Member
We do not want insta-kill combos. We don't want moves that are easy to pull off and that do lots of damage. We don't want moves with special characteristics that circumvent skillful game-play.
What we want are characters with varied move-sets and styles, with a different move for every occasion. What we don't want are more characters that get their play-ability by debilitating the enemy. I'm talking about the countless unblock-able moves almost every DLC character has, which simply take away the enemy player's ability to block. Or the hyper armour on every second heavy, which removes the ability for the enemy player to interrupt the enemy with well timed counterattacks. (exception for Shugoki because that's his defining characteristic). Or even the bleed effect attached to the shaman's lighting fast feint attacks and combo finishers. Bleed is more of an issue in the feats that make weapons do triple or more damage in bleed damage. It's just ridiculous how much damage those feats do. There's also the characters that stun, preventing other players from seeing what they're doing. All these characteristics don't make the game better. They make the game worse because they remove crucial aspects of the game.
If you really want to balance the characters then what you need to do is remove the awful moves and status effects that prevent players from controlling their character. I'm talking about the super duper gank moves like the raider hug, shaman pounce, shugoki grab and centurion stab, where the player is completely vulnerable to every other enemy besides the one currently pinning them down. There's no way to defend yourself or to get out of the animation, you just have to take the hits and more often than not, die. Not even revenge can knock you out of these animations, and revenge was designed as an anti-gank mechanic.
Another problem is simply the insta-kill combos or moves, as I mentioned earlier. The most obvious one is the centurions wall bash, charged heavy, charged melee, eagle strike. Which will usually leave you dead or with very little health. I would count the raider and warlord's crazy throw distance and running melee attacks in this, since you can activate either of them from a simple parry grab and as long as you're remotely near an edge they can send you off it. Have you ever tried taking a warlord down at C on the mountain level? The one with the bridges. it's impossible because you can't get across the bridge without getting thrown down.
Also, could we please get some fairness on guard-breaking people out of heavy attacks? Previously you made it so that there was only a 100ms gap to guard-break anyone. That was good, but now you've changed it back for some reason. It makes it incredibly hard on heavy characters who already have slower guard-break animations. While we're at it, guard-breaks should be able to interrupt dash attacks! Or all of them at least! It really annoys me when I'm playing against an orochi or shinobi and I time the guard-break just right for when they're dodging but then they start a dash attack, I bounce off and they get a free hit! What makes it worse is that it doesn't apply to everyone. i play conqueror and if you try a dash melee with the conqueror and someone guard-breaks you, you'll be broken out of your unblockable animation. The orange fire effect shows up and disappear as someone guard-breaks you which proves you'd started that shoulder bash move and should be immune.So please, make this fair!
Please also don't include any heroes with horrible 50/50 moves. The warden's shoulder bash feint into guard-break is a perfect example. It's become his crutch move because it's just too reliable. It's not actually a 50/50 move at all because the player using it knows which option they're going to pick. They can also create a pattern and then break it to catch their opponent out. There's literally no way of knowing which the character is going to use and it just removes any skill from the game. At that point you may as well just toss a coin and celebrate every time it comes up heads, because that's the kind of random game of chance the game becomes. Another example is the raider's zone attack feint into stunning tap. Either you wait for the parry, dodge or wait for the stunning tap. If you wait for the parry and he feints, you get wacked. If you try to dodge and he feints, you get wacked. If you wait for the stunning tap and he doesn't feint... You get wacked. It's only made worse if he's in revenge because he can do it infinitely. It's actually pretty much the same if he cancels to guard-break. It just adds another option for him that you can't anticipate.
Moves like these are not fun. They're just guesswork for the opponent, and if the opponent gets it wrong they get punished but most often if the attacker gets caught out they don't get punished. Oh, also the shaman's heavy feint into stab. It's another of those 50/50 moves.
Something also needs to be done about parrying. We were promised defence meta changes but all I can see that came out of that was the run away prevention system. Parrying is a great mechanic if it's really difficult and often fails. The way it is now, the best players can parry every attack so there's no way to be aggressive. Especially if you're playing as a heavy character. Which of course means you have to resort to learning how to parry every move and becoming one of these players yourself. Forever defending and only punishing the enemy's moves.
Perhaps a good solution would be to have unparryable attacks, like with the unblockable attacks. In fact, just un-punishable attacks in general but none of them in long chains. That way players could be aggressive without having to worry about being parried every time they try to attack. Even if you just removed the free hits from parries and left the stamina damage that would be good enough.
Anyway, I hope these suggestions get taken on board. I would like to see a more skill based fighting game rather than one based on guesswork, debilitating your opponents and one hit kill moves.
Member
This guy wants a good game. An inprovement for existing system, and fixing the flaws in mechanics.
He will get bashed mostly by players, and probably ignored by developers.
They love to make new chars more powerful then old, and to add stupid guessing chains and openers which are absolute no skill and "NO art of battle" !
Expect to be flamed, while i support your post in every paragraph.
Community Manager
Senior Member
Grozni is right in fearing that others might jump on here and flame your post for what you wrote. You do make some good points, and I'll provide a detailed, constructive feedback concerning each and every one.
Most definitely agree. For Honor shouldn't be based around landing those super-banzai-saiyan moves that will net you a win in 3 hits. However, very few characters can actually pull this off. While they certainly aren't 'insta-kill' combos, they still do take a good chunk of damage provided you failed to counter or escape during several brief windows. More than anything, it's mostly about knowing your enemy's moveset and knowing whether they are going for such a combo, and then counter-play it effectively.Originally Posted by Duskmare Go to original post
I won't take into consideration Shaman's Predator Mercy because this move cannot be compared to anything else in the game. It yields a lot of reward for Shaman, and the only risk is when it's dodged, netting a free GB / heavy on Shaman. Still, it's avoidable, counterable, dodgeable. And it still isn't an insta-kill move, plus requires Shaman to bleed you first.
That's the purpose of an unblockable; an attack which you cannot block and will go through your defense. Regardless of how fast or slow it is. Unblockables are only really annoying when there's lag / latency because the reaction window is gone, you cannot react on time.Originally Posted by Duskmare Go to original post
Bear in mind, much of your paragraph describes a 4v4 scenario with feats. This game caters to both duels and 4v4s, it cannot favor balancing for one side and discard the other. Those unblockables are certainly much more troublesome in 4v4s, however they are as intended in 1v1s.
