Centurion solution | Forums

[Lucifist666]

If the match starts and there is one in the game. Leave. Simple. They are ruining the game. I call for a game wide strike. If no one plays against them maybe people will stop being pathetic chumps and quit using them.

[kweassa1]

...or alternately, git gud.

This usually works way more directly, is a better fundamental solution in every way, and much more satisfying as well.


Or maybe, why not just call a "strike" on any class anyone feels they don't like much, and ruins their fun?

Oh wait.. people already do that... it's called 'rage-quit"... which causes 90% of the network instability, desync, and match dumps.

[Mia.Nora]

If the match starts and there is one in the game. Leave. Simple. They are ruining the game. I call for a game wide strike. If no one plays against them maybe people will stop being pathetic chumps and quit using them.

That's already have been a thing for a while now. I do all the time and see others doing it all the as well (when where are more than one centurion on my team).

When developers fail to properly balance their game it is the players who take initiative in their own hands. However the way it works in FH is really poor. They should have done what every other game does, allow a ban phase.

BAN PHASE: Each team votes for banning ONE hero from enemy picks, the most voted hero gets banned from enemy picks. Problem solved, that automatically balances all problems in other games. Here we have to quit instead. Poor thought on development.

[guor6800]

.

Oh wait.. people already do that... it's called 'rage-quit"... which causes 90% of the network instability, desync, and match dumps.

No man.100% of network instability,desync and match dumps are caused from ubisoft incompetence to get a decent coding.
For once again stop accusing the community for the company's mistakes.

[ChampionRuby50g]

No man.100% of network instability,desync and match dumps are caused from ubisoft incompetence to get a decent coding.
For once again stop accusing the community for the company's mistakes.

No, he's right. Today, 5 times at least at the start of the game someone left (none of us play Cent in my team) and 4 out of 5 times, so 90%, the game ended up dropping. One Centurion is not bad to fight against. When maiming my LB I never had problems. Now playing Raider it's a little harder, but that's perhaps because I'm still getting used to him. Cents only have real power during ganks. The attacks are easily blockable, the parry window on UB is fairly easy to get right. Their are a few issues, admittedly, such has the stamina. But most people do need to get good other than complaining. Leaving a game purely because you don't like a hero on the other team is just pure scum, causing more issues for other players. If you can't get out of your own shell, and realise that every fight has a winner and loser, maybe these type of people will enjoy the game more.

[guor6800]

No, he's right. Today, 5 times at least at the start of the game someone left (none of us play Cent in my team) and 4 out of 5 times, so 90%, the game ended up dropping. One Centurion is not bad to fight against. When maiming my LB I never had problems. Now playing Raider it's a little harder, but that's perhaps because I'm still getting used to him. Cents only have real power during ganks. The attacks are easily blockable, the parry window on UB is fairly easy to get right. Their are a few issues, admittedly, such has the stamina. But most people do need to get good other than complaining. Leaving a game purely because you don't like a hero on the other team is just pure scum, causing more issues for other players. If you can't get out of your own shell, and realise that every fight has a winner and loser, maybe these type of people will enjoy the game more.

This is my first online multiplayer where a player leaves and causes the whole match to crash. I have played many online games. I have dealt with a ton of leavers all these years and i despise as much as you do. But once more it is UNACCEPTABLE for a triple A multiplayer ONLINE game to crash because a guy left the session. It's my first time trying to play an ONLINE game that cannot access ONLINE.

[ChampionRuby50g]

This is my first online multiplayer where a player leaves and causes the whole match to crash. I have played many online games. I have dealt with a ton of leavers all these years and i despise as much as you do. But once more it is UNACCEPTABLE for a triple A multiplayer ONLINE game to crash because a guy left the session. It's my first time trying to play an ONLINE game that cannot access ONLINE.

I agree, first online game in memory for me that has these issues. It's pretty crazy. I do think that the big heads ag Ubi realised how much they stuffed up on the release of this though, it's the final nail in the coffin so to speak. They know the next few games they release have to be top notch, otherwise no one will trust their company again. But I still have faith in For Honor and the team. These
Routers, or whatever they are doing for the connection soon will make or break it for me. Xbox notoriously has worse connection than other two platforms, so we are already behind.

[kweassa1]

This is my first online multiplayer where a player leaves and causes the whole match to crash. I have played many online games. I have dealt with a ton of leavers all these years and i despise as much as you do. But once more it is UNACCEPTABLE for a triple A multiplayer ONLINE game to crash because a guy left the session. It's my first time trying to play an ONLINE game that cannot access ONLINE.

