@png-1982-60hz I agree for the most part. There is too much focus on temporary content and a severe lack of expansions, standard updates, and OoL changes. New permanent content is limited to two new heroes a year, cosmetics, and balance changes.

Changes I would like to see:

1. Updating the story campaign's combat to the latest build.
2. New hero bundles coming with a story chapter. The current battle bundles are pointless as they don't offer extra content; they're just time savers(correct where I'm wrong here).
3. Battle Bundles could at least make all Limited-Time content permanent for that season.
4. Remove the time limit for battle passes. They are already paid for and would sell more if new players can purchase old passes.
5. Allow players to simultaneously complete multiple battle pass tracks or switch between them at their leisure.
6. Remove dead game modes like Tribute and Deathmatch.
7. Adapt Tribute maps to Dominion.
8. Take Ranked Duels out of beta with a revamp.
9. Add back Ranked Dominion with higher XP and steel rewards and a fairer rank system(i.e. so no player on the winning team is punished for scoring the lowest). This mode would complement the Dominion Series and satisfy players who are after single-pick.
10. Add online matchmaking to Arcade but the mode can still remain exclusive to Marching Fire owners.
11. Add online matchmaking to the Story campaign.
12. I would like to see an 8-player co-op mode of some sort that fulfills the large-scale battle experience. I would also like to see the use of various siege engines including the ballista bridges from the campaign, shield formations, commanding archers, use of cavalry, etc.
13. All aspects of the competitive scene/tournaments should be handled in-game from registration to match-ups. For example, like event playlists, there should be a tournament playlist that becomes active when the Dominion Series or a registered tournament from Battlefy goes live.
14. There should be dedicated tournament servers to ensure smooth play and minimal disconnects with the option to rejoin.
15. Players should be able to equip multiple materials and both types(metals and leather/softs) for deeper customisation.
16. I would also like to equip multiple ornaments at all parts of the body(like the symbols) instead of only one at the head or the shoulders.
17. Now we have more capable hardware, equipping multiple effects should be tested again, even if it is just two effects in the same slot but 3-4 would be ideal.

Introduction
I would like to see an 8 player co-op of some sort that fulfills the large-scale battle experience.

I won’t be too explicit on how the mode would play out since there many possibilities and I would like a discussion about it. For example, you can have 8 player vs 8 bots or a horde mode. However, I will mention the features I would like to see:

1. Paired executions(execute an enemy with a teammate)
2. Multi-kill executions, both individual and paired. This is where the player(s) can take down multiple opponents in a single execution.
3. Return of the Responsive Dialogue System being used on enemy A.I. for more immersion. Of course, this should come with a toggle option.
4. Realtime use of:

• Archers,
• cavalry,
• infantry,
• shield formations
• siege engines & towers, etc.
• ballista bridges(from the campaign)

I feel a horde mode would be the best way to introduce 8 player co-op given the current state of the community where many players prefer to kill in the popular game modes at the expense of the objectives. If killing was the main objective then that would solve a common problem.

8 player co-op Horde Mode features:

1. Vote for attacker or defender perspectives, e.g. attack the castle from all sides, or defend the castle from all sides
2. Fight endless waves with mid-level and end-of-wave bosses with a limited number of tickets.
3. Kill mid-level and end-of-wave bosses that drop banners that can give boosts such as hero shield & attack, ticket increment & locks, gate shielding, wall reinforcement, archer boost, infantry boost, siege engine & tower boosts, etc.
4. 1 loot crate for reaching 30 minutes and 1 crate every 10 minutes after the 30-minute mark. Loot crates are better for longer game modes as this saves players scrambling to sort and delete lots of loot at the end of a match to avoid reaching full capacity or needing to leave the lobby entirely to sort through the loot.
5. Higher XP and steel per minute after 30 minutes are completed by the individual player(and not the team or lobby session). The reward rate would be the same as Breach for the first 30 minutes.
6. Drop-in and out at any time. Like Arcade, rewards would be calculated for each wave or minute completed. This is good if you get disconnected during a long session.
7. Rejoin option if disconnected.
8. New enemy AI introduced each seasonal event based on the event’s theme.
9. Old enemy AI from past events reintroduced either through throwback events or popular demand. For example, if the AI was a Guardian of some sort, such as the Possessed Kyoshin, then the special boosts would apply if it was defeated.
10. All new enemy AI and returning old AI, including seasonal, remain as permanent additions to the mode so it increases in value and challenge over time.
11. Leader boards – Top: Takedowns, executions, multi-kills, paired executions, longest fight, kill streak, etc.
12. Adapted maps from both the story campaign and Breach.
13. New maps inspired by For Honor's lore, such as The Battle of the Eclipse as depicted in the art below. To me, this is a very romantic setting for a large-scale battle.

