🛈 Announcement
Greetings! The For Honor forums are now archived and accessible in read-only mode, please go to the new platform to discuss the game
  1. #1

    Faction war winners!

    Technical Test - Last round counted - Vikings winning before and after - Congrats Vikings
    Closed Beta - Last round counted - Vikings winning before and after - Congrats Vikings


    (Twitter)
    For Honor Verified account
    ‏@ForHonorGame

    Only one hour left to play the Open Beta. Play for free now to help your side win the War of the Factions! #ForHonor


    Open Beta - Last round didn't count - Knights winning before Vikings winning after - Congrats Vikings... Wait... They say keep fighting because it counts. And don't count it. But did for every previous iteration... Well congrats Knights on being given a victory by the devs. You "almost" earned it. Sorry vikings your 3-0 w/l in the faction war gets you nothing!

    TL;DR Samurai where you at? (I see a bunch of Viking tears but you were winning the entire beta until it mattered...)
     6 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  2. #2
    Can't fault them for not counting a 2hr turn. The problem with that is that the leading faction starts with a massive turn disadvantage to give the other factions a leg up in getting back in the fight to keep the faction war balanced. This deficit isn't something that can be overcome super quickly, especially when you have to hold 8 territories with that disadvantage. With only 2hrs there simply wasn't enough time in the turn for the knights to apply enough resources to beat the turn start disadvantage. So counting that last 2hr turn would have been wrong since vikings would have been fed a win due to being in last with massive turn start advantage out of the gate. Both knights and samurai with only 2hrs would not have been able to overcome that start advantage the vikings had. That is why the knights making that push for the lead gave them the win.

    Deus Vult!
     1 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  3. #3
    teksuo1's Avatar Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Posts
    2,433
    as a knight, i honestly didn't care about winning this. TBH i didn't think the knights even stood a chance considering most known streamers went with vikings/samurais.

    I'm really glad we won now that i realize how much tears this brings. I'll proudly wear my emblem of power golden frame forever.

    so shiny
     3 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  4. #4
    So will I, I'm proud of my brother and sister knights for pulling off the epic comeback, especially after being kicked down to 9 territories. Factions are going to have to learn to not attack and just play D when they are in the lead.
    Share this post

  5. #5

    Bump thread please

    I Think the first post in this thread sums up my exact thoughts i have been talking about this on here since i seen the result, cause i literally logged in to try and help us after that post went up LUL SO I GOT REKD.
    Share this post

  6. #6
    The biggest issue I have with all of this is that the developers gave misconceptions on two accounts:

    1) Explaining that the determining factor in the Faction Warfare Beta was total war assets, and players specifically played to that end. If they had said "most territories wins", then the Vikings may very well have adopted a strategy for that gameplay. The rules were explicitly stated and players played the game accordingly, expecting certain outcomes. The fact that there was no fine print, parenthesis, or addendum to add on hot-button counter arguments like, "Well Vikings got a 5% bonus" is contrary to that logic; the fact was that there was no disclaimer stating "UNLESS" or "IF", it simply said "most war assets = win", plain as day.

    The removal of that criteria from the website and the fact that the results are clearly contrary to that logic suggests either bias/favoritism or poor elaboration on intended mechanics. Neither of which is an acceptable justification when prizes and bragging rights in a tournament-esque style environment are on the line.

    2) The blatant misconception that any play within the last hour/two hours would have any effect whatsoever on the results. The developers had to have known that the beta was going to end mid-round AT LEAST up until the point they made the declaration that there was an hour left to play, and to expressly ignore results despite claims of the play being measurable, recorded criteria in the determination of a victor borders on bait-and-switch. One could argue that the developers should have accomodated for this eventuality, but even if we are to assume that they -DIDN'T- know that the beta would end mid-round they should have considered the implications of it before calling a victor and then explained their decision.

    Both of these situations make for a very bitter taste to deal with on their own, but that players have to deal with both on top of the other factions rubbing in the loss by technicality is, for lack of better wording, totally ****ed. However, what worries me most is the implications and precedence that this sets for the -actual- game and whether or not we can expect technicalities such as these when the game goes live.

    Frankly, that makes me really worried about my investment in the $100 edition of this game.
     4 people found this helpful
    Share this post

  7. #7
    I thought it went by who was in the lead the longest.

    I mean think about it, it's bound to come down to the last couple of rounds in Live as well, if one faction is consistently dominating for months at a time then another faction happens to pull out some wins at the last minute?

    Then again, if they did it that way the other factions would just give up and not care in the last months.
    Share this post

  8. #8
    Originally Posted by The_Quieter Go to original post
    I thought it went by who was in the lead the longest.

    I mean think about it, it's bound to come down to the last couple of rounds in Live as well, if one faction is consistently dominating for months at a time then another faction happens to pull out some wins at the last minute?

    Then again, if they did it that way the other factions would just give up and not care in the last months.
    If that was the case the Samurai would have won. They were in the lead for 9/15 turns. The Vikings had 4/15 and the Knights 2/15. So by most metrics Knights were the least deserving of the win.
    Share this post

  9. #9
    Originally Posted by The_Quieter Go to original post
    I thought it went by who was in the lead the longest.

    I mean think about it, it's bound to come down to the last couple of rounds in Live as well, if one faction is consistently dominating for months at a time then another faction happens to pull out some wins at the last minute?

    Then again, if they did it that way the other factions would just give up and not care in the last months.
    Every season will have several rounds. Winning one round by luck, will not ensure victory in that season.
    Share this post

  10. #10
    awolcz's Avatar Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    Prague, Czech Republic
    Posts
    185
    Originally Posted by teksuo1 Go to original post
    as a knight, i honestly didn't care about winning this. TBH i didn't think the knights even stood a chance considering most known streamers went with vikings/samurais.

    I'm really glad we won now that i realize how much tears this brings. I'll proudly wear my emblem of power golden frame forever.

    so shiny
    Exactly :-D I absolutely did not care about some faction war, but since I see how those Viking babies cry, I'm glad we won and I'm so proud of having that nice golden frame.
    Share this post

Page 1 of 4 123 ... Last ►►