4v4s in For Honor have always been a mess of feats and ganks. If anything, the problem isn't with the heroes themselves. It's how the 4v4s, particularly Dominion, were designed. They encourage gank scenarios much more than actual combat scenarios. I've mentioned a long while ago in this forum, that the Dominion maps need to be bigger, at least twice as big. Forcing players to invest in two choices: guard a zone, or travel to another zone in an attempt to capture it. And the map shouldn't be empty, there should be minions and NPCs that belong to each team, with archers too.
Dominion, as it is, it's just too easy to switch between zones, lay traps everywhere, and with all the ledges and environmental hazards, and the zone B forever filled with annoying minions, you get the idea. It's just a bad overall layout design of this game mode. Particularly, The Shard. The zones are literally right next to each other. This map shouldn't even be in Dominion.
I agree about bleed and that the additive bleed attacks and feats make for an effective HP-draining fest. Shaman has powerful bleed bombs, plus bleed attacks, plus minor auto-heal on bleed. Aramusha has bleed on top of his side-top-side light combo. Etc etc. Yet again, it mostly concerns 4v4s. In 1v1s, it's simply some bleed attacks here and there; nothing wrong with them. Nobushi and PK still deal greater bleed than Shaman, and Gladiator's only bleed is a special grab-stab move, which isn't always easy to land. In 1v1s, the original heroes still have better bleed status.
Yet again, it's the 4v4 scenario. Should you remove Raider's Stampede Charge, Shugoki's Demon Embrace, and Shaman's Predator Mercy, they'll become useless heroes in 1v1s, and not only that, you're also taking away their signature moves. Raider's only and best gimmick is zone feint -> tap -> GB -> Stampede -> wallsplat -> knee hit -> quick light -> zone feint into tap -> zone. Shugoki's best way of dealing serious damage is his charged heavy (unblockable) and his Demon Embrace. And Shaman's entire kit revolves around landing a bleed so she can open Predator's Mercy.Originally Posted by Duskmare Go to original post
Concerning Revenge: Revenge isn't meant as a 'God Mode', it's meant as a defense and attack buff to give you a quick edge in ganks, and just that. It's not meant to turn a gank into an easy 3v1. Additionally, you can cater specific gear stats for Revenge, effectively making you a three-man-worth of strength if you pop Revenge. One thing to note, they gave the possibility of doing three loadouts per hero. The loadouts help in defining which specific gear stats you would like to put into play. Whether you like all-balanced, or pure damage, or pure defense, or pure Revenge. And it adds up to each hero's specific moveset and signature moves. A berserker with a full-damage build and with the damage feat can take as much as 75 damage in one heavy, then kill you with a zone.
Centurion's punish is the de-facto 'cutscene punish' which frustrates the receiving end moreso than almost every other combo. Yet, may I say, Centurion's kit has now been transcended by heavier degrees of cheese combos that the newer heroes can pull off.Originally Posted by Duskmare Go to original post
- Gladiator can land a free hit with his zone, chain it with a toestab, then dash-bash, quick light, another toestab, then bleed unblockable, throw you on the ground, free heavy, bash again, you'll be OOS, spam toestab knockdown for the win.
- Highlander can enter offensive stance, feint the kick into grab (double unblockable), throw you down, then effectively chain the grab until you're OOS. He'll then enter offensive stance again and resort to kicks and unblockables.
- Shinobi practically gets 3 free hits on each GB, and he can GB you from a distance. All he has to do is wait for an attack, smoke-dash, backflip, and range GB while you're in recovery.
- Shaman can feint anything into anything and she can initiate Predator's Mercy 3 times before a bleed wears off. She can also chain GB throw into headbutt for the longest throw distance in the game, straight towards a ledge or environmental hazard. Recently, recovery on her Predator's Mercy has been readjusted iirc, but this still doesn't make her any easier to deal with, if you don't escape her pounce on time. Add to that, she can spam jump attacks which have a tiny reactive window as to whether the attack is coming from left or right. If it lands, it's a free bleed followup. She also gets a free bleed on deflect.
- Some other heroes can also cheese heavier than Centurion. Lawbringer can block-shove all day and gets free lights, plus has hyperarmored bash. Nobushi can spam zone into bleed poke into zone into bleed poke. Or, the more experienced players can also use Hidden Stance. You get the point.
Centurion's era is long gone; these days he's very, very manageable. And by no means he'll take all your HP in one combo. He cannot do that unless you're OOS, stuck on a wall, and don't know how to counter him. Which is extremely situational.
Dodge attacks are the signature strength of assassins. It is because of dodge attacks that they are much more effective at evasive tactics and counterattacks. If you can GB an assassin during his dodge attack, then what's the point of a dodge attack? it's like giving a free GB for your enemy. GB can counter a dodge, yes; dodge is a defense mechanic, not a counterattack mechanic. GB counters defensive tactics. But for GB to also counter counterattack tactics, that will make GB too imbalanced, and most certainly, too spammable.Originally Posted by Duskmare Go to original post
Conqueror isn't an assassin; he's a heavy. He excels at defense. That means when he tries anything other than defense, he's at risk. It's logical that he's vulnerable as long as he's not doing a heavy, because otherwise, if you give him an excellent defense + uninterruptible unblockables, that will effectively make Conqueror the most broken hero in the game. Also to note, the actual window to GB a Conqueror during his shield bash is rather small; you might just have gotten unlucky with your timing a couple times.
This is a long-winded debate: the 50/50 scenarios. First off, Warden and Lawbringer's best tactics are to rely on their unblockables if they want to be actually dangerous and challenging. They are next to nothing without them. It's not that their unblockables are too reliable, it's simply that they can be mixed up with various things, effectively netting a satisfactory mixup potential out of a rather limited and primitive moveset.Originally Posted by Duskmare Go to original post
It's not a random guessing game by any means. It revolves around reading your opponent, studying him, taking a mental note of what he prefers to pull off against you. And Warden's SB is fully reactable and counterable with a quick light. Most characters have 500ms lights, and these work perfectly. The actual skill isn't in using those unblockables, it's rather chaining them with other things rather than spamming the same thing over and over again (in which case, with Warden, it's called the vortex, and it's one of the cheese moves in the game, but not the worst).
