Ubi Says They're Listening.... | Forums

[Varicose_Veins]

No one's talking about gutting defensive play.

It's more about tweaking things so defence isn't as dominant so we don't have attackers being punished.

[ThePollie]

Like it or not, that is how combat has always been.

Aggression in combat, while valuable to maintain the initiative, is risky. If you can attack him, he can attack you, and any time you open yourself for a strike, you are yourself opened for a strike. Stalling out an attack and counter-attacking has been a staple of combat for thousands of years. If you want to hammer your opponent, you need to do so in a way that doesn't have him confident and ready for you.

[The4ngryLem0n]

Before we address the debatable defense and class balancing ect, I think we should address the nigh undeniable issue of a lack of dedicated servers.

Hey UBI! YOU LISTENING! JUST BECAUSE THIS ISN"T ANOTHER BLAND MILITARY SHOOTER DOESN"T MEAN IT ISN"T GOOD! STOP BEING MONEY GRUBBERS AND GET SOME SERVERS. IF THIS GAME DOESN"T MAKE YOU MONEY IT"S CUZ YOU BOTCHED IT, NOT BECAUSE IT"S A BAD GAME.

[YOGZULA]

Imagine how bad characters like Lawbringer would be if you gutted defensive play.

You would sharply emphasize their already poor offense but rendering their defense too little to carry them through.

lawbringer has tools that follow up parrying as class combos. What they need to do is just remove the parry -> guard break combo. The guard break should be techable. Classes that are meant to be played more defensively can still have parry follow ups like LB. Classes that are meant to play more aggressively should have tools that allow them to do so, like warden's shoulder charge.

[Gubermensch]

@Varicose_Veins don't explain yourself to the simpletons, you'll go mad!

[Varangian_Wolf]

I have a friend who works at Ubisoft; his exact words today when I asked him about it on text: "Honestly, from the inside, it feels like Ubi has better **** to do. The game is what it is, and the word up top is that the release was rough, and the game isn't where they were hoping it would be. P2P was obviously a bad way to go, a lot of people here believe it was a bad thing, and most of the personnel resources for this game are now being moved to other projects, so balance and forum complaints are not a top priority. Changes will happen, but it wont be fast, and the life of the game may or may not be long. They are already at work on their next set of projects."

Personally, I think that pretty much sums it up. I think everyone already knows that, flat out, THE ENITRE JAPANESE LINEUP is broken; And the Warden, Warlord, and peacekeeper are either broken or need a nerfing in SEVERAL areas.
The biggest problem in this game for most, is the changing of guard position. If everyone changed guard at the same rate of speed it would actually fix issues between many of the classes.
The worst is the Raider. I LOVE my raider, and its the most worthless piece of *&^% in the game. You WONT,, flat out WONT, win most of your games as a raider because he take SO LONG to change guard, and he has NO stun, His unblockable is parryable... its so bad.

Truthfully, if you can get over the "new sparkly" feel of it being a new game WE ALL WANTED so badly; then honestly, this game is really kind of bad.
In truth, its fun, but the game itself is not very long, the story was generic and boring, and the multiplayer is shoddy at best; with a HORRIBLE community of players who are often racist and overtly evil to one another, EXTREME imbalances between classes, VERY LITTLE to NO communication with the community from the devs (which is the biggest sign that a AAA developer is unhappy with a game and looking to move on), and one of the worst server systems for multiplayer play that I have ever seen in the history of gaming with a AAA developer.

This whole thing is honestly just a really bad release. The game maybe, if being realistic, deserves a 5.5 out of 10 at this point.

[DBLxxShotz]

Parry, block or step back/side step to avoid attacks and then counter. You are punished for attacking and rewarded for defending.

How is this a bad thing? Isnt this the way it should be? In boxing when you throw a punch you are vulnerable to counter attack against a good defensive opponent. To deal with guys like this you have to bait them into attacking so that they open up avenues to attack. Im tired of games being all about offense. Games like fight night and ufc dont award defense at all! This game is a refreshing change. You take away the defense first meta and the game is going to turn into a hack and slash spam fest i guarantee it. That was exactly what happen to the first ufc game. Blocking would block all strikes coming in and guys would turtle up causing players to get frustrated and saying the game is broken. a small minority warned against drastically changing this and we were all crucified for it. The majority got what they wanted and suddenly the forums were filled with cries of "Spam is out of control" complainers. The game never recovered and pretty much died out. Ufc 2 stand up is still the worst part of the game although improved somewhat.

[Varicose_Veins]

How is this a bad thing? Isnt this the way it should be? In boxing when you throw a punch you are vulnerable to counter attack against a good defensive opponent. To deal with guys like this you have to bait them into attacking so that they open up avenues to attack. Im tired of games being all about offense. Games like fight night and ufc dont award defense at all! This game is a refreshing change. You take away the defense first meta and the game is going to turn into a hack and slash spam fest i guarantee it. That was exactly what happen to the first ufc game. Blocking would block all strikes coming in and guys would turtle up causing players to get frustrated and saying the game is broken. a small minority warned against drastically changing this and we were all crucified for it. The majority got what they wanted and suddenly the forums were filled with cries of "Spam is out of control" complainers. The game never recovered and pretty much died out. Ufc 2 stand up is still the worst part of the game although improved somewhat.

Invariably when people try to defend the status quo they conflate trying to balance offence and defence with being "all about offence" and "hack and slash spam fest".

No. It's not. Let's stop the hyperbole.

It comes down to what most people enjoy doing - is there a big enough player base out there wanting long fights with endless circling and feinting vs people who want a 2-5 minute fight that has better balance between offence and defence.


I've read stacks of threads here and on Reddit about this specific issue and I've watched hundreds of hours of FH on Twitch.

In my humble opinion most people by far want balance and they want to pull back on the current defensive model and give offence a bit more zip.

[Sun_TzUwU]

... you don't get what people mean by 'defensive meta', do you? they aren't talking about using full block. they're talking about doing exactly what you just explained. Parry, block or step back/side step to avoid attacks and then counter. You are punished for attacking and rewarded for defending.

So bait the counter/dodge maneuvers and counter-punish them for doing so. It's not hard.

[GenLiu]

So how do we reconcile their claim of listening with the fact there isn't a single measure in tomorrow's patch to redress the emerging defensive meta or the issues around the Top 4?

I fear by the time they realize the reality of what needs addressing only a hardcore rump of players will be left.

Because it's too complicated to be fixed that fast. The community of player is large and when some peoples struggles with the defensive aspect of the game (highest level) some others are struggling with the offense (lower level).

You can't just say f%&^* you to someone just because he's a casual gamer who don't want to spend his entire life playing all day, he still paid the same price to get his game and don't want to lose into a pit every single game because now GBs are just frame and you take a ton of chip damage when you manage to block an attack.

The problem might seem easy for some people because they just think about one part of the community but you have to respect everyone at once.
This is why I think the change they have to make must affect the general rules of duels themself (through reduction of the time limit and a point system that favors the aggressor in case of a time out) and not the general core of the game.