Exploits need to be removed before anymore balance patches roll out. | Forums

[Valor_Ash]

LOL. So that's why we all agree that letting 108 gear veterans beat up on new players with no gear is totally the most balanced gameplay mechanic ever. Ubisoft designed it that way so they must be right!

Seriously? "Ubisoft said so" is no excuse to stop thinking for yourself.

I've logged in today just to send a reply to you. You've replied to every thread made about exploits, and you're trying to defend them by giving an excuse of examples of previous games.

Look I get what you're saying. From the looks of it, you've been practicing these "techs" or "exploits" or whatever you want to call it, and you made it well, which others would say it opened up this "defensive" meta.

But your examples are in the wrong way. You can't say "previous game's mechanic was an exploit and made real, so it makes it OK to exploit this game too"
It's like saying "I bashed your head by accident into a rock and you still lived without injury, i'll just keep bashing your head seeing you survived the first hit."

What I'm trying to say is, even if old games' combat was an exploit, it made progress and newer generation games were built on top of combos or others. But it doesn't give it an excuse to keep exploiting.

Because as you mentioned the combos were an exploit, but it did not hurt the playerbase, as it was adapted into reaction.

But using these glitches will hinder the community. Why? Because opposite of your "combo glitch into real", For Honor glitches will just disable the user and will not have a fighting chance.

These glitches include the abuse of the buffer guard mechanic by using soft light attacks, guardbreak feints, unblockable/unparryable zone attacks etc..

It will not be fair to all players due to controller vs keyboard, or even frame counts of your game. If you dipped lower than 45 FPS, you can't perform it or even react to it, which includes console players getting screwed.

A combo is understandable if it was a glitch then turned into legit fighting mechanic. But abusing the guard stance indicator, what good will it do? Guessing game? People like reaction times, gives then that adrenaline feeling. But once you break that mechanic, the only person enjoying this is the person abusing the glitch.

Which in turn kills the players, and the community.

If ubisoft really wants to have it in, then make it accessible for everyone to easily perform it.

PS: Assassins can't perform some glitches due to their limited guard stance btw. Shoguki cannot perform specific glitch but raider can. There is also a glitch only valkyrie's and nobushi can perform a perfect glitch while the rest cant.

Oh and for @MisterGuyMan, I'll leave ya with this video.

https://clips.twitch.tv/CleanTenuousMomCoolCat


Glitch kills the game because its unfair.

Its unfair because you can do it without risking anything.

Without risking anything as in you do not drain your stamina as you would normal do if you hit a heavy attack and use the normal feint.

[MisterGuyMan]

But your examples are in the wrong way. You can't say "previous game's mechanic was an exploit and made real, so it makes it OK to exploit this game too"
It's like saying "I bashed your head by accident into a rock and you still lived without injury, i'll just keep bashing your head seeing you survived the first hit."

But using these glitches will hinder the community. Why? Because opposite of your "combo glitch into real", For Honor glitches will just disable the user and will not have a fighting chance.

These glitches include the abuse of the buffer guard mechanic by using soft light attacks, guardbreak feints, unblockable/unparryable zone attacks etc..

It will not be fair to all players due to controller vs keyboard, or even frame counts of your game. If you dipped lower than 45 FPS, you can't perform it or even react to it, which includes console players getting screwed.

Which in turn kills the players, and the community.

If ubisoft really wants to have it in, then make it accessible for everyone to easily perform it.

PS: Assassins can't perform some glitches due to their limited guard stance btw. Shoguki cannot perform specific glitch but raider can. There is also a glitch only valkyrie's and nobushi can perform a perfect glitch while the rest cant.

Oh and for @MisterGuyMan, I'll leave ya with this video.

https://clips.twitch.tv/CleanTenuousMomCoolCat

Glitch kills the game because its unfair.

Its unfair because you can do it without risking anything.

Without risking anything as in you do not drain your stamina as you would normal do if you hit a heavy attack and use the normal feint.

Your arguments simply do not hold water when you actually examine the glitches. The game, even with the glitches that help out offense, are still substantially dominated by defense. The problem is that people can turtle up too much not that offense is too strong. Recall how your argument is that combos aren't unfair because combo glitches was adapted to. Well the FH community has adapted to the offense glitches and defense is still king. So purely from a game balance standpoint the combo glitch is worse. Combos made a game where offense dominated and allowed it to dominate even more. The argument that "it's unfair because you can do it without risking anything" also doesn't follow. Combos can be done without risk. Not all characters have equal combos too. Unequal is fine. It's all about the balance. It's literally free damage. Do you play fighting games? Go watch the top 8 of any MvC tournament. I'm willing to beat that half if not all of the matches will have some massively overpowered tactic that was completely unintentional. I can also promise that this exploit has multiple counters to it.

