Senior Member
Senior Member
That is a good point. And no, I wouldn't want players awarded feats for being bad either. That would feel really sucky. Surely there must be a compromise between the two extremes though.Originally Posted by Arekonator Go to original post
I liked ChampionRuby's idea in another thread whereby if a players dies to a gank then that player gets a bit of renown. The more people that ganked him at the time the more renown he gets as compensation but never as much renown as he would get if he were doing the killing. That feels like a more balanced way to treat both the deathball meta and the harsh snowball effect of the winning team getting tier 4 feats. At least it would put a bit of a stop gap on the extreme situations we can have currently whereby a deathballing team can get their T4 feats before their opponents even get their Tier 1 feats.
In my opinion a more balanced system would allow for the losing team to at least offer a decent fight until the very end, if they can get organised. Something which doesn't really happen currently in Dominion once one team goes far enough ahead of the other in terms of feats unlocked.
Senior Member
The deathball meta could be countered by changing the way renown is awarded. So for example.
Capture a zone = 40 renown shared between players. 1 player captures and gets 40 renown, 4 players capture, 10 each.
Holding a zone = 4 renown per sec, shared between players. So 4 players holding a zone get 1 renown per sec each, 3 get 2, 2 get 3, 1 gets 4.
Kills = 5 renown * number of adversaries, so getting ganked by 4 people and manage to kill one = 20 renown. Conversely, if you're ganking 4 v 1 and you kill them, you get 5 renown - the number in the gank, so for a 4 man gank, 1 renown.
The numbers are just off the top of my head, but I think that general approach would encourage people to at lest pair up and go for zones, if not split up entirely and try to take and hold a zone each.
As for feats, the best way to balance them and make them fair is to remove them entirely, or to make them passive only and put powerful passive feats in tier 1, with them getting weaker as you unlock them, so the players who aren't doing so well get a decent helping hand early on to enable them to unlock more feats. Maybe have the top tier feats in tier 4 still, to give players a reason to care about unlocking them.
Just my thoughts.
Senior Member
They should just take out feats and give revenge like a turbo button where you only get to use it once per life and u have it when u spawn not as a reward for parry and blocks. If you use it at the wrong time it's your own fault. I don't disagree that a team that is hopelessly behind needs something. It's not fun joining a game that the original crew backed out on...it a kd killer but I don't like having out either. I've noticed that the loosing team 's minions seem to become more prevalent so that is something
Junior Member
This is a fighting game and as many other fighting games it does have a system to even out the playing field when a player is outnumbered (i.e. revenge, which reminds you of the Street Fighter IV Ultra system which rewarded you for receiving damage). Street Fighter IV also has the Super System that rewards a player for successful attacks, which looks to me like the Feats system in For Honor. Only For Honor is a team fighter, and some feats affect the team performance as a whole so I agree the game should at least include a parallel feat system that would enter in action when the team is being beaten up. Something like, 1 powerful feat that could help make a comeback for a team that is losing, and that should be available when losing by a great difference. Off course, it should be balanced not to encourage a team to purposefully start losing.
By the way, I found this thread looking for documentation about the renown system. Is there a table or a list or anything official from Ubisoft that tells me how much renown each in-game action earns me?
Banned
Perfect.Originally Posted by DefiledDragon Go to original post
Senior Member
Feats are one of those things, I long ago learnt they are here to stay (like cliffs). Both arguments above are valid - why give tools to a winning side to win more. Why reward bad play instead?
Personally I think feats either need to;
1 - have a minimum timer before everyone gets level 1 feat, then level 2 feat etc. If you go well you get to access them as usual. Falling behind can become too crushing at the moment. Breaking = all feats unlocked. This also helps with getting dumped into a losing game with 0 renown while catapults are flying
OR
2 - all feats are available from the start of the game, with limited uses (this also helps balance out some of the weaker feats, give them more uses). You'd feel less salty going down during breaking knowing your opponent held their catapult all game for that moment. This adds alot more thought to the use of feats - i.e. do you really want to throw your last bomb at minions halfway into the game?
Banned
I like the first idea. That teams should gain access to all their feats while breaking. The feats should simply be given to them for the duration of their breaking, and if they get out of breaking, access to those feats goes away, but the cooldowns remain.Originally Posted by Sweaty_Sock Go to original post
Senior Member
To fix this the real way to do it would be changing the things that make you able to unlock them, instead of just kills make it based on damage done, damage blocked, parry, conquering zones and defending from multiple opponents (this one would be a points bonus based on the time you survive a 2-4 man gank alone)
The actual way of getting points it's the problem, the system should favor the most skilled players regardless of if they are winning or losing, that way bad players will not get feats that easily and good players would have a comeback option even if their team is losing.
Member
