How customization may ruin the competitive scene | Forums

[MisterWillow]

It feels like you are not reading my post ^^
I said about 5 times, that it is very likely that the stats will be nerfed in the final game. I don't have an evidence or source for this, but it's kinda like logical to me.

And I said at least once that my criticism is aimed at how things currently are, not at how they might be in the future.

You fight all the time, and i really doubt that people want to stop 1min per enemy after a while. Additionally in duells or brawl you just focus on one enemy (in brawl more or less), where people concentrate more on you and the duell will endure longer, because there is no need to hurry.

I'll admit an entire minute for a fight in Dominion would be pretty long, but currently you can kill people in a matter of seconds. That isn't satisfying either.

Again: Players learn the mechanics by campaign and by intros, you just perfectionate it in the Multiplayer.

But the multiplayer is where you'd actually get to put into practice. That's where the game really shines, and I think that is undermined by the current stat system.

And you have to earn your equalty, like in reality.
You don't start with the best of the best. You work your way up to the sunlight!

You earn that by being more skillful, not by being given something that makes you better by virtue of that item existing.

And a good proverb says, that the path is the real goal.
And just perfectionating you own skills is a short path ...

That is the path. Continual self-improvement. That's the meaning of the proverb.

You are complaining all the time about having too much challenge and now you complain about having no challenge ^^
The reality is, that one opponent is weaker than you and the other is stronger then you and not everybody is as strong as you ... that's refreshing!
There will also be many people as strong as you will be ... here is your effort, here is you challenge

It depends on what you mean by strength. In context of For Honor, strength should equate with the skill of the fighter, not some arbitrary amplification of damage models.

No no don't worry it brings it up to the point more or less.
I like to learn the mechanics, but I don't want to consist the whole game of that (talking about Multiplayer).
I like to build up the character, to shape him, to make strategy with gear and celebrate if it turns out to be a good idea or if the item is good, because I use it!

Sounds like you should play more straight RPGs.

I also don't like it, when stats dominate the game!
Actually in many games i played a friends High-End build, and terribly f*cked up, because I wasn't able to play ... and that's the way how it should be in my eyes.

In certain games, maybe. In this sort of game I think it does more harm than good.

But this way you get your weapon in the end, and people have there development. Everybody is lucky in the end.

I'd rather not depend on luck to get a piece of gear that might improve my character in a way that's beneficial. Remember, all gear drops are random.

I didn't play Tekken Revolution ... just the other games ^^
But tekken revolution can't be a general proof that stats are evil ... stats and Arcade Games don't go well together ... but For Honor is far away from Arcade!

It indicates that in a multiplayer melee game stats do nothing but create unnecessary imbalances that cause large swathes of people to stop playing after a couple months.

I know that fighting games are associated with arcades, with good reason, but they've existed in the same environment as CoD for years now on consoles

Aside from that, I'd actually call For Honor a fairly arcade-y game. It's certainly not a simulation, and there's enough complexity in the mechanics to allow for strategy, but in terms of actual gameplay, it's pretty good arcade action game.

But after all still a huge player-base with many many contended players!

Team Fortress (with it's just cosmetic stuff) has a much lower player-base, which doesn't speak for it ...

On the contrary. Today alone, TF2 had a peak playerbase of 63,000 people, compared to Infinite Warfare's peak of 7000 (on PC).

Admittedly, Battlefield 1 is in the same ballpark, averaging anywhere between 50-80,000 over the past few days (again, on PC), but that can be blamed on it being new and the hype associated with it. Give it a few months and I bet it will drop to half that.

Again playing with words ...
In many cases the better equiped one will win and in many others the more experienced guy!
Experience doesn't mean an auto-win.

I'm not playing with words. I'm providing ways in which experience alone gives you an advantage. Gear shouldn't mean an auto-win either.

Not if the opponent knows how to use his weapon even a bit ...

The man Musashi killed was Sasaki Kojiro and was considered a master swordsman.

[Dez_troi_aR]

I want to remind you all that unlike us, MisterWillow has played the games for many hours, not only during the alpha test. While i do not think that this makes critique on his statements obsolete, it is still important to keep in mind. Especially because we all have to make up our statements based on feelings about the random footage we saw.

Personally, i like the idea of a stat system that allows for some fine tuning, but if it affects the gameplay as heavyly as is seems it does, than i would rather have it removed. I also am an achiever and want stuff to work towards, but that could be cosmetics as well as reaching a higher league. The goal of entering the master league kept me on my toes for years in SC2!

[Dez_troi_aR]

Anyone interested in the subject could go here https://m.reddit.com/r/forhonor/comm...f=search_posts .

Where both side of the argument are discussed and also showing what some renown 5 gear might look like in term of stats.

His main renown 5 sword actually triple his block attack damage while very sligthly lowering basic attack and lowering revenge stage damage by a lot.

A sword like that would be a huge advantage in 1v1 where revenge state is basicly useless no?

Thank you for the link, really interesting!

