Senior Member
It would be really neat if you would go in another direction instead of 50/50s, unblockable feints into gb, bash cancel into bash, etc., etc.....
This is not meant to be insulting or anything. But For Honor has literally nothing to do with medieval fighting. All this non-sense tracking and bashes. Unnecessary fast attacks and unfair free damage. It is disappointing.
Furthermore the nonexistent support for console players. I hear balance here and balance there but it's only great for PC players afterwards. It was mentioned a hundred times already:
Consoles need 60 fps!
You can't simply balance characters in terms of speed and reaction stuff when console versions still have 30 fps.
Ok now, even if the game is not a medieval fighting game. Please look at the UFC series from EA. This is realistic fighting put in a very great gameplay. Intense fights, without unnecessary fast attacks, without unblockables and no free damage. They did great in terms of logical solutions for problems For Honor has, imo. Just look at the different mechanics and imagine it for For Honor.
For Honor could have done so much better with correct balancing and better thought out solutions in terms of turtle meta, underpowered heroes, nerfs, buffs, etc.,....
It is sad. And it may seem to have an awesome comeback in October but with all the decisions you are making I'm not sure how long you can keep up the hype for new content.
I'm decently hyped for the new mode and the new characters. But I still wish the game to take another direction, tbh.
Just my opinion. It shouldn't sound like I'm complaining or disliking the game.
Member
I would leave a link to that one thread I made about the defense overhaul, but you already know that one
At some point one has to just realize, that the game will never be close to balanced or even remotely reach the potential it could have had. It's f*ing sad is what it is. This game was an opportunity to create the best fighting game ever to have existed. Wasted.
Senior Member
Member
I'm not going to link the thread here, because there is just too much toxicity in the comments alreadyI also feel like the original post was a bit lackluster when it comes to explaining and justifying my suggestions. So please allow me "take over" your thread with these ideas
In no particular order, but numbered for better quotability:
1. Slow down light attacks, to make them more reactable /blockable again -> having your own lights blocked wouldn't be so punishing as discussed in 2 and 3.
2. No superior block on light attacks -> light chains would continue when blocked, so one can keep the pressure on, while both players keep in control of their character.
3. Light parry only guarantees light attack -> because of how "slow" they are now. You can also dish them out without too much fear of being heavily punished.
4. Chip damage on all blocked heavy attacks (25% maybe?) -> to lift them over just being slower light attacks + makes them feel more powerful and overall viable to use.
5. Heavy parry guarantees nothing, but negates damage, stops chains. Basically exactly like normally blocking a light attack as is. PURELY defensive.
6. No softfeints on unblockables, only hardfeints -> less cheese. You can still open up opponents with feints, but they won't be as quick and unreactable.
7. GB only guarantees light attack -> debatable. But I think it would work well in the context of the other changes.
8. less hitstagger/stun -> So to be able to block followup attacks if the first on the chain hit. Less guaranteed BS + more reactability and control over the character.
9. speed up/shorten the parry animations to make the fight more fluent -> basically already touched on this. light parries are as quick as heavy parries and heavy parries are as quick as light blocks.
10: parrying unblockables still guarantees light -> to mitigate UB spam and because blocking isn't an option.
This is a whole revamp of the fighting systems and aims to make the defense tools more available, while making them less viable. Especially less viable for offense, which was exactly the cause of the turle/defense meta. (Defense was a better offense than offense). My suggestion would separate offense and defense more from one another, making it easier to achieve balance overall.
@Alustar (who will turn up eventually) Please have some CONSTRUCTIVE criticism, don't just scream "defense meta". Explain! Please.
Senior Member
Yes, I'm ashamed of your misbehaviour. Inacceptable!
I might have agreed with all of your points past then but I changed my mind towards parries.
My ideas:
1. A parry guerentees no free damage at all. You only have the privilege to attack first. Post parry attacks can be blocked and parried.
2. If a combo finisher successfully hits the opponent (whether it's blocked or not) it triggers an attack which is 100% guarenteed. A parry or dodge can negate this attack. This would fit perfectly with your 2nd point.
3. As you already said, unblockables should not be soft-feintable. Bashes and grabs should also not be soft-feintable. Bashes in genaral should not be feintable at all.
4. You should not be able to gb someone out of an attack! So if the opponent is in heavy start-up and you gb at the same time, you will get hit.
5. Zone attacks can not be cancelled. If you start a zone attack, you have to commit to it. (Sorry, Raider)
Member
1. Not even light parries guaranteeing a light attack? They are significantly harder to pull of, so I think a light punish would be ok still.Originally Posted by DFQN1 Go to original postYes, I'm ashamed of your misbehaviour. Inacceptable!
I might have agreed with all of your points past then but I changed my mind towards parries.
My ideas:
1. A parry guerentees no free damage at all. You only have the privilege to attack first. Post parry attacks can be blocked and parried.
2. If a combo finisher successfully hits the opponent (whether it's blocked or not) it triggers an attack which is 100% guarenteed. A parry or dodge can negate this attack. This would fit perfectly with your 2nd point.
3. As you already said, unblockables should not be soft-feintable. Bashes and grabs should also not be soft-feintable. Bashes in genaral should not be feintable at all.
