Junior Member
Does Ubi want FH to be reactable, so you play against a Hero's moveset, or non-reactable, so you play against your opponent's mind?
It seems like Ubi hasn't quite decided how it wants For Honor to play. It's not only inconsistent within a skill level, there's also big variation in how it plays between highly-competitive, young/fast-reflex, p.c. (low lag) players vs. a middle-tier, mediocre-reflex, console (higher lag) player.
Is it to be a react-able game of reflexes and moveset memorization that can be played "perfectly"? Or is it to have the Yomi strength of many popular fighting games, where mind-gaming your opponent and keeping them guessing is both necessary and very effective (you're playing deeply against your opponent's mind)?
...On the one side, does Ubi want most attacks in FH to be react-able/slow, completely determined (little 50/50 guessing), with 100% safe, penalty-free defense?
In that case you're primarily playing against the other Hero's moveset and character design. It will be possible to play "perfectly", if you've memorized everything the other Hero can do, everything that's "guaranteed", everything that's punishable, etc. The mind of your opponent becomes less relevant. Just watch to see what they do, then react. This also contributes to the defensive turtle meta (because nearly every attack is reactable, and most are punishable).
...OR does Ubi want most attacks to be non-reactable (50/50's?), less punishable, faster, harder to parry, etc? In which case you'll have to play against your opponent's mind, because you can't rely on pure reaction. Trying to "read their mind", predict them, condition/manipulate/trick them, etc.
It's like the difference between playing rock/paper/scissors the regular way (non-react-able, you're trying to guess/read their mind), versus playing it where you always get to see what they've chosen before you have to make your choice (reactable).
Right now, for highly-competitive, young/fast-reflex p.c. players, the game is almost entirely react-able. Almost entirely too slow. Which bores a lot of them. Makes for a shallow game. And anyone that wants to rely on mind games, has mediocre reflexes, or a little too much lag, can never compete at the higher levels. Because it's about fast-reflexes and close-to-perfect play.
For a middle-tier, mediocre-reflex, or console player (especially if your TV is "slow"), several aspects of the game are non-react-able, and hard/impossible to defend against or escape. It's too fast. Which is frustrating/boring when an opponent can spam a bunch of unpunishable attacks. Yet they have no such attacks they can make in return, unless they chose the "right" Hero (Peacekeeper?and you can still lose if your reflexes are mediocre or your setup is a little too laggy).
If FH commits to the mind-game/Yomi emphasis for tuning the game, where you're forced to read your opponent, and can do well if you're successful at that, players of all types can enjoy it quite deeply (like many popular fighting games). If it commits to a react-able/high-reflex-dependent emphasis, only certain players will be able to enjoy it. Right now it hasn't committed to either (but leans heavily towards reactable).
Member
high tier games are all about mind games, that's because the goal of the game is to goad the enemy into attacking and then punishing him.
heroes that are actually too fast (peacekeeper and now shinobi) are considered broken because you cannot react to their attack spam especially with slower guard changing heroes, this coupled with tons of 50/50s or mixups makes the game about guessing right more than about skill / execution.
Member
The thing people need to keep in mind is that this game is not a fighting game. It's a brawler that you can have 1v1s in. Street Fighter and other such games can have those mostly mind game style fighting because you know it will always only be against one other player, and so the mechanics work for the game. The other modes of this game would be completely broken if Ubi went into full fighting game territory of most moves being 50/50s and what not. No one would ever be able to fight more than one person reliably in that case, not unless you're some kind of super human. With that said, this game obviously tries to be a little bit of both, with react-able basic attacks and a few 50/50 special attacks depending on the character. Whether it succeeds in that is debatable of course, but generally speaking, I think Ubisoft have succeeded in making, at the very least, a fun "fighting game-lite" style game that a more casual audience to get into, with some very apparent skill ceilings and problems for pro players regarding the defensive meta.
Junior Member
If it's a mind-game at all, then it's about the only one, and it's shallow, repetitive, and boring. It's just a test of patience. Who can "turtle harder", for longer. Every high-level player I talk to describes it as just waiting, because attacking = losing. I wouldn't even call that mind-gaming. It's just patience, to execute the best tactic in the game (defend & counter).Originally Posted by Lord_Nirgal Go to original post
There are few 50/50's, and mixups don't work, because you aren't going to "mixup" a good-reflex opponent...they will wait to see what you do, then react to it. Because it's possible to do that with nearly every attack in the game. They're almost all react-able. And then punish you. The game is primarily about reflexes, skill, and execution, with almost no guessing ever required. You rarely have to read/predict/guess. You aren't playing your opponent's mind, because you don't have to.Originally Posted by Lord_Nirgal Go to original post
Member
Junior Member
And that may be entirely true. The game is, at the core, aimed at 4v4.Originally Posted by Tnigz Go to original post
Although, is it important that players be able to fight 1vX "reliably"? Yes, you want them to have a chance...but does it need to be "reliable"? Shouldn't being ganged-up on mostly mean you die? Unless you greatly outclass them, or are lucky?
