PDA

View Full Version : 1 hero each per team (Future competitive 4v4 mode)



Aku...
09-13-2017, 06:56 PM
I don't expect this game to be ready for a fair and balanced 4v4 for a long time, but here is a standard esport games

1a. only 1 player can use one hero per team (whether it be tank, support, assassin, etc), Nearly all competitive games play like this

So with for honor, for sure there can only be one warden, one orochi, one shugoki, one centurion etc (no quad centurions)

this is mainly because if they don't restrict them, it's quite boring to watch and exploits are more frequent

Aku...
09-13-2017, 07:08 PM
the next stuff is extra, you don't need to read it, but it's all ideas I feel would greatly benefit this game and it true competitive side

1b. how about another step further, one of each type of class, 1 vanguard, 1 assassin, 1 heavy and 1 hybrid for each team (maybe possibly have multiple hybrids, but I'm not sure about this idea)

for this to really work, they need to add more vanguards and heavies, I would suggest changes to hero type classes for these two

Lawbringer = heavy (he's more of a heavy than conq imo)
highlander = vanguard (he's just a slower version of kensei with more options)

this would actually encourage more tactical thinking, due to the speed of your class and properties etc (right now, people just do whatever the hell they like and it works)

2. gear stats and feats, in a competitive setting, is tricky, but for sure, people who have played longer with their account should not have any buff advantage whatsoever, so no gear stats modifiers, just like duel and brawl

feats however are not so bad, some of them do need to be nerfed (haymaker, spear storm damage amount etc) but if done right, these can be a part of competitve

3a. Friendly fire, I've said many times, actual friendly fire is a must, right now, it is extremely difficult to kill your own team mate (the only possibilities are is if the ally is low on health and you have a buff or a feat)

it is practically impossible to kill your teammate if you two are alone, it takes forever to bring his health down to critical, and once you do, he starts regenerating health, making it impossible

The only way you can die to friendly fire right now is, getting ledged by a friendly pushing an enemy into you (very rare), catapult/bomb though you still have to low health (this is a little common, and getting struck with a friendly high damage heavy when your health is critical or lower (rare) or getting staggered by friendly fire and enemy killing you when you are critical (very rare)

only an idiot would do these things, but fortunately, the game doesn't punish stupidity yet, you can just revive your team mate

With actual friendly fire, it would take skill to gank someone, or a friend you have practiced with, it could be amazing to see the coordination of combos people come up with, or see the one player overcome the three due to his skill, and their poor team work (right now these gank buster videos you see are really not that impressive once you know the game)

ganking someone should NOT be an easy win, 1v3/4 players is impossible to win against anyone competent (1v2 is possible but still not likely if they use easy friendly fire exploits)

3b. revenge mode and exhaustion, these need some tweaks in my opinion, right now,

I've always felt that after you use revenge, once it wears off, you should be exhausted, making you be more cautious on when to use your revenge

also exhaustion should be that you that you can't interrupt lights on block, making you take light block damage

I'll add more if there is time, but the way the game is right now, you don't need any strategy at all, just run and kill, this is annoyingly repetitive and boring to watch

When I first saw this game's gameplay reveal at e3 2015, I dreamed of the amazing coordination of fighters, which other games have implemented but not greatly, dark souls has parry and the uniteruptable riposte (this was all right) dragonball xenoverse had great combos, but it was very poorly done, you couldn't switch targets mid combo and no friendly fire whatsoever, so you could end up being Kamehameha'd to death, making it impossible to win 1v2

This game has the tools to be something we haven't seen before, but players are holding it back, trying to force it to be for the casual player, because true competitive games are too hard for most

CandleInTheDark
09-13-2017, 07:51 PM
It would have to be without gearscore,I think,especially if you want to also restrict classes which is something also worth at least considering. I mean I could do it, I have two hybrids and one of each of the others in legendary gear, I plan to get another 2-5 there over the next season and a half or so (two are about a third there and I have put on a good pace this season, what I have currently was my target for the end of this one), but I very much doubt that most people have that kind of time or want to play any more than one character in some cases which is why I always oppose this idea in regular play. The alternative is to pick before matchmaking starts and be matched based on character, that would allow people with one main and nothing else to do that,since even without gearscore people who only play (x character) are screwed.

TheArc6
09-13-2017, 08:59 PM
I was thinking of something pretty much exactly like this earlier today, but I was concerned about how matchmaking would handle it. I think CandleInTheDark's idea about selecting a character before matchmaking would probably work the best, at least from a gameplay standpoint, but then again, if literally everyone loves to play a certain character, the wait time would drive me insane. But I also was thinking about if players were forced into a class at the beginning of a match. This would encourage a variable playstyle and, I think, help people be more competitive in the long run. However, Candle also raised a valid point about many players not having that much time for the game. Having 2 matchmaking modes would clutter up the screen more, so I'm inclined to agree with making a match based on character.