4. You should not be able to gb someone out of an attack! So if the opponent is in heavy start-up and you gb at the same time, you will get hit.
5. Zone attacks can not be cancelled. If you start a zone attack, you have to commit to it. (Sorry, Raider)
2. Guaranteed, can be parried but not blocked? So basically add an unblockable combo finisher across the board? meh why?
3. I actually don't have a big problem with hard-feintable (cancel input) CC attacks (unless feinted midair (looking at you shaman)), since all they would get from guard breaking you out of your dodge attempt is a light.. so not too powerful while not being useless. Soft feints should be removed across the board.
4. Hm but why even do mind-games then? You trick someone into parrying and you get hit for it? Nah. Remember, that GB only gives you a light attack, so it should be totally fine. The only issue I see there is the possible ledge kill. But they could introduce a system where if you hit the dodge button at the correct time, you could evade the throw and go back to neutral, but it would cost lots of stamina. What do you think about that?
5. soft-feint, no, hard-feint, yes actually. Otherwise some zone attacks are just save parries, which is a bit boring IMO.
Senior Member
1. Yes, no free damage of a parry. The idea behind that is to not give hardcore turtles the benefit of getting free damage with their playstyle. Taking the possibility to do damage off of a parry would encourage players to play more aggressively. And yes, light parries are harder than heavy parries but a 400ms light is still harder to parry than a 600ms light. And look at it this way: Centurion's heavies are 600ms fast, Shugoki's lights are 600ms fast as well. So why is it justified to punish Shugoki with receiving damage when his lights get parried but Centurion will not get punished for it?
2. It can be blocked because it is still a basic light or heavy attack (depends on the character). A parry or dodge just negates the combo finisher follow-up. The idea behind that is to force the opponent to make a move when you are doing your combo finishers, since I nerfed parries to oblivion in point 1. It is basically an attack which is guarenteed when the finisher hits and it shouldn't do a lot of damage. Furthermore it encourages you to want to pull of your combo finishers. Which makes you do more attacks, which leads to making the opponent wants to parry more. So potential mind games all the way. And to still have a use for parries.
3. I see your point there. I agree.
4. This is not a mind game, imo. Throwing out a heavy but the opponent expects a light and tries to parry it, that is a mind game. So you feint your attack and throw out another attack from a different direction with the hope of getting the hit. That's why you would feint in real life. To "trick" the opponent, as you said.
To add something for your concerns:
If you don't commit to your parry attampt (feint it), you can get guard broken without being able to counter gb. So you need to let it fly to be safe from a gb.
5. Despite the fact that a zone should only be used for clearing minions, some zones are a pain in the *** to deal with. But if we choose to remove their feintability why not for everyone? So in this case we still have a reason to finish of opponents with zones but with the risk of not being able to feint them.
Look at it this way:
Why can Highlander feint his zone and Centurion can't? Why can PK but Shinobi can't?
Member
1. Actually you are right with this one, if there is no guaranteed damage, then why parry if you can just block to negate the damage. The only thing it would give you is the chance to strike first. I like the thinking, because then parrying becomes much less viable and therefore less common.Originally Posted by DFQN1 Go to original post
2. Please define guaranteed in that context... What I think you mean is have the combo-finisher have such a strong stun-window, that an additional light attack cannot be blocked, dodged or parried, when the combo-finisher connects? (or is blocked)... While I like the idea, I think it should only apply to heavy combo-finishers, not light ones.
4. Hmmm I like the idea of having to let it fly in order to punish someone... I just don't see why anyone would ever try to feint-GB anymore, since then it would become a high risk, low reward move. With this one I am torn....
Senior Member
2. I thought of a character specific move at the end of a combo. For an understanding of what I mean, watch this video. It shows the game Kingdom Come Deliverance. The "Combo finisher follow-up" is called "doubling" in this case. You see the combo he needs to pull of at the beginning of the video. The doubling is the little strike to the face at the end of the combo.Originally Posted by Camemberto Go to original post
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_FM...channel=Jappen
And yes, I think you are right. It should only apply to heavy finishers. And it should not to unblockables.
4. You can still pull of a gb after the opponent feints his parry attempt. Otherwise you can get a parry. And if you land a successful gb, you can still throw the opponent into a wall for extra damage.
I'm not a fan of the gb mechanic in this game even though it is low reward after the changes we discussed. So in this case you are opening up an opponent not to gb them (because you already broke their guard by tricking them) but to try to pull of an attack with the hope of it to land which then leads to another combo start-up.
Senior Member
The difference in fps is at most 33ms, it might be the favourite villain to blame but there are other things within the player's control that add more lag.
Router instead of being hardwired can add up to 50 as can the controller being wireless. The television can add 150.
People seem to be under the illusion that the console is a fair competitive gaming utopia where we all pay the same price and we all have the same chance, far from it. Like with the pc it is an arms race as to who has the best setup.
Not to say that there aren't other ways of going about things than faster attacks but the fps myth has been peddled around so much that players just look foolish parroting it now.
In before I play on pc, I have played on both pc and on Xbox with a gaming tv and without, the television makes a bigger difference than the fps.
