PDA

View Full Version : Enemies Strength



Dead1y-Derri
08-24-2013, 07:59 PM
Hi,

One of my biggest disappointments since AC Brotherhood (this is when it started) is that how easy guards were to defeat. Essentially once you learn all the tip and tricks behind countering (which doesn't take long) and which type of enemy to employ them against (again not taking too long) the guards essentially become too easy and therefore you don't need to use stealth instead you can charge in and deal with all the guards.

I just wish the enemies could be more powerful and therefore really make me be creative on how I deal with them. It would also encourage stealth which was really absent in AC3. I've been watching a lot of gameplay for Black Flag and that game too seems like (while it has much more stealth options which is good) the enemies are easy to take on.

I just wish they made them slightly more harder to deal. Does anyone else feel the same way?

Sushiglutton
08-24-2013, 08:54 PM
Yeah I think there are many who feel that way :). Combat is too easy and shallow. I don't expect any improvements in that area sadly. There are plenty of AC fans who don't care/are not skilled enough to appreciate solid gameplay. Most of them just want to watch some cool stuff and get on with the story, which is fine ofc. I mean to each their own. I'm still a bit dispointed that the gameplay designers are not trying harder.

Jexx21
08-24-2013, 11:43 PM
Why do people only resort to stealth if the combat is too hard?

why not stealth for stealth's sake? That's what I do in Deus Ex: HR. That's what I do for every game that has stealth.

Jexx21
08-24-2013, 11:48 PM
Yeah I think there are many who feel that way :). Combat is too easy and shallow. I don't expect any improvements in that area sadly. There are plenty of AC fans who don't care/are not skilled enough to appreciate solid gameplay. Most of them just want to watch some cool stuff and get on with the story, which is fine ofc. I mean to each their own. I'm still a bit dispointed that the gameplay designers are not trying harder.

I never see you actually suggest improvements to combat and the AI, I just see you complain about it.

It would be helpful if people actually suggested improvements, instead of just sitting around whining about stuff. Yes... Ubisoft hearing more cries about how combat is too easy should make them more likely to try and improve combat themselves, and that isn't the issue. We have feedback threads after the release of the game for that. But forums are for discussion about the games and ideas for the games, and whining isn't a big facilitator of quality discussion.

I have put forth ideas on how to improve combat, and you (or someone else who also whines about the easiness of combat a lot, forget who), shot it down and said that it's a problem with the AI. Why not suggest AI Improvements then?

I would love to actually discuss improvements to the series gameplay beyond pointing out the rights and wrongs of it.

Spider_Sith9
08-24-2013, 11:53 PM
I never see you actually suggest improvements to combat and the AI, I just see you complain about it.

It would be helpful if people actually suggested improvements, instead of just sitting around whining about stuff. Yes... Ubisoft hearing more cries about how combat is too easy should make them more likely to try and improve combat themselves, and that isn't the issue. We have feedback threads after the release of the game for that. But forums are for discussion about the games and ideas for the games, and whining isn't a big facilitator of quality discussion.

I have put forth ideas on how to improve combat, and you (or someone else who also whines about the easiness of combat a lot, forget who), shot it down and said that it's a problem with the AI. Why not suggest AI Improvements then?

I would love to actually discuss improvements to the series gameplay beyond pointing out the rights and wrongs of it.
It's Sushi. Of course he'll complain. :P

Jexx21
08-24-2013, 11:53 PM
not helping.

Clockwork78
08-25-2013, 12:44 AM
The ideal system for me personally, would be as following:
Your control scheme if simple, each button, when in combat controls a different leg. Two for the arms, two for the legs. In combat, each different type of button combination leads to different results. For example, right arm, right arm, left leg, could lead to a 2 hit combo with the weapon, and then a kick to the enemies lower section. Each enemy requires different combos to take down.
But how would countering, the pillar of AC combat, work?
Simple. Each time an enemy is attacking, if hold on the button for just a little bit, you go into a defensive stance. This way, you have to take into account the angle and which side you're being attacked from. Sometimes enemies hit low, sometimes high. Always take that into consideration.
There is also alot of contextual actions. You're in the market fighting next to the barrel? you could possibly lure an enemy to charge and have them fall over. A butchers knife next to you? grab it for one free kill on an enemy.
I might add more to this later.