I read through most of it and the impressions given made me reconsider my position. I think the game would definately be better off without stat system. If its only for the finetuning aspect, as they said it would be, its not that important anyway but holds a lot of dangers. The temptation for pushing the game a little bit into the pay-to-win direction is very high and frustration and unblanced fights might become very common until you reach that high stat-gear and start grinding gamers who have a disadvantage yourself.

[Dez_troi_aR]

"Sounds like you should play more straight RPGs."

This isn't matter of the topic ^^

There actually is a point to that. If leveling up and developing your character is your main interest in a game, then you will definately be more happy while playing an RPG or MMORPG than you would be figuring out street fighter combos. If the game is skillbased and esport orientated, you will never have that much character progress. I dont want to exclude anyone, i hope to see as many of you guys from the forums in the game as possible and if you are more the rpg type of guy i encourage you to try out games were your skill is the main subject to progress. It is more satisfying in my opinion. But you should not expect all the role play elements to be carried over to the skillbased approach.

Tekken is also a game 1vs1
I played Tekken very often and I wouldn't like to have it with stats ... but For Honor isn't really 1vs1 (just sometimes)

People seem to have divided opinions about that. I for one am much more looking forward to the duel mode, where the game comes very close to the fighting genre. Others seem to be more exited about the "hughe battle simulation" that they see in dominion. There is no point in arguing about which mode is closer to the core of the game but in defense of my personal perspective and considering the threads topic i'd like to mention that dominion itself is also more or less built about the 1v1 encounter. If a player vs player encounter is unfair than dominion breaks down, too. Arguing that there could always be a second guy jumping into the back of a player who has superior gear and "evening" the odds that way isn't really a satisfying argument.

Please I don't know who they are and just because of the anime characters you can't say that in reality always skill totally dominates.

These are of course not fictional characters but historical figures and 10 seconds of google can provide you with that knowledge.

[Sakinahz]

Let's not forget that the game is about 3 month from release.Within that time they not only have to finish/polish the whole game, but try to balance the unreleased 6 additional class that we havent seen in action yet.Balancing a game that rely so much on player skill is allready hard enough but when you add gear to the equation it becomes that much harder to balance and that much easier to abuse for players.

Also many people say they want to use gear to fine tune thier character to their playstyle wich is entirely possible to do without relying on a drop system.Just make every piece of gear available to everyone right from the start so you can pick how to equip you character, that way no one gets left behind.

I see the argument "matchmaking will match you with equaly geared opponent anyway"but a lot but people seems to forget that matchmaking is just not that great in general.Not only does the matchmaking system as to be very solid but as soon a player count start to drop guess whats gonna happen? The matchmaking will be forced to match new players with players way above them just so they can play and every newcomer will get destroyed by fully geared players.Hell battleborn tryed to sell thier game for 10$ to get a surge of new players in and every lvl 1 players were being matched vs lvl 100 fully geared pre mades because the player count was so low.Every newcomer just left and the game is now as good as dead.(player peak of 427..)Even with a good player base you will occasionly get the over geared dude in a match.Not to mention a newbie that brings his fully geared friend into his matches.

I feel like a big part of todays gamer got suckered into the "a game can't be enjoyable unless it has some form of gear progression''. Hell i still remember before Overwatch release so many were saying the game would flop because they could not see a reason to play a game if everything is unlokced right from the start(in my head all i could think was "what the hell...How about playing for fun?!").The game mechanic of For Honor do feel like they would good be enough to stand on its own just like a fighting game would.You get better at the game by learning combos,counters,spacing,blocking,good timing,feints and that is how you would beat other players.Not trough gearing up.

I am very scared gear will affect the game balance too much and actualy mess up the competitive aspect of it but at the same time removing it completly would mean some player might not enjoy the game as much? hmmm.


options to consider maybe?

1) Make every piece of gear available right from the start so everyone can fine tune thier character how they see fit.

or

2)Make the gear only matter in dominion mode and leave 1v1 and 2v2 gearless. (bit of both world)

or

3)At least get rid of the random loot nature and replace it with a currency system so you can buy any piece you want directly.(it at least lessen the fustration of not being lucky)

or

4)have 2 different matchmaking. 1 that allows gear and one that does not.(won't work unless you have a big player base).or in the same alley make it so ranked match have no gear in them.

If gear stay in game in its current form i could only hope that any set of gear you equip would never give you any more that a 10% advantage in a stat total.

You should never be able to kill someone in only 2 heavy hits instead of 3 because by then your allready 33% stronger than your opponent and yes i know that if you boost your attack some other stats get reduced but not every stats is equal.Just like if you dont have that sword for 1v1 in the link i provided you would be severly gimped because revenge state as no use in that mode.

Sorry my tought are all over the place i have a hard time explaning myself coherently in english :P

[Pandaego]

I had my opinions changed on stats after my trip to Montreal. I was very worried they would ruin the game but after seeing the balance done on them already I have hope. The most important thing regardless of how Ubisoft handles it is that they will continue to support the game post launch. Stats can work as long as they are not afraid to nerf/change them if they are too influential on the gameplay.

[MisterWillow]

You said: "You earn that by being more skillful, not by being given something that makes you better by virtue of that item existing."