The game could be more like Street Fighter mind-games, and if that makes you too weak in 1vX in 4v4, perhaps they buff revenge in group scenarios.
Because the same react-able, deterministic mechanic that can make the game boring and shallow in 1v1 duel modes, and very hard for mediocre-reflex, laggy, or mind-oriented players, is the same mechanic you're sometimes "enjoying" when you have 1-2 minutes to 1v1 the guy in Dominion who's trying to take your zone away.
Make it more mind-game-y, and all fights will be more interesting and dynamic.
The fighting certainly seems aimed/optimized for 1v1, not 1vX...which means the priority should be to make the 1v1 better, and buff the 1vX as best they can.
Except those more casual players (or mediocre-reflex and/or a bit lagged and/or mind-game oriented) are really nailed by certain Heroes (PK on console?), or opponents who are high-reflex and/or low lag. Casuals could enjoy it more if it were more mind-game-y.Originally Posted by Tnigz Go to original post
Member
Member
Regarding 1vX, it already is extremely difficult to come out ahead in a 1vx situation, unless you greatly outclass the other players attacking you, or they already have low health. Assuming all are equally skilled on the other hand, you will almost always be slaughtered, and I think this is the way it should be. "Reliable" more being that it's actually possible, not so much in that you can theoretically pull it off 100% or even 70% of the time, which I don't think even the best players can do.Originally Posted by jason_kal Go to original post
People have already complained that revenge is too powerful as is, I don't think anyone wants a buff, even if there are changes to the mechanics of the overall game lol. But yeah, the game could certainly be more mind game-y, and I think that comes from weakening the defensive meta, not necessarily introducing more 50/50 style attacks. Making it so you have to commit to a parry for instance, would instantly change things.
Fights are aimed at 1v1's yes, but with the caveat that any fight could be interrupted by another player. The dynamics are completely changed because of that, and mean that many attacks have to be inherently react-able, otherwise that situation would be basically impossible to deal with, regardless of any skill gap (assuming most or all attacks that come in are 50/50s). No amount of revenge will help you in that case, at least not until we're back to the point where revenge is too powerful and no one ever ganks because of it.
This is a game for a more mainstream audience, I dont think there's any getting around that. Yeah, some characters are harder to deal with for people who are new to the game, but its still a big AAA game that is meant to be accessible to a large audience (Small move lists compared to more niche fighting games, fewer mechanics, easy to get into, ideally difficult to master n all that).
Junior Member
Yes, lots of ways Ubi could alter the fighting, not just 50/50's.Originally Posted by Tnigz Go to original post
I too think 1vX is appropriately hard (though some think it's not that hard). If changing the fighting made 1vX too hard...buffing 1vX revenge wouldn't have to affect 1v1 revenge. For instance, what if 1vX revenge knocked everyone near you over? Or just stunned them so your zone attack could hit everyone? What if it made you immune to GBs from people you're not locked-onto? Or their external GB only served to interrupt your attacks, but wouldn't leave you defenseless to a guaranteed hit? There's a lot of things they could experiment with. Some changes could also be tested to non-revenge 1vX too...like how external GBs are treated.
Right now feels like ganking in Dominion is too much the prevalent mechanic. And ganking others all the time isn't all that fun. Neither is getting ganked frequently. I'd actually like it if changes to 1vX made ganking a bit less quick, sure, desirable, and rewarding.
Or even, if they just made it that you got "rage"/resolve, which kept your life bar going longer, but made your attacks/defense no better than currently. You're still likely going down...but it's going to take longer. Meanwhile the gankers are paying a price for spending all that time on you...your teammates are either capturing zones, or coming in to gank the gankers.
Make ganking less "free", more costly. They might choose 1v1 more often, instead of ganking. "Encouraging" 1vX seems like the wrong direction.
Junior Member
While it's good to do, this is something that will probably also make 1vX harder. Ubi may have to look at that.Originally Posted by Tnigz Go to original post