SB cancel into GB is a perfect counter-tactic to overly-defensive opponents who just sit and wait, dodge, then strike a quick light or a heavy, rinse, repeat. If not for these mind games, how do you effectively break their defense? where is the 'fun' in having every unblockable straightforward, uncancellable, and fully reactable? of what use would they be, if they weren't cancellable or mixable with other things? a super linear combat with mostly block - light - block - occasional parry - heavy - block - light... not fun at all. The unblockables are there to mitigate the repetitive combat and offer a lot more ways to counter your opponent; and even more so when they're cancellable and feintable into other moves.
Fighting a Warden who relies too much on SB into GB revolves around not letting him pull off the SB in the first place. If he does, and you know he'll GB, don't dodge. It's a matter of reading your opponent. Furthermore, some heroes have hyperarmored attacks, like Warlord and Shugoki. They can tank through the SB and effectively shut the Warden down.
The same is true for Lawbringer. His block-shove is guaranteed, but his quick light followup isn't always guaranteed. Whether your opponent prefers to block-shove-light or block-shove-GB, it's up to you to read them, and counter accordingly. I've certainly met a few deadly Lawbringers and Wardens but they're only deadly because they don't let themselves be too predictable; and that's the real fun of the game. Unpredictable opponents.
The parry meta is definitely bothersome seeing as how, currently, parry is the best and strongest tool simply because of how many advantages it nets you for 1 parry. The solution is simple: remove guaranteed GB from all parries (the enemy can still CGB) and remove guaranteed heavies from heavy parries and from unblockable parries (you can only have a guaranteed heavy on a light parry). By removing these two, you reduce, and solve, much of the ongoing parry meta problems. I'm still eagerly awaiting the parry changes.Originally Posted by Duskmare Go to original post
Member
Member
Thank you both for the support, and FredEx for the reply. ^_^
You've come up with loads of points there Fady. I'll try to answer them but I'm sure I'll miss a few so sorry in advance, haha.
Hmm, I see what you're saying but at the end of the day it just puts a massive amount of pressure on blocking that first combo move, without you having much chance of escaping afterwards. I'm talking about high level play viable combos here. So nothing with a slow heavy, slow zone attack, or dodge-able melee charge anywhere in the middle. In other words, combos that you're locked into after they land that first move, assuming they don't make a mistake. I would count those 50/50 moves as part of a 'lock in combo' since it's impossible to guess what they'll do next. So, the centurion's combo after that first charged heavy or wallbash. The raider's feinting hurricane of death. The aramusha's light spam mixed with heavy feints. (he can literally just do that until you die because they're all crazy fast and totally unpredictable. If most moves are 50/50, that one is at least 13/87 with the amount of combinations he can do that heavy feint.)Originally Posted by Fady117 Go to original post
I agree with you saying the shaman's pounce isn't overpowered in itself. However when the heavy feint to light gives an almost guaranteed bleed, because it's too fast to react to, and the move is literally unavoidable if they get a guard-break and throw you first, it's a bit overpowered.
Now, I definitely disagree with this... Well, I mean, I don't disagree that that's an explanation of what unblockables are. I disagree that they should be used in that way. An unblockable attack should be a high risk, high reward move. The raider's zone was a good example before he got the mix-up. It's slow, easily parried and easily punished but if it lands then it does a large amount of damage. Applying unblockable status to fast attacks is just awful because it means that you both have to react quickly and react a certain way, as opposed to blocking which might be your go-to defence. It's acceptable when it's from a feat that only lasts a short while, like the Kensei's feat.Originally Posted by Fady117 Go to original post
I also think you're mistaken in saying that unblockable attacks are fine as they are in duel mode. It's in duel mode that they become more horrible to deal with because duel mode is entirely focused on players who enjoy the defence meta and 50/50 moves. In the 4v4 modes you're able to make a mistake or two while fighting an opponent but in the duel modes the second you make a mistake (a mistake being as simple as trying a heavy attack when they're able to block) you get destroyed. Unblockables shine (with the most glaring horrible light) here because they force you to do something but can also be feinted. Meaning that they're essentially used to make the opponent mess up due to one of the before mentioned 50/50 scenarios.
Also, unblockable attacks heavily favour assassin characters. Their main defence is dodging and unblockables can be dodged just like any other attack. It simply punishes heavy characters who are more reliant on blocking since they have diminished dodging abilities.
I agree that bleed isn't much of a problem in duels. It's really just the shaman's ultra fast feint bleed attack and the feats that add pretty much double the weapon's normal damage in bleed.
It's not about removing their attacks. It's simply about making the victim of those attacks immune from other enemies while stuck in their animations, and allowing them to break out of it using a revenge activation. In 1v1 these moves are totally balanced. It's just in 4v4 with large environmental hazards they can be unbalanced.Originally Posted by Fady117 Go to original post
Except from raider's charge. That needs a change or a substitution. It does way too much stamina damage and it can carry the opponent way too far. It's just the perfect tool for an edgelord. (Ps. I think edging people is fine if done occasionally and as a spur of the moment thing. What I don't like is when raiders and warlords camp out near ledges because they know it'll get them easy kills.)
Exactly! Except it doesn't do that because it can't get you that advantage if you're pinned down by the attacks previously mentioned. Often times its auto-parry doesn't even work any more. You were also supposed to be immune to melee attacks while in revenge but that doesn't seem to be the case now either. Quite simply revenge doesn't help at all, it just gives you a small amount of shield for a while and that's it.Originally Posted by Fady117 Go to original post
If those combos you're saying are worse than the centurions are unavoidable after the first move then yes, they're much worse. However, if you get opportunities to interrupt them and dodge or block the next attack in the chain then they're much more manageable. The issue with the centurion's combo isn't just that it leaves you without control, it's that it does 4 or so bars of damage without any way of avoiding it after that first hit. Fighting centurions just isn't fun because it's all about dodging that charged heavy or countering that guardbreak to stop them getting into their chain. As soon as they get that chain even once you're pretty much done because it only takes one or two more hits to finish you off, and with the centurion's speed that's not hard for them to manage. Even worse if they're a high skilled player who can parry even one or two attacks. One parry could get them a guardbreak, send you into a wall and destroy you.
If those combos are actually worse than the cents then they absolutely should be looked at and reworked so that they're not so over powered.
