all work together. Many other fighters have these aspects in them but not in the same way. The way this system set up makes things sort of a fencer. What I mean is in fencing you position yourself to be the most protected but also positioning yourself to have the best chance at landing a blow. In fencing you typically only land one blow to end a fight. That might sound boring, but it's actually not because of how they try to mind game their opponent into making a mistake whilst also trying to understand their opponent so they know when they're being tricked so they can properly defend a potential on coming attack.

In for honor (at least in team fights/ganks) one mistake can often lead to death. feints/soft feints specifically exist to trick you into opening up so you can get hit. Parrying is a way to expose the player. both players potentially. And the games defense is designed in a way to let you be defending but also be able to attack. So as you can see, very similar to fencing.


The problem:

Unfortunately as cool as all of this sounds it quickly falls apart. Because of this the devs have to go over the top with certain tactics in order to try to keep the dream of fencing alive. At low level play this just turns out to be a frustrating mess of practically guaranteed damage (for all intent and purpose) and in high level play it's the only thing you can do. Or worse the mechanics end up being used in an unintended way essentially breaking the fight system JUST so something can be used. (example unlock play.) Only mid tier players like myself even some what get a glimpse of the intent behind the changes. But it's very clear. The higher you climb up the latter in regards to becoming a better player the less and less things become viable. This is exactly counter opposite of other fighters. Where the higher you get the more the game opens up thus the depth of the game starts to shine.

So what's the cause of all of this? The foundation. aka the art of battle system. (hero design too but it's effected by the system so.) So what's wrong with the system? it's simple. It's far too simplistic for it's own good. There is no actual depth to the mechanics. They do a thing. And that's it. And this is what the developers need to fix. And fixing it is no easy task.

So lets break down each piece of the system explaining it's current issues. Then i'll finish off the thread post by briefly talking about hero design and what needs to happen there in order to go forward.


Blocking:

Let's start out with the easiest part to talk about and arguably one of if not the biggest reasons things are so screwed up. Blocking as is is a BIG problem. It's far too easy to do. It allows you to be defended whilst also attacking (aside from reflex heros.) And because of this it breaks offense. You effectively shut out offense from just one of the 3 sides just by your guard existing. Going forward blocking needs to not be as strong as a base mechanic. This would mean blocking shouldn't really be a passive thing anymore. Blocking should also not shut someone out from attacking. Meaning combos should be happening wether you're blocking or not.

Blocking as is is the reason why bashes and unblockable attacks are crutched on. Blocking is why attacks have to be insanely quick. Blocking is why guaranteed damage is so important. Until blocking is actually fixed For honor will not go forward. And the frustrations people have with the games "spam" will only continue to exist and be added on to.


Parrying:

Parrying in itself is not a bad mechanic. The problem is practically everything in the game revolves around parrying. Because you can't reliably get damage in VIA attacking parrying is relied upon. Because offense in itself is pretty risky to attempt outside of very strong attacks/mix ups parrying to get damage is better. Because parrying is safe ish and nets you free damage it's always the better bet to wait and parry if you don't have a good mix up. Guard break only functions usefully because parrying exists. Going forward parrying needs to be far less important. the base parry action shouldn't give free damage. Most of this will likely be fixed on it's own once the rest of the game is fixed. As parrying is only so important now because the rest of the game's problems exist. But parrying's own problem is guaranteed damage. And that has to go.


Guard breaking:

Guard breaks themselves are not broken in a powerful way. quite the opposite. It's more of an issue that guard breaks themselves are not useful without other things. Guard breaks are this games throws. It being easily techable or techable at all really isn't the problem. It's that guard breaks can only functionally be used during GB vulnerability phases. i.e when they can't be teched. Guard breaks/throws instead should be things that you threaten with during combo string mix ups. Traditonally speaking throws are the things that guarantee damage. The thing we need to do with guard breaks is allow them to be more accessable. And then we need to decide what we want out of a throw. Do we want the potential for combos? Or do we want guard breaks to be a sequence of attacks that do damage but end the combo (see soul calibur)


Feinting:

Last but not least feinting. Feinting like guard breaking isn't broken because of a strength. Rather feinting is too basic. It's far too easy to tell a feint from an attack attempt. Soft feints are the only kind of feints that really end up working out. But because soft feints are very limited and don't often lead to more mix ups or combos it's just a one off. where you get your damage and then go back to neutral. Going forward feints need to be a lot harder to tell. And feints need to be more incorporated into move sets. They shouldn't only be things to try and trick someone from neutral.


Things to consider:

Before I get to hero design real quick I just want to give you guys things to chew on before you write suggestions. You need to remember that for honor is a 3d fighter. Meaning you're having to defend from 3 possible sides instead of two. even soul calibur only has two directions that you worry about at a time. You also need to remember that this is a team fighting game first and foremost. Meaning you have to think on how your changes will or will not work in an external situation. You also have other smaller factors that you need to think about. We have a stamina system that determines how aggressive we can be. We have revenge which throws that way. We have an out of stamina state. we have attack indicators. etc.


Hero design:

Briefly we will touch on hero design. The main issue behind hero design really is quite simple. Not all kits are created equal. This game originally was heavily class based (and who knows maybe we can revive that some how whilst also fixing all the other issues.) There are fundamental things each and every kit needs. This is to ensure everyone starts off being capable. And from there hero designs can be built upon. So what are some of these fundamentals? Getting a heavy on guard break, having some kind of dodge attack to deal with external situations and committed to bashes. many many many more combos for each hero and probably longer combos. A decent zone attack for basic option selecting. And some kind of opener. It's already very clear that if you're missing any of these aspects in your kit you struggle if not out right can't compete in high tier.


Final thoughts/summing up:


To conclude For honor is in a state of flux. It has the potential to be a very good and very unique entry into the fighting genre. But it's own trade marked system is what's currently choking the game out. It is certainly not possible to continue to play in this current state of the game. And you can forget about the game ever moving forward if drastic change isn't made. The scary/difficult thing is it might not be possible to retain most of what makes for honor unique by making such drastic changes. I personally believe for honor will still be for honor so long as it keeps to the same style and being a 3D combat fighter. We might even be able to salvage most of the game and not have to go full blown corner juggling combos or super long strings of attacks. But we will have to lose some of what for honor traditionally was. And as sad as that might be I would rather the game continue to thrive for many years to come. As nice as it was to first jump into this game and have the really cool stare down games where reactions were enough alone to get my heart pumping those days are gone. And can't ever come back, not really.

Thanks for reading. I look forward to the discussions!


EDIT: to tack onto this I think we also should look at indicators and stamina's role in this game as broader points of discussion.

Jazz117Volkov
11-20-2018, 09:57 AM
Before we get right into dramatic changes to the design, I think it'd be worth evaluating the existing incentives and dangers and properly gauge how they balance out. For example, feinting doesn't work because blocking is too safe; that's really the cause, you don't lose enough for refusing to engage with your opponent. Dodging has been nerfed into the ground, and for good reasons, but the dodge mechanic itself should be a treebranch with a lot of leafs, unfortunately most characters can only do one thing from a dodge, which they can't feint (assassin's and some hybrids can do more but deflects don't branch from a successful dodge, they're a unique attack mechanic that hijacks the dodge if the timing is right), and dodging on it's own renders you extremely vulnerable: guard breaks, external damage, combos (because guard switch lock on dodge) and tracking attacks. Standing still and ignoring everything that isn't unblockable, waiting for a safe parry is still the safest option. Has the number of unblockables increased? Of course. Is the problem solved? No.

If the numbers were juggled a bit, I think heavy attacks could be promoted to best and optimal offense. They do good damage, they lead to executions, and they can be feinted. Boost chip damage way up for heavies, reduce stamina cost, especially when you're parried, and make the feint animations more convincing. I think these would all be good improvements. Furthermore, I was kicking an idea around recently with Warden; what if your heavies (from at least one direction) were like slow but devastating lights (think Centurion's neutral heavies and how they're considered safe). To access your stronger but slower heavy, hold the attack button. Dark Souls III implemented this style of heavy attacks, and some heroes in For Honor already utilize it (again, look at Centurion). This would give you a third attack option from neutral, a new way to mix-up your combos, and ultimately grant you an attack with all the advantages of a heavy but almost the safety of a light. If this became standard across the cast I think the need for this 400 ms noise would resolve on its own.