Farlander1991
08-25-2013, 01:05 AM
Your control scheme if simple, each button, when in combat controls a different leg. Two for the arms, two for the legs. In combat, each different type of button combination leads to different results. For example, right arm, right arm, left leg, could lead to a 2 hit combo with the weapon, and then a kick to the enemies lower section. Each enemy requires different combos to take down.
But how would countering, the pillar of AC combat, work?
Simple. Each time an enemy is attacking, if hold on the button for just a little bit, you go into a defensive stance. This way, you have to take into account the angle and which side you're being attacked from.

I had a similar concept for a 2D-fighting system focusing on one on one battles, totally broke at prototyping stage, I can imagine in 3D with multiple enemies it's going to break even more... Everything looks good on paper, but when you start implementing it, things can go... haywire.

roostersrule2
08-25-2013, 01:10 AM
Janissaries can bench 1000kg.

ACfan443
08-25-2013, 01:12 AM
Blame chain killing.

ProletariatPleb
08-25-2013, 01:15 AM
Blame chain killing.
Yep.

ProletariatPleb
08-25-2013, 01:18 AM
I never see you actually suggest improvements to combat and the AI, I just see you complain about it.
............WHAT

>Sushi
>Not one of the most constructive critic of a members we have

Yeah sure, lol

dxsxhxcx
08-25-2013, 01:19 AM
+ make the guards deal more damage;
+ give them the skills they used to have in AC1 (counter, break our defense, etc) and make them use them;
+ make them attack more often and in groups (similar to Batman) instead of sit there waiting to be slaughtered;
+ make the counter window smaller;


many times I saw people posting suggestions like this and some much more richer in detail, If this isn't enough for them to figure out what to do then I don't know what kind of feedback the devs want, but IMO this seems pretty easy to understand, why is taking so long for them to do something tangible to improve certain areas of the game is beyond me but the lack of proper feedback isn't the reason.

ACfan443
08-25-2013, 01:23 AM
............WHAT

>Sushi
>Not one of the most constructive critic of a members we have

Yeah sure, lol

Agreed, his posts are of the most detailed and constructive, he's always suggesting improvements.

Jexx21
08-25-2013, 03:40 AM
Then why do I see none?

adventurewomen
08-25-2013, 04:00 AM
Enemies strength has never been a problem, they all have their variety of skill range from Brutes to those simple guards.

I don't see a problem with the current Guard strengths.

Wolfmeister1010
08-25-2013, 04:12 AM
Here is my list of ideas:

1. Enemies attack faster and with each other.
2. Enemies do about twice as much damage from melee weapons and three times as much damage from guns
3. It takes more than one counter to disable an enemy (similar to arkham city)
4. Make counter window way smaller
5. Make counter slo mo last a shorter amount of time.

ProletariatPleb
08-25-2013, 04:59 AM
Then why do I see none?
because you're oblivious.

Gi1t
08-25-2013, 06:57 AM
Then why do I see none?

Perhaps you misread it? I talk about combat, and especially enemy strength pretty much every time I see it come up, and I mostly jibber-jabber about NInja Gaiden when I do. Maybe you're reading that as just being praise? There's more to it than that. The features I talk about aren't just things I'm saying are great, they're suggestions for what AC ought to do. I stop short of literally saying "AC should do this" for two reasons. One: this isn't Simon Says; making suggestions doesn't require that I announce that it is a suggestion. It's not all that hard to put two and two together when I'm referring to a problem, then saying another game solved it this way basically means this is what I think they should do...sort of. The second reason is that it's not quite accurate to just say 'they should do this exactly' when we're talking about two different games.

By way of example: In Ninja Gaiden, it's rarely a good idea to attack an enemy head-on. They'll block, evade or overpower your attack. You want to let them move first and then find an opening. I'd like to see that in AC...BUT not exactly the same way. In Ninja Gaiden, you do a lot of jumping and rolling around to avoid the enemies, which would'nt look right in an AC game, so it would be better to add more to the blocking system to allow the player to block a variety of different attacks using different methods of blocking for different attack types. Once you defend, same thing; you wait for an opening in an enemy's defenses where you can hit them back. Saying all that is a bit of a mouthfull on top of an already lengthy statement and it's not that hard to figure out the last half of what I said there. Implement the same idea, but in a way that makes more sense for AC, in other words. I've even made suggestions relating to Prince of Persia mechanics, a game THEY make (well, used to -__- ); surely they can understand how to implement a suggestion like that when they already implemented it before. XD