Now this is the one I disagree with most. Assassins already have better dodges than heavies. They have a much shorter vulnerability period after a dodge and they can dodge much farther distances. That's what makes them more apt at dodging.Originally Posted by Fady117 Go to original post
Counter attacks are fair enough. Assassin characters should have counter attacks. However, they should only have them as COUNTER-attacks, not as free dodges plus an attack. The only way for a heavy character to beat a shinobi, for example, is to guardbreak them while they're dodging around or to parry one of their very fast attacks. Even feints are rendered useless because you can feint a side heavy, they dodge, you go for the guardbreak and it doesn't work because they're using their dash attack. Quite simply, dash attacks should be viable for countering actual attacks. They should not protect the player from guardbreaks that would catch them mid dodge.
What's more, heavy characters are sooooo disadvantaged compared to fast characters.First of all, outside battle the heavies move slower. Fair enough, right? Except this means that they get to the fight later. If they're balanced in the fight but get to the fight later then they're at a disadvantage.
As it stands now, they're both disadvantaged in combat and while travelling so it's simply compounded. Most of their attacks simply aren't viable due to the ease with which they can be parried. Plus they can be guardbroken out of their heavy attacks pretty easily too. They really have almost nothing going for them compared to the assassin characters.
I see your point about the conqueror not being an assassin, but if assassins can avoid a guardbreak by using a dodge attack (when guardbreaks are supposed to be the counter for overly dodgy assassin characters) then the conqueror and other heavies absolutely should be able to do the same. Also, I'm pretty sure the window is massive. I get guardbroken out of it every time I begin a dodge attack and someone guardbreaks. I even got broken out of it just as I was about to hit them earlier today. Though, that may have been the running variation... I can't quite remember. Either way it's a pretty stupidly big window.
It's not that they have plenty of options stemming from their unblockables because they really don't. The warden has his double lights on a non-charged shoulder bash or his heavy on a charged one while the lawbro has his poke which can then lead into a heavy but often those heavies are simply blocked or dodged. No, the real reason they rely on their unblockable is because it's the only way they can compete with the newer characters since the newer characters have so many unblockable moves.Originally Posted by Fady117 Go to original post
The warden's only other viable move is his zone attack, which is still stupidly fast, like the orochi's and the PKs. They really need slowed down a little. Or even if they just slowed down the startup and sped up the actual swing and recovery. That way the move would take the same amount of time but it would actually be possible to react to.
The SB into GB isn't used to counter overly defensive players. It's used to make a player defensive (because it's unblockable without the ability to parry) and then punish them for trying to do the only thing they can do to avoid being hit by it. There's no mind games. It's just a simple ****ish sucker-punch.
You can't stop a warden from using his shoulder bash unless you're playing an assassin with a dodge attack. The heavy characters can't get close enough to swing at him while he starts the attack. If they try to dodge toward him as he dodges back he recovers much faster and can just guardbreak you.
The Hyper armour is a fair comment. Except only a small handful of characters have those attacks. Plus, he can always guardbreak while you're starting the heavy attack and just break you out of it. Especially if you're playing shugoki.
Hmm, I see what you're going for in your idea for parries but it wouldn't work. It would just slow down gameplay making people play the exact same way but for smaller rewards. I also heavily disagree with removing the guaranteed guardbreak or heavy from an unblockable attack. As I said, they're supposed to be high risk, high reward attacks. Taking away the risk would just make them far too spammable. Also, having better rewards for parrying light attacks just favours assassins again since their attacks are far faster than heavies or vanguards.
Anyway, while we disagree on a lot of this I'm glad you've given me such a detailed response and there are certainly some good ideas coming from our discussion. So thanks again for taking the time to type all that out.
Senior Member
Hey thanks for your reply! I'm glad you took your time to reply to my journal, I know it was a long read, and I did not expect a response honestly seeing as I contradicted almost everything you saiddon't worry if you missed some points, they all come together anyway under one major topic focus: balancing of For Honor's combat mechanics. We do have diverging opinions, however we both ultimately agree that the overall combat mechanic is in need of further tweaking. Let me see if I can agree with your newer points stated above.
First off, 'high level play' is honestly an overrated term. What is high level play in this game, other than being really proficient with your hero of choice, and knowing your opponent's moveset (which are essentially skills acquirable by anyone who sits through hard training?) high level play involves cheesiness more often than you think, and usually involves players who are adept at specific cheese mechanics; I'm not talking about ledge spam, I'm saying they tend to play competitively and they often don't use the full extent of a hero's kit. So in two words, 'high level play' is people who, even though skilled at using their heroes, are afraid of losing and will resort to crutch cheese mechanics.Originally Posted by Duskmare Go to original post
I've done a fair share of Ranked Duel Tournament over the course of two days, non-stop. Most players I've met did not use the full extent of a hero's kit. Berserkers used heavy-into-zone more than any other move, Gladiators used dodge-bash into quick light into toestab more than any other move, and they spam toestab if you're OOS. It becomes a telltale of which maneuver they prefer to crutch over, and once you counter that.... they don't know what to do and will end up losing.
Same goes for Centurion. They tend to resort to imbalancing you with a Legion Kick, if that fails they'll either zone in your face in the hopes for free damage (easily parried) or they'll do a jab into GB. The latter is their main combo starter, when LK fails and when heavy feinting doesn't work. Keep in mind if you get wallsplatted, his charged heavy is guaranteed, which guarantees a knockdown and an Eagle Talon. The only issue with Centurion, is if he wallsplats you often because on one wallsplat it can guarantee 3 hits. Since LK doesn't wallsplat, his only way to wallsplat you is landing a GB. Which becomes a situational scenario: either a CGB failed, or you got parried.
If a CGB failed, Centurion is simply exercising a punish; in no way it's an incounterable insta-kill 50/50 move. However, if you got parried, GBed, wallsplatted, then 3 hits guaranteed, this isn't an issue specific to Centurion. It's an issue with how much one parry rewards the defender. Other heroes are capable of bigger cheese upon parrying you, simply because one parry rewards too much. Hence my argument concerning parry changes; GB shouldn't be guaranteed upon parry because it landslides the fight for some free hits after each parry. Some heroes can land 1 heavy, but others can chain things, like Centurion, Shaman, etc. Hence why no parry whatsoever should guarantee a GB, because it stabilizes parry reward across the entire roster. Chaining things would require a GB and wallsplat, and the GB must be earned, by making your opponent fail to CGB, not freely acquire GB through a parry.
