CCU's effects on overall gameplay

[Xuulis]

I'd like to start off by saying I'm a casual player who rotates the games I play. I won't stick to For Honor and make it the only game I play as it's just a mood thing for me. I'm not a pro player, and such the people I am MM"d with are probably not pro players either, mentioning it is a moot point and is a waste of both of our time.

The CCU's intention to balance "light spam" and curb light centered tactics has only seemed to increase it.. Ubisoft has been successful in moving forward and promoting more offensive playstyles, they did this by speeding up lights, if you read some of the pinned material you'll notice how they did this and how it affects lights timing but I'll just TL:DR it. A buffered light would come out at the speed of 500 ms, you'd see the attack coming from the moment the character was able to perform it and then 433 ms if it was delayed to the absolute maximum, if there's internet problems this can vary as you know, some people can get hit with attacks they never saw thrown until they die or the opponent disconnects. With this new system for god knows what reason they left a buffer zone of 100ms that the opponent cannot actually see as to try and curb instant lights and add some consistency to the game even with people with poor internet will always have the same timing on their attacks(I haven't seen this in action, I still get instant lighted to death by people with ping in the hundreds). This small quality of life fix attempt I feel is more of a balance fix they wanted to slip in for the competitive scene, as competitive players can easily parry 500 ms lights. However, not many of the population can. I believe this change to be toxic to the overall health of the game. It went from being fairly reactable with practice to highly unlikely and I don't even know if their "new technology" even works and it's even worse then what they want it to be.

Now I'm sure I'll get flamed, because of course there are die hards in the community and the lovely "git gud" community that are dying for a chance to utter the words and hope that they're hailed for being good at the game. Though my intention is much more simple then that, the CCU that was intended for stopping lightspam increased it. In 300-400 rep matches. Lights are the leading tool for everyone and nothing but, which is cool that some weaker classes with only light combos get a chance to use them, but hurts the overall enjoyment of the game. I do believe there's a balance to be struck to help the game be successful for the low tier and the high tier players. Whether that's giving every character a 50/50 or making new bait mechanics like Nuxia's traps. For many people this might be a non-issue and I can understand the mindset as 'Hey, now I can play offensively with lights the games in a good spot." well it seems like it isn't for everyone. It's a struggle to find that balance and it might not be the best solution, but the way the game currently is, alienates newcomers/returning players from enjoying the game and then dissuades them from ever attempting to master it. Pushing more people away from the game, off the servers, increasing wait times and killing the game. We might have a few elitests that will stick around but that'll be it and the game will die which no one wants.

[AR-NewRecruit]

Originally posted by SushiJaguar:

The stupidest thing about balancing for casual players, etcetera, is that it never ends. It's an endless downward spiral that, at the bottom level, is just an uroboros of players demanding that it gets simpler, and easier, and more basic to react to and then, when they get the bare-bones gameplay, they refuse to diversify any new options and variables until the game literally becomes a flowchart of two to three interactions of "if X then do Y" statements where it's not about reads, it's about just the brain dead fun and wins without needing to put any major effort in.

TL;DR: Stop balancing around casual players because casual players are not any more special than anyone else, and if they don't like the game, then they never liked the game to begin with, they just liked winning.

Notice how this slippery slope can be applied both ways? This is why fallacies aren't an argument, it's just spewing out biased opinion.

[Wallahluigi]

Originally posted by AR-NewRecruit:

Originally posted by SushiJaguar:

The stupidest thing about balancing for casual players, etcetera, is that it never ends. It's an endless downward spiral that, at the bottom level, is just an uroboros of players demanding that it gets simpler, and easier, and more basic to react to and then, when they get the bare-bones gameplay, they refuse to diversify any new options and variables until the game literally becomes a flowchart of two to three interactions of "if X then do Y" statements where it's not about reads, it's about just the brain dead fun and wins without needing to put any major effort in.

TL;DR: Stop balancing around casual players because casual players are not any more special than anyone else, and if they don't like the game, then they never liked the game to begin with, they just liked winning.