Lastly, I don't actually agree that unreactable attacks are necessary. I saw zero craig's bit on it and I'm just not convinced. 400 ms lights seem to be needed because of the state of the game, however, from a logical perspective they fall under the pure 50/50 umbrella that made everyone rage at Warden's guardbreak soft-cancel. They're an option that not every hero has that no player can react to; you have to "read it". I don't think that's how For Honor should be played, and I think arguing an favour of it is a mistake. But of course, everyone is entitled to their opinion. My opinion is there's enough mechanics on the table already that you should be able to reliably achieve damage by playing smarter than your opponent, not so fast that they can't play back. I think unreactable moves change the chemistry of fights too much. For Honor should be about set-ups and punishes, neither of which should rely on or frequently involve light attacks. I've been hearing talk that light attack damage should be dramatically decreased. Maybe this is a good idea. Incentivize them in a way that their employment is normally an inferior option. 500 ms lights are fine, they're not good openers all the time, but maybe we shouldn't be opening with lights.

edit: a thought regarding combos. What if, as part of some combos, you could optionally perform "fake" attacks that would briefly cause the indicator to display two threats from one opponent. Like, this could be a terrible idea, it might just feel really wonky, but it does make sense for someone like PeaceKeeper, who has two weapons, to threaten with one while actually attacking with the other, Lawbringer too, he's got a lot of options with the poleaxe, and obviously Warden, you could threaten with a top heavy when your attack is actually a crossguard strike from the side. These could be interesting ways to get reliable chip damage and minimize the threat of parries while keeping your combos more than two inputs long.

Knight_Raime
11-20-2018, 11:24 AM
@Jazz117Volkov

To avoid a giant wall quote for replies i'll just take segmented parts from each and put them in quotes and then put my reply in bold. Apologies if this format is annoying.

"For example, feinting doesn't work because blocking is too safe; that's really the cause, you don't lose enough for refusing to engage with your opponent."

I think that's part of feint's issue. But I still assert that feint itself is underutilized and is too easy to distinguish currently.

"Dodging has been nerfed into the ground, and for good reasons, but the dodge mechanic itself should be a treebranch with a lot of leafs."

I'd be curious to hear how they could utilize/expand on dodges from you. I personally don't think dodges are weak right now. More I think heros without dodge based attacks for countering are weak.

"Boost chip damage way up for heavies, reduce stamina cost, especially when you're parried, and make the feint animations more convincing."

I can get behind this mostly. The only one i'm stuck on is changing the stamina cost from being parried. As heavies are as versatile as you say. Meaning there should be proper risk associated with them. But I guess I might be able to get behind this if I knew what parry changes were going to happen and what stamina based changes would happen. If neither change from your perspective I can't get behind the stamina change.

"Furthermore, I was kicking an idea around recently with Warden; what if your heavies (from at least one direction) were like slow but devastating lights (think Centurion's neutral heavies and how they're considered safe). To access your stronger but slower heavy."

So basically you want to give everyone a chargable attack that turns from a light into a heavy? Why? Charged heavies in this game are notorious for being bad.

"My opinion is there's enough mechanics on the table already that you should be able to reliably achieve damage by playing smarter than your opponent, not so fast that they can't play back."

the concept of unreactable for fighting games is to serve as the basis for mind games. If you could react to every single attack/mix up then the top tier of play would have nothing. You need to be able to force reads and apart of that involves attack speed. No hero should overly rely on unreactable attacks. Like Nuxia and orochi. But they can serve to be parts of kits. So long as they don't over shadow the kit design or the kit resign doesn't rely on it. Simply look at tiandi and Shaolin as examples of heros who use unreactable attacks/mix ups. But not rely on them. Reads are the very definition of playing smarter than your opponent.

"been hearing talk that light attack damage should be dramatically decreased. Maybe this is a good idea. Incentivize them in a way that their employment is normally an inferior option. 500 ms lights are fine, they're not good openers all the time, but maybe we shouldn't be opening with lights."

Wouldn't change anything for top tier play. Doesn't solve any actual issue. Just draws fights out more. Lights unless stated otherwise for certain move lists are chip damage and gaps between mix ups.

"What if, as part of some combos, you could optionally perform "fake" attacks that would briefly cause the indicator to display two threats from one opponent."

So the old flicker indicator problem from the olden days?

Jazz117Volkov
11-20-2018, 12:47 PM
@Jazz117Volkov
Apologies if this format is annoying.All g.


I think that's part of feint's issue. But I still assert that feint itself is underutilized and is too easy to distinguish currently.I definitely agree on that second point. Feints are often too easy to distinguish. The very first night of the Warden rework and I was side-stepping the top heavy without every practicing, it was just too obvious when it was committed and when it wasn't.

I think Kensei and Highlander (and Raider, iirc) have better feinting where they can either feint early (which is useless) or delay the feint. Maybe that's something to look at for more of the cast.


I'd be curious to hear how they could utilize/expand on dodges from you. I personally don't think dodges are weak right now. More I think heros without dodge based attacks for countering are weak.This is true, and in some cases dodge attacks aren't very good anyway. Gladiator has the right idea, trident strike or shield punch. And in light of that, those are the types of options I'm thinking about with dodging. I think the player should have more control over what attacks the do from a dodge and what direction they come from. Like, I think it should be pretty standard to have top heavies chain from a side dodge, so you can still feint them, but you shave a few hundred ms off the startup to get in some pressure and chip damage if not a direct strike.


I can get behind this mostly. The only one i'm stuck on is changing the stamina cost from being parried. As heavies are as versatile as you say. Meaning there should be proper risk associated with them. But I guess I might be able to get behind this if I knew what parry changes were going to happen and what stamina based changes would happen. If neither change from your perspective I can't get behind the stamina change.Well, in my mind the risk associated with heavies is they're slow and pretty easy to dodge or parry, but I agree, installing this into the game exactly as is might be too much, but I would really like to see heavies as relatively safe option. There are multiple ways to avoid taking damage from a heavy, but having said that, I don't think blocking should be nearly as effective.

It might be better for blocking to only be damage mitigation and not actually save you from death, at least against heavies. It would be interesting to see how things would play out if the killing blow is a heavy, regardless of if they're blocking, you get an execution.


So basically you want to give everyone a chargable attack that turns from a light into a heavy? Why? Charged heavies in this game are notorious for being bad.Not exactly. Chargable attacks are typically bad because of the awkward animations and lack of a feint. However, if we look at Highlander, his defensive heavy and offensive heavy works fine, and essentially it's that input, only, instead of one being UB and the other HA, you'd just be looking at a "medium attack" and a "heavy attack". And maybe not give it to everyone. Like, I'm not saying this is a complete idea, it's just something I thought would help out a few kits, especially ones that lack good mix-ups with their weapons, like Warlord, Warden, and even PeaceKeeper.


the concept of unreactable for fighting games is to serve as the basis for mind games. If you could react to every single attack/mix up then the top tier of play would have nothing. You need to be able to force reads and apart of that involves attack speed. No hero should overly rely on unreactable attacks. Like Nuxia and orochi. But they can serve to be parts of kits. So long as they don't over shadow the kit design or the kit resign doesn't rely on it. Simply look at tiandi and Shaolin as examples of heros who use unreactable attacks/mix ups. But not rely on them. Reads are the very definition of playing smarter than your opponent.Well, not always. Sometimes playing smarter is positioning yourself so their back is to a hazard, and side parry with Lawbringer. They's was dumb. Still, I know what you're saying, but I don't like the way unreactable attacks pollute the game. Maybe they do have to be there, but it's like they said on the den, the kits that have outstandingly effective moves really only use those moves: glad zone, conq sb, zerker light, etc.