Poor Raider can only feint so much before he's nearly all out of stamina and he'll then GB for a free Stampede Charge. His zone feint into stunning tap is honestly his best gimmick, and isn't all that hard to counter provided you already know Raider's gimmicks (and there's no serious lag).
Aramusha's case might differ whether you have an assassin or a non-assassin, but in either case, I do agree it gets confusing with feints. The trick lies in not letting him freely start his chain; always force a reaction, and keep your guard up often. I'll leave the discussion of tricks in countering Aramusha for later.
The problems actually are two things:Originally Posted by Duskmare Go to original post
- The amazing fluidity and flow of her kit. She's the only hero who can accomplish that, that's why her bleeds feel so fast and unpredictable. The bleed attacks themselves are on-par with Peacekeeper's, iirc.
- Her guaranteed bleed upon a deflect (yes, it's too fast, cannot be reacted to and cannot be dodged). Statistically, your opponent only needs to deflect, bleed, GB, throw, then Predator Mercy to take half your HP away and recharge their HP to full. It's silly, honestly. Guaranteed bleed on deflect + guaranteed Predator Mercy on throw.
The real use of an unblockable, outside of being something you cannot block, is something that's supposed to surprise you; not make your opponent sit there and wait to get parried. In my opinion, I think high risk high reward is a bit too extreme for all unblockable moves, seeing as unblockables are generally used frequently in combat. Exceptions would be things like Shugoki's Demon Embrace, yes, this is a high risk high reward move and it's a very fair move like that. However, things like Gladiator's toestab, should be safe for the Gladiator to use, its purpose is to surprise you, break your balance, break your defense. Its purpose isn't to deal damage. Upon being dodged (which is tough), that's where Gladiator is punished. Seeing as it's an unblockable not focused on dealing damage, I think it's fair.Originally Posted by Duskmare Go to original post
Similarly, Cent's LK, by itself, is nothing. Just a small shove, no damage, no wallsplat, little stamina loss. It's only used to open up a combo. And it perfectly makes sense, seeing as Cent needs to get through your defense first, to be able to combo. One block or one dodge will interrupt everything he's doing.
We can't group all unblockables into one category, and have them as high risk high reward moves; these several types of unblockables add very good layering to For Honor's combat system. On top of being feintable, cancellable, comboable, etc. It's a beautiful depth to the combat. Honestly, turning all these into extremely punishable moves, will be a much worse case than the defense meta, and a much worse case than the parry meta too.
Unblockables are far less dangerous in duels and brawls, than in 4v4s. Imagine four Gladiators spamming toestab at you, or four Cents spamming LK, or four Shamans spamming headbutt. That, is an actual helpless infinite stun scenario. You cannot escape it. In duels, the unblockables themselves do not define those 50/50 mixups; it's the followups, and how an unblockable can be comboed. Unblockables in this game are one of the essential mechanics for advanced combos (other than feints), this is much more apparent in duels because you feel the combo in duels; in 4v4s it's just a mess of people whacking at each other. That's why you tend to feel helpless in duel. There's no one else there to help you stop your opponent; it's all up to you to stop him. Hence why I stress on why duels carry much more combat importance than 4v4s; and diminishing/removing anything related to unblockables or feints, will heavily impact duels in a way that will essentially turn this game into a 4v4 headless chicken circus. Duels will be dead because, heroes will be next to useless in countering each other in 1v1. It'll be just light and heavy attacks, no one will dare throw out an unblockable. And in For Honor, when you kill the duelling, you basically kill the essence of the game.
Not sure how would this work... the moment you're GB'ed and carried by Raider, your entire body collision should be negated to every other player except the Raider player?Originally Posted by Duskmare Go to original postyo this isn't Dark Souls where if you do a parry riposte, you're immune to other players
Many people have been reporting that the current Revenge mechanic is bugged, so I dunno. I only came to For Honor early November, I don't know how Revenge was before Season 3.
Raider, Warlord, LB, Shugoki, and Shaman are all ledgelords, because of throwing capabilities. The problem isn't them, honestly. The problem is the damned over-abundance of ledges and environmental hazards everywhere. Like, I get it, some maps should have obvious dangers etc but.... everywhere!?! in every map?? that's a bit too much.
First off, if you're referring to a 4v4 scenario, Centurion might have had feats and buffs and gear stats for him to make that much damage per one combo. Without feats and gear stats, there is absolutely no way he'll take close to 4 bars of HP in one combo. In duel, should his entire combo land, he'll take half your HP at most, and that's even with some bonus lights. There are much, much worse cases than Centurion in 4v4s. I did mention Berserker's max-damage at 180 stat, with feats, doing a heavy into zone. If Berserker has Revenge too, and you're being hit, you'll die in 2 seconds. If you were OOS and knocked down by another opponent, and such a Berserker does an overhead heavy, you'll die in 1 hit. That's far worse than what Centurion can do.Originally Posted by Duskmare Go to original post
Also let's not forget that some heroes have the AoE defense reduction feat. Mix this with other feats and you're essentially setting yourself up for suicide if you challenge a Berserker or an Aramusha who has 180 gear stat. 4v4 is one big mess of ganking, feats, and weapon-clanging. The problem, again, is how this mode was designed; not the heroes themselves.
Hmm. Let me first point out: when it's a dodge + an attack, it's no longer a dodge; it's a counterattack. And it's an assassin's best friend. If they cannot use this dodge attack, what else do they have left. At this point they're forced to mostly play like vanguards or hybrids and they're likely to fail because they don't have as much health and their kits aren't optimized around static defense and countering from neutral.Originally Posted by Duskmare Go to original post
A GB can catch anyone mid-dodge as long as it's a dodge; not a dodge attack. Your gripe seems to be thinking a dodge attack as a dodge far too often in the midst of combat, hitting GB, failing to connect it, and eating the dodge attack (and a subsequent combo). When you're facing an assassin, and especially if they're good, avoid directly GB'ing when they dodge. Instead, feint more often. If they simply dodged and you finished feinting, there's still a tiny window where you can still GB. If they pulled out a dodge attack, and you completed your feint, you can parry and punish. Directly GB'ing an assassin mid-dodge is a no-no because they're often doing dodge attacks. The only exception being Kensei, who is a non-assassin, and yet has a very good dodge attack which you cannot GB him out of. With Kensei, always be mindful of his dodges.