CandleInTheDark
09-13-2017, 09:12 PM
I was thinking of something pretty much exactly like this earlier today, but I was concerned about how matchmaking would handle it. I think CandleInTheDark's idea about selecting a character before matchmaking would probably work the best, at least from a gameplay standpoint, but then again, if literally everyone loves to play a certain character, the wait time would drive me insane. But I also was thinking about if players were forced into a class at the beginning of a match. This would encourage a variable playstyle and, I think, help people be more competitive in the long run. However, Candle also raised a valid point about many players not having that much time for the game. Having 2 matchmaking modes would clutter up the screen more, so I'm inclined to agree with making a match based on character.

Yeah that is the caveat I have always given with that idea before, I would be willing to wait an extra couple minutes to play my peacekeeper or warden in a game but it would get old really fast if I kept getting booted ten seconds into the game. With dedicated servers coming it is more a possibility I think.

Aku...
09-13-2017, 10:02 PM
I didn't think about people who main only one class tbh, I've always had the mentality of being flexible, I myself have 8 heroes who are above rep 7

The idea of being able to select who you prefer to fight as is a good one, I would like to see that in some form

as said Gear stats would definitely need to be off in competitive, like duel and brawl

Even though it would be annoying, restriction is necessary for both a strategic play and to limit exploit uses

I compare this to overwatch, since they have had similar issues, overwatch used to allow people to play as many heroes they wanted, but this caused a lot of issues on people using cheesy methods that couldn't really be beat (6 bastions, 6 mei's etc) there was no way to balance all the thousands of combinations, so they got rid of this standard and restricted it to one per player about 4 months after release. some people weren't happy with it because they found it fun to mess around in, but you can still play like this in arcade and custom games, but not in the standard competitive setting

this game does have the issue of people who one trick, I'm not sure if that really should hold back the developers from making a proper competitive game mode though. the game right now is too soft on people who just main one hero, they are casual players in my opinion, whether it was because the hero was good at ledging, or overpowered, you should be at a disadvantage if you plan to main one hero competitively.

A4einboy
09-13-2017, 11:15 PM
I don't expect this game to be ready for a fair and balanced 4v4 for a long time, but here is a standard esport games

1a. only 1 player can use one hero per team (whether it be tank, support, assassin, etc), Nearly all competitive games play like this

So with for honor, for sure there can only be one warden, one orochi, one shugoki, one centurion etc (no quad centurions)

this is mainly because if they don't restrict them, it's quite boring to watch and exploits are more frequent

you will see alot of people quiting as soon the match starts and will leave you with bots because i for one will quit out in the first 30 secs if i dont get to use my main and if that happens to be the same main as you then i wont stick around why not just go to matchmaking with bots there are alot of people that dont know how to handle certain heros in 4v4 . if you get ganked by 4 lawbringers or 4 cents you think you still have a chance hahahahah you dont

CandleInTheDark
09-13-2017, 11:21 PM
I didn't think about people who main only one class tbh, I've always had the mentality of being flexible, I myself have 8 heroes who are above rep 7

The idea of being able to select who you prefer to fight as is a good one, I would like to see that in some form

as said Gear stats would definitely need to be off in competitive, like duel and brawl

Even though it would be annoying, restriction is necessary for both a strategic play and to limit exploit uses

I compare this to overwatch, since they have had similar issues, overwatch used to allow people to play as many heroes they wanted, but this caused a lot of issues on people using cheesy methods that couldn't really be beat (6 bastions, 6 mei's etc) there was no way to balance all the thousands of combinations, so they got rid of this standard and restricted it to one per player about 4 months after release. some people weren't happy with it because they found it fun to mess around in, but you can still play like this in arcade and custom games, but not in the standard competitive setting

this game does have the issue of people who one trick, I'm not sure if that really should hold back the developers from making a proper competitive game mode though. the game right now is too soft on people who just main one hero, they are casual players in my opinion, whether it was because the hero was good at ledging, or overpowered, you should be at a disadvantage if you plan to main one hero competitively.

I get what you are saying. I have always protested this idea because people have wanted it in the regular game modes that are there now, so long as this is strictly for a separate ranked feature where people know going in there are these restrictions and the regular modes we have now still exist that isn't something I have so much an issue with.


you will see alot of people quiting as soon the match starts and will leave you with bots because i for one will quit out in the first 30 secs if i dont get to use my main and if that happens to be the same main as you then i wont stick around

Except he is talking about a separate ranked feature. I am fairly certain there would be no grace period and, as there is in duel ranked, quite a harsh ranking penalty for doing that since leaving bots in screws around with the ranking of others.

UbiNoty
09-13-2017, 11:38 PM
A few big differences between OW and FH that complicates things is gear-score, choosing a hero pre-match vs being able to change mid-session, and unlocking heroes vs. everyone is available. Currently as it stands, it's difficult to enforce a single-pick hero select lobby in FH because we risk alienating people if we don't allow them to play on their main heroes that they've spent time leveling up. In duels it's not as bad since it's only two people, but in a 4v4, you run the possibility of being forced far, far outside of your hero pool. And unlike OW, FH requires a much more intimate knowledge of your moveset. Both games equally require tons of skill, but it's much easier to pick up a new hero on OW (you have 4 keys) vs "just picking up" a hero in FH.

It's something we do have in our back-pocket, but we haven't made any moves just yet to make single-pick happen for a number of reasons.