Wouldn't change anything for top tier play. Doesn't solve any actual issue. Just draws fights out more. Lights unless stated otherwise for certain move lists are chip damage and gaps between mix ups.Maybe, maybe not. I've seen high level play; it's more about range than speed. Wait long enough and the other guy will initiate, but you know the attack range so well that all you need to do is light attack forward with Nobushi and cut through his feint, because of course it was feint, because no one actually throws heavies. It's not very exciting, tbh. Waiting, waiting, waiting, waiting, ZONE ATTACK...cancel, back dodge...waiting waiting waiting...

You're right, it wouldn't change much.


So the old flicker indicator problem from the olden days?I wouldn't say briefly means flicker. I was thinking more about external block and how that plays out. idk, it was half an idea I was having. Long combos are just parry bait at the moment. Has anyone actually every used Gladiator's light chain? Like, it ends once you get blocked.

Tatsu147146
11-20-2018, 04:39 PM
I like the idea of semi charged heavy attacks, it would in theory solve many of the safe block and parry issues. If the heavy were made with a changing parry timing and longer feint window it would be harder to correctly predict when to parry and make it safer (again in theory) to throw the heavy. Although I think that the faster you throw the heavy attack the less damage it should do since this happens in real life (I actually own a katana and there is a threshold where it's just the right amount of speed and strength to give out the most of a blow, to increase speed there is less strength involved and more use of sudden movements instead). This kind of heavy makes it safer to feint and attack since as I have painfully found out with Shugoki that pressing the heavy to parry someone and accidentally charging it will get me utterly screwed, making the charged heavy a strength and a weakness at the same time.

Vakris_One
11-20-2018, 04:50 PM
"Furthermore, I was kicking an idea around recently with Warden; what if your heavies (from at least one direction) were like slow but devastating lights (think Centurion's neutral heavies and how they're considered safe). To access your stronger but slower heavy."

So basically you want to give everyone a chargable attack that turns from a light into a heavy? Why? Charged heavies in this game are notorious for being bad.

There is merit in this idea of having two tiers of heavy attack. It would provide players with access to varied milisecond increments for attacks which would reduce parrying as this one stop shop tool for deleting your opponent's offensive options. And it would put the focus away from adding any more emphasis on 400ms attacks.

Combine it with feints being made less obvious and all heroes being given an opener of some kind and it could be something quite nice. A technique you learn at lower level but one that stays relevant all the way up to the highest level. Deepening along with the player's understanding of mind games. I'm just not sure how varied heavy attack timings would work for characters like Highlander or Shaolin who have to hold down the attack button to get into their stance change.

SpaceJim12
11-20-2018, 05:28 PM
I like the idea of semi charged heavy attacks, it would in theory solve many of the safe block and parry issues.

Centurion do not agree with you.=) People block fast heavy and pretty often parry charged one. It's just the matter of time when timings will be learned and become useless.

@Knight_Raime

Maybe I see only now, but I'm glad people start to understand that overall battle system in For Honor is quite broken. I spoke about it right before my first break, in the middle of season 5. I understand, how hard could be to fix such a core gameplay mechanic, but without it game will become to something unplayable.
I should notice, that main problem here is that devs increase the distance between real fencing and Sould Calibur style fencing. For example, blocking. Let's say I'm in the fight with someone. We have swords and equal strength. If I start to hitting again and again from top and my opponent will block it, this not mean I'll lost all my stamina in a second and my opponent will use it to kick me off. When I hitting again and again, I put pressure to my opponent and his guard will be break once, or I could fast switch my next hit to shoulder bash that will be not predictable, cause opponent concentrate on blocking. In For Honor you could easily block attacks from any direction with no stress. Even 400ms lights do not put pressure to your opponent. He even will be relax enough to parry one of your light. If I switched my hit to SB, opponent will easily dodge it, cause he not concentrate on blocking. And in this situation only one person lose stamina.
Blocking in For Honor works like youe are Neo and your opponent Agent Smith in end scene of first Matrix. It's not a question, to defend yourself or not. If you see sitation is critical, you just block and dodge everything until you get revenge and stupid advantage in fight. Every player I meet nowadays stop fighting on the last bar of the health and become defence god and wait for revenge. Is it ok in real fencing? It's just impossible there.

The more devs concentrate on attack side and ignore defence side, the more broken gameplay will be.

And I really want classes will count again. I want to see how LB or Shugo scared four opponents around them as real tanks. I already tired to see Orochi easily parry fourth opponents or Shaolin block every attack even fainted one with this bare hand. Stop to do superheroes. Make players understand, that if they pick up an assassin this should work twice harder in 4v1 fights, than Shugo or LB. And even in 1v1 they should feel lack of defence cause of class.

Vakris_One
11-20-2018, 06:00 PM
Centurion do not agree with you.=) People block fast heavy and pretty often parry charged one. It's just the matter of time when timings will be learned and become useless.
The problem there is that he has to commit to his charged heavy once it becomes unblockable and that's just far too easy for the opponent to realise when to parry.

If Centurion could feint his unblockable then it becomes a different matter entirely. Now all of a sudden his varied timing heavies can provide pressure because they will require the opponent to make a successful read in order to pull off a parry rather than simply parrying on reaction to that unblockable glow, which is too easy to do.



@Knight_Raime

Maybe I see only now, but I'm glad people start to understand that overall battle system in For Honor is quite broken. I spoke about it right before my first break, in the middle of season 5. I understand, how hard could be to fix such a core gameplay mechanic, but without it game will become to something unplayable.
I should notice, that main problem here is that devs increase the distance between real fencing and Sould Calibur style fencing. For example, blocking. Let's say I'm in the fight with someone. We have swords and equal strength. If I start to hitting again and again from top and my opponent will block it, this not mean I'll lost all my stamina in a second and my opponent will use it to kick me off. When I hitting again and again, I put pressure to my opponent and his guard will be break once, or I could fast switch my next hit to shoulder bash that will be not predictable, cause opponent concentrate on blocking. In For Honor you could easily block attacks from any direction with no stress. Even 400ms lights do not put pressure to your opponent. He even will be relax enough to parry one of your light. If I switched my hit to SB, opponent will easily dodge it, cause he not concentrate on blocking. And in this situation only one person lose stamina.
Blocking in For Honor works like youe are Neo and your opponent Agent Smith in end scene of first Matrix. It's not a question, to defend yourself or not. If you see sitation is critical, you just block and dodge everything until you get revenge and stupid advantage in fight. Every player I meet nowadays stop fighting on the last bar of the health and become defence god and wait for revenge. Is it ok in real fencing? It's just impossible there.

The more devs concentrate on attack side and ignore defence side, the more broken gameplay will be.

And I really want classes will count again. I want to see how LB or Shugo scared four opponents around them as real tanks. I already tired to see Orochi easily parry fourth opponents or Shaolin block every attack even fainted one with this bare hand. Stop to do superheroes. Make players understand, that if they pick up an assassin this should work twice harder in 4v1 fights, than Shugo or LB. And even in 1v1 they should feel lack of defence cause of class.
I disagree with the last part. All heroes should have enough options so as to be viable in both 1v1s and group fights. Designing a character to only be good in one mode is how we got the likes of Raider and most recently Jiang Jun, despite the devs saying they wanted more heroes to be viable in all modes.

Kensei's rework is living proof that you can have a hero who can do well in both modes because his power is more or less equally distributed across the whole of his kit - i.e. he is not a one trick pony, rather he has to use his whole kit in order to prevail.

DoctorMcBatman
11-20-2018, 09:43 PM
A number of players (including myself when I made a thread on it months ago) have noted the way this game lets you block indefinitely is problematic. And the devs wonder why there's a turtle meta?!

Now we're at a point where so much of the game is based on blocking, that if you change the blocking mechanic you're going to **** up 90 million things at the same time.