As for stealth, I think the issue is not so much when you're entering an area and are choosing your method of attack (assault/stealth) but rather, once something goes wrong and the guards are after you. Sure, I'd be inclinced to use stealth just for the fun of it at first, but on the other hand, running away from a pathetically easy fight, disappearing, and trying the stealth option again turns 'fun' into a chore pretty fast. It'd take a year and a half to die, so the only thing to do is kill them. Now, if they're strong enough, making the effort to stay alive and get away, it doesn't feel like you're deliberately running from a pathetic fight just to satisfy your obessive need to stealth; it feel like you're doing the sensible thiing, because it would be just as tough to beat the guards in open combat as it would be to run off and disappear. That doesn't mean you can't kill one or two if they're in your way, but the overall goal is to escape and vanish somehow.

And maybe that's something else they can do: work on the second chance scenario. Don't just plan the level so that you can sneak by if you do it right, but if you fail you have to fight guards; make it so that if you do get spotted, you can find a different route to escape and disappear and thus initiate a new scenario for stealth instead of having to run back and wait for things to reset so you can try it again.

For example: say your'e sneaking into a building and you're passing by a courtyard area. The guards are in the courtyard and you have a way to climb over their heads. Instead of having the courtyard be closed and if you fall in, you have to fight the guards, make it open to some surrounding corridors and such and if you fall in, you can run off into one of the adjacent areas and find a way to disappear, then hunt down the guards as they attempt to find you. This way, you could try stealth again, but without having to backtrack and wait etc. But again, if they're really pathetic guards, it's less time-consuming to just kill them and get on with it, so they need to be better at their jobs. Honestly I rearely mess around gratuitously with weaklings. It's fun once, but when you've got a lot of them to pick off it gets old quick. Screwing with tough enemies, on the other hand, is pretty much always gratifying. :D

Sushiglutton
08-25-2013, 07:44 AM
I never see you actually suggest improvements to combat and the AI, I just see you complain about it.

It would be helpful if people actually suggested improvements, instead of just sitting around whining about stuff. Yes... Ubisoft hearing more cries about how combat is too easy should make them more likely to try and improve combat themselves, and that isn't the issue. We have feedback threads after the release of the game for that. But forums are for discussion about the games and ideas for the games, and whining isn't a big facilitator of quality discussion.

I have put forth ideas on how to improve combat, and you (or someone else who also whines about the easiness of combat a lot, forget who), shot it down and said that it's a problem with the AI. Why not suggest AI Improvements then?

I would love to actually discuss improvements to the series gameplay beyond pointing out the rights and wrongs of it.


I have made tons of constructive posts in the past. Way more so than you, who I mostly see take out your frustration on other members by assaulting them. That said the last few weeks I have been very whiny/non-constructive. The reason is that the gameplay videos have been so disapointing to watch. Even more so given all the hours I have spent giving feedback. It has made me a bit bitter lol.

But no one really gains anything from me whining so I will try to just post less for a while. Tbh I should probably leave the forum alltogether because I don't feel like a fan anymore.


............WHAT

>Sushi
>Not one of the most constructive critic of a members we have

Yeah sure, lol

Thanks man :). How do you feel about the last few weeks of gameplay vids? Am I exaggerating or do they look pretty much as clunky as AC3 with some minor tweaks?

Biggest facepalm moment for me was the "Assassinate the the officer with a running assassination" thing. My confidence in Ashraf sunk like a rock.

Gi1t
08-25-2013, 07:54 AM
I have made tons of constructive posts in the past. Way more so than you, who I mostly see take out your frustration on other members by assaulting them. That said the last few weeks I have been very whiny/non-constructive. The reason is that the gameplay videos have been so disapointing to watch. Even more so given all the hours I have spent giving feedback. It has made me a bit bitter lol.

But no one really gains anything from me whining so I will try to just post less for a while. Tbh I should probably leave the forum alltogether because I don't feel like a fan anymore.

