For Honor (Medieval War Game)

[Vibe]

This is a good review of the game for those who haven't played yet:

Tbh my only gripe with the game at the moment is that high skill play is ultra defensive. If you attack first you're pretty much guaranteed to be punished. Really hope they change that up as it's a game of patience currently and a bit boring because of it. Thankfully not a lot of people play like that, so most of the matches are still fun.

[Patoson]

Everything in that review are exactly my thoughts. So many people complain about P2P, and I agree that the disconnects and not being able to play suck, but, if Ubi manages to fix these problems, it would be perfect, because, unlike with dedicated servers, I never notice lag (missing blocks, parries,...), and in Warband I raged so many times because of having a higher ping.

I love For Honor.

[Kafein]

He talks about group fights being kinda bad, is that true? I don't mind playing only duel, though.

[Gravoth_iii]

He talks about group fights being kinda bad, is that true? I don't mind playing only duel, though.

Easier with some classes. The game has a ton of environment kills so you always have the chance of throwing people off cliffs or into spikes quickly. But otherwise you gotta block a lot and build up revenge to fight back with hyper armor. Its an okay system, a bit annoying at times. But duels or 2v2 is preferred, less ganking.

[Taser]

Going off the beta since I haven't bought it yet, group fights were a bitch a if you had nothing around to throw them down or into. At least in mount and blade you can handle multiple opponents especially since you don't lock on to fight.

Its not to say it can't be done even without the revenge buildup but its not as easy. If it had been setup so you didn't have to lock on, oh fuck it'd be awesome.

[Gravoth_iii]

Going off the beta since I haven't bought it yet, group fights were a bitch a if you had nothing around to throw them down or into. At least in mount and blade you can handle multiple opponents especially since you don't lock on to fight.

Its not to say it can't be done even without the revenge buildup but its not as easy. If it had been setup so you didn't have to lock on, oh fuck it'd be awesome.

Well, it took me hundreds of hours to survive ganks in M&B, to say that its harder to survive ganks in For Honor after ~10 hours gameplay is at least in my perspective not right. Revenge mechanic actually makes it quite doable, it all comes down to being able to counter-guard break, and to keep track of blocking. You can block multiple people while targetting one, so you just follow the markers that show up on your character.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38sPNZ8QHO4&t=0s Based crowbcat, not that ive experienced this yet, not at this scale at least.

[Patoson]

That all sounds scary. I had a lag or whatever it was situation once where the enemy did a heavy attack on me without animation, and suddenly I was being executed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xf9NS-Hkwy4

[Vibe]

Group fights are both good and bad.

Bad from two points:
- revenge with a proper build is retarded (damage really high), and you can do cheese knockdowns with the activation for guaranteed hits
- against players that know what they're doing you won't be able to win 1vX (as in they dont just spam attacks at you), revenge or not

Good from one point - it breaks the monotony of the ultradefensive playstyle that's currently how most tryhards play. Luckily there's not so many tryhards around yet (no ranked gamemode), but just because of that I like 4v4 or 2v2. It forces people to fight differently and can make for some interesting fights.

To sum it up, I like group fights myself.

As for P2P: sure there are some legit complaints but honestly more than 90% of my games don't have any issues (lags, disconnects). Seeing the comments in that video just makes me think none of those people have actually played the game or they don't know how to forward ports or something. They're talking as if the game is completely ruined by P2P when in fact most of the time players don't really have issues with connection.

Here's a funny fact, in Rainbow Six Siege, Ubisoft's other popular multiplayer game that works on a server basis, I have way more connection/lag issues (everyone does...)

[Gravoth_iii]

Okay so im on NAT Moderate, and my friend i want to play with is NAT Strict. So we are unable to play with eachother. Had to open ports and shit, still no success, P2P SeemsGood

[Vibe]

Okay so im on NAT Moderate, and my friend i want to play with is NAT Strict. So we are unable to play with eachother. Had to open ports and shit, still no success, P2P SeemsGood

Unrelated to P2P, probably. Rainbow Six Siege has the same shit. I had NAT strict (in FH as well) until I opened all the required ports, are you sure you got them all?

[Gravoth_iii]

Unrelated to P2P, probably. Rainbow Six Siege has the same shit. I had NAT strict (in FH as well) until I opened all the required ports, are you sure you got them all?

Will try it again i guess. And ill just simply blame ubitrash then.

[Taser]

Well, it took me hundreds of hours to survive ganks in M&B, to say that its harder to survive ganks in For Honor after ~10 hours gameplay is at least in my perspective not right. Revenge mechanic actually makes it quite doable, it all comes down to being able to counter-guard break, and to keep track of blocking. You can block multiple people while targetting one, so you just follow the markers that show up on your character.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=38sPNZ8QHO4&t=0s Based crowbcat, not that ive experienced this yet, not at this scale at least.

Fair point but without the markers coming up for block its much harder since you're locked in on one enemy.

I will admit that any melee game that comes out is compared to the standard of mount and blade and I usually find flaws because of this. For honor is fun and I liked it in the beta but I dislike the locking on. If it didn't have that and you could fight freely, oh shit it'd be awesome. Even with only 3 directions.

[Molly]

[...]And ill just simply blame ubitrash then.

You'll never miss with that one...

[Gravoth_iii]

You'll never miss with that one...

At least theyve stepped up their game quality, Rayman, R6S, For honor. All pretty good.

[Vibe]

Ubi gets a lot of shit but at least their multiplayer games are quite decent. This might sound like fanboyism but trust me it's not, there's plenty of very annoying issues ubi needs to fix in their games.

Rainbow 6 Siege, which is a shooter that has grown quite a lot after a very rocky release (this is very rare to see in gaming world).
Steep, at least personally, I found it pretty decent.
For Honor, which is another good multiplayer game that went far beyond my expectations from videos.
The Division, while I only played betas and free weekends, since I didn't have time for another game, I also found pretty decent.

To add, Ubi takes great care of their games post release. Sure, some content is through their DLCs, which in R6 can simply be acquired by playing enough and I'm going to guess it's going to be the same for For Honor (god what a cringy name for a game). But in both R6 Siege and Division they've fixed up a LOT of shit and catered their games to community's wishes.

They get a lot of flak but they don't deserve half of it, these days at least.