TSCDescon
09-13-2017, 11:48 PM
Nope. I like having 4 Centurions on my team.

:P

Aku...
09-14-2017, 12:57 AM
A few big differences between OW and FH that complicates things is gear-score, choosing a hero pre-match vs being able to change mid-session, and unlocking heroes vs. everyone is available. Currently as it stands, it's difficult to enforce a single-pick hero select lobby in FH because we risk alienating people if we don't allow them to play on their main heroes that they've spent time leveling up. In duels it's not as bad since it's only two people, but in a 4v4, you run the possibility of being forced far, far outside of your hero pool. And unlike OW, FH requires a much more intimate knowledge of your moveset. Both games equally require tons of skill, but it's much easier to pick up a new hero on OW (you have 4 keys) vs "just picking up" a hero in FH.

It's something we do have in our back-pocket, but we haven't made any moves just yet to make single-pick happen for a number of reasons.

I only compare overwatch to for honor due to similar issues they are/were having in development, for example overwatch has had many different balancing changes for their heroes, making heroes op or a must have, creating things like the tank meta or dive meta, overwatch had only three standard game modes for months until they finally added the arcade, both games use the same dlc plan (apart from the events) and are criticised for being micro transaction heavy.

As I have said, gear stats should not be present in ranked competitive game mode. making any hero you play having a fair shot at someone else, 4v4 ranked should be more demanding of the player than 1v1 ranked, it should require good game knowledge and knowing what your role is, I would have to disagree on the part of overwatch heroes being easier to pick up, while yes there are a limited amount of controls you need, that is because the game revolves around what role you should be playing, anyone can pick up a Winston or raider and play around, it's not that hard, but to do well is to understand what your heroes role is and what he counters and how to implement this knowledge. This is much more difficult than learning a moveset, the biggest hurdle for people who only main one hero, would be getting out of habits, like trying to shield bash when they have no shield. once you understand the controls, heavy, light, gb etc, then you have it down, I have not leveled up my warlord past even level 1, but I know I can kick someone's *** easily with him, I cannot say the same for an overwatch hero I barely know. That would be much more difficult

I have poured about the same amount of hours into overwatch and for honor, and I do feel the similarities are there and some could be learnt from.

this is how I view my choice when I play ranked in overwatch, I have to be flexible, I'm part of a team, not a one man wrecking army, I didn't feel comfortable playing my first few ranked matches until I was confident with 5 different heroes. not everyone will think this way, but is someone's unwillingness to try and learn another hero for a ranked match the developers problem? or the player's problem? ranked competitive would be for serious balanced team gameplay, therefore one trick's should struggle! they can always play another game mode. you could always find a group of people that you know don't like to play your hero and queue up with them. this isn't really a problem in overwatch, sometimes multiple mercy mains are put on one team, but it doesn't alienate them, they just negotiate, or get toxic, it's not the developer fault, it's needed for balanced gameplay

if the restrictions are put through, then all players would need to do is learn the movesets of at least 4 heroes, so they don't run the risk of having all their options taken, I know 11 heroes movesets of by heart and could easily wing it with the other 5.

I know there is a big division of casual players and pro players, but a ranked competitive game mode is not for casual players, it's for the gamers who take the game seriously and want a fair fight

UbiNoty
09-14-2017, 01:24 AM
I only compare overwatch to for honor due to similar issues they are/were having in development, for example overwatch has had many different balancing changes for their heroes, making heroes op or a must have, creating things like the tank meta or dive meta, overwatch had only three standard game modes for months until they finally added the arcade, both games use the same dlc plan (apart from the events) and are criticised for being micro transaction heavy.

As I have said, gear stats should not be present in ranked competitive game mode. making any hero you play having a fair shot at someone else, 4v4 ranked should be more demanding of the player than 1v1 ranked, it should require good game knowledge and knowing what your role is, I would have to disagree on the part of overwatch heroes being easier to pick up, while yes there are a limited amount of controls you need, that is because the game revolves around what role you should be playing, anyone can pick up a Winston or raider and play around, it's not that hard, but to do well is to understand what your heroes role is and what he counters and how to implement this knowledge. This is much more difficult than learning a moveset, the biggest hurdle for people who only main one hero, would be getting out of habits, like trying to shield bash when they have no shield. once you understand the controls, heavy, light, gb etc, then you have it down, I have not leveled up my warlord past even level 1, but I know I can kick someone's *** easily with him, I cannot say the same for an overwatch hero I barely know. That would be much more difficult

I have poured about the same amount of hours into overwatch and for honor, and I do feel the similarities are there and some could be learnt from.

this is how I view my choice when I play ranked in overwatch, I have to be flexible, I'm part of a team, not a one man wrecking army, I didn't feel comfortable playing my first few ranked matches until I was confident with 5 different heroes. not everyone will think this way, but is someone's unwillingness to try and learn another hero for a ranked match the developers problem? or the player's problem? ranked competitive would be for serious balanced team gameplay, therefore one trick's should struggle! they can always play another game mode. you could always find a group of people that you know don't like to play your hero and queue up with them. this isn't really a problem in overwatch, sometimes multiple mercy mains are put on one team, but it doesn't alienate them, they just negotiate, or get toxic, it's not the developer fault, it's needed for balanced gameplay

if the restrictions are put through, then all players would need to do is learn the movesets of at least 4 heroes, so they don't run the risk of having all their options taken, I know 11 heroes movesets of by heart and could easily wing it with the other 5.