The three current heavies are Shugo, Warlord and Conq. The first two have hyperarmor which can counter pretty much any other hit. Warlord and Conq have very strong deflects, and Conq, by simply blocking, will deflect the enemy and can earn a quick light. There are far more ways in dealing with assassins as heavy, than simply GB or parry. You seem to be describing a Shugoki case?
Conq is fine, he moves as fast as any other guy; but yeah, Warlord is a bit slower, and Shugoki is the slowest. Though not sure how this accounts into how the hero can counter other heroes? movement speed never posed any hindrance for me, personally; only when I'm carrying an offering in Tribute lol. But that's another matter.Originally Posted by Duskmare Go to original post
Parrying a Warlord is trickier than you think, especially if you're deflected and hit with a guaranteed headbutt. Conq yeah, Conq is a problem, he's often too easily parried. As for Shugoki, it's so-so. It all depends how he's used. Concerning GB, this is valid for all heroes honestly, especially Aramusha, there is an issue with him where you can literally GB him out of any move, even his zone. But yeah you can GB out of startup animations if you're really quick. Most times it won't land, but sometimes, it does land. Though I wouldn't recommend it, if you know your opponent is going to attack, counter that attack instead of GB'ing. The startup window is rather wonky.Originally Posted by Duskmare Go to original post
But I digress; it all boils down to how skilled the heavy player is. Assassins in no way have an undisputable advantage over heavies. If you're referring to a case of Shugo vs Shaman, that's an extreme case
Honestly, this paragraph is more of an angry rant, hah. Believe me, most of what you said here is not true. Warden's SB is near-useless against Shaman. And when you're up against Warden or Orochi or PK, remember to keep most of your guard in the corresponding stance, to nullify their zones. For Warden, block your left. For Orochi and PK, block your right. They are fast, but that's why they're useful; they're fast and they catch you by surprise. Blocking their zones is a free GB on them. Slowing them down will render them useless and it'll be like these heroes are sitting there draining their stamina and asking you to hit them for free.Originally Posted by Duskmare Go to original post
Warden's SB is perfectly counterable and cancellable with any 500ms light, preferably top light. It doesn't take an assassin to counter his SB. Also if you're playing Shugoki, Warden and Orochi and PK's zones are really useless because you can trade with static hyperarmor and they cannot dodge quickly after a zone, and a zone will drain stamina. Headbutt them and they're almost OOS, or completely OOS. No good Warden, Orochi or PK will throw a zone against a Shugo just like that. And Warden's SB is often countered by Shugo's static hyperarmor. He will need to either GB or secure 2 hits first, for his SB to stagger you. And even then, he'll only land 1 SB. Your static hyperamor will come back up.
The guaranteed GB on any parry should go; I'm not sure if parrying a heavy unblockable should net a free top heavy or side heavy; but I agree it should definitely net a free heavy regardless. Otherwise people will tend to spam unblockables more. And that's definitely not the better road for For Honor's combat.Originally Posted by Duskmare Go to original post
Well, thanks again for reading!
Senior Member
Member
Haha, yeah, you have a point. I'm sure everyone describes "high level play" as the way they play. :POriginally Posted by Fady117 Go to original post
For me, high level play mean they're able to reliably do the basics with every character. By that I mean, dodge dodge-able attacks, interrupt block light attacks, guardbreak at the moments that guardbreak is uninterruptible and parry most slow attacks and all unblock-able attacks. The "crutch cheese mechanics" reliant players I could consider 'Pro level play' since it's no longer about fun, it's about being the best, regardless of cheapness.
You describe counters to the issues with the characters I mentioned. So first of all, the centurion can also guardbreak you if you try to dodge. If you catch someone mid-dodge with a guardbreak then it can't be countered. Unless you're an assassin character with a dodge attack, which you can use to null their guardbreak. (Which I dislike because guardbreak is supposed to be a counter to dodging and assassins dodge the most! I think I might have mentioned that once or twice already though, haha.)
So say he does a heavy feint. You then have to guess whether he'll carry through, guardbreak or try to parry your failed parry heavy. So already it's unlikely you'll guess right because you've only got a 33% chance of guessing right. Then if he lands a guardbreak or parry you end up in the wall and take loads of damage. If not then you still take a bit of damage. The best counter is just to defend without trying to parry, but then you'll take chip damage and he can continue with his mix-ups. Unless you're a conq, in which case you can use your superior block and punish it with a guardbreak heavy, or just counter the guardbreak. You say the wall splat is situational but you can pretty much always land a wall splat unless you're in the middle of a battlefield on dominion. Even if you don't get it on the first one you can always do a couple more feints, or carry through, keeping it un-patterned so they can't guess, and just edge them toward the wall a ledge or something.
The only real way to beat them is to aggressively attack them as an assassin character so that they don't get a chance to put you on the defensive. That kinda leaves heavies and even vanguards out in the cold a bit though.
I would also say that it is specifically a big problem for the centurion since most characters that get a guardbeak wall splat can only get a single uncharged heavy out of it. The cent gets a charged heavy, his punch (drains stamina and maybe health if in 4v4 and he's got 'haymaker' on his feats) and his eagle's talon. While a normal character might do just about a full bar of damage the centurion does about 2 or 2 and a half bars of damage. Some characters can't even get a heavy off a wall splat I don't think... Not to mention that he's got a decent throw distance which other characters lack. So wall splatting is actually fairly easy for him compared to characters like the orochi or PK.
I would say that some wall-splat combos are not too bad. In fact, it's pretty much the only way to pull some moves off, like the shugoki's charge. There's almost no point in having all guardbreaks
as counter-able guardbreaks because they're simply too easy to counter. Perhaps earlier when they had the guardbreak change in the beta version of the game, when it was more like a parry and you had to press the button once at the right time to counter it, that would be more fair. However, when they did that people just ended up spamming guardbreaks. I think having guaranteed guardbreaks as a counter to dodging and as a way to punish missed melee moves is good. However it's just too unfair and bias at the moment. Like I said, it heavily favours assassins because they can dash attack and any guardbreak attempt just gives them a free hit. Perhaps it's just the Conqueror but it seems like he can be guardbroken out of anything except light attacks. His dash melee attacks can be guardbroken up to near the last few frames. I even got guardbroken out of the running knockdown shield bash as it was about to hit someone the other day! Plus his heavies can be guardbroken up to about 500ms in. Looking at other heavies, the shugoki is weak to guardbreaks because even with a guardbreak counter his hyper armour is broken. The warlord is kind of immune because the only way to effectively play him (or I should say, the only way I've seen him played effectively) is as a cheeselord, spamming headbutts, throws and his fast zone attack, all mostly near cliffs or hazards so that one throw is enough to win.