Team Style: 8 Player vs 8 Bots
Team-based modes tend to involve objectives. I personally don’t recommend a new objective-focused game mode given the current state of the community. However, a team-style 8 player co-op could work if the objectives revolve around killing the enemy.

For example, the teams need to capture the zones to access the siege engines that would allow them to take out the opposition quickly. This mode would be ticket-based instead of points. So players wouldn’t be required to stay in the zone to boost points but to have the most firepower to deplete the enemy team’s tickets. Like Breach, the team on their last 4 tickets would go into breaking and would no longer respawn after being taken down or executed. Other layers to this mode could include real-time use of shield formations, archers, cavalry, etc. as mentioned earlier.

1. Playing with a larger team without the lock-on issues 16 player PvP would bring.
2. Use feats and other features, both old and new, that may not be balanced for PvP.
3. Poor matchmaking or low and high rep players mixing wouldn’t hurt as much in co-op as it does in PvP.
4. Good for buddy/mentor schemes where veterans and new players can meet up, and not worry about their MMR. Here, the new players can learn the mechanics at a more comfortable pace.
5. Co-op is less toxic than PvP; good for players that want to grind without the grief PvP brings or just want to relax in the world of For Honor.
6. Better rewards for players who only enjoy Player vs AI.
7. Hopefully, emote spammers and goofs will migrate to co-op and leave the more competitive and objective-focused players to PvP.
8. Players who effectively play Skirmish in team modes would feel at home in Horde Mode at least.
9. Streamers and content creators could team up with more members of their community during their play sessions.

Why do you think?

• What is your take on large-scale battle modes and 8 player co-op in For Honor?
• How should 8 player co-op be introduced?
• What features in a large-scale battle mode would you like to see?
• Did you have something else in mind that would fulfill similar goals? 

@eidetik They should start with improving Ranked Duel, which is still in beta, and Ranked Dominion to compliment the Dominion Series. However, it should be implemented where players pick their hero first then queue for a match. That way more players would try ranked since there would be no restriction on which hero they could use. The only ones that would be restricted would be a party of friends. The other benefit is it may save the competitive community needing to set up custom Dominion matches as often as they do for single-pick conditions.

In general, it's not selfish for players to choose who they want to pick since the heroes are monetised, we all have our comfort picks, many players may want to grind for specific cosmetics which is very time consuming, orders impact hero choice, new and struggling players can't play with any or every hero, and no member of the community has the right to tell another which hero to pick. Most of us are paying customers and, as long as the game is played the way it is intended, we should be able to enjoy the game as we see fit.

@dha_beast To me, all this means that the damage is too high post CCU, and this allows players to exploit the guessing game. If it was lower, more players would be able to make reads and help give back some of the old feel For Honor used to have.

Lower damage would make the game more accessible and would probably reduce the complaints when new heroes and reworks drop when, again, you actually have a reasonable amount of time to make reads instead of getting blown up in seconds.

@soldier_of_dawn
More changes I would like to see:
18. More execution inputs: light, heavy, and the D-pad. 12 in total.

19. New execution types: ground executions, wallsplat executions, paired executions. These executions could give bonus renown. Paired executions would work like paired emotes and could also give bonus healing to teammates within a certain proximity. A default execution would run if no teammate joins in. These new execution types would be good for co-op and interesting direction for universal and faction exclusive executions.

