Oi boys. I am in the closed beta. I never had any real interest in playing for honor to be honest because the videos did not impress me. But for honor is a surprisingly good game. The amount of customization in visuals of your character and gear is I-N-S-A-N-E. You can play 2v2, 1v1 or 4v4 and there's a map where you can deploy war assets to help your faction gain control of areas. The game is extremely much more than block-attack-block. There are combos ala Street fighter style that happen with the combination of keys and sequences. Graphically the game looks amazing. Tutorial covers almost every aspect of the game. Gear has stats and you unlock gear by opening crates (scavenging the battlefield) or by drops after a match. You can equip, upgrade, transmogrify the appearance with another set or dismantle it and get salvage. Each hero has his own level and the player has his own. So you can be a rank 10 x hero while your account level is different. I never expected anything out of ubisoft to actually be THAT good. For honor is amazing so far. The only downside is that it has a host system. I did not have any problems so far though, 3 green bars most of the time, the game is very responsive. Bannerlord will have a tough competitor. If you have any questions about it shoot, just dont ask about single player, it's not in the closed beta.
For Honor
- Thread starter DrBlacksmith
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
I really don't think this game is aimed at the same audience as Bannerlord.
Both titles are medieval games with a heavy focus on combat. When it comes to multiplayer you can compare them as to which one is more fun. The whole 'audience' **** is a gimmick in my opinion. I dont think Bannerlord is getting released only for its audience but also attract new playerbase. That said, I still see them as competitors when it comes to multiplayer.
I like it, surprisingly enough. It's a great game for playing when you get tired of realistic, tough, competitive games. It's like PAYDAY 2's medieval version for M&B, when you just want to mindlessly slaughter things. I like the combat system for an arcade system.
578 said:
I have no idea what that means.
But that's just it, I doubt For Honor will have the same proportion of singleplayer:multiplayer users as Mount & Blade does. Compare their multiplayer merits as much as you want, Bannerlord comes from a franchise with a strong emphasis on the singleplayer RPG sandbox. The type of player that attracts is quite different than what you'll mostly find in For Honor's probable multiplayer demographics. Since its release Warband has had more players in SP than MP at any given time, and those aren't all diehards from the original M&B. The same will likely be true for Bannerlord, where lots of the new blood tries the multiplayer for a bit (if at all) and then sticks to singleplayer. "Target audience" is definitely a thing, ask anybody in marketing, and with games it's more than just age or ethnic groups.578 said:
All that said, I'll wait about a week to hear how balance has been changed since the alphas. Is Orochi still OP because of his high mobility & agile attacks, are guard breaks still super safe, and does the buff viking two-hander guy still cheese everyone off of ledges and into pits? If not, did they just implement counters to these by adding more cheese to the other characters or did they actually *gasp* balance their game?
Orion said:
Narutos (I call samurais that) are the easiest classes. Nobushi's damage over time effects are a bit OP if she catches you but people forget they can dodge. Raider can grab you and push you of the cliffs only if you mistakenly have your back towards the cliff. Otherwise Raider is pretty slow. Everything can be countered in the game, guard breaking, grappling etc. I dont see why people moan about balance. It has some overpowered tactics but not that overpowered to actually make me not want to play against them tbh.
I whined about balance because when I played (in the alpha), the window for countering guard breaks was absolutely tiny and a countered guard break resulted in a stalemate. It was no-risk, because the worst that could happen is you get countered and just stare at each other awkwardly for a second. The best that could happen is you don't get countered and you score a free hit. Considering the low cost of performing a guard break and how it could only backfire if you completely missed (very unlikely), it was a winning strategy to simply repeat guard break->attack. The only way to win against it was to force them to miss or to grab them, and most characters don't have powerful offensive grabs like the raider or whatever the two-handed sword dude is called for the knights (I forget). Orochi was also the only one who could attack during a dodge, so he could counter it offensively as well. That was it, nobody else had options for taking the initiative. Guard-breaking wasn't limited to specific characters, it was universally available and viable in almost all situations. That's a hallmark of something being unbalanced. It dominated playstyles, so if you didn't do it you were handicapping yourself because anyone half-decent or better was doing it, and your options against it were limited.
For something so easy to perform and with such a high reward it was inevitable that it would stunt the metagame of the time, and it did. That's why people moan about balance, because when something is overpowered it can become the winning strategy. Then every game you play is the same, as everyone uses the winning strategy. It's incredibly dull, and you can bet your ass I'm not spending $60 just to play rock-paper-scissors where rock beats everything.
For something so easy to perform and with such a high reward it was inevitable that it would stunt the metagame of the time, and it did. That's why people moan about balance, because when something is overpowered it can become the winning strategy. Then every game you play is the same, as everyone uses the winning strategy. It's incredibly dull, and you can bet your ass I'm not spending $60 just to play rock-paper-scissors where rock beats everything.
Guard breaks are still a bit cheesy, very tiny window to counter and if you do you don't get any advantage. Guard breaks are a risk now though because if you initiate one at the same time your opponent initiates an attack your guard break will fail, even if you were first. Regardless, guard breaks still allow free hits at any other time.
Swissky
****ing Robbaz, he has primed me to hear "Kom hit, din fitta!" (Come here, you ****/*****!) everytime I hear the vikings scream. 
You can only attack in three directions, as I've understood? Seems a bit simplified.
You can only attack in three directions, as I've understood? Seems a bit simplified.
Speaking of which, I'm almost certain the samurai yell "hrafninn flygur!" in this.
Swissky
Sounds like he's got an eye for good movies. Just the one, though.
Jackson... said:
Very modern of them to use cultural appropriation as a form of psychological warfare.
Swissky
Or it's just a Scandinavian weeaboo, there are some of those in the WoT forums too.
Swissky
Nazis or Sweden Hills residents?