Eh, I haven't played since Brotherhood. I'm largely here because it's the same site as the PoP forums and becuase of the people on both forums. I'm not totally opposed to buying another AC at some point if I see one I want, so it's not like I'm talking about something I have no interest in at all. There are a lot of people like you still here and it'd a shame to lose you. :D

Jexx21
08-25-2013, 08:06 AM
I'm gonna try and take a break from the forums then. My attitude on these forums is affected by a variety of things, and time away will make me forget these things more easily.

Sushi, you have brought up great things in the past, I loved the idea of a non-violent AC game, it's just that I feel like you push what you see as negative aspects more in the light, and it bothers me.

Anyway, if I manage to stay away I probably won't be back until December or January.

Sushiglutton
08-25-2013, 08:07 AM
Eh, I haven't played since Brotherhood. I'm largely here because it's the same site as the PoP forums and becuase of the people on both forums. I'm not totally opposed to buying another AC at some point if I see one I want, so it's not like I'm talking about something I have no interest in at all. There are a lot of people like you still here and it'd a shame to lose you. :D

Haha you haven't missed much! I'm also a bigger PoP, than AC fan. AC has so much potential but the devs insists on doing a lot of dumb things to screw it up. I also like several of the posters here, so I'll stick around :). I'm just saying that I probably shouldn't.



I'm gonna try and take a break from the forums then. My attitude on these forums is affected by a variety of things, and time away will make me forget these things more easily.

Sushi, you have brought up great things in the past, I loved the idea of a non-violent AC game, it's just that I feel like you push what you see as negative aspects more in the light, and it bothers me.

Anyway, if I manage to stay away I probably won't be back until December or January.


Don't worry about it, you are correct I have been too negative lately. I have stopped saying anything constructive. I have also been a bit tired, not just from AC. Maybe we would both be better off from a break? Either way I wish you the best of luck with the stuff in your life! No hard feelings from my part, just be nice to people :)!

Jexx21
08-25-2013, 08:25 AM
Yea, it's just I've been going through some rough stuff, and the forum isn't really helping. I'm not gonna lie, your comment about me mostly showing aggravation to other members is true, but I do feel like I have made some good posts, so it also hurt me. I typically am always present on some forum, and I guess I've been making a transition to a different one already, so it sort of feels like a natural thing to leave this one behind.

Hopefully I'll come back calmer. :P

Sushiglutton
08-25-2013, 08:53 AM
your comment about me mostly showing aggravation to other members is true, but I do feel like I have made some good posts, so it also hurt me.

I said that because I got defensive. Of course you make lots of good posts :)!

Sigv4rd
08-25-2013, 09:02 PM
I never see you actually suggest improvements to combat and the AI, I just see you complain about it.

Before I had an account Sushi was my favorite person on this forum... He used to have links to all of his most constructive threads with many ideas of how to improve the game. I loved his posts and
If it weren't for Sushi I probably would have never have made an account...
Also Farlander and Woodbeam made great posts too :)

ArabianFrost
08-25-2013, 09:14 PM
Before I had an account Sushi was my favorite person on this forum... He used to have links to all of his most constructive threads with many ideas of how to improve the game. I loved his posts and
If it weren't for Sushi I probably would have never have made an account...
Also Farlander and Woodbeam made great posts too :)

Sushi, Farlander, woodbeam, SixKeys, M, Mr.I'm Batman (and lightrey even though he hasn't posted lately). They all write a great deal of constructive pieces. The forums wouldn't be the same without them. They are some of the people that give constructive posts longevity and depth.

(Sorry if I didn't mention you. These are who i could remember. Most of you have some awesome constructive ideas).

Sushiglutton
08-25-2013, 09:23 PM
Thanks for the kind words guys, I really appreciate it :). The amount of time I have spent writing feedback for AC3.... I really don't want to think about it lol. I got a bit obsessive after AC3 which disapointed me a great deal. There are also tons of great posters on this forum who I like to discuss games with. But writing some of those longer posts, given that it's like a 0.001% they would have any impact, that's borderline insane tbh. Anyway super glad someone have atleast read them and thought they were ok :).

ArabianFrost
08-25-2013, 09:32 PM
Thanks for the kind words guys, I really appreciate it :). The amount of time I have spent writing feedback for AC3.... I really don't want to think about it lol. I got a bit obsessive after AC3 which disapointed me a great deal. There are also tons of great posters on this forum who I like to discuss games with. But writing some of those longer posts, given that it's like a 0.001% they would have any impact, that's borderline insane tbh. Anyway super glad someone have atleast read them and thought they were ok :).

