For honor!!!

[chainer1216]

For Honor is a multiplayer melee combat sim that just came out that pits Knights, Vikings and, Samurai against one another in an extremely anachronistic setting. Game modes include a campaign, 1v1, 2v2, and a couple flavors of 4v4.

Anybody else here playing it? What platform are you on? What faction did you choose? Whats your favorite class or game mode?

Im on the PS4(username: chainer1216), i picked the Knights and so far i like the Lawbringer and the Shugoki, ive always prefered characters like that. Slow big hitters that require good timing.

[Anteros]

For Honor is a multiplayer melee combat sim that just came out that pits Knights, Vikings and, Samurai against one another in an extremely anachronistic setting. Game modes include a campaign, 1v1, 2v2, and a couple flavors of 4v4.

Anybody else here playing it? What platform are you on? What faction did you choose? Whats your favorite class or game mode?

Im on the PS4(username: chainer1216), i picked the Knights and so far i like the Lawbringer and the Shugoki, ive always prefered characters like that. Slow big hitters that require good timing.

I thought about picking it up, but I'm a bit leery of Ubisoft games so I'm waiting a bit. From what I've seen the balance isn't very good, which is a death sentence for a fighting game.

[Dienekes]

I thought about picking it up, but I'm a bit leery of Ubisoft games so I'm waiting a bit. From what I've seen the balance isn't very good, which is a death sentence for a fighting game.

I played quite a bit during the Betas, I honestly don't know where the balance complaints come from. Each class had very distinct strengths and weaknesses. Overall I really quite liked it. The combat feels very visceral, and I was able to make every class I played work. I have heard that the 3 newly introduced classes have a bit of a screwy balance, but I can't comment on it. I'm sure that some will be a bit better than others, down the line, but I think the Devs have said that they see this as a living game with balance patches coming once data is sufficient to tell where it's needed.

I really did quite enjoy it, honestly, I think it's my favorite melee combat system I've ever played in a game. Realistic enough to get that intensity I had when I did HEMA, but obviously unrealistic enough to make it a dynamic fighting game.

That said, I've personally opted not to get the game until it gets cheaper. I cannot tell you how many times games were interrupted because someone left or it just loaded up incorrectly. Ubisoft's also not lived up to quite a few of their early promises for the game which put a bad taste in my mouth.

I'll definitely end up getting it, but not before it drops to half price or lower.

As an aside, I'm curious why you think imbalance is the death sentence of a fighting game. I'll admit I don't follow the genre thoroughly, but the ones I've played: the Smash Bros franchise, Soul Caliber, some of the old Tekkens. None of them were particularly well balanced and as far as I know they were exceedingly popular.

[Antonok]

I played the betas, but the peer to peer connection system caused more trouble than it was worth. Maybe when it drops to in the $20 range I'll see about picking it up, if it isn't completely dead by then.

[Vitruviansquid]

There are enough playable classes that you can have a bit of variety. As far as I'm aware, if you're playing to win, you have the pick of Warden, Peacekeeper, Orochi, Valkyrie, Nobushi, and Warlord. I think the jury's still out on Shugoki. Raider, Kensei, Berserker, and Lawbringer are considered unplayably bad (with Kensei, I think it's just because Warden does pretty much everything, but better).

For Honor's definitely extremely fun at most levels of play, but the forums are abuzz with discussion about the problem that this game has a strong defender's advantage at high level play. When you engage in a duel, the optimal play is actually to wait for the opponent to attack, parry it, and then get your free damage, which is an incredibly bad design flaw. Hopefully, some patch comes along and changes the game's mechanics to give an attacker's advantage.

[Avilan the Grey]

I haven't played it for these reasons :

1. Ubisoft
2. ****ty network code.
3. Jim Sterling claiming that the most fun he had with the game was yelling "For Honor!" into the microphone when talking about it.
4. Too expensive.

[chainer1216]

well, for what its worth, since the full release i have had no connection issues at all.

[super dark33]

I haven't played it for these reasons :

1. Ubisoft
2. ****ty network code.
3. Jim Sterling claiming that the most fun he had with the game was yelling "For Honor!" into the microphone when talking about it.
4. Too expensive.

Ill expand on these for mine:

5. Microtransactions.
6. Gross historical inaccurcies.

[Dienekes]

Ill expand on these for mine:

5. Microtransactions.
6. Gross historical inaccurcies.

I'll defend it a little bit. The microtransactions in this game are the somewhat ridiculous sort. You can spend money to buy steel, but you get steel just by playing the game, a lot of it just by doing the missions. If you do get enough steel to buy loot packs, but those packs are level gated. So you can buy a bunch of equipment off the bat, but since it's all level appropriate equipment, you basically get a bunch of the worst equipment in the game. And once you level a character high enough to get the good stuff, you usually have more than enough steel just to get the loot packs you want anyway. The other things you can get with steel are entirely pointless customization pieces (most of which look bad, in my opinion, but I can't speak for everyone), and different executions which don't really have a benefit over the standard executions.

As far as microtransactions go, in For Honor it's just a tool for the impatient. So, it doesn't really bother me, though I guess it will annoy others.

As far as historical inaccuracies, yeah, you have me there. 15th century knights fighting alongside 13th century knights and some Assassin's Creed character, fighting against 11th century vikings, who are fighting with Conan the Barbarian. It's a mess, but I don't think it ever claimed to be accurate, since, you know, the vikings are fighting samurai and all.

[Morty]

The plot of the game, as far as I can tell, is an excuse to allow people to hit each other with a variety of historical weapons. Adjusted for being an action game, and not a faithful rendering of combat. Accusing it of historical inaccuracy is kind of like condemning Lion King for failing to faithfully represent the ecosystem of the African savannah. Technically true, but also missing the point.

This game looks quite tempting, but like others here, I'd have to wait for it to get cheaper.

[Archer the Cat]

I played the open beta and got the special edition (in between standard and gold). I enjoy the game, combat feels visceral, most heroes have one or two neat tricks that make them fun to play, 4v4 modes feel like wargame skirmishes, Duel/Brawl modes are pure salt factories, but they usually force you to get better. I feel it touches on a niche that few games try (a cross between a Souls game and an arena fighter would be my best description).

I've seen a ton of people online get really upset about the environmental kills and guard breaks/throw/unblockables, but like a fighting game I feel that once people get really into it and figure out the tech, most of the "cheap" tactics will be easier for players to deal with.

Granted, the connection issues are a huge concern, and if it wasn't for the massive marketing campaign it might not have had enough of an initial playerbase to push through the people who dropped it already.

Overall I am having fun, but depending on how they handle things in the future, that might not last forever

[super dark33]

My problem with the inaccurecy is that none of the weapons and armor look good, just standard stupid fantasy stuff.

If they bothered to research and model based on actual things it would be nicer and improve the game in all aspects, as research and knowledge always brings more dedication and planning.


So yes imo everyone look like they are wearing bondage gear with too much metal.

[GungHo]

I am still looking forward to the Pol Pot vs Saddam Hussein DLC.

[Dienekes]

My problem with the inaccurecy is that none of the weapons and armor look good, just standard stupid fantasy stuff.

If they bothered to research and model based on actual things it would be nicer and improve the game in all aspects, as research and knowledge always brings more dedication and planning.


So yes imo everyone look like they are wearing bondage gear with too much metal.

That's fair (especially for the vikings). I will say, a lot of the promotional material just shows people wearing the lowest and worst armor that looks like crap. At around mid-level you gain some actually decent looking equipment, still not anywhere close to perfect, or accurate, but decent.

But then the high level stuff steps over into fantasy silliness again. Some better than others, but most look pretty garish.