20. Multi-kill executions for single-player and co-op player modes. This could be a battle pass feature.

21. Return of the Responsive Dialogue System with a toggle option; good for single player and co-op modes to improve immersion.

22. Emote wheel.

23. Better matchmaking. No more low and high rep players mixed together(e.g rep 1-50 vs 300+, rep 500+ carrying rep 1-50, etc). Not only do high rep players frequently dominate the low reps in fights but, when they are on the same team, low rep players tend to make poorer decisions at the frustration of high rep players(e.g ignoring shield banners & ramparts, going for the guardian at the wrong time, poor rotation, etc.) Breach suffers from this the most. Overall, this is not fun for either low or high rep players.

24. Rejoin option for disconnects.

25. Regularly updated in-game tutorials; hero tutorials, CCU(what is frame advantage, etc.), advanced & competitive level tutorials for game modes and combat, etc. The game needs to explain itself to the point where it is no longer necessary for players watch YouTube videos or visit websites in general to fully understand the game and reach a high level. In-game competitive level tutorials are necessary to make the competitive scene more accessible and give it a needed boost.

26. Additional progression system that tracks hero performance such as parries, blocks, deflects, crushing counters, attacks landed(zones, heavies, lights, feats, etc.) revives, zones captured, regions & castles conquered, Faction War victories, Faction War contribution, as well as wins, losses, kills, deaths, and assists. Reaching milestones would unlock rewards.

27. Map editor and open door for the Modding Community in terms of map, weapon, and armour creation(the free stuff). MC content would be subject to approval before shipping to the live game.

28. Hero editor. This would solely be in the interest of demonstrating rework suggestions. Edited heroes would only be available in custom matches.

29. Theater mode.

30. Having the option to apply your hero customisations to bots in training modes and custom matches would be fun, good for content creators, interesting to see your customisation from a different perspective, and another way to show off your fashion.

31. Cross progression across all platforms.

32. Cross-play option for PC and next-gen consoles with 60FPS cap. Good boost for matchmaking and the competitive scene.

@therancoreee Honestly, it would be better to just remove the hero rep cap completely. This 'max rep' thing is just vain and I'm far from convinced everyone wants it and I'm sure it would cause little pain if it ends. The benefits of the cap removal outweigh the 'perks' of having a max rep hero. The benefits of repping up with no caps are:

1. Higher loot drop rates, which is good when a)new armour and weapons drop, B)the RNG becomes stubborn, and c)needing more salvage for XP boosts and leveling up your gear
2. 100 steel per rep. This adds up very quickly.
3. High hero rep duels and team fights would be additional options for content creators & streamers.
4. Continued progression overall. This allows players to return to old high rep heroes with no compromises.

Even with the rep cap removal, you can still have rep milestones and earn rewards for reaching them. Max reps/rep caps bring nothing of real value or reward; they just halt progression. There are plenty of other ways to give that sense of achievement. Halting progression is far from necessary.

@deathtocakl Most zones are not OP. Glad's and Raider's seem to be the only real exceptions. If any attack is overtuned, they should be nerfed by damage(as with Orochi in this case), speed, or property, but not by stamina. As with Warlord, I don't see 12 being a problem. Single hit zones that are not feintable, not unblockable, come from the same direction, and do less damage than a normal opening heavy are not OP. Their high stamina costs are arbitrary and counter-intuitive to their purpose. In general, many players complain about a range of heroes having high stamina consumption and a lot of that comes from high-cost zones.

@brandarsson
Should a zone cost more stamina for having additional properties, being quick, and having a wide hitbox? No, not really because there are chain finishers that also have special properties, wide hitboxes, come in multiple directions, do more damage, and cost less stamina. Again, zones are more predictable and less viable overall when compared to other attacks and mix-ups so there is no justification for them to have higher stamina costs. As for Zhanhu, his zone got a speed nerf so if he tried to spam it he would get parried more often.

Yes, I did point out that in certain circumstances Raider's zone can go over 50 damage and they are the ones where stamina nerfs won't solve the