You are speaking in a perspective like you are deciding ^^
In many games it's you own skill combined with technical advantage ... and it's a successfully modell with many many people speaking for it.

Okay? There's also plenty of games that rely on player skill alone that are just as successful.

"That is the path. Continual self-improvement. That's the meaning of the proverb."

Please don't explain me my own proverb.
The meaning is self-improvement OR trying to achieve a certain goal, which doesn't requiere skill always. (So doesn't always mean self-improvement)
In this case it means an increase of skill, but also to build up a characters power.

I didn't know you were Mahatma Ghandi... interesting.

I mean, I suppose with it being a spiritual quote that requires some introspection, it could be open to interpretation, so I'd rather not belabor the point too much, but generally the quote/proverb is taken to mean that there is no goal to life, that the experience of living should be your purpose, but that's in its original context.

Adopting it for a warrior's path, I would take it to mean continual self-improvement is its own reward. It has a vein in Bushido philosophy especially, in that improving sword skills is a meditative act that improves you as a person, and that improvement is the goal. Therefore, the path is the goal.

"It depends on what you mean by strength. In context of For Honor, strength should equate with the skill of the fighter, not some arbitrary amplification of damage models."

Should equate only with skill in your eyes, but in mine this is boring after a short while ... because there is no space to tune you character even a bit (not speaking of my own skill)

This is more a philosophical disagreement, so there's not really much to argue.

"Sounds like you should play more straight RPGs."

This isn't matter of the topic ^^

As Dez_troi_aR said, if your primary interest in playing games is power progression, you'd probably enjoy RPGs much more than a game like For Honor, which inherently relies more on player skill, even if there is some sort of progression system.

Still, for the type of game this is, I think it would benefit more from having players be equal in terms of stats (and by that I mean have characters with different base stats but have those stats remain static).

Tekken is also a game 1vs1
I played Tekken very often and I wouldn't like to have it with stats ... but For Honor isn't really 1vs1 (just sometimes)

In my eyes For Honor is much more comparable to this games, then to Tekken, because Tekken is 1vs1 and shooters play in an open map where you just have to survive and make kills and bring in the stuff that gives you a higher chance of survival.
Reminding in Tekken it's duell all the time ... in For Honor just sometimes!

The point I'm making with the fighting game comparison is that they have more in common mechanically than any other genre, and as such should be approaching in a similar way. It's ranged vs melee.

Obviously there's room for tweaks to things more unique to For Honor like revive speed or debuff resistance, but in terms of raw damage numbers and whatnot, I don't think those sorts of augmentation should be applicable.

Infinite Warfare also was a flop ...
But MW, CoD, etc. build the total majority and have a stat system.
Nobody complains.

Plenty of people have been complaining since MW3 at least because if you aren't there on day 1 and play 20 hours a week, you can't compete after a couple of months because the players that play at least that much have more gear than you, and therefore have more options than you, plus they have all the natural skill from playing that long.

I know a lot of people who don't even bother picking up a game like Battlefield if they can't get it day 1, because they know they'll never catch up.

Please I don't know who they are and just because of the anime characters you can't say that in reality always skill totally dominates.

Miyamoto Musashi is widely regarded as the greatest swordsman in Japapanese history, and wrote the Book of Five Rings, a series of scrolls on sword fighting.

Sasaki Kojiro, who I linked in the last post, was also considered a master swordsman, but is mostly known for being killed by Musashi.

Both were real people.

[Rain-Dragon]

Quote-wars

[mpettit24]

I haven't read all of the articles so I don't know what all everyone has said. But one possible solution that I could see is making a difference between competitive and quick play. The difference being that you can use whatever gear you want in competitive, but you're limited to specific gear or no gear in quick play. Just a thought.

[whovie]

I really don't understand why this thread has so many replies and why it's viewed as such a major issue. The odds of them not making a ranked and casual playlist like RB6S is really small. If everyone on this forum is aware of the skill and competitive potential the devs are more than aware already. The solution is simple by making the gear you get purely cosmetic in competitive. If your worried about gear stats ruining casual, I really don't see that being an issue and without it you would lose another level of customization and immersion this game has to offer. When I played the alpha I primarily played the berserker, to the point that at the end. mine was renown 2 lvl 5. I used my gear stats to sure up my weakness, defense and to boost my offensive play style with stamina and attack. Towards the end of the alpha i could tell my stats were definitely giving me an advantage on the battlefield. But that was only a weekend of play and I don't imagine many people played with one character so much like i did. When the game releases or even the beta for that matter with more options to choose from and more time to play it will make stats far less relevant because your time on characters will be more spread out and everybody will have time to adjust their own stats. From what i could tell by the way my stats were increasing, by renown 5 i imagine whatever stat you are trying to boost will be maxed out. It will only be a matter of time then when stats are pretty much irrelevant since everyone will have the stats to support their play style. With a proper skill based matchmaking you wont have new players facing geared out experienced players. So this whole stats argument in my opinion is pretty unfounded. Not trying to piss anyone off. Its just my observations.