I don't think FH can be saved, mechanics-wise. Everything the devs have done has essentially been fixing/mitigating the negatives of a system that's inherently faulty. I should rephrase, I do think it's possible, BUT I don't think it's realistic. Giving blocking the revamp it needs in order to make fights flow better would likely lead to drastic changes in gameplay, both ****ing up a bunch of other things in the game and changing the overall identity. The devs seem happy with the game's identity overall and just want to make small changes to push play styles in certain directions.

Knight_Raime
11-21-2018, 02:52 AM
@Jazz117Volkov

"I think Kensei and Highlander (and Raider, iirc) have better feinting where they can either feint early (which is useless) or delay the feint. Maybe that's something to look at for more of the cast."

I don't think their feints are better mechanically. Just how they're incorperated into the kits are better. Kensei's being held up with his SB on dodge and being able to dodge out of his top heavy for countering and his top heavy mix up in general, Highlander general feints can be utilized along side going into a different form. having 3 main UB mix ups from his ballors might to suit different instances. and raider being (I think) the only hero in the game that currently has a varried soft feint input in the game at this point. I'd say raider would be the minimum for feinting as far as incorperating into kits go. Varied timing is just so useful.

"those are the types of options I'm thinking about with dodging. I think the player should have more control over what attacks the do from a dodge and what direction they come from."

So essentially you're asking for everyone to have multiple options off of dodge and be able to chain from their dodge moves? I can agree to that.

"It might be better for blocking to only be damage mitigation and not actually save you from death, at least against heavies. It would be interesting to see how things would play out if the killing blow is a heavy, regardless of if they're blocking, you get an execution."

Well people over on the competitive sub have sort of asked for chip damage being able to kill. But due to lights getting chip in OOS people kinda pushed against that idea. I think tacking your suggestion in with this would satisfy that problem and also allow chip to kill. Basically if a heavy lands on block and the chip damage is enough to kill the person's guard is broken (new animation) and you go straight through to do an execution.

"look at Highlander, his defensive heavy and offensive heavy works fine, and essentially it's that input, only, instead of one being UB and the other HA, you'd just be looking at a "medium attack" and a "heavy attack"."

Guess i'm still a little confused. Are you saying the act of holding it isn't charging it but rather turning it into a different attack? So you want to give some heros the ability to turn an attack from one version to another. It's interesting. But i'm still struggling with wrapping my head around how that would be.

"but I don't like the way unreactable attacks pollute the game."

I should clarify in saying i'm not really looking to increase the amount of unreactable attacks in the game by much if at all. I just mean the concept of something being unreactable belongs in a fighting game. I think zerks unreactable light after heavy feint is a good medium ground for this. As you can't actually react to the attack itself. But because it's telegraphed by a feint beforehad its a bit easier to deal with. And yeah that's true about what they said on the den. But that is an issue because one the attack itself is severely over tuned on it's own. And two because the kit itself (at least in regards to the likes of glad and his zone) is poorly designed. If the rest of his kit was up to snuff more of his kit would be used and the really good moves wouldn't need to be as good as they are now.

Knight_Raime
11-21-2018, 02:56 AM
There is merit in this idea of having two tiers of heavy attack. It would provide players with access to varied milisecond increments for attacks which would reduce parrying as this one stop shop tool for deleting your opponent's offensive options. And it would put the focus away from adding any more emphasis on 400ms attacks.

Combine it with feints being made less obvious and all heroes being given an opener of some kind and it could be something quite nice. A technique you learn at lower level but one that stays relevant all the way up to the highest level. Deepening along with the player's understanding of mind games. I'm just not sure how varied heavy attack timings would work for characters like Highlander or Shaolin who have to hold down the attack button to get into their stance change.

Something similar to this idea (in my mind anyway) is orochi's riptide strike. He could have his light and heavy version. two seperate inputs. But same speed. Heavy version is executable and unblockable. But can be semi charged to do more damage/be a mix up. On the opponents end they wouldn't be able to tell from animation. they'ed have to keep an eye out for the unblockable itself. And even then they couldn't just react to it because the timing could be slightly varied and it could be feinted. In other words it kind of plays on how rochi's storm rush and riptide work right now. Where you can't react on the back dodge alone. This would be adding onto it but also giving rochi a way to deal with external situations via unblockable.

Knight_Raime
11-21-2018, 03:00 AM
Centurion do not agree with you.=) People block fast heavy and pretty often parry charged one. It's just the matter of time when timings will be learned and become useless.

@Knight_Raime

Maybe I see only now, but I'm glad people start to understand that overall battle system in For Honor is quite broken. I spoke about it right before my first break, in the middle of season 5. I understand, how hard could be to fix such a core gameplay mechanic, but without it game will become to something unplayable.
I should notice, that main problem here is that devs increase the distance between real fencing and Sould Calibur style fencing. For example, blocking. Let's say I'm in the fight with someone. We have swords and equal strength. If I start to hitting again and again from top and my opponent will block it, this not mean I'll lost all my stamina in a second and my opponent will use it to kick me off. When I hitting again and again, I put pressure to my opponent and his guard will be break once, or I could fast switch my next hit to shoulder bash that will be not predictable, cause opponent concentrate on blocking. In For Honor you could easily block attacks from any direction with no stress. Even 400ms lights do not put pressure to your opponent. He even will be relax enough to parry one of your light. If I switched my hit to SB, opponent will easily dodge it, cause he not concentrate on blocking. And in this situation only one person lose stamina.
Blocking in For Honor works like youe are Neo and your opponent Agent Smith in end scene of first Matrix. It's not a question, to defend yourself or not. If you see sitation is critical, you just block and dodge everything until you get revenge and stupid advantage in fight. Every player I meet nowadays stop fighting on the last bar of the health and become defence god and wait for revenge. Is it ok in real fencing? It's just impossible there.

The more devs concentrate on attack side and ignore defence side, the more broken gameplay will be.

And I really want classes will count again. I want to see how LB or Shugo scared four opponents around them as real tanks. I already tired to see Orochi easily parry fourth opponents or Shaolin block every attack even fainted one with this bare hand. Stop to do superheroes. Make players understand, that if they pick up an assassin this should work twice harder in 4v1 fights, than Shugo or LB. And even in 1v1 they should feel lack of defence cause of class.

Centurion's charged heavy is flawed because once you commit to the unblockable it's obvious. He can't fake people out with it. If the second heavy was unblockable practically instantly and could be feinted out of in the standard window all other unblockable feints have it could actually work as a proper mix up.

I mentioned in a different thread that I would have no issue with them trying to make the class system be a thing again as that's what the team fighting in this game was based off of. But we'd need to make sure every hero has the same fundamentals and then build off of that. The problem with the original class system is it didn't offer everyone the same opportunities to attack, defend, and punish. Those basic tools need to be the same across the board. If we want to have heavies have special tanking properties or blocking properties that's fine. So long as everyone can still defend from the same things in a basic manner. etc.

Knight_Raime
11-21-2018, 03:03 AM
A number of players (including myself when I made a thread on it months ago) have noted the way this game lets you block indefinitely is problematic. And the devs wonder why there's a turtle meta?!

Now we're at a point where so much of the game is based on blocking, that if you change the blocking mechanic you're going to **** up 90 million things at the same time.

I don't think FH can be saved, mechanics-wise. Everything the devs have done has essentially been fixing/mitigating the negatives of a system that's inherently faulty. I should rephrase, I do think it's possible, BUT I don't think it's realistic. Giving blocking the revamp it needs in order to make fights flow better would likely lead to drastic changes in gameplay, both ****ing up a bunch of other things in the game and changing the overall identity. The devs seem happy with the game's identity overall and just want to make small changes to push play styles in certain directions.

I didn't watch the den, But the fact that they're looking into making feinting better/more active in things and looking to increase offensive capability globally without a massive speed increase and the mention of delays gives me hope that they would consider changing blocking. But we just have to see how they actually do things because often what they say doesn't match up with what they do.

DefiledDragon
11-21-2018, 04:25 AM
I've weighed in on this issue before in other threads. I've been a bit reluctant to do so in this instance because I think that my vision for the game, or rather, what I would like the game to be(come) is probably quite different to most and likely won't be a popular opinion among existing players, but I'll throw my 2p in nonetheless, for what it's worth. Do bear in mind that this is all just my opinion and it is no more or less valid than anybody else's nor do I make any claim of expertise.