Your FPS argument doesn't hold water. As I mentioned in other posts, the difference between 60 and 30 FPS will, at most, give PC players 1/6oth of a second more time to react. That's nowhere near enough to make a difference. Moreover as I also stated previously, these glitches amount to a basic 50/50. By definition you cannot defend a 50/50 mixups on reaction. Both the attack and the defender has to guess. If you are correct that this game cannot have any 50/50 mixups then we'd have to get rid of Warden's Vortex loop. That's a 50/50. So if you're just arguing on principle that players should be able to react to everything then your principle simple does not apply to FH.

In your video it looks confusing but the attacker has to commit at some point. A simple top light would have cut through all that BS anyway.

[nexallus]

As someone who has much experience in Fighting Games, let me say that 50/50's are a terrible way to balance a fighting game. Mortal Kombat X foe example went through this same phase where almost every character had a 50/50 and the majority playerbase (including high-level players) hated this until they finally removed the majority of 50/50's a year later.

While I do agree defense in For Honor is too strong, these indicator bugs are NOT the way to fix the defense meta. They are unbalanced and stronger when used with certain characters due to varying factors such as attack speed and stamina cost. There is also still the fact that Assassin characters cannot even use the indicator bug thanks to how their guard stance works.

So please explain to me (without insulting me) why the indicator bug should stay. Honestly, I am intrigued.

[MisterGuyMan]

As someone who has much experience in Fighting Games, let me say that 50/50's are a terrible way to balance a fighting game. Mortal Kombat X foe example went through this same phase where almost every character had a 50/50 and the majority playerbase (including high-level players) hated this until they finally removed the majority of 50/50's a year later.

While I do agree defense in For Honor is too strong, these indicator bugs are NOT the way to fix the defense meta. They are unbalanced and stronger when used with certain characters due to varying factors such as attack speed and stamina cost. There is also still the fact that Assassin characters cannot even use the indicator bug thanks to how their guard stance works.

So please explain to me (without insulting me) why the indicator bug should stay. Honestly, I am intrigued.

Unless you're referring to another indicator bug, Assassins can very much do this bug.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDgCas6xz6g

I'm not saying 50/50 mechanics are always good. I'm just explaining that 50/50 mechanics, by virtue of being 50/50 mechanics alone don't have to be gamebreaking. There are two arguments I'm addressing. The first is that flicker glitch is bad because Ubisoft said so. I hate that argument as an appeal to authority fallacy. The second argument people use is that it's borderline cheating or people can abuse it or whatever. So what you're asking for is actually healthy. *IS* the flicker glitch unbalanced? I say no because defense as it exists now is still stronger than offense with the flicker glitch. I can't make the semantic connection to saying this one exploit is unbalanced when it's entire purpose to get past something that is even more unbalanced.

The second reason to get rid of an exploit is if its reductionist. If all people do is this one exploit and all the other options are now useless then the exploit is unbalanced. It's removing complexity by existing. I don't see this happening either. Normal attacks and feinting are still the primary ways of attacking and if some one always anticipates a flicker ZA you can always switch it up to a normal attack for a free hit. By it's very nature you can't always use one option of a 50/50. Here's a good podcast on reductionist "cocaine logic" gameplay:
https://player.fm/series/sirlinnet-g...-cocaine-logic

In For Honor I'm generally on the side of variety. The game wants to be about defense which is fine but I feel like other ways to play should be a part of any competitive game. Defense and Offense should both be viable and if flicker helps offense a little then I'm all for it. If anything it's making the game more balanced by helping out an entire underpowered style of play and stopping an already too dominant style from being even more dominant. For all intents and purposes Flicker is just a faster, more expensive and risker version of feint. What's the argument exactly that flicker is OP? To be clear I don't even think flicker is even that great... it's... OK. I never played MK since MK2 all those years ago so I can't comment on that game specifically. If a game is nothing but 50/50s then that's a problem too. DoA IMO was just under the good fighters because it was all 50/50s. I never felt there was enough incentive to mix it up beyond getting that hit in. If MK is filled with 50/50s then I suspect both options were equally good or close enough to it that the game was reduced to a coin flip guessing game. That's not balanced either.

[DrExtrem]

The indicator bug abuse is standard on xbox.

Even nobushis do it.

