Problem:
From what is known about the game it will not be new player friendly in competitive play. The loot you can receive varies by level and luck of the champion and even then the
loot can offer different attributes. While I do think that the wide variety of customization will be fantastic aesthetically speaking, the stat system will ruin the game in my opinion.
This will take away balance at all levels of play and will create an immense divide between those who have played since the game is released and those who start months later. It will take away from how skilled an individual is and make it more important how long you have played. Whether you are just getting into the game or just playing a hero that you haven't leveled, a player could be defeated not because they are less skilled, but instead that they have high stats from their loot. This will make the game unbalanced from a competitive stand point, whether it be online ranked play or professional, which would not only harm the chance of there being any sort of competitive following but also diminish the possibility of the game having a long lifespan. As unfortunate as it is to say no matter how good the game is, the longevity of games now online presence which is greatly dependent on its ability to be balanced and its accessibility.
Possible solutions:
1. In competitive play stats of items are null but aesthetically they are the same.
2. In stead of giving stat to the items, allow the players to allocate what their stats go into. Place a maximum number of points. Have one point for each level unlocked by a player (overall not just on a specific champion) and have the maximum level at reasonably ascertainable experience requirement. These points can go into any variety of attributes deemed necessary for any champion of battle.
Conclusion:
I know it may seem like I'm jumping the gun on this or that I'm bringing up a topic that may not be of any importance but from what I have seen happen in many good games is that with out a strong online presence the life span of the game will be short and will not live up to its potential. I make this post because I want to see this game to succeed and live up to its full potential instead of instead of burning out quickly because because players become disheartened by unfair advantages.
Your scepticism is appropriate, there have been a lot of alpha players worrying about stats making too much of a difference.
However, if they turn out as they are intended to be then they will be an advanced form of customization and i think that would be great. I d rather would want them to make it work than to throw the concept overboard. It might take a little while, though. There will be wining about unfair items etc but i trust they can find a system that gives us the possibility to work towards rewards without breaking anything !
I hope my assumptions end up being wrong. I think that there is a chance that the customization could be a really cool feature but as of right now it seems like the system was made to resemble an MMO pvp instead of the MOBA style that they seemed to be aiming for originally. I plan on playing regardless but personally I have lost faith in ubisoft as a company. Whether it is putting out an unfinished game, putting out many DLC's that cost more than the content is worth, or not maintaining their games well, ubisoft has a poor track. Just look at how Rainbow Six: Siege and The Division are doing. Both are good games with great potential but how ubisoft handles their games the community around them are basically dead.Originally Posted by Dez_troi_aR Go to original post
Yes they are very experienced in creating games but their overal quality of games has been pretty poor, aside from the farcry series, over the last decade. They put out games as fast as they can and it sometimes not even fished. I cant say every game but for the most part ubisoft puts out trailers for games that look great but when they come out they dont live up to the hype. Overall I just dont trust ubisoft because they seem more like they try to cash in on a quick buck, leave a game with a short life span, and then try to sell a sequel because it people think they may do things differently the next time around.Originally Posted by Illyrianslayer Go to original post
I disagree.Originally Posted by Illyrianslayer Go to original post
The major reason I was so drawn to the game in the first place is that the combat system is all about skill. Adding stats that augment player's inherent power undermines this, since if I can increase my attack power enough to kill someone in two or three hits instead of the normal five or six, or increase my armour so that I can sustain more damage than normal, it does nothing to actually increase my skill at the game. If anything, it allows for sloppier play, since you know you have that inherent advantage over someone without gear, or with lower-tiered gear.