My background is, like many others I imagine, traditional 2d and 2.5d fighters. SF, MK, FF, Tekken, DOA, Injustice, KoF, MvC and so on. I was drawn to FH largely because of the aesthetic of the game and the fact that I love anything medieval, be it RPG's, RTS, fighting games or whatever. However, while I find the combat viscerally satisfying, it is, in my opinion, mechanically somewhat lacking.

So, on to my major gripe. The pacing. The pace of combat in FH is tragically slow. This is especially prevalent at higher levels of play where players will be extremely reluctant to commit to any kind of offence and spend almost all their time trying to goad each other into a punishable reaction. While this sounds reasonable on paper and is a core aspect of any fight, the nature of the mechanics in FH make the process incredibly slow paced and boring, in my opinion.

The issue with pacing boils down to the awesome power of defence and the impotence of offence. The simple act of blocking a light attack resets the fight. Parrying a heavy attack and administering whatever punishment your character is capable of resets the fight. Unlock rolling resets the fight, in most instances. There are exceptions to this depending on who you play as and what their available mix ups are, but in many cases, a successful defensive move resets the fight to neutral. This gives a very stop-start feel to the combat and it's not something I'm a fan of. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy a thoughtful, tactical bout but at the same time I also believe in the ability to apply consistent pressure to your opponent and this is what's lacking in the game.

So, with all that said, what would I like to see? Well, for starters I would like to see chains continue, even when blocked. Even light chains. I don't know if anyone who plays FH has ever engaged in or watched an actual sword fight, but when somebody strikes at you with their weapon and you block the attack, their weapon does not "bounce off" and in most cases, they will follow it up with another strike from a different angle, or maybe even a different type of strike that can involve their weapon or not, depending on the weapon and the style employed. I would like to see more of this in FH.

I would also like to see defending made more skill based (timing based) with the removal of static guard with all heroes going to a fast decay reflex guard, somewhere in the region of 75ms, maybe 100ms but the numbers could be tweaked.

I believe the parry windows should be shortened dramatically (or maybe even removed altogether) to something like 50ms from the 200ms it is now. It's way too easy to parry and the rewards for doing so are ridiculous in the case of light attacks.

I would like to see bashes removed and replaced with other options that can be executed during a chain. So, for example, Conqueror could use his shield as a weapon, mid chain, for slightly higher damage than a light attack but with no possibility of an execution in the event that it kills you. Same goes for Warden, who could work thrusting attacks and pommel strikes into his chains in a similar way. Other heroes kits could be similarly reworked based on their available equipment and their fighting style.

All the characters need longer chains. Two hit chains are pointless and offer zero tactical depth or opportunities to apply pressure. The shortest chains in the game should be 3 hits and the longest perhaps upwards of 5 or more. Infinite combo's should be removed and replaced with proper chains.

Guard breaks should be changed to a techable grapple that allows you to push or throw your opponent and should be executable mid chain so environmental advantages can still be taken but the free hit opportunity should be removed.

Unlock attacks like Shinobi's slide, LB's impale, Raiders stampede etc... are fine and are really useful in 4 v 4's although their tracking should be removed to prevent abuse in 1 v 1's (Shinobi/Warlord) so they are only really viable against unsuspecting foes, i.e. people already engaged with a teammate.

I think those changes (and possibly others that may occur to me at a later date) would give the combat a much more dynamic and fast paced feel, while retaining much of the visceral nature of the game and at the same time bring it a few steps closer to what an actual fight with the weapons each character employs might look like and I believe the game would be better for it.

Knight_Raime
11-21-2018, 05:16 AM
@DefiledDragon

"I would like to see chains continue, even when blocked. Even light chains."

I more or less want this as well. I was unsure about lights in chain being blocked on continuing. But I deff think lights from neutral/chain starting lights shouldn't bounce.

"I would also like to see defending made more skill based (timing based) with the removal of static guard with all heroes going to a fast decay reflex guard, somewhere in the region of 75ms, maybe 100ms but the numbers could be tweaked."

I think the best out come we can have with blocking being changed would be a fast ish decay like shinobi's. maybe slightly faster. But you can hold guard in that direction to keep it up. We can't go as low as glad's block decay though.

"I believe the parry windows should be shortened dramatically."

200ms is already really short. Parrying is easy not because the window is forgiving but because the pace of the game being slow, the majority of the attacks being slow ish especially in combo, and the fact that we force attacks to 100ms increments. If we address these issues and take less importance off of parries then parries themselves don't need to become harder like you're wanting.

"I would like to see bashes removed and replaced with other options that can be executed during a chain."

There is no need to remove something at this point. Ideally we should have bashes still exist as options. Just not things that are relied upon. And we should also have more options with chains rather than attack or base feint. Like being able to dodge out of a heavy to a dodge light that chains, or fitting in zone and being able to chain off of that. etc.

"All the characters need longer chains. Two hit chains are pointless and offer zero tactical depth or opportunities to apply pressure. The shortest chains in the game should be 3 hits and the longest perhaps upwards of 5 or more. Infinite combo's should be removed and replaced with proper chains."

Agreed. All though I think the possibility of being able to chain forever should exist. Like aramusha with deadly feints.

"Guard breaks should be changed to a techable grapple that allows you to push or throw your opponent and should be executable mid chain so environmental advantages can still be taken but the free hit opportunity should be removed."

So basically what we have now but in chain and you can't attack on guard break? Maybe. Throw distance would need to be looked at. As punishes with splats vary a lot based on distance.
Everyone would need to be able to get something wether they threw them next to a wall or there was decent space with the wall. And how would this translate for OOS punishes when your throw puts them on the floor? Because a lot of the punishes depend on you attacking at a specific time after you throw them. Some of them immediately after you throw them. Personally I like the chain idea. You also have to consider that GB into heavy is how people get executions. which are vital for most modes. If you remove the ability to attack on GB then you kinda ruin that. Just food for thought.

DefiledDragon
11-21-2018, 05:32 AM
@KnightRaime

Agreed. All though I think the possibility of being able to chain forever should exist. Like aramusha with deadly feints.

Well the way I would have guard work is that just blocking an attack wouldn't prevent any followup, regardless. Imagine Aramusha's infinite light against a reflex guard that doesn't stop lights. It would be a nightmare to deal with. With the guard you suggest, where follow up lights are blocked (or "bounce off"), it wouldn't be so bad.

So basically what we have now but in chain and you can't attack on guard break? Maybe. Throw distance would need to be looked at. As punishes with splats vary a lot based on distance.
Everyone would need to be able to get something wether they threw them next to a wall or there was decent space with the wall. And how would this translate for OOS punishes when your throw puts them on the floor? Because a lot of the punishes depend on you attacking at a specific time after you throw them. Some of them immediately after you throw them. Personally I like the chain idea. You also have to consider that GB into heavy is how people get executions. which are vital for most modes. If you remove the ability to attack on GB then you kinda ruin that. Just food for thought.[/QUOTE]

Not really. More like what we have now, but without the first stage. First, you get the actual guard break, then you decide if you want to throw an attack or continue with the throw. I propose making it go straight to the throw (still directable), but you can insert it into a chain instead of a strike. Not as a feint, but as a natural move within the chain itself, with no limitation on where in the chain it can be thrown. The tech for it might need to be a reversal of some sort, to make it a high risk, high reward manoeuvre where you get a ledge/spike or a wall splat if successful but if not, your opponent gets an immediate riposte with potential follow up.

Knight_Raime
11-21-2018, 07:02 AM
@DefiledDragon

"Well the way I would have guard work is that just blocking an attack wouldn't prevent any followup, regardless. Imagine Aramusha's infinite light against a reflex guard that doesn't stop lights. It would be a nightmare to deal with. With the guard you suggest, where follow up lights are blocked (or "bounce off"), it wouldn't be so bad."