[VMPL1]

Unless you're referring to another indicator bug, Assassins can very much do this bug.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TDgCas6xz6g

I'm not saying 50/50 mechanics are always good. I'm just explaining that 50/50 mechanics, by virtue of being 50/50 mechanics alone don't have to be gamebreaking. There are two arguments I'm addressing. The first is that flicker glitch is bad because Ubisoft said so. I hate that argument as an appeal to authority fallacy. The second argument people use is that it's borderline cheating or people can abuse it or whatever. So what you're asking for is actually healthy. *IS* the flicker glitch unbalanced? I say no because defense as it exists now is still stronger than offense with the flicker glitch. I can't make the semantic connection to saying this one exploit is unbalanced when it's entire purpose to get past something that is even more unbalanced.

The second reason to get rid of an exploit is if its reductionist. If all people do is this one exploit and all the other options are now useless then the exploit is unbalanced. It's removing complexity by existing. I don't see this happening either. Normal attacks and feinting are still the primary ways of attacking and if some one always anticipates a flicker ZA you can always switch it up to a normal attack for a free hit. By it's very nature you can't always use one option of a 50/50. Here's a good podcast on reductionist "cocaine logic" gameplay:
https://player.fm/series/sirlinnet-g...-cocaine-logic

In For Honor I'm generally on the side of variety. The game wants to be about defense which is fine but I feel like other ways to play should be a part of any competitive game. Defense and Offense should both be viable and if flicker helps offense a little then I'm all for it. If anything it's making the game more balanced by helping out an entire underpowered style of play and stopping an already too dominant style from being even more dominant. For all intents and purposes Flicker is just a faster, more expensive and risker version of feint. What's the argument exactly that flicker is OP? To be clear I don't even think flicker is even that great... it's... OK. I never played MK since MK2 all those years ago so I can't comment on that game specifically. If a game is nothing but 50/50s then that's a problem too. DoA IMO was just under the good fighters because it was all 50/50s. I never felt there was enough incentive to mix it up beyond getting that hit in. If MK is filled with 50/50s then I suspect both options were equally good or close enough to it that the game was reduced to a coin flip guessing game. That's not balanced either.

This is a game, not a gamble, 50/50 is never good, especially when it's exploitable and only applied to specific cases. It's not a mechanic if only a collected few can use it.

[Conjecturable]

This is a game, not a gamble, 50/50 is never good, especially when it's exploitable and only applied to specific cases. It's not a mechanic if only a collected few can use it.

Only a select few characters can use Full Guard, so therefore by your standards, it's not a game mechanic.

Only Nobushi has access to Hidden Stance, again that must make it not a game mechanic.

Look. I get what you are saying, but at least find a way to say it without being so easily disproven. These things being in the game are a hindrance to the game. People that try to defend the use of exploits are the people that are not good enough to play without them.

Ignore them, beat them at their own game (even though they are using exploits, most of them aren't even good WITH them), and then move on to the next opponent. The last time Ubisoft tried to fix something pertaining to damage PK's bleed was bugged. I'd happily let them take their time with a fix for all of this if when we get the fix for everything we don't have game breaking bugs like that again.

[MisterGuyMan]

The indicator bug abuse is standard on xbox.

Even nobushis do it.

Lots of mechanics are standard without being unbalanced.

This is a game, not a gamble, 50/50 is never good, especially when it's exploitable and only applied to specific cases. It's not a mechanic if only a collected few can use it.

Literally every balanced fighting game I know of has 50/50s that all the best players exploit to win. Also every character having different moves is just the price you pay if you want different characters. The first Street Fighter was balanced. The first Street Fighter also only had Ken and Ryu as playable and both were identical to each other.

[DrExtrem]

Its not a mechanic - its a f*****g exploit.

And using exploits ob purpose is cheating.

[Remnancy1]

Lots of mechanics are standard without being unbalanced.


Literally every balanced fighting game I know of has 50/50s that all the best players exploit to win. Also every character having different moves is just the price you pay if you want different characters. The first Street Fighter was balanced. The first Street Fighter also only had Ken and Ryu as playable and both were identical to each other.

A few points about why you are way off base

1.Exploits are cheating this is not debatable.
2.No amount of unsound mechanical unbalance makes using them excusable because by this logic hacking should also be considered acceptable.
3.Your claim of these "techs" being inclusionist is blatantly untrue if I have to always keep right guard for PK zone glitch that means I have less options.Furthermore since PK can't hold block for protection against warden zone glitch she has even fewer options.Considering as well if I have to dodge the raider zone "tech" because it cannot be parried therefore cannot be punished that is far fewer options so no these malfunctions are intensely reductionist which is why they must go

P.S. Please actually look up what the appeal to authority fallacy actually means