I know there is a big division of casual players and pro players, but a ranked competitive game mode is not for casual players, it's for the gamers who take the game seriously and want a fair fight

I understand where you're coming from, and I do think it would be great to have players be more flexible and well-rounded, but we also have to weigh the current reality of the circumstances - so that plays a factor into our decision making.

But we still don't have a ranked 4v4 mode yet, and we still don't know what's going to happen to gear-score in ranked 4v4. Things can always change in the future, anything is possible. So here's looking towards a better, fairer, and more balanced FH.

Aku...
09-14-2017, 01:14 PM
I understand where you're coming from, and I do think it would be great to have players be more flexible and well-rounded, but we also have to weigh the current reality of the circumstances - so that plays a factor into our decision making.

But we still don't have a ranked 4v4 mode yet, and we still don't know what's going to happen to gear-score in ranked 4v4. Things can always change in the future, anything is possible. So here's looking towards a better, fairer, and more balanced FH.

well at least it's still being considered, I do have hope this game can pull a rainbow six siege and come back better and more successful after a year or so

I get that you don't want alienate current players, but to be honest I don't think there is any action the devs can do that won't alienate the players, I heard kensei would be getting new moves, Great to hear, that's amazing! I wouldn't mind if you nerfed some of his light damage while at it, to balance him. some people still think he's op, which is nuts, you can't please everyone in this game

Unfortunately, the way the game is right now, I feel I have seen everything, which is sad to say, because I know there is the HUGE unexplored part of coordinated team fights, people love to see coordinated strikes that take time to master, and if you screw up then the other has an advantage. I dream of seeing this one day. because even true masters can't defeat a gank squad that know how to exploit

Thanks for reading my ramblings btw, in my opinion though, for honor is too easy to master

Netcode_err_404
09-14-2017, 01:24 PM
I only compare overwatch to for honor due to similar issues they are/were having in development, for example overwatch has had many different balancing changes for their heroes, making heroes op or a must have, creating things like the tank meta or dive meta, overwatch had only three standard game modes for months until they finally added the arcade, both games use the same dlc plan (apart from the events) and are criticised for being micro transaction heavy.

As I have said, gear stats should not be present in ranked competitive game mode. making any hero you play having a fair shot at someone else, 4v4 ranked should be more demanding of the player than 1v1 ranked, it should require good game knowledge and knowing what your role is, I would have to disagree on the part of overwatch heroes being easier to pick up, while yes there are a limited amount of controls you need, that is because the game revolves around what role you should be playing, anyone can pick up a Winston or raider and play around, it's not that hard, but to do well is to understand what your heroes role is and what he counters and how to implement this knowledge. This is much more difficult than learning a moveset, the biggest hurdle for people who only main one hero, would be getting out of habits, like trying to shield bash when they have no shield. once you understand the controls, heavy, light, gb etc, then you have it down, I have not leveled up my warlord past even level 1, but I know I can kick someone's *** easily with him, I cannot say the same for an overwatch hero I barely know. That would be much more difficult

I have poured about the same amount of hours into overwatch and for honor, and I do feel the similarities are there and some could be learnt from.

this is how I view my choice when I play ranked in overwatch, I have to be flexible, I'm part of a team, not a one man wrecking army, I didn't feel comfortable playing my first few ranked matches until I was confident with 5 different heroes. not everyone will think this way, but is someone's unwillingness to try and learn another hero for a ranked match the developers problem? or the player's problem? ranked competitive would be for serious balanced team gameplay, therefore one trick's should struggle! they can always play another game mode. you could always find a group of people that you know don't like to play your hero and queue up with them. this isn't really a problem in overwatch, sometimes multiple mercy mains are put on one team, but it doesn't alienate them, they just negotiate, or get toxic, it's not the developer fault, it's needed for balanced gameplay

if the restrictions are put through, then all players would need to do is learn the movesets of at least 4 heroes, so they don't run the risk of having all their options taken, I know 11 heroes movesets of by heart and could easily wing it with the other 5.

I know there is a big division of casual players and pro players, but a ranked competitive game mode is not for casual players, it's for the gamers who take the game seriously and want a fair fight


Then why are you on this game ?

Aku...
09-14-2017, 01:37 PM
Then why are you on this game ?

I don't understand, are you accusing me of being a casual player? how does that question relate to a possible future ranked competitive game mode? or are you implying that it's impossible to take the game seriously and expect a fair fight?

please explain yourself dude, it isn't very clear

Netcode_err_404
09-14-2017, 01:40 PM
I don't understand, are you accusing me of being a casual player? how does that question relate to a possible future ranked competitive game mode? or are you implying that it's impossible to take the game seriously and expect a fair fight?

please explain yourself dude, it isn't very clear


:D

Aku...
09-14-2017, 02:44 PM
:D

haha, in it's current state, yeh it's impossible, totally agree with you

That's why I ask for a proper ranked mode

gj4063
09-14-2017, 07:40 PM
People quit because you used an emote on them, and you want to tell them they can't use their favorite class at the start of a match?