My personal problem with infinite combos is the fact that it easily lets someone mash out. I like Aramusha's deadly feints because of the fact that it technically would allow you to keep attacking.
So long as you can keep up on using that mechanic properly and it was paying off. We could technically go with your suggestion about no lights bouncing off even in combo by mixing that in with my guard idea. Where if you're just taping your guard in that direction then the combo won't stop. But if you're actively holding your guard in that direction it would (still referring to in combo attacks only.) No idea how that would go down programming wise though.

"Not really. More like what we have now, but without the first stage."

I see. So how would you handle OOS throws then in regards to punishment? And what about executions?

"but as a natural move within the chain itself, with no limitation on where in the chain it can be thrown."

So basically like centurion's quick throw but not limited to only coming after lights?

SpaceJim12
11-21-2018, 10:30 AM
@Vakris_One @Knight_Raime


I mentioned in a different thread that I would have no issue with them trying to make the class system be a thing again as that's what the team fighting in this game was based off of. But we'd need to make sure every hero has the same fundamentals and then build off of that. The problem with the original class system is it didn't offer everyone the same opportunities to attack, defend, and punish. Those basic tools need to be the same across the board. If we want to have heavies have special tanking properties or blocking properties that's fine. So long as everyone can still defend from the same things in a basic manner. etc.


I disagree with the last part. All heroes should have enough options so as to be viable in both 1v1s and group fights. Designing a character to only be good in one mode is how we got the likes of Raider and most recently Jiang Jun, despite the devs saying they wanted more heroes to be viable in all modes.

Kensei's rework is living proof that you can have a hero who can do well in both modes because his power is more or less equally distributed across the whole of his kit - i.e. he is not a one trick pony, rather he has to use his whole kit in order to prevail.

I didn't mean to make assassins helpless in 4v4 battles.=) I just tried to say you don't care now, which character you play on. You can parry everything and use same stratagy on Orochi and Lb both. I think it's not right. For example, when I played Shinobi, I mostly use dodge as a tool in 1vX fights. So let the heavy classes be no-move towers in 1vX fights and let assassins to rely on dodging at the same situation.

And I agree with Vakris about Kensei. As far as I can see now Kensei looks like most balanced and well-made character for For Honor. He really require your head and hand to play against skilled opponent, but you really do not feel frustrating using his kit. But still I'm in love with Nobushi and so hope she will get same rework, as Kensei have.

KWi_08j
11-22-2018, 07:46 AM
I think blocking should be used for you to only take chip damage but not stop/cancel out another characters combo. I believe the blocking should be used to keep from taking heavy damage but not save you from being pressured as attacks are still coming at you. This is where parry could come into play as they should be what are used to stop a combo as like a combo breaker but in all situations it should only guarantee a light attack to let you try to start applying pressure to your opponent. There are just some characters to who get canceled out by one block. This idea isnít complete but it can allow a little more room to find options to make it tougher on the defender and force them to not just stay on the defensive. (Maybe).

Knight_Raime
11-22-2018, 09:00 AM
I think blocking should be used for you to only take chip damage but not stop/cancel out another characters combo. I believe the blocking should be used to keep from taking heavy damage but not save you from being pressured as attacks are still coming at you. This is where parry could come into play as they should be what are used to stop a combo as like a combo breaker but in all situations it should only guarantee a light attack to let you try to start applying pressure to your opponent. There are just some characters to who get canceled out by one block. This idea isn’t complete but it can allow a little more room to find options to make it tougher on the defender and force them to not just stay on the defensive. (Maybe).

Blocks not stopping combos seems to be a running theme for most people i've talked to. So perhaps the devs should look into that.

NHLGoldenKnight
11-22-2018, 11:23 AM
This game is getting worse and worse and based on many suggestions here, it isn't getting any better. I am not sure if you guys play same game as I do but some of suggestions would make sure that this game loses the tiny little bit of medieval logic it has, and turns into Mortal Kombat, if isn't already.

Tatsu147146
11-22-2018, 11:52 AM
This game is getting worse and worse and based on many suggestions here, it isn't getting any better. I am not sure if you guys play same game as I do but some of suggestions would make sure that this game loses the tiny little bit of medieval logic it has, and turns into Mortal Kombat, if isn't already.

Sorry bro, but like I have been told on countless times every time I have brought up historical accuracy or realism even by the community managers is that (unfortunately) this isn't meant to be a real simulator. This isn't to say that I don't want this to change I have probably been one of the community's members most actively trying to get the dev's attention to base the characters move sets to be from real manuscripts and actual fighting techniques (at least to my knowledge I am, if I'm not than I'd like to meet whoever is).

@Knight_Raime

Yes I do think that blocking shouldn't stop a chain since that is what parry is for (I was taught this during the small amount of time I had in fencing classes as a kid) but technically that's the movement they do when they block light attacks. Since in my opinion there should be conscious thought behind parrying they should take away the ability to stop attacks simply by blocking them, since blocking should be a way to stop from receiving a killing blow but not stop your opponent. On the other hand lights shouldn't cause too much damage to balance out the fact that they are no longer stopped by blocking. And Shugoki should have higher chip damage to keep his light attack different from everyone else.

Knight_Raime
11-22-2018, 12:38 PM
This game is getting worse and worse and based on many suggestions here, it isn't getting any better. I am not sure if you guys play same game as I do but some of suggestions would make sure that this game loses the tiny little bit of medieval logic it has, and turns into Mortal Kombat, if isn't already.


Mortal kombat has juggling. None of the suggestions made here put combat even close to that. If you're going to comment about being against suggestions actually give feedback. Don't say the ideas are worse "cause" and then end your post.


Sorry bro, but like I have been told on countless times every time I have brought up historical accuracy or realism even by the community managers is that (unfortunately) this isn't meant to be a real simulator. This isn't to say that I don't want this to change I have probably been one of the community's members most actively trying to get the dev's attention to base the characters move sets to be from real manuscripts and actual fighting techniques (at least to my knowledge I am, if I'm not than I'd like to meet whoever is).

@Knight_Raime

Yes I do think that blocking shouldn't stop a chain since that is what parry is for (I was taught this during the small amount of time I had in fencing classes as a kid) but technically that's the movement they do when they block light attacks. Since in my opinion there should be conscious thought behind parrying they should take away the ability to stop attacks simply by blocking them, since blocking should be a way to stop from receiving a killing blow but not stop your opponent. On the other hand lights shouldn't cause too much damage to balance out the fact that they are no longer stopped by blocking. And Shugoki should have higher chip damage to keep his light attack different from everyone else.

Well some animations yes. But they're not doing the key part of shoving the blade off to the side. They kind of bat it away which is a good way to damage your weapon.

ishisan4902
11-22-2018, 08:02 PM
1.How about adding more options to heavy attack what if you can soft feint heavy to light, gb, dodge or hard feint it to bait if all characters have this this will give more depth to offense.

2.Give all characters a bash on neutral but only to daze but no confirmed next hit.

3.Take out all 400ms attacks or give all characters lights with same speed.

4.Give everybody reflex guard.

5.heavy attack should kill on chip damage.

NHLGoldenKnight
11-22-2018, 08:09 PM
Who cares about my feedback anyway?

I could tell you right away how it is not true that blocking is too easy, at least not for 80-85% of players but you would disagree. I could also tell you that there is a bunch of cheaters who make blocking looks easy and you wouldn't believe me.

All changes you guys suggest wouldn't change anything except damage further any slower type of hero. It is much easier to light spam than to defend properly and right now none of fast light spammers does any defending at all. Making blocking less useful would just benefit one group of players.

Blocking also should stop any chain unless it is dual wield hero. There is no any reason why blocking wouldn't stop chain when attacker doesn't dual wield, none whatsoever.

Then GB, that is probably most broken move in a whole game. GB should reward with heavy only if someone is thrown on the wall or on the ground. There is no reason why someone would just put their hand on je and magically I can't move for few seconds (or less). Rewardfor GB is too big without actually having to perform full move. It is nonsense that reward/risk is better for just GB than to perform throw or push completely. That is why everyone keeps cancelling everything just so they can get cheesy GB.