On the contrary. The last (non-NDA'd) alpha I could literally kill people in two hits with my Raider with the gear I had, and it wasn't even very high leveled.The Devs said multiple times, that the stats don't have drastically but noticably effects![]()
Technically you could still make kills as a newby, but players with higher level gear who are also skilled at the game gain such an advantage over people simply because of their gear that they demolish players with lower level gear where it would otherwise be (nearly) an even match, because the player with higher level gear is afforded much more room for error. If they get hit once or twice, it might not be that bad, since they have high level defense gear, and because they have high level damage gear as well, their opponent can survive half as many hits as they otherwise would have.That means, that you can still make kills as a Newby, but higher Players will have a technically advantage towards you ... as long as you don't work on your own gear.
Everything should be cosmetic.
I love youOriginally Posted by MisterWillow Go to original post
Originally Posted by PowerSenpai Go to original post
Because it makes fights boring for me. The tension is removed if I can shrug off more hits than normal, or take half an opponent's life in a single heavy attack, or am able to throw out twice as many attacks as them before my stamina runs out.Originally Posted by Illyrianslayer Go to original post
The fact that I gained such a marked advantage over people in 4 days also doesn't speak well of the game's longevity. If you take that advantage, presume it would only grow the more time I spend playing, and extend that time to a month, how much of an advantage would I have? Would I be able to kill a new player in a single light attack? Ignoring how boring it would be for me, how frustrating would it be for new people? Would they even keep playing long enough to get gear adequate enough to withstand the literal superhuman I had created?
And that's just the Raider. I fought Orochis with much higher level gear that me and they were able to kill me in 4 hits even with increased defense stats. The Orochi is already at an advantage with their speed, recovery time, and combo ability. If I were to enter the game a month or two into release and were getting destroyed by people who already have a handle on the mechanics and had all their stats augmented, I might just drop the game altogether.
No it isn't. Once you reach rank 20, you gain a Renown level and reset to rank 1 (essentially COD's Prestige system), at which point, you start getting higher level gear. Blue gear at 1 renown, purple at 2 renown (if I recall correctly). This increases the amount you're augmented exponentially.Btw.: Level 20 is the max, so I don't know how far you did get ...
Progression based on cosmetics works perfectly well for Overwatch. You just have to make those cosmetics interesting enough for people to want them. They have enough potential between the three cultures and their imagination to have plenty of things for players to covet.removing the stats would mean, that you just play to unlock new cosmetics and that's REALLY boring!
You're made artificially more badass. You don't become a better fighter by increasing your strength to the point that you can kill people in one hit. Your worth as a player should be determined by how well you grasp the mechanics and are able to utilise them properly, not overpower an opponent simply because you have a special sword.the way how it is, you don't stay long with a technically disatvantage and additionally you have a progress system, which fuels you to play further and makes it long-term exciting to make you character even more badass ^^
This isn't just any other PvP game. Mechanically, it's more like a fighting game. How many of those have augmenteable stats? The only one I can think of off the top of my head was the free to play Tekken Revolutions, and it had the same problem I'm identifying here. Within a week, I could kill people in two or three hits with my Kazuya, which defeats the entire purpose for me.Edit: Additionally you don't increase one single stat without sacrificing another to compensate, so it's more an exchange like in any other PvP game.
Why not? It's an organic evolution.Originally Posted by Illyrianslayer Go to original post
So you want a player who's been playing longer, has more experience, know at least one character's every strength and limitation, and is presumably familiar enough with the combat mechanics that they're proficient at the game's advanced tactics, can feint effectively, can parry effectively, and knows the maps enough that they have inherently superior situational awareness to also have the advantage of being able to kill someone in roughly half the hits of someone without any of the listed experience or knowledge?I can also imagine, that they increased the effects of the stats for the Alpha, just to see the way it works ... and I repeat myself, that I would wish a difference between A high Player and Newby like 3-4 hits and 5-6 hits
Orochi's rush attack>double light took half my health. They can recover and combo that in quick succession with almost no risk to them. That's six hits altogether. Raider also has second highest health. Anyone else except Conqueror is dead from the first combo.But you just said "with much higher level gear" - the Orochi is an offensive character! Much higher then you and still 4 hits neccessary is still okay with one eye closed! (I admit, evrything above would be unfair, so even I would disagree)
So what's the point, from your perspective, playing past rank 20, if the progression you want stops at that point?I personally thought you just get new gear till level 20 and prestige is just prestige without anything new.