UbiNoty
09-14-2017, 11:20 PM
So just an update: we talked very, very briefly about it in the livestream today - and it looks like the devs are strongly favoring a single-pick type system in ranked 4v4 modes. So while we still have yet to even seriously test ranked 4v4s - at least this news should be a comfort to any of those worried about it.

CandleInTheDark
09-14-2017, 11:30 PM
So just an update: we talked very, very briefly about it in the livestream today - and it looks like the devs are strongly favoring a single-pick type system in ranked 4v4 modes. So while we still have yet to even seriously test ranked 4v4s - at least this news should be a comfort to any of those worried about it.

I honestly thought of this thread when I heard that one line >.>lol

Aku...
09-15-2017, 12:47 AM
Damn, I must have missed that, guess I was too busy trying to look for the differences in this next patch build they said to look out for

that's Great to hear, would love to see that come to pass and more, tribute also looks pretty good

Thanks for the update, much appreciated

TheTKOShow
09-15-2017, 05:13 AM
Highest rep picks first for your team? Lowest rep, is it a free for all for picks, can there be the same hero on the other team.

It only works if you pick you toon first then look for a game imo. What if a rep 40 raider doesn't get his raider, he will most likely back out,

I think 2 of a hero is good enough lock it after 2 players pick a class.

Tyrjo
09-16-2017, 08:45 PM
One pick is the only way 4v4 ranked can work well.



It only works if you pick you toon first then look for a game imo. What if a rep 40 raider doesn't get his raider, he will most likely back out,


Then he will get a match penalty for one hour.

Devils-_-legacy
09-16-2017, 09:17 PM
1 hour?

Aku...
09-18-2017, 08:52 PM
1 hour of not being able to matchmake is the penalty for backing out of a duel tournament

To be honest, for 4v4 ranked, it should be more, since you backing out will not only count as a loss for you, but put your team at a severe disadavantage, and probably make them lose

if they rage quit or leave for whatever reason, then they should get a 3 hour ban and Lose rank amount

if they repeat this more than once, then they should also get a steel and xp gain reduction (-50%) and a ban from participating in ranked matches for either the current season, or for all future ranked matches, depending on how much they leave of course

4v4 ranked matches need the dedicated servers first to avoid exploits on leaving and unfair punishments of course

Devils-_-legacy
09-18-2017, 08:59 PM
Never been in a ranked but I personally don't see the point as someone who stands still and just parrying is still a easy win but that sort of punishment will put people off if it's from leaving a ranked then it shouldn't pass over to the casual side would work but they would have to keep the penalty to tournament's to kick a casual for 3 hours and shrink his xp is going a bit farr

Aku...
09-18-2017, 09:37 PM
I've used overwatch's current penalty system as a standard, you get all these with the exception of the time ban (for overwatch, if you are bad enough, your IP address is completely banned, so you can not play the game on any account from where you live)

When you leave the duel ranked tournament, the only one that suffers, is you alone.

Keep in mind, that in 4v4 ranked, when you leave, you effect your team as well, some players get off the fact that they are pissing of their allies and making them lose, having a simple 1 hour ban would not deter people from doing this what so ever

If you are gonna play a ranked match without quitting, then you have nothing to fear. If you think you might rage quit, then simply don't play ranked

Right now ubisoft is only banning accounts for serious offenses (hacking etc). if you repeatedly quit out of ranked matches, then it's clear they do the same in casual. They need a punishment that would deter you from doing it again, the xp reduction would only happen after repeatedly doing it. 3 hour ban is for making your team lose, no one wants to play with someone who quits when things go bad

If you didn't know, with a ranked 4v4 match, if one person quits during the match, he will not be replaced by another player (Don't know about putting bot in his place either)

Felis_Menari
09-19-2017, 01:33 AM
Exclusive character picks in matches would have to be an extra, optional game mode. As a standard mode effect, this would absolutely cause players to bail on matches if their mains were taken by others.

bmason1000
09-19-2017, 02:49 AM
I know there is a big division of casual players and pro players, but a ranked competitive game mode is not for casual players, it's for the gamers who take the game seriously and want a fair fight


this game does have the issue of people who one trick, I'm not sure if that really should hold back the developers from making a proper competitive game mode though. the game right now is too soft on people who just main one hero, they are casual players in my opinion, whether it was because the hero was good at ledging, or overpowered, you should be at a disadvantage if you plan to main one hero competitively.I'm just a bit confused by some of your opinions which seem quite strong. I was hoping you could help me understand it better.

So I've exclusively played one character since the beta. I've taken this character in to the ranked tournaments many, many times and several organized community tournaments as well. I excusively play one character because i enjoy that class and I'm nowhere near as good as i could be, which requires extensive practice that i won't get if I'm using someone else. According to you though, i don't take the game seriously? I don't see how those facts are correlated.

You also claim the game "is too soft on people who just main one hero." Why should it be "hard" on people who do as i do?