There wasn't reason to speed up game to the point where majority of mid tier players can't keep up anymore. In lab conditions 400ms doesn't sound that bad, however in real life situation it works differently. Average latency is not taken into account as well as other and rather often issues with Ubisoft "servers". It is getting near impossible to react on certain attacks unless you predict them and that is not what fighting game should be about, not this kind of game anyway.

Only thing they should have done is to keep light at 500ms as fastest and increase chip damage for blocking where heroes with faster attacks and smaller weapons would cause less chip damage and where slower heroes with large weapons would have higher chip damage stats. But it shouldn't be anything crazy, just little bit of something extra to motivate players to open up just a little bit.

I can speak from personal experience that the more Ubi is trying to speed up the game using wrong methods, the more I have to turtle when playing slow hero. They bring 400ms lights, they take away stamina management, and who benefits from all of that? Just fast heroes. And the more they benefit, more dangerous they are. And it means even more turtiling by big boys because there is nothing else to do.

Tatsu147146
11-22-2018, 09:25 PM
Who cares about my feedback anyway?

I could tell you right away how it is not true that blocking is too easy, at least not for 80-85% of players but you would disagree. I could also tell you that there is a bunch of cheaters who make blocking looks easy and you wouldn't believe me.

All changes you guys suggest wouldn't change anything except damage further any slower type of hero. It is much easier to light spam than to defend properly and right now none of fast light spammers does any defending at all. Making blocking less useful would just benefit one group of players.

Blocking also should stop any chain unless it is dual wield hero. There is no any reason why blocking wouldn't stop chain when attacker doesn't dual wield, none whatsoever.

Then GB, that is probably most broken move in a whole game. GB should reward with heavy only if someone is thrown on the wall or on the ground. There is no reason why someone would just put their hand on je and magically I can't move for few seconds (or less). Rewardfor GB is too big without actually having to perform full move. It is nonsense that reward/risk is better for just GB than to perform throw or push completely. That is why everyone keeps cancelling everything just so they can get cheesy GB.

There wasn't reason to speed up game to the point where majority of mid tier players can't keep up anymore. In lab conditions 400ms doesn't sound that bad, however in real life situation it works differently. Average latency is not taken into account as well as other and rather often issues with Ubisoft "servers". It is getting near impossible to react on certain attacks unless you predict them and that is not what fighting game should be about, not this kind of game anyway.

Only thing they should have done is to keep light at 500ms as fastest and increase chip damage for blocking where heroes with faster attacks and smaller weapons would cause less chip damage and where slower heroes with large weapons would have higher chip damage stats. But it shouldn't be anything crazy, just little bit of something extra to motivate players to open up just a little bit.

I can speak from personal experience that the more Ubi is trying to speed up the game using wrong methods, the more I have to turtle when playing slow hero. They bring 400ms lights, they take away stamina management, and who benefits from all of that? Just fast heroes. And the more they benefit, more dangerous they are. And it means even more turtiling by big boys because there is nothing else to do.

You are right I don't believe you, you have no proof for your claims that 80-85% of the player base don't find it easy enough to block, I also don't believe (and you can't prove) that there as many people using cheats to block when they could be using cheats to parry, and this all falls apart when you take into account the fact that before the light "spam" problem there was the turtle meta and the majority of the community used that, so in fact they are fully capable of blocking.

Second, have you ever even gotten into anything even remotely related to sword fighting, even with sticks as a child, because if not than blocking isn't so safe as you say or think it is. Not to mention if you can't predict enemy attacks then you aren't analyzing the fight which is why light "spam" works well against lower level players. Fast characters who rely on light attacks and dodge attacks eventually get parried an punished.

Also 500ms light attacks are much easier to parry and punish than you think this is why a lot of people parry Gladiator relatively easy. And when you say slow heroes who do you mean because most of the slow heroes need reworks although not faster lights but some other way to put pressure on the enemy.

Finally the GB problem, there the risk reward is something I can agree on, a lot of high risk moves have low reward and low risk moves have high reward for no reason. On the other hand if you keep falling for a feint into GB than like I said before you need to read the fight because if you don't, than the fact you can't read it is the real problem and not some "cheesy" move used repeatedly on you that can be reacted to but you can't, that's what you're basing this of?

I honestly hate saying this but you have to get better to see just what we are talking about. This is still in a minimal way a skill based game and if you don't get better than things like GB and light spam will be a constant problem for you and higher skilled players will stomp you. But the problems you have mentioned are not as problematic once you get better and they become less useful in combat.

KWi_08j
11-22-2018, 09:52 PM
@Knight_Raime

Yes I do think that blocking shouldn't stop a chain since that is what parry is for (I was taught this during the small amount of time I had in fencing classes as a kid) but technically that's the movement they do when they block light attacks. Since in my opinion there should be conscious thought behind parrying they should take away the ability to stop attacks simply by blocking them, since blocking should be a way to stop from receiving a killing blow but not stop your opponent. On the other hand lights shouldn't cause too much damage to balance out the fact that they are no longer stopped by blocking. And Shugoki should have higher chip damage to keep his light attack different from everyone else.

I can get behind this as it could bring a deference to the way defense would be looked at as blocking one light wonít save you from being pressured. Itís going to be hated at first I think it would be good to lower the damage of light attacks but donít let blocking cancel them out. It seems a little more realistic to me than bouncing back like you were doing a charging attack against a wall.

I think lawbringer should get more chip damage as well as the Shugoki should.

Knight_Raime
11-22-2018, 11:16 PM
1.How about adding more options to heavy attack what if you can soft feint heavy to light, gb, dodge or hard feint it to bait if all characters have this this will give more depth to offense.

2.Give all characters a bash on neutral but only to daze but no confirmed next hit.

3.Take out all 400ms attacks or give all characters lights with same speed.

4.Give everybody reflex guard.

5.heavy attack should kill on chip damage.

1) More options in kits is a good thing yes.

2) Disagree. I think all heros need an opener. But I don't think all openers should be bashes. if that makes sense.

3) I would say at the moment that the only 400ms attack that should be removed should probably be one of Nuxia's. We don't need to make all lights the same speed either. There are ways of making lights more viable without making them all unreactable.

4) This is a common asked thing that I agree with.

5) Kill and execute.

Knight_Raime
11-22-2018, 11:35 PM
@NHLGoldenKnight

"Who cares about my feedback anyway?"

This is a thread specifically about giving feedback for making major changes to the game. If you've nothing to add about that then why bother commenting.

"I could tell you right away how it is not true that blocking is too easy, at least not for 80-85% of players but you would disagree. I could also tell you that there is a bunch of cheaters who make blocking looks easy and you wouldn't believe me."

It is. Even if your statistic was accurate games are supposed to balance from the top down. And it's entirely possible to have a game that works competitively but supports casual play. Super smash brothers is a fighting game series that more than accomplishes this. I don't play pc so I can't comment on cheaters. But I know that I play in high mid tier on console. Nearly everyone I fight is capable of blocking most things thrown at them. So unless you're actually suggesting that every single person i've fought for the past 3 months is a cheater then i'm not sure what you're getting at.

"All changes you guys suggest wouldn't change anything except damage further any slower type of hero. Making blocking less useful would just benefit one group of players."

The only slow hero in this game is Goki and it's universally agreed that he's a bad hero. Kits that also rely purely on counter attacks are also bad design. All kits need to be able to be decent at base for all things. And then heros can be built to be really good at one thing. For honor's hero design problem is not all of the heros were created equally. The changes do not make blocking less useful. They just make a strong defense as a concept harder to manage. The only actual change has been combos continue regardless of blocking. Which needs to happen. Because without combos the game heavily relies on single very powerful tools and high guaranteed damage on punishes. You can't not have "op moves" and easy strong defense. That's what was FH's problem at launch.

"Blocking also should stop any chain unless it is dual wield hero. There is no any reason why blocking wouldn't stop chain when attacker doesn't dual wield, none whatsoever."