So really, I just think guardbreak needs to be more balanced. Assassin characters should be susceptible to guardbreak during their dash attacks and characters with longer throw distances should have some sort of counter effect on their guardbreaks. Perhaps they have to mash the guardbreak button faster than their opponent to carry them further? Or perhaps they can get a normal short throw guaranteed but the opponent gets a second guardbreak counter opportunity before the long distance throw? Also, it shouldn't be possible for people to guardbreak the opponent out of a heavy attack after a feint. Mostly because it's only heavy and vanguard characters that suffer from this. Assassins and some hybrids have heavy attacks that can't reliably be guardbroken from a feint. Feints could still be used to parry, get a quick light attack in or punish an overzealous dodger. You should also be able to knock anyone out of a melee start up or heavy charge start-up with a guardbreak. This would help counter the warden's shoulder bash because at the moment it's completely uninterruptable. Guardbreaks bounce off it and he gets hyper armour during the actual shove so light attacks do nothing to knock him out of it, leaving your only option to dodge which is countered by the guardbreak feint. Well, actually, you can roll away from it and avoid damage, but then you lose a large chunk of stamina and he can just start charging it up again, so it's more of a delay tactic than an actually viable counter...
As I said, I think the issue with parries is that they're too reliable. Honestly I think it should be near impossible if not totally impossible to parry a light attack, and heavy attacks should be very difficult to parry. Really it should be an unblockable but for defence; high risk, high reward. At the moment, it's fairly low risk and high reward. Dark souls had parries that worked because they were almost impossible to pull off without loads of practice, and practising them in dark souls meant dying to weak enemies loads of times because it was extremely hard to get the timing down. It should be the same here. Even a highly skilled (pro level cheeser player) shouldn't be able to land a parry 100% of the time. It should really only be viable against the slowest most powerful high risk moves, like the raider's, shugoki's, berzerkers and warden's heavies and/or unblockables. (I think those characters have the slowest heavies, I'm not entirely sure though.) I think it should still be just as easy to counter an unblockable attack with a parry but I think the parry windows on all other attacks should be halved or even quartered.
Haha, maybe, but then he just retreats for a second or two and lets it recover. Unless you've got a stamina draining character like the centurion or gladiator then there's not much you can do to push his stamina down. Maybe if he takes it right to the edge you could put him out of stamina with a conq/valk shield bash, a shugo/warlord headbutt or a warden/lawbro shove, but even then he's only out of stamina and that doesn't mean too much in the current build, especially if he's running with high exhaustion recovery on one of his gear stats. Even if you get him on the ground and take off a bar or two of health you'd still have to do it twice more and he'd probably watch his stamina more carefully after that.Originally Posted by Fady117 Go to original post
As for the aramusha... His attacks are literally too fast for an assassin to dodge out of. I've been playing a lot of shaman recently when I feel like I'm getting stomped as conq, haha, and every time I come up against an aramush and get caught in his light spam I fail to get out because I focus on trying to dodge out but there's literally not enough time between his attacks to escape with a dodge. The only time you can dodge out is when he feints his heavy, but by then you're just starting to try to block because you realise you can't dodge out and then he gets you with the feint into another light or a heavy from another direction. I'll admit I'm not the most skilled player out there. I don't have lightning fast reflexes like some people do, but I'm certainly not a bad player. I would say that I'm above average and if not then at least average. So if i can't come close to countering this then I doubt anyone but the most skilled or practiced players can.
On the shaman, I don't really think it's simply the "fluidity and flow of her kit". I was talking specifically about her heavy feint into a bleed stab. When she starts a heavy attack she can cancel it into a 200ms (I think. Either that or 300ms) bleed stab from any direction. It's simply impossible to react to. Her bleed stab after a combo isn't as bad because you actually have to land the combo hits first. I think it's different from the PK as well, in that the PK only gets a quick bleed stab guaranteed after her dash heavy stab. Plus, the PK doesn't then get all sorts of bonuses because her opponent is bleeding.Originally Posted by Fady117 Go to original post
I also don't think the deflect stab is too bad either. I mean, it's no worse than a parry anyway, haha. At least that way they have to time it right and take a risk. They also have to be aiming for a deflect. The timing is usually too tight to hit the light attack button if you get a deflect by chance. Usually they'll be ready for a dash attack instead since it's safer. I would definitely say that the heavy feint into bleed stab is a far safer way to get that bleed applied in the first case. Then they can go for the guardbreak, throw, pounce.
Alright, you put in a large section about unblockable but I'm really only going to address this line and the last paragraph. The reason being that I perhaps wasn't clear enough. When I say "unblockable" I really mean the directional attacks with unblockable status, not melee unblockables which I simply refer to as 'melee' attacks. Your first three paragraphs are about 'melee' attacks, not the unblockables I was meaning. So you're right in saying you can't just count them all as 'unblockables' but I already was counting them as separate things, just not very clearly, haha.Originally Posted by Fady117 Go to original post
Oh, actually there's a line in your third paragraph about unblockables being feint-able and how it makes the combat system "beautiful". I completely disagree. The reason being that it's simply disabling your opponent. You remove the opponent's ability to block. This is fine if you have other options for defending yourself, like dodging or parrying. However, if that unblockable is feint-able then you can counter both their dodge and their attempted parry with a guardbreak. This effectively makes it an unavoidable attack, not just an unblockable attack. it doesn't make the combat system 'beautiful' it makes it 'unbalanced'. :P
Anyway, that line I quoted. You can counter those 4v1 melee spams with revenge. It gives you hyper armour and it was supposed to prevent melee attacks from hitting you at all but for some reason I think that was removed again... Anyway, you still get hyper armour when heavy attacking with revenge, regardless of character, so just start wailing on them with heavies and hope none of them are focused enough on you to parry. it was better when they removed the ability to parry someone in revenge. That really meant you could go all out and put the opponents on the defensive for a little bit, until your time ran out anyway. That's how revenge was originally designed; to give you some time so that your buddies could come and help you. There's no way you'd be able to take on 3 or 4 coordinated people, even with parry proof revenge. Still it would certainly give the blind spammers a bit of punishment for not defending themselves since they're not paying attention because they've got you out-numbered.