You also claim players who main one hero competitively "should be at a disadvantage." Why do you feel such players should be disadvantaged?

Aku...
09-19-2017, 04:20 AM
I'm just a bit confused by some of your opinions which seem quite strong. I was hoping you could help me understand it better.

So I've exclusively played one character since the beta. I've taken this character in to the ranked tournaments many, many times and several organized community tournaments as well. I excusively play one character because i enjoy that class and I'm nowhere near as good as i could be, which requires extensive practice that i won't get if I'm using someone else. According to you though, i don't take the game seriously? I don't see how those facts are correlated.

You also claim the game "is too soft on people who just main one hero." Why should it be "hard" on people who do as i do?

You also claim players who main one hero competitively "should be at a disadvantage." Why do you feel such players should be disadvantaged?

Yeh sorry If I wasn't too clear, but I have talked about how it is a way to balance the game

Right now this game is known for its bugs and unbalanced heroes etc. especially in 4v4, where ganking is too strong, feats and gears score can make one to powerful and a load of combo exploits. If there were on one team all warlord mains (plus pre nerf warlord), you could end up having a load of in killable warlords running around ledging and more, There is no good counter to this, and there are thousands more combinations which would be impossible to beat strategically or skillfully.

Limiting the amount of one hero to one is a necessary change to balance a 4v4 match

now going into the whole casual players who either play a little or only play one hero exclusively. While yes it is true that one class can be the most fun for a person, that leaves them seriously lacking the understanding of how another hero interacts with another. 4v4 ranked will hopefully be about coordination, skill and strategy, the mode dominion right now has nearly zero need for these traits.

when it comes to taking this game seriously, it's hard to sometimes for me, since I want to have fun, my idea of fun is playing with my main kensei, because it's challenging, and his moves are cool to do, but if I want to win, I can't use him, since he is very useless against higher skilled players, I'd end up using Lawbringer, Valkyrie, nobushi etc if I want to win.

I started using kensei in the alpha, and I could have stuck with him all the way, it would have been easier, but I knew that I wasn't going to get any better without playing another hero.

people who one trick are all around in other games as well, and they as well are put at a disadvantage if their main is taken. The way I see it, they are casual players too, competitive players are the ones who are willing to put the time in to get better at the game, as well as increase their game knowledge.

In my opinion, 1v1 competitive isn't complex enough (even if all the issues were fixed) to be interesting to watch. other fighting games have much better systems, like mortal kombat, where you have a large amount of combos, resets, and their is also the slight advantage that some fighters have over others via game knowledge (like being a better zoner or is a counter zoner etc). If you only play one fighter in one of these fighter games, and you go to play competitively at a tournament, you are asking to be destroyed.

The game allows you to play whatever you like, it hasn't even touched proper competitiveness yet. If you are going to play as part of a team in a ranked match, then you need to be ready to win, not through cheese, but actual strategy. If you are afraid of being match with another person who mains your hero, then you can always queue with your own pre made team. your team would still be at a disadvantage for you not understanding their roles, but it's still nothing. you could always just not play ranked as well

Oh by the way, it's not that hard to pick up another hero, right now I have eight of the 16 heroes I could consider mains (every hero has very similar movesets when it comes to inputs), the other ones I could still use them and beat the majority of players since I know how they play after fighting them for a while. it may not be fun for casuals at first, but it's the only way to get better at the game

Aku...
09-19-2017, 04:34 AM
I've met a number of casual players who think they are competitive and skilled at the game and then say that their character is the weakest in the game and demand buffs to that hero, their minds become seriously warped by themselves, thinking that all the problems they are having, are the only ones there, and no one has problems with them. If devs listened to these guys, they would have destroyed what's left of their community

Lawbringer was at the beginning a very weak hero, he had a lot of weak moves that were extremely punishable, and they buffed him well. But then you had a storm of people who main only one hero start complaining about him, saying he's too powerful. Anyone who knew anything about Lawbringer should have known that he needed those buffs, like to the move the long arm, a move that if you avoided (very easy to do) leaves you wide open for a full two seconds, and even if the long arm connected, all you would get was a light attack. a huge risk, for a puny reward

You also have some of theses kinds of people shouting out that their teammates are always awful, and say that certain players are light spammers or turtles. I'm sorry to say, but a lot of this community doesn't understand what a fair competitive game should look like, and a lot of these problems start with people who only main one hero. It can annoy me a lot when a casual player dismisses everyone else, and thinks their feedback is extremely valuable to the game since they main the one hero alone, therefore, their feedback is highly valuable. which is laughable. I'm not saying this is you, it's just very annoying to deal with these kinds of people who refuse to play another hero for a few hours to help them see the bigger picture in the game.

bmason1000
09-19-2017, 09:23 AM
I've met a number of casual players who think they are competitive and skilled at the game and then say that their character is the weakest in the game and demand buffs to that hero, their minds become seriously warped by themselves, thinking that all the problems they are having, are the only ones there, and no one has problems with them. If devs listened to these guys, they would have destroyed what's left of their community

