Usual statements aside. I make bad titles, this isn't wholistically my own opinion but i'm sharing it anyway, this is indeed another ramble, it will be all over the place blah blah blah blah. SO, I got the idea to post this from watching Zero_Craic's stream segment covering Raveyne's most recent video involving the state of balance. If you're not aware of who Craic he is a former console casual player that over his time spent playing this game has moved over to pc and is now a tournament level player. And if you're not aware of the whole Raveyne video here is a quick TLDW of it:
"Devs should cater to the majority instead of the minority. There is a massive disconnect in the community."
It doesn't take a genius to understand why this is a very polarizing video and why it's picked up some traction. And to be fair Raveyne does make some accurate points in the video. The biggest two being the developers really need to tackle this disconnect in the community and be more vocal about it. And that there is an actual disconnect in the community. Unfortunately he also got a lot wrong with what he was saying. But this thread isn't about pointing out those false statements. This thread is about dropping some hard truths and dispelling very popular statements that are made across the community.
Us versus them mentality and the misuse of the term balance.
Both in the video and in the community in general there is this very harmful perspective in that one side is correct over another side. And that sides have to be picked. Weather this is about console versus pc or pro players versus casual players. For WHATEVER reason people believe that it has to be one over the other. When this has never ever ever been the case. Not with for honor and certainly not with other games. The developers one and only goal has always been to make the game as enjoyable as possible for as many players as possible. They do not pick sides and if you've been around awhile you can point out areas in where changes are made that would seem to favor one side or the other. So the developers clearly don't have a favorite.
So why is it that this concept is not only one that exists but is continued to be used in discussion? That is where we talk about Balance. more specifically people's false perception on what balance is. Balance isn't just about straight power level. Balance also is about the design of the hero. Is the hero fun to play as/against? What does a player gain in benefit from getting better with the hero? What is the learning curve like for the hero? What are the meta ways to play the hero once mastered?
Players often overly focus only on the power level aspect of the hero. (aka tier lists.) And here is the first hard to swallow pill, Pro players don't only discuss power level of a hero. They discuss all aspects of the hero. Just because the pros claim that Warden is an S tier hero that doesn't mean said pro players think warden's whole kit is perfectly fine. This doesn't mean that they wouldn't want to see more variety in his kit. The reason Warden is talked about positively AT ALL is because Warden is a very good example of a workable offense that is basic. In other words he's a hero that proves you can have a pretty basic concept that allows a player to have offense without being overly mechanical or complex.
Back to the point, balance can be achieved for many types of players regardless of skill level. You often here players talk about balancing from the top down but it's never really elaborated on. Basically let's call the top the "meta" play and the bottom "causal play." The idea from balancing the top down (if done correctly) is that the game is enjoyable at both levels of play. The reason top level play is important is because you WANT to attract new players. Answer me this. When you're looking to get into a a video game what would be more interesting for you to watch?
What someone with basic gear is doing in an early level mission. Or seeing late gameplay where someone is mostly decked out in gear doing cool things and fighting something that looks amazing? This translates to pvp games as well. What's more fun to see? Someone who doesn't have a solid grasp on the gameplay but is laughing it up and having a jolly time. Or a group of players making clutch communications that massively swing a team fight to win them the game? It's the latter in both cases. This is why watching fighting tournaments at EVO is such a big deal. This is why competitive play exists in pvp games. If the top level of play looks fun it's going to drive players to want to learn how to get to that level and do it themselves. Which is a lovely segway into my next point.
The often used but clearly misunderstood disconnect.
There is indeed a massive disconnect between both parts of the community and the developers in communication with us. But it's nothing to do with how the game is balanced. I mean sure. If things are not properly explained (or worse you continually publish misleading info cough state of balance cough,) then confusion will ensue. But the REAL disconnect is actually much bigger than that. The first part being the idea that pro players are very "anti casual" and don't care for fun. Let me smack you with another hard to swallow pill.
The pro players WANT more people to get better so the competitive scene grows. They WANT the game to be more fun in general. They would NOT have a problem with changes being made to the game that benefits casual players. The problem is the suggestions put forth by said casual players are not only aimed at attacking power level of a hero only but they also are highly misinformed.
This isn't casual players fault. This is where the second half of the disconnect comes from. The power/learning curve of the game let alone the heros is terrible. For honor isn't a very mechanical heavy game. For the most part the mechanics are very straight forward. You maybe have a few match up specific situations where there is complexity. But for the most part For honor's "depth" as it were lies within team play. And this is where the problem starts.
The game doesn't teach you frick when it comes to this. How many casual players know the importance of spacing and positioning? Rotations? taking advantage of hitstun/block stun? etc. The game does a VERY poor job of explaining how to play itself. So it's no wonder that players are walking around with these misinformed perspectives. What is called "exploiting" or "cheesy" is how the game is actually MEANT to be played. You're supposed to dip out of a 3v1 you just arrived at instead of committing. You're SUPPOSED to hold revenge as long as you can to stall as long as you can. etc.
The curve from starting out to making it to "meta" play is absolutely garbage and is THE main reason there is such a divide between gameplay from casual play and meta play. And that's another quick pill for you. Meta's are not created by pro players nor do devs create them with intent. Meta's are discovered by pro players and the developers react to the discovery and make changes based around what they like/don't like about it.
Reality hurts like a sack of bricks.
We're about done here. But I wanted to go out with a hard hitting truth. er, well several. Firstly. an absolute majority of players in this game are bad. Not like having an off day bad. But like "I can't hold a controller that's ductaped to my hand" level of bad. And as i've said already. This isn't all their fault. The game doesn't teach you how to play it. The reason I bring this up is because people constantly bring up examples of other players, examples of their own experiences, dev "data" you name it. The reality is this. If you don't play a character optimally you don't have them mastered. If you don't know match up specifics then you don't know what you're talking about. If you don't know how to play dominion then you don't have much sway with your opinion. yes, casual perspective is important. Because that curve needs to exist. But someone who spends dozens of hours learning the game in and out, that guy who sits in the top .0001% of players is going to have more weight because he KNOWS what he's talking about.
You probably have an abnormal console setup. So your experience isn't catered to. We all know the terrible input delay that the console version has. Yes, it's insane that you have to alter a basic gaming setup to get over most of that. There's nothing that can be done about it. Running an optimal console setup is comparable to a low spec pc or gaming laptop. So it's not like console play in its entirety is a dumpster fire. The reality of the situation is you have an avenue to improve your experience on console. Or you can move to pc whenever they make it free (which they're doing it a lot lately.) If you don't want to change your setup that's perfectly fine. But don't expect to have any weight when it comes to discussions. You either tough it out, improve your situation, or you leave.
Finally I just want to say that I'm not agreeing or stating that every change that's been made or will be made is a good decision. A very recent example is how shinobi and nobushi were treated. Both needed nerfs. Both got nerfs in the areas they needed to be nerfed in. (shinobi still needs some nerfs.) But they both needed buffs as well. This is where the developers really struggle and have typically struggled in the past. They don't do enough simultaneous adjustments. The competitive community was just as upset about nobushi being thrown in the trash as were average players. They were also screaming for her to be buffed as well. But the reality remains that they both needed nerfing. And if you didn't use their kit properly and to their fullest in the context of how dominion is played then you can't really argue against the nerfs. Because you lack the fundamental understanding of not only how the game is meant to be played but the mastery of a hero. It's all well and good to share opinions and no one is saying you can't express yourself. But if you're going to weigh in on the changes and actually WANT your feedback to mean something then you actually NEED to know what you're talking about.
Well that's that...whatever that is. As always I appreciate everyone who takes the time to read my threads. Even if you disagree with me and think i'm a jerk. (:
The idea of balance for mid level or high level just doesn't make sense to me. A well balanced game plays good at the highest level, and therefore at all levels beneath it.
Chess is the perfect example, two Grand Masters can play chess and the whole thing doesn't fall apart, because it's balanced. And of course anyone of any skill beneath master can also enjoy it. Games don't only work at high level or mid level, they're either balanced or their not.
For honor will never be competitive because it's simply poorly designed from its core. You can have fun at low to mid levels, but the moment you reach top level, that is to say, when you understand the game completely, it falls apart. Because it's a badly designed game.
Chess is indeed a good example of what I was talking about. However I disagree with for honor falling apart at the top level. it's had it's rough spots but I genuinely find the game to be a lot more enjoyable both from a player perspective and also a spectator perspective when watching scrims/tournaments. I wouldn't say that the game will never be competitive either. I feel like the game is approaching that level. Slowly yes, but still going. Even if it never becomes a big E sport and has a hugely sucessful turn around like siege did I still think what the devs are doing is great and I hope they continue to improve.Originally Posted by Hormly Go to original post
I would agree with the majority of this, but would also like to point out that if we want everyone to be on the same page a couple things need to happen:
1. We need to get everyone to a better level of understanding of both heroes and mechanics. Solution to this is easy to understand, and easy to access information on all the minutiae of the game. There needs to be a tactics section on the main page that compiles how everything works, from attack speeds, and recoveries, hitstun, block stun, to hero specific data for the more unique things each hero can do.
I'll re-stress: this needs to be in game. I guarantee most players don't spend large amounts of time on either the forums, or reddit trying to drudge up info. Even some that do don't know what they are looking for. If this can happen, I think as a whole we'll see the community disconnect fade to less of a problem.
2. There is and always will be a large disconnect between the pros and the rest of the community, even if that community does make a large improvements. The reason for this is very simple: reaction speeds. Some people think much faster than others, can adapt faster than others, and can react faster than others. Those people tend to be the pros. They will straight up have different views on what is reactable/balanced compared to say someone who is getting older and knows that they'll have trouble blocking a 500 MS attack let alone parrying/deflecting it.
Even if they both have the same info and experience, that gap cannot be overcome. And they are both right to ask for changes that will improve their experience. This is where things become difficult for the devs and frankly there isn't a good answer to the problem.
Originally Posted by Velentix Go to original post
I agree more information and better information needs to be in the game. The devs haven't made a big enough effort there and it's something they should be actively working on. As far as your second part goes...eh. As I said. Changes can be made for either side. As long as both sides are accounted for. Say...nerfing something frustrating for the casual players but then taking a different aspect of the kit and improving it at the top level. If a hero is to receive significant changes then both nerfs and buffs need to happen and they need to be in proportion to each other.
As for the reaction comment that's largely due to improper setups for a majority of console players. For me simply switching to a monitor was enough to drastically improve my performance until I made the eventual switch to pc. yes. there are players out there like clutchmiester who have insane reaction times. But the gap between someone like him and seasoned players really isn't as big as you think. It's very easy to improve your choice action reaction time via learning how to read players. Which does a good job at making up for one's decent raw reaction capabilities. I'm living proof of that.
Being a pro means being the best with what you have. Go youtube 'pro hammering nails' & i bet you get a guy with a hammer & alot of skill, without an 'optimal setup'. They dont change the nails, don't change the hammer, they just master it.
Stop messing the game up.. the hyperarmour/bash/revenge changes have reduced the games braincell count by a large margin. I have put 92 D, 14h & 53 minutes into this game. through all the changes I can say the recent direction is by far the worst - this direction of the game is a little like art vs science. Art used to exist, minion killing, using looser tolerances, showing individual playstyles. Now its all science, and thats the competitive scene right there. Optimal play only. Each player resembles each other. Its... boring.
Excel spreadsheets & guides are fun for a few people, but most do not enjoy it. I find myself more restricted now than ever, and if thats 'good' then skill really is being phased out of the game for a 'painting by numbers' style of fighting that... to be honest... &^$%ing sucks for many people... which is why I laugh when 'pro' players applaud it, they want to rote learn the responses and not have to come up with anything original themselves.
EDIT: I've stuck around through the changes because at its heart this was a unique game - that unique flavor is fading fast & I think sadly these changes will be the death of the game. The player base has already cratered, there are alot of new younger players turning up but like all games their patience is fleeting - the hardcore beating heart of the game is leaving in droves... its actually quite sad for me
I want to play how I want, not how i'm told.
I found Hormly's comparsion with chess very accurate. There are tenthousands of kids/beginners who seek imptovement to the highest levels, and since chess has a solid professional scene and even professional literature for centuries, everyone understands what it takes to ascend there. On the rare times I actually faced a grandmaster, I always accepted that all my shortcomings will be exploited (and I could get some draws when I succesfully overcame them), and my weaker opponents always knew that they must overcome some technical shortcomings against me in order to not lose. And really everyone accepts this, maybe there were some salt against rich kids whose parents payed for high level masters to teach them, but it was ultimately an excuse.
Casual can mean a lots of things. In chess, it means on my level that the player likes the game, understands technical things to an extent, but does not understand those things instinctively nor mastered openings (matchups here, he knows a few things, doesn't know everything). People calling themselves casuals and ranting over everything are the equivalent of players in a pub or park who keep going for "beauty", and if you play with them, exploit the numerous mistakes they make in search for something fancy, and win in 20 moves, they call you names because you don't attack, you just tear apart their lines through the numerous gaps they don't even notice. For them, that is not beautiful, boring, because they don't have a clue about what is happening, let alone countering it. For me, there is nothing beautiful in a checkmate with a queen sacrifice if both players kept making mistakes so serious that both players could have won a dozen times already, but chose to find a fancy ending (there is a pk FH youruber I love to warch, expect it is so irritating he purposefully does not use deep gouge). For Honor is the same for me in this regard. If I lose, I mostly try to find fault in myself (though of course chess is more balanced, FH matches can be lost on the character choice), not blame the opponent for choosing a cheap tactic (if it's working, it's good).
I think there are quite a few ways to get better, if some players have no such endevours, I don't understand why they play. For the complex story? And why should a game adapt to those who are not willing to learn it?
You can play the way you want. Just don't expect too much if that is not zhe optimal way.
I did watch Ravens ramble. Balance is mostly fine, the toxicy implanted in the game needs to go. Ubi should make atleast a 10vs10 game mode to widen the pool.
I say balance is fine cuz anyone can pick a good hero out of the large selection. Don't like getting light spammed? Play shugoki or hito. Does the game need tweeks sure.
I just think ubi would be better off vastly opening up the amount of players per team.
This is actually a well formatted post. And I think you mentioned one of the BIGGEST issues when it comes to balance, besides the "us vs them" player mentality in the community as far as pro vs casual is concerned. That is that the devs struggle to change EVERYTHING on a character that needs it. A character needs changing because something on them is too powerful (we will say shinobi's hyper armor abuse and death button in sickle rain for example), this was a problem in his kit that needed nerfing, but in order to keep him viable the scales have to be balanced, which they did not. They cut off both his legs and said he was fine.
They fail to recognize often what makes something op in a character is its power relative to the rest of the character's kit. Often times moves are spammed in a character's kit because they are really good and the other moves are just not as good. So in shinobi's case they removed the hyper armor and evasiveness that made him such a pain to fight but gave him nothing in return, rather than changing how the character played in order to make them work better in fights and use more of/a better kit, they dropped overall effectiveness with heavy nerfs, thus dropping the character's power.
I use shinobi only because he is the most recent one to suffer such a way. But throughout the game's life we have seen many a character rise and fall based on how hard they got buffed or nerfed. Every now and then Ubi would ring jackpot and fairly rework a character such as with Warden or Kensei, giving enough but taking some as well. But you know, blind squirrels and nuts and all that. I think the devs have to stop being so afraid of changing a character too much with buffs and nerfs, and learn to take things in balance. Character got a much more diverse and faster kit with mixups? Maybe cut their damage a bit to make sure they don't run a train on someone for making 3 mistakes.
That being said, I enjoyed reading this. I agree with a lot of this. and there is a lot more I could say on the topic, but I already wrote a novel and it is 4am so...
Originally Posted by Goat_of_Vermund Go to original post
Nicely put.