▶ Doesn't matter how many online games you've played over how long a span of time. You simply don't know what the issue is, and therefore arrive at the conclusion that it's the dev's fault, since you literally don't know any better.

P2P doesn't automatically mean "inferior"... and while all this hassle does make me think using P2P was ultimately a mistake, I don't necessary think it was a bad choice during development phases.


Woe to the devs -- they should have never assumed that players will keep to the code of conduct and sportsmanship... and they really should have predicted that most players would simply be immature dirks that ragequit all the time.

So they give us a system that mostly works perfectly fine with all the strengths of P2P doing great -- but the given reality is most players are total losers with anger management issues and just ragequit on the game.... so it's mostly then -- when an unsportsmanly, childish, immature and simply sore, sore loser decides to pull his plug -- the greatest weaknesses of P2P manifest... and this is the developer's fault... huh?

Yeah, it's their fault for not making the game under the premise the players are dirks.


It's like saying automakers are total dirks, and its always their fault when accidents kill people. They should give us "totally safe cars that never kill people", and it's totally their fault for not selling us one of those. Of course, casually ignoring the reality it's usually the drivers doing stuff they shouldn't be doing while driving a car that causes accidents.

So, let me remind you that automakers and their cars don't kill people -- it's the drunken and stoned, fooling around, distracted, dozing people that kill other people with cars, and much the same the P2P itself doesn't cause any serious connection problems -- PEOPLE do.


(ps) I'll make you a $50 bet that if they ever do change into a centralized server system, the exact same people will be then complaining about lag and how it's "killing the game", and they should "make a better code" to prevent lags from happening (dear god, as if that's possible). Ignorance does that.

[guor6800]

▶ Doesn't matter how many online games you've played over how long a span of time. You simply don't know what the issue is, and therefore arrive at the conclusion that it's the dev's fault, since you literally don't know any better.

P2P doesn't automatically mean "inferior"... and while all this hassle does make me think using P2P was ultimately a mistake, I don't necessary think it was a bad choice during development phases.


Woe to the devs -- they should have never assumed that players will keep to the code of conduct and sportsmanship... and they really should have predicted that most players would simply be immature dirks that ragequit all the time.

So they give us a system that mostly works perfectly fine with all the strengths of P2P doing great -- but the given reality is most players are total losers with anger management issues and just ragequit on the game.... so it's mostly then -- when an unsportsmanly, childish, immature and simply sore, sore loser decides to pull his plug -- the greatest weaknesses of P2P manifest... and this is the developer's fault... huh?

Yeah, it's their fault for not making the game under the premise the players are dirks.


It's like saying automakers are total dirks, and its always their fault when accidents kill people. They should give us "totally safe cars that never kill people", and it's totally their fault for not selling us one of those. Of course, casually ignoring the reality it's usually the drivers doing stuff they shouldn't be doing while driving a car that causes accidents.

So, let me remind you that automakers and their cars don't kill people -- it's the drunken and stoned, fooling around, distracted, dozing people that kill other people with cars, and much the same the P2P itself doesn't cause any serious connection problems -- PEOPLE do.


(ps) I'll make you a $50 bet that if they ever do change into a centralized server system, the exact same people will be then complaining about lag and how it's "killing the game", and they should "make a better code" to prevent lags from happening (dear god, as if that's possible). Ignorance does that.

Dear Kweassa1. I ll try to keep it short. I don't need to be a chef to understand when a food sucks and it's badly cooked. I may cannot explain the exact reasons (which ingredients used wrong,temperatures etc) but i can sure tell that it tastes bad. Telling me that 15 years of gaming experience are irrelevant because you say so is the least i can think provoking.

But anyway, to the point.

P2P is indeed kinda inferior but its not my main case here.It's not about p2p vs dedicated servers. If you compare for honor with most p2p based games it is lacking. Let's take left 4 dead as example. Build with p2p around 2-8 players. Decent build. Not once in my experience had a session break down because of a player disconnecting/leaving/ragequitting etc. While in for honor nowadays a player leaves and you have a very good chance for the session to simply die.
So now i may not need to be a next level network expert but i can clearly see that the build is bad. Very bad.That's my case and i stand firm by it.
The rest of your post about comparing p2p and driving i think is a little out of the picture so no comment.

Have a nice day.

[Trbevis]

I dont mind playing against one centurion, its only when there is two of them running around together, thats where it ruins the game, hopefully they fix him soon, and if they cant maybe a temp hero lock for one of each team, i dont know. It is unfair to stop people playing a hero they brought into the game but when theres two running around together it leaves people severely disliking the game. That is not what they want surely.... hopefully a solution comes soon