Lawbringer was at the beginning a very weak hero, he had a lot of weak moves that were extremely punishable, and they buffed him well. But then you had a storm of people who main only one hero start complaining about him, saying he's too powerful. Anyone who knew anything about Lawbringer should have known that he needed those buffs, like to the move the long arm, a move that if you avoided (very easy to do) leaves you wide open for a full two seconds, and even if the long arm connected, all you would get was a light attack. a huge risk, for a puny reward

You also have some of theses kinds of people shouting out that their teammates are always awful, and say that certain players are light spammers or turtles. I'm sorry to say, but a lot of this community doesn't understand what a fair competitive game should look like, and a lot of these problems start with people who only main one hero. It can annoy me a lot when a casual player dismisses everyone else, and thinks their feedback is extremely valuable to the game since they main the one hero alone, therefore, their feedback is highly valuable. which is laughable. I'm not saying this is you, it's just very annoying to deal with these kinds of people who refuse to play another hero for a few hours to help them see the bigger picture in the game.People who complained about lawbringer after the buff weren't necessarily one hero players, but more likely just not LB players. I get the feeling us one-picks are a reallll fringe group.

A lot of what you're saying makes absolute sense though. If you don't use a character it IS significantly harder to understand them, I'll agree with that. Me personally, i haven't found that using a character in fighting games, which I've been playing for about 20 years now, actually helps me to understand them from an opponents perspective. Fighting them over and over and studying them from that perspective is what works for me. I'm very willing to accept i am a minority in this case. It seems kind of counter intuitive, i get that and accept it as my hang up, not a flaw in your logic. Character switching also tends to make me verrry rusty with chosen characters, verrry quickly. Except capcom vs snk 2...i could have played half that roster blind at any given time, i swear haha.

So one of my first questions got kinda muddled in all these answers, i think. So we've established HOW single hero players can be disadvantaged, but not necessarily why you think they SHOULD be, which sounded like you wanted the players soecifically punished for using one character. Or was that just a semantic issue? Also, why do you feel the game is "too soft" on people who don't play more heroes? Are you saying the disadvantage isn't big enough?

(Just a heads up, figured I'd mention that i do agree with you that ranked 4v4 SHOULD have some kind of hero limitation to keep things fair. 100% totally agree. If that's the case, i may finally narrow down a second pick. I'm not passing up 4v4 ranked because of my own nonsense.)

matt89connor
09-19-2017, 09:36 AM
I don't expect this game to be ready for a fair and balanced 4v4 for a long time, but here is a standard esport games

1a. only 1 player can use one hero per team (whether it be tank, support, assassin, etc), Nearly all competitive games play like this

So with for honor, for sure there can only be one warden, one orochi, one shugoki, one centurion etc (no quad centurions)

this is mainly because if they don't restrict them, it's quite boring to watch and exploits are more frequent

i speak about the title...and i'm ok with that, competitive shuldn't have 2 or more heroes of the same type for team( example 3 centurions or 3 riders)

Aku...
09-19-2017, 05:33 PM
People who complained about lawbringer after the buff weren't necessarily one hero players, but more likely just not LB players. I get the feeling us one-picks are a reallll fringe group.

A lot of what you're saying makes absolute sense though. If you don't use a character it IS significantly harder to understand them, I'll agree with that. Me personally, i haven't found that using a character in fighting games, which I've been playing for about 20 years now, actually helps me to understand them from an opponents perspective. Fighting them over and over and studying them from that perspective is what works for me. I'm very willing to accept i am a minority in this case. It seems kind of counter intuitive, i get that and accept it as my hang up, not a flaw in your logic. Character switching also tends to make me verrry rusty with chosen characters, verrry quickly. Except capcom vs snk 2...i could have played half that roster blind at any given time, i swear haha.

So one of my first questions got kinda muddled in all these answers, i think. So we've established HOW single hero players can be disadvantaged, but not necessarily why you think they SHOULD be, which sounded like you wanted the players soecifically punished for using one character. Or was that just a semantic issue? Also, why do you feel the game is "too soft" on people who don't play more heroes? Are you saying the disadvantage isn't big enough?

(Just a heads up, figured I'd mention that i do agree with you that ranked 4v4 SHOULD have some kind of hero limitation to keep things fair. 100% totally agree. If that's the case, i may finally narrow down a second pick. I'm not passing up 4v4 ranked because of my own nonsense.)

Ok, about the too soft question. In the game right now, you can play what ever you like, and keep playing like that, as you said, you can learn how to fight other heroes by just fighting them for a while. there wasn't really an limit to what you could pick, with the exception of brawl mode. In casual play, you are free, to pick what you like, which is good in a sense, but to then expect than this will be good enough to allow you to compete in the future properly in a team ranked mode Is a bit too much.

I can see that you understand and agree my first points on why there should be limitations, my comment on this game being to soft etc was mainly targeted towards the ones who absolutely refuse to play another hero and expect everyone else to deal with it, and then get very toxic or leave straight afterwards. I've had this experience enough with other games like overwatch and r6 siege to be rather sick of it, apologies, I may have been too harsh to generalise these people who main one hero

bmason1000
09-19-2017, 09:35 PM
Okay, i think i understand everything you're trying to get across. I really appreciate your patience by the way, thanks.