In my deep deep thoughts, I have an image of Jade Raymond, staying all night behind her Selena Gomez laptop (Selena is her favourite performer) and taking notes of every bit of feedback. Ashraf genuinely seemed like he looked into our cries for an AC1-esque comeback, but he just didn't have enough time to do it all. Seriously, a man who sits all day answering twitter question must be aware of our woes. Even if, I appreciate everything Ashraf does. I can't imagine he has enough space to alter the formula much back to the original AC formula. They must keep it simple otherwise he can risk alienating a big chunk of the fans.

In reality though, a company ripe with 5000 people's ideas probably wouldn't postpone them to take our opinions into consideration. This is why a smaller team like that of The Witcher is far better. The team is rather small, however, they are absolutely focused on what the game is about and they have a great deal of space for fan interaction.

Assassin_M
08-25-2013, 09:43 PM
Thanks for the kind words guys, I really appreciate it :). The amount of time I have spent writing feedback for AC3.... I really don't want to think about it lol. I got a bit obsessive after AC3 which disapointed me a great deal. There are also tons of great posters on this forum who I like to discuss games with. But writing some of those longer posts, given that it's like a 0.001% they would have any impact, that's borderline insane tbh. Anyway super glad someone have atleast read them and thought they were ok :).
Hey, sushi if you're leaving for a while then I just want to say sorry man and dissolve any heat we may have had in the past, because yeah many of your posts are great to read and your insight is definitely valued.

Bye Jexx :P (nah you're still my friend)

Megas_Doux
08-25-2013, 09:45 PM
Sushi, whether I agree with him or not, is a great poster who can build up and support his ideas. However I think he might be exaggerating this time hehe.

Farlander1991
08-25-2013, 09:55 PM
Sushi, Farlander, woodbeam, SixKeys, M, Mr.I'm Batman (and lightrey even though he hasn't posted lately). They all write a great deal of constructive pieces. The forums wouldn't be the same without them. They are some of the people that keep constructive posts longevity and depth.

Wow, thanks. :o

SixKeys
08-25-2013, 10:05 PM
Don't forget Twenty_glyphs and DoubleclickTF. They post rarely, but whenever they do, it's always something insightful.

Anyway, I hope both Sushi and Jexx will stay.

Rickin10
08-25-2013, 10:10 PM
In my deep deep thoughts, I have an image of Jade Raymond, staying all night behind her Selena Gomez laptop (Selena is her favourite performer) and taking notes of every bit of feedback. Ashraf genuinely seemed like he looked into our cries for an AC1-esque comeback, but he just didn't have enough time to do it all. Seriously, a man who sits all day answering twitter question must be aware of our woes. Even if, I appreciate everything Ashraf does. I can't imagine he has enough space to alter the formula much back to the original AC formula. They must keep it simple otherwise he can risk alienating a big chunk of the fans.

In reality though, a company ripe with 5000 people's ideas probably wouldn't postpone them to take our opinions into consideration. This is why a smaller team like that of The Witcher is far better. The team is rather small, however, they are absolutely focused on what the game is about and they have a great deal of space for fan interaction.


The team that make the Witcher have in a way what all developers would love, which is a vision, a passion for what they do, and even though they don't have the AAA budget they have what I view as the most precious of commodities: time.and freedom They craft the game they want and give it the time it needs.

Unfortunately dev teams like those at Ubisoft are basically tasked with churning out a similar title every year and expected to deliver at a specific release date regardless of quality. AC3 was a great example of this: a game with such huge scope and ambition, a lot of good ideas but poorly implemented, and crippled with bugs.

The best thing that could happen to the series is for it to take a 3-4 year break, reflect, take feedback from fans and rebuild from the ground up, and take the time to deliver a truly epic experience that has been promised ever since the original. But after a significant leap in AC2 the series has just lurched from one game to the next simply polishing an old formula with creaking mechanics sprinkling box-garnish like bomb crafting. I would have much preferred they never ventured down the Naval route - not because I don't think it's impressive - because it was an addition at the expense of improving the games fundamentals.