While an argument might be made that one weapon or breastplate could be of a higher quality than another, in most respects a sword's a sword. If you want to look at it realistically, nobody would charge into battle with a poorly made weapon.It's also realistic, that a noble with finest equipment is stronger, than an armored servant!
Even with this perspective, none of the warriors the player selects could possibly be construed as anything close to servants.
They wouldn't be copies, though, because the players controlling them all play the character differently, and utilise their skills differently. Some will be more skilled than others. That's the difference.It would be a funny if every Warden for example was an exact copy of all the other Wardens on the battlefield (except of the cosmetics) ... without having someone, who is quicker, or stronger, or durates more ...
I'd rather them not follow what everyone else is doing.Most online games have a progress system in form of stats! Some are unfair (I also don't like them) ... but this one I hope to be balanced.
I'd also rather not get bogged down in grinding out something that will just make fights easier for me. I'd rather beat somebody and know it was because I was a better fighter, not because I do inherently more damage than they do.
You're advocating artificial augmentation through inherent power enhancement, not natural advancement through knowledge and experience.Originally Posted by Illyrianslayer Go to original post
But games with the sort of stat-enhancement progression systems you're talking about often see drop-offs from the playerbase after a couple of months because the people who have been playing since day one have such an advantage over new people that new people are discouraged from playing because they lack the in-game tools to compete.And the combat system in general you also learn in the campaign or the intros ... all these complainings are all like "first few days-struggle"
Of course you won't master the controll in a few days, but enough to be at least on a moderate scale.
The only way to 'balance' this is to allow people to buy those tools and enhancements.
I'd rather not have either happen in For Honor.
And I repeat that it will only discourage new people from playing if they have to both learn the nuances of the control system and map layout while having to hit someone who is familiar with both twice as many times as said experienced player has to hit them. A month in and the playerbase will possibly stagnate the same way it does for CoD and Battlefield with every one of their installments.I admit, I don't know much about the single attacks of the Orochi, but I reat my stance ... 3-4 hit instead of 5-6 is welcome to me
That's a distinction between one style of sword over another. It doesn't necessarily say anything about the quality of the weapon itself.A sword is by far not like any other swords ... just as an example: Japanese Warriors mostly weren't able to cut through leather armor, before inventing the high quality Katana
I understand that from a real-world perspective, but again, none of the warriors the player selects are peons with shoddy weapons and armour. Even the base-level stuff is visually of good quality. All that changes visually at higher levels is that they become more ornate. If you want to make an argument in terms of realism, most of the higher level gear look like implements that in the real world would be reserved for ceremonial purposes instead of being used for combat, and in fact would be less-well made as a result, since none of it is meant to save your life.A sword can be a poorly made mass-product or a special crafting with a sharper, harder blade and other features! It's not just a difference in video games!
Well then it's a matter of opinion.In my eyes not enough ... some people like these templates with different colours, but i definitely don't.
Cosmetically maybe. Polarization in terms of inherent player power brings frustration and the possibility that new people stop playing after a few matches because they literally cant's compete.Polarization brings change and additional possibilities to individualize.
Overwatch is one game, and far from the norm in terms of progression. If I wanted them to follow a trend, I'd want them to do what fighting games do: Characters are different in terms of inherent strengths and weaknesses, but those strengths and weaknesses are unchanged over time, and through fighting and progressing, you unlock various cosmetic pieces that lets you make a character your own.But you just talked about Overwatch and want For Honor following that ^^
For Honor has more in common mechanically with fighting games than anything else anyway.
Again, it exists in fighting games. That's how they should approach player progression and game longevity.This equality you talk about is something you have to fight for in almost every single game, and most of them function well!