Helnekromancer
09-20-2017, 06:47 PM
I don't care what the stipulations are for 4v4 Ranked as long as gear-score stays. With how the devs balance this game some heroes are far weaker than others. My Nobushi sucks in 1v1 because she has a low stamina pool and gets oomed very quickly if she ever decides to be aggressive thus fighting, in small concentrated bursts allowing the opponent to always catch their breathe, never fully punishing an opponent. I knew this from playing a ton of duels in the first few months of the games release and now in Ranked 1v1. I would always get to the finals or semi-finals and come up short, got to plat with her so i was fine but i know my limitations. Until she gets a buff nobushi will always be at a disadvantage. I'm not whining and constantly begging for buffs just simply taking my
ball elsewhere. If stamina issue is her problem I simply tailor my gear and increase the stamina regen and cost reduction and losing about 9% defense at the cost of it. If they wont buff the character you can do it yourself with gear and that's what separates these modes from 1v1 and 2v2 which is literally staring contests.

Playing without gear score in Ranked would be the equivalent of playing a FPS Ranked with zero attachments. More than half the guns are going to be unusable because they have crappy iron sights.

UbiNoty
09-20-2017, 11:13 PM
We haven't made any solid announcements yet about 4v4 ranked (we're still in beta for ranked duel after all!) but I will bring up the concern about gear for 4v4 ranked so we can keep it in mind.
I'm just guessing that it's likely that it will stay if we're trying to mirror normal 4v4s for ranked(it would be a very drastic change if we removed it for ranked) - but that can change depending on if new factors arise.

CandleInTheDark
09-21-2017, 04:51 PM
I don't care what the stipulations are for 4v4 Ranked as long as gear-score stays. With how the devs balance this game some heroes are far weaker than others. My Nobushi sucks in 1v1 because she has a low stamina pool and gets oomed very quickly if she ever decides to be aggressive thus fighting, in small concentrated bursts allowing the opponent to always catch their breathe, never fully punishing an opponent. I knew this from playing a ton of duels in the first few months of the games release and now in Ranked 1v1. I would always get to the finals or semi-finals and come up short, got to plat with her so i was fine but i know my limitations. Until she gets a buff nobushi will always be at a disadvantage. I'm not whining and constantly begging for buffs just simply taking my
ball elsewhere. If stamina issue is her problem I simply tailor my gear and increase the stamina regen and cost reduction and losing about 9% defense at the cost of it. If they wont buff the character you can do it yourself with gear and that's what separates these modes from 1v1 and 2v2 which is literally staring contests.

Playing without gear score in Ranked would be the equivalent of playing a FPS Ranked with zero attachments. More than half the guns are going to be unusable because they have crappy iron sights.

The problem with that is if it is single pick that is a very long grind. I mean hey I have done it, but if you power grind vs ai, with contract orders you are looking 6-8 hours of active play per rep point (8 without any orders going by the fact it took me four per rep on the double xp weekend and I managed two a day for six total). You have to do that seven times to get one character into legendary gear, to get four there, and realistically it needs to be four, I have been on teams where if I had just three of the characters I have I would have no character in legendary armour to choose, you're looking at doing that twenty eight times. That is why I don't think single pick with matchmaking before you choose your hero and gear score should go together. Change the matchmaking so it lets you choose your character before matchmaking, preferably with a filter that will prevent all assassin or all heavy teams so your team has a mix, and that is a different story but they need to get the stability fixed if some people are going to have to wait longer to use their main.

Helnekromancer
09-21-2017, 07:50 PM
The problem with that is if it is single pick that is a very long grind. I mean hey I have done it, but if you power grind vs ai, with contract orders you are looking 6-8 hours of active play (8 without any orders going by the fact it took me four per rep on the double xp weekend and I managed two a day for six total). You have to do that seven times to get one character into legendary gear, to get four there, and realistically it needs to be four, I have been on teams where if I had just three of the characters I have I would have no character in legendary armour to choose, you're looking at doing that twenty eight times. That is why I don't think single pick with matchmaking before you choose your hero and gear score should go together. Change the matchmaking so it lets you choose your character before matchmaking, preferably with a filter that will prevent all assassin or all heavy teams so your team has a mix, and that is a different story but they need to get the stability fixed if some people are going to have to wait longer to use their main.

You don't even have to grind that much, get to atleast rep 5 or even 3 and you have the bare minimum of gear to not die instantly. Gear doesn't trump overall skill, if you know how to parry, block, and attack effectively what's the big deal? 1v1 was the same problem no gear stats so only those with great kits were at the top. With gear 4v4 creates a new meta now you see conqs, nobushis and lawbringers and valkyries running around, take away the gear they go back into the dumpster and Ranked 4v4 would be cents, glads, wardens, raiders,peacekeepers, and warlord even though he got nerfed can still do better than conq. Sure you can get a team to create a comp but if you pick a low tier fighter in this scenario you are going to feel it and drag your team down.

It would be just like 1v1 but now you have feats. Also the devs could just do another Double exp to catch everyone up before they role out the 4v4 ranked, don't know how many times they would need to do it. But you can't hold players back just because someone didn't want to put the time in