But alas I am dreaming. Ubisoft have stated they just want to do franchises, and make as much money as possible. So we'll continue to get production-line games that are fun but ultimately dumb, inconsistent and buggy. The only way the series will ever achieve it's potential is if people stop buying it and Ubisoft see their bottom line shrinking.

SixKeys
08-25-2013, 10:29 PM
The best thing that could happen to the series is for it to take a 3-4 year break, reflect, take feedback from fans and rebuild from the ground up, and take the time to deliver a truly epic experience that has been promised ever since the original. But after a significant leap in AC2 the series has just lurched from one game to the next simply polishing an old formula with creaking mechanics sprinkling box-garnish like bomb crafting. I would have much preferred they never ventured down the Naval route - not because I don't think it's impressive - because it was an addition at the expense of improving the games fundamentals.

Agreed. I don't mind the naval aspect, but I wish they wouldn't have introduced it in AC3. It would have felt like a huge leap forward if AC4 had been the first one to introduce the mechanic, and it makes more sense in the pirate context than it ever did for Connor.

Shahkulu101
08-25-2013, 10:36 PM
Agreed. I don't mind the naval aspect, but I wish they wouldn't have introduced it in AC3. It would have felt like a huge leap forward if AC4 had been the first one to introduce the mechanic, and it makes more sense in the pirate context than it ever did for Connor.

Agreed. it felt so out of place when you were blowing up ships as 14 year old Connor.

ACfan443
08-25-2013, 10:41 PM
Don't forget Twenty_glyphs and DoubleclickTF. They post rarely, but whenever they do, it's always something insightful.

I agree, twenty's posts are some of my favourites, I find myself agreeing with almost everything he says.

ToughGuy31
08-27-2013, 02:21 AM
The team that make the Witcher have in a way what all developers would love, which is a vision, a passion for what they do, and even though they don't have the AAA budget they have what I view as the most precious of commodities: time.and freedom They craft the game they want and give it the time it needs.

Unfortunately dev teams like those at Ubisoft are basically tasked with churning out a similar title every year and expected to deliver at a specific release date regardless of quality. AC3 was a great example of this: a game with such huge scope and ambition, a lot of good ideas but poorly implemented, and crippled with bugs.

The best thing that could happen to the series is for it to take a 3-4 year break, reflect, take feedback from fans and rebuild from the ground up, and take the time to deliver a truly epic experience that
has been promised ever since the original. But after a significant leap in AC2 the series has just lurched from one game to the next simply polishing an old formula with creaking mechanics sprinkling box-garnish like bomb crafting. I would have much preferred they never ventured down the Naval route - not because I don't think it's impressive - because it was an addition at the expense of improving the games fundamentals.

But alas I am dreaming. Ubisoft have stated they just want to do franchises, and make as much money as possible. So we'll continue to get production-line games that are fun but ultimately dumb, inconsistent and buggy. The only way the series will ever achieve it's potential is if people stop buying it and Ubisoft see their bottom line shrinking.

I agree with everything u said. Another good example would be team ico, they release the game when it's ready, why can't ubi? Heck, ea is even doing this now. The mirrors edge trailer literally says, out when it's ready.

Gi1t
08-27-2013, 02:25 AM
But alas I am dreaming. Ubisoft have stated they just want to do franchises, and make as much money as possible. So we'll continue to get production-line games that are fun but ultimately dumb, inconsistent and buggy. The only way the series will ever achieve it's potential is if people stop buying it and Ubisoft see their bottom line shrinking.

I agree, but sadly, if what they've done and said is anything to go by, they won't give it a break if that happens, they'll just drop it. -__-

Bashilir
08-27-2013, 02:49 AM
I'd like see enemies that require more than one button combo to kill them(x + mash square). Maybe even enemies that's combo to kill them randomizes any time you see them. Perhaps the first it's relatively easy but the second time he requires to press square, press x, and then he deny it, stun you and push you back. Forcing you get all the other enemies down to be able to focus on only him and not lose as much health. Thoughts?

Templar_Az
08-27-2013, 03:23 AM
I agree it would be nice if there was stronger enemies because I would be more inclined to take them out by stealth rather than just face-to-face confrontations which would make the experience of being an "assassin" all the more enjoyable.

So far with the present games I find I only have to use stealth when I am on a mission which requires no detection.