What is your basis for this? realism? Because it makes sense in your head? It doesn't matter either way. Offense isn't a possible thing in this game because blocking is so strong. If you're landing constant hits now or seeing it happen then that's not the norm and said experiences shouldn't be the basis for the game as a whole.

"Then GB, that is probably most broken move in a whole game. GB should reward with heavy only if someone is thrown on the wall or on the ground. There is no reason why someone would just put their hand on je and magically I can't move for few seconds (or less). Rewardfor GB is too big without actually having to perform full move. It is nonsense that reward/risk is better for just GB than to perform throw or push completely. That is why everyone keeps cancelling everything just so they can get cheesy GB."

Guard breaks absolutely do not land against any competent player unless it's during a situation in which the person can't actually tech it because they're in a gb vulnerable period. If anything this statement proves you're playing a different game than a vast majority of players. None the less GB is a topic I covered. And what it does/rewards is a topic of discussion.

"There wasn't reason to speed up game to the point where majority of mid tier players can't keep up anymore. In lab conditions 400ms doesn't sound that bad, however in real life situation it works differently. Average latency is not taken into account as well as other and rather often issues with Ubisoft "servers". It is getting near impossible to react on certain attacks unless you predict them and that is not what fighting game should be about, not this kind of game anyway."

I've pretty much been in mid tier the entire time i've been on for honor. I've never once struggled to keep up with the change of pace of the game. Please don't make baseless claims. Connection is not a factor in balance because connection is never consistent. Also you clearly have little fighting game experience/knowledge. Unreactable attacks/mix ups exist in any main stay fighting game. Pure reactions don't allow a player for personal growth as it's pretty much impossible to get massively better reactions. Mind games exist to make fights more interesting and it also gives players with less strong reactions a chance to actually beat people with really good reactions.

"Only thing they should have done is to keep light at 500ms as fastest and increase chip damage for blocking where heroes with faster attacks and smaller weapons would cause less chip damage and where slower heroes with large weapons would have higher chip damage stats. But it shouldn't be anything crazy, just little bit of something extra to motivate players to open up just a little bit."

Lights do not do chip damage unless OOS because lights bounce off guard. So keeping lights at 500ms while increasing their chip damage makes zero sense. Increasing chip damage alone is not enough to make a move threatening especially if it's a slow one. Because slow ones are reactable and thus dodged or parried. And even if that wasn't the case chip doesn't kill. So the extra chip damage will not movtivate a player to open up.

NHLGoldenKnight
11-23-2018, 12:32 AM
As I said, why bother? Because you are here to tell everyone how we are wrong and you are right. I was warned about you so long time ago, before I even joined forum and rightfully so. You are the cancer of this forum.

You come as so arrogant and so wrong at the same time that is almost unbelievable. But you are loudest here so I guess devs listen to people like you which is why we have current issues in the game. Detached from reality is how they call cases like this if I am mistaken.

Also, telling me how I shouldn't say something as if I am representing community while you are the one who is claiming how blocking is soo easy. For you or for community? Is that the same 1% players you are referring to? So we should balance game based on what, less than 100 players? Great business plan I must say. Those "elite" players who don't shy from cheating on tournaments and who have zero latency are perfect way to balance the game.

Because of people like you and poor dev decisions this game has turned from something very close to fighting simulator to complete hack and slash mindless type of game. Just keep doing great job, by the end of next year only you and your precious 1% will be playing this game.

PS, I have been playing all kind of games games for more time than you for sure 3 decades so far, and number of games I played is measured in hundreds. That is not reason why I think my opinion is more valuable but just explanation since your opinion is that I haven't played many fighting games. I guess not, if you take away 20 years of Tekken and number of years playing other fighting games.

Knight_Raime
11-23-2018, 04:20 AM
@NHLGoldenKnight

"As I said, why bother? Because you are here to tell everyone how we are wrong and you are right. I was warned about you so long time ago, before I even joined forum and rightfully so. You are the cancer of this forum."

If that's how you really felt then you shouldn't have even posted in this thread let alone ever engage in discussions with me. This statement only serves to tear me down instead of actually properly dispute anything I say. I don't claim to know the game in and out. But i'm probably 1 of maybe 10 people on this forum (that are regularly active) that actually have a solid grip on how this game works. So yeah. Excuse me if I come off a little arrogant. It's only because it's 100% justifyable.

"You come as so arrogant and so wrong at the same time that is almost unbelievable. But you are loudest here so I guess devs listen to people like you which is why we have current issues in the game. Detached from reality is how they call cases like this if I am mistaken."

Hate to break it to you but For honor had issues before I was a regular poster. And it would still if i'd never said anything. Though i'm flattered that you actually think I have any kind of impact on the game. The most influence you could say I have is whenever I point out bugs that get forwarded to the team.

"Also, telling me how I shouldn't say something as if I am representing community while you are the one who is claiming how blocking is soo easy. For you or for community? Is that the same 1% players you are referring to? So we should balance game based on what, less than 100 players? Great business plan I must say. Those "elite" players who don't shy from cheating on tournaments and who have zero latency are perfect way to balance the game."

I never claimed to represent the community. And you really should sit down and listen to yourself sometimes. If only 100 people could actually block most things then we wouldn't have several hundred videos on youtube showing just how turtle happy the game used to be. Nor would we continue to have content showing at best pub stompers (who are not even close to high tier) not only blocking consistently but fighting people who can as well. But I guess it's hard to see anything with blinders on. Already mentioned why latency isn't figured into balancing. People who play better than you are not cheaters. They're just better.

"Because of people like you and poor dev decisions this game has turned from something very close to fighting simulator to complete hack and slash mindless type of game. Just keep doing great job, by the end of next year only you and your precious 1% will be playing this game."

Not the first time a change happened where people said it would kill the game. It's not going to die out because no other game offers what For honor offers experience wise. If people could suffer a whole year where one player quitting would end the game for everyone i'm sure the game could survive people quitting over trivial nonsense.

"I have been playing all kind of games games for more time than you for sure 3 decades so far."

If you really are over 30 than i'm actually pretty appalled that someone who's older than me can behave like such a child.

"your opinion is that I haven't played many fighting games. I guess not, if you take away 20 years of Tekken and number of years playing other fighting games."

If you have that much experience with tekken alone then you should be more than familiar with how fighting games play. It's a mix of reactions AND reads. I never once admitted in this thread that the current way unreactibility as a concept is being handled the best possible way. I merely pointed out that it has to exist.

Now i'm not going to derail the thread further. So unless you have any more big game changing suggestions about the core mechanics that we can actually discuss don't bother with a reply as i'll ignore it.

Tatsu147146
11-23-2018, 11:46 AM
I was thinking on the block mechanics and the light attack not being stopped and I think they should add extra reactions on block so blocking a light (or if the medium attack is being considered) they don't stagger as much as blocking a heavy attack, like when you're OOS which (to my knowledge) is the same stagger for all blocks. On a side note I remember reading here that all heroes should have a modified version of reflex guard where you hold the position of the guard to prevent decay and I can definitely get behind that idea.

Roseguard_Cpt
11-23-2018, 12:20 PM
I've gone on hiatus from FH again for reasons. I've been playing other games and it got me thinking of what could be an interesting change to the parry mechanic. In the Mount and Blade series the combat is stance based, four stances with attacks that come from each. Blocking in that game works much like reflex guard in FH. Guard is not up until you tell it to be. The game doesn't use a block-on system admittedly, as you have to turn the camera to match stance while clicking the block button.

Blocking is of course not the only defense option in the game however. In M&B you hold the attack button to get your weapon ready and release the button to swing. If you time your startup of your character readying their weapon to swing, it actually has block frames, which parries your opponent as they're now in a brief blockstun as you let your hit go. Removing "Parrying" as we know it in FH and simply giving all heavy attacks Superior Block during startup sounds like a potentially interesting change. An issue with it though is how For Honor has an UB system, and the fact that heavy attacks cannot be held indefinitely to create variation in timing.

Just a little food for thought from how other games handle parrying