You talk about "advanced combos" and how unblockables are the keystone of those advanced combos because of the options it gives you. You're literally just talking about the 50/50 guesswork combos and the unblockables being crucial to them because they remove the opposing player's ability to block. They give you more options because they take options away from your opponent. that's not fair gameplay, that's unbalanced gameplay.
Melee unblockables are alright for combos because they can be dodged and punished. The gladiator's foot stab and the valks spear sweep are difficult to dodge but dodge-able none the less and therefore balanced.
Honestly, combos should work one of two ways. They should either be long and complex but doing very little damage, taking maybe three or four full combos to kill an opponent (three for assassins, four for heavies and vanguards), or they should be very powerful but easily interrupt-able.
At the moment, For Honor is leaning more to the latter, however there are characters, like the centurion, which are more like the former except from the damage reduction.
If you look at other fighting games like Mortal Kombat or Injustice, for example, they're more the former. They have long combos which do very little damage. Obviously this wouldn't work in 4v4 scenarios but the other type would work well for both 4v4s and 1v1s, which is why For Honor should try to make sure all its characters fit that pattern.
I think that changing unblockables and feints would actually improve duels rather than ruin them because it would down to player skill, not just the movesets of the characters. Using an unblockable feint like that gives you a massive advantage because you then completely control that scenario. Your best result is a guarbreak heavy or unblockable, your worst result is them countering your guardbreak, blocking your followup light attack or just not doing anything when you feint hoping for a failed parry. In other words, using a combo like that you stand to do a lot of damage with very little, if any, punishment.
By having all attacks punishable using each kind of defence you add enough room for people to make mistakes or lead others into making mistakes but you also allow people to fight exceptionally well.
Wiffed or blocked light attacks should allow you to throw out a light attack faster than they can come back with another light attack, regardless of character, but they should also have enough time to dodge or block your return light attack. That way you'd prevent aggressive unpunishable light attack spamming. I would say that only certain characters should be able to continue a light attack chain after missing a light attack, or that the second light attack should be much slower if the first was missed. This would help deal with light attack spams that can catch you while you recover from dodging the first light attack. All light combos should be able to be dodged out of too... aramusha... :P
This could be too harsh on assassins so another option would be to let assassins be the exception to the above rule and that they can light attack faster than the opponent can throw out a light attack. However, if that was the case then I'd want some character's light attacks slowed down a bit, like the PK's and aramusha's.
Zone attacks should be equalised. I think it's fair for heavy characters to have zone attacks focused on destroying mob soldiers, since they're supposed to act as defenders. While assassins could have more damaging zone attacks that would be useful against other players. However, at the moment the assassin zone attacks are very powerful. The orochi relies on his zone attack to be a playable character, the PK can zone attack faster than you can blink with no indicator on the first hit (which she can then cancel out of her zone after, avoiding any punishment) and the gladiator has his guaranteed damage and unparriable/unblockable bash that a lot of people complain about. These need to be slowed down and balanced out. I would be alright with them getting a damage buff if they were slowed down to a speed between a light attack and heavy attack.
A missed heavy by assassin characters should give you a free guardbreak, a missed heavy by vanguards should give you a free light attack and a missed heavy by a heavy character would be able to chain into another heavy and have no punishment. The reason for differences here is that the attack speeds are different. Assassins typically have more powerful or faster heavy attacks, while vanguards have average heavy attacks in both respects and heavies have slow or less powerful heavy attacks. This would work because assassins would be susceptible to having their heavies dodged while heavy characters would be susceptible to having their heavies interrupted by a counter attack. Vanguards would be in the middle where their heavies can be dodged more easily than an assassins and more difficultly than a heavy character's but the reward is only a light attack. Similarly you could interrupt them much more easily with a light attack than an assassin but they'd be more difficult to interrupt than a heavy. This would also work because even if a heavy character chains heavy attacks constantly they'll drain his stamina much faster and the opposing player would be able to continuously dodge or block until he stops, if they don't feel confident enough to try to time an interrupting attack right. (I'm leaving parries out of it because I'd rather see them much less often. Like I said, they should be very difficult to pull off reliably against any character.)
Finally, guardbreaks should be useful in catching out rapidly dodging characters and breaking people out of charge up attacks. They could also make it so that guardbreaks are as easy as they are now from a standing start but if you catch someone during a dodge or when it's normally uninterruptable you could make it like the beta guardbreak. That way it would be far more difficult to break out of a guardbreak when you're caught out but it wouldn't be impossible. It would also prevent people from spamming it though because it would still be just as easy to stop if you're not caught out. They should maybe add a stamina cost to guardbreaking too...
With this kind of system the duels would be much the same but without easy win combos and characters would have more of a unique play-style depending on their type. At the moment, assassins can last in a 4v1 just as long as a heavy can (usually 2 seconds, hahaha, but sometimes there are players that can last a while longer) which doesn't really make sense since a heavy is supposed to be better at surviving while assassins are supposed to be better at DPS, either through fast attack chains with small damage (aramusha/pk style) or dealing heavy damage with average/slow attacks (berserker style).
Oh man... Not even half way though... :O
Exactly! Just like that. Executions should still be vulnerable but I think you should be able to cancel an execution if you see an enemy approaching.Originally Posted by Fady117 Go to original post
I think it would be easy enough. I mean they turn off damage collision when you die and turn it back on again when you're revived, so I don't see why they can't do that during the duration of a raider charge or shugoki grab. They might have to apply the shugoki grab damage a slightly different way, depending on the coding. I'm not sure.
I would also give the shaman bite a pass on this one because if someone hits you before they bite you then they get knocked off, you don't take the bite damage and they don't get healed. It's annoyed me a few times when my teammates have interrupted my bites while playing as shaman, haha.
Alright, I'm going to take a break. My sister wants to play the new Dishonoured on my computer too since hers can't run it, haha. So I'll finish this later. :P
Speaking of Dishonour, next time we'll discuss edgelords... :P