LoyalACFan
08-27-2013, 04:00 AM
I'd like see enemies that require more than one button combo to kill them(x + mash square). Maybe even enemies that's combo to kill them randomizes any time you see them. Perhaps the first it's relatively easy but the second time he requires to press square, press x, and then he deny it, stun you and push you back. Forcing you get all the other enemies down to be able to focus on only him and not lose as much health. Thoughts?

If I'm understanding you right, that sounds dangerously close to QTE's, which are never the right way to go IMO. Although I agree AC needs better one-on-one encounters, I'm not really sure how it could be incorporated without completely overhauling the whole combat system. Again. AC3's combat was great for fighting a bunch of lesser guards, but all the tougher enemies all fell to a single specific move that cou could spam over and over. I actually liked the system overall, but the elite archetypes were still too easy to beat.

pyrotechnick777
08-27-2013, 08:25 AM
If I'm understanding you right, that sounds dangerously close to QTE's, which are never the right way to go IMO. Although I agree AC needs better one-on-one encounters, I'm not really sure how it could be incorporated without completely overhauling the whole combat system. Again. AC3's combat was great for fighting a bunch of lesser guards, but all the tougher enemies all fell to a single specific move that cou could spam over and over. I actually liked the system overall, but the elite archetypes were still too easy to beat.

Basically to counter any of the elite enemies (or any enemy archetype for that matter), one can just use the special counter when prompted with the tools (gun, darts, snare...) all of them were one hit kills.

Will AC4 have a wider variety of archetypes or at least some that are rare but difficult to defeat? And what about enemies using special weapons/tools as well such as the rope dart, dart, and smoke bombs?

LoyalACFan
08-27-2013, 03:48 PM
Basically to counter any of the elite enemies (or any enemy archetype for that matter), one can just use the special counter when prompted with the tools (gun, darts, snare...) all of them were one hit kills.

Will AC4 have a wider variety of archetypes or at least some that are rare but difficult to defeat? And what about enemies using special weapons/tools as well such as the rope dart, dart, and smoke bombs?

Well, we've been told that there are gunners who can kill you in two shots. But if human shields are still around, I don't think they'll be too much of a problem unless they're shooting at you from sniper nests or something. Which is exactly what we saw in the plantation gameplay from a while back, the gunner guy was standing guard over the place and you had to take him out first.

Gi1t
08-27-2013, 04:19 PM
I'd like see enemies that require more than one button combo to kill them(x + mash square). Maybe even enemies that's combo to kill them randomizes any time you see them. Perhaps the first it's relatively easy but the second time he requires to press square, press x, and then he deny it, stun you and push you back. Forcing you get all the other enemies down to be able to focus on only him and not lose as much health. Thoughts?

I think it's best to focus on different attack TYPES, starting with the quick and heavy attacks, then moving into physical, grappling, evasive, contact only and other types of attacks, all of which have specific interactions regardless of context, just like the rules of any strategy game. A rock-paper-scissors system, if you will, but with a lot more factors involved, (player skill obviously being the top factor). Context-sensitive action is great for interacting with an environment, but it can be limiting in combat. I think it's best to have a system that operates in a certain way regardless of context, since it allows the player to employ the rules of combat in ways that may not have been deliberately programmed into the game, but which work due to a solid set of rules. :) An enemy archetype would have a specific list of attacks to match their style and the way you take them down would still vary depending on which ones they use and the context you're in at the time. You wouldn't have to kill them exactly the same way every time you encountered them.

Bastiaen
08-27-2013, 04:34 PM
Why do people only resort to stealth if the combat is too hard?

why not stealth for stealth's sake? That's what I do in Deus Ex: HR. That's what I do for every game that has stealth.

I agree absolutely. I've been playing a lot of splinter cell blacklist this last week. I love it. All three playstyles are about equally viable, but I love playing as a ghost. The key is that the player is rewarded for stealth. I think that being rewarded for stealth in assassination contracts is a start, but we need more incentive, not punishment for failing to be stealthy. If I die because combat is hard, or even if I'm just frustrated because it's boring (like in AC2), that is no different from getting a big red message saying that I failed the full sync. In fact, I think that failure message is a better option because it increases replay without making the game boring or stupid.
Stealth needs to improve. But let's be honest, it's not because of easy combat that we fail to be stealthy. It's because the game design doesn't encourage the use of stealth.
Final thought... If you want to play stealthily, DO IT.