Notice how this slippery slope can be applied both ways? This is why fallacies aren't an argument, it's just spewing out biased opinion.

If youre saying that "not balancing for competitive players will lead to a broken game" is a slippery slope fallacy, while you may be correct in calling that one I would say that I have more evidence to say that top down development *if done right* can make the game better for everyone.

[Fed Groomer (Get that Glowussy)]

Originally posted by Caulin:

Originally posted by AR-NewRecruit:

Notice how this slippery slope can be applied both ways? This is why fallacies aren't an argument, it's just spewing out biased opinion.

If youre saying that "not balancing for competitive players will lead to a broken game" is a slippery slope fallacy, while you may be correct in calling that one I would say that I have more evidence to say that top down development *if done right* can make the game better for everyone.

You balance what the character is capable of, not the players. "Comp" players are just better at not being complete trash

[Wallahluigi]

Originally posted by Dying Alone:

Originally posted by Caulin:

If youre saying that "not balancing for competitive players will lead to a broken game" is a slippery slope fallacy, while you may be correct in calling that one I would say that I have more evidence to say that top down development *if done right* can make the game better for everyone.

You balance what the character is capable of, not the players. "Comp" players are just better at not being complete trash

What do you mean by that?

[Fed Groomer (Get that Glowussy)]

Originally posted by Caulin:

Originally posted by Dying Alone:

You balance what the character is capable of, not the players. "Comp" players are just better at not being complete trash

What do you mean by that?

Every hero blocks. There is a 100 Ms window for guard swap.
Do you
A) balance around someone that can block every attack without issue
Or
B) balance around the dude next to him failing to block?
Balance expects you to play well, not play like ♥♥♥♥

[Wallahluigi]

Originally posted by Dying Alone:

Originally posted by Caulin:

What do you mean by that?

Every hero blocks. There is a 100 Ms window for guard swap.
Do you
A) balance around someone that can block every attack without issue
Or
B) balance around the dude next to him failing to block?
Balance expects you to play well, not play like ♥♥♥♥

Ah ok that clears it up

[AR-NewRecruit]

Originally posted by Cattahyr:

I don't know where you got the 100 ms guard switch but I'll take your word for it.

As mentioned and implied by the name, it's the time for your Guard to transition from one stance to another. If it wasn't a thing? It'd be very much possible to rapidly move your guard to all three guard stances and block as if it's a full guard. In addition to this though, it also serves a pivotal function to make certain attacks legitimately unreactable (400ms lights).

Originally posted by Cattahyr:

Reaction times are often measured in your ability to ability to perform a simple task. If you look up a reaction time test, it'll probably ask you to click the button when you see the light. Now something like that is rather simple and an easily performed task. However, in For Honor, you have to receive that image that there's a light coming from top and receive that message, you then have to activate gross motor control to move your arm on your mouse to input that guard direction. Now it does take a lot longer then 250 ms for all of that to occur. I'd say it's closer to 300 or even 400 if you aren't able to react to it and insist on leaving. It isn't the light spam that's the problem, it's just the ability to affectly play the game.

This is rather disingenuous because passively blocking on indicator, even if requiring a little more motor coordination, is still a simple reaction.
Choice reactions start to come into play when you're pressured by things such as a neutral bash, or are focusing on what is a light or heavy that you can parry, etc...

At a fundamental level, a 500ms light is still fully reactable to the average player. It only starts to become unreactable when people start mixing it up and others fall into those traps. In essence, spam exists outside of the game's control, it's typically another factor such as hardware setups, an invidual's physical health, or because some people are simply scrubs, etc...

[shower speedrunner]

The 33ms is not exactly non-existent before.
It can be achieved by delayed input, so if you can block/parry before, you still can do now, but less on neutral/open.ner.
So it's not really different.

The dmg change, speed change and WM feat is a whole different issue however. Also I can't seem to gb a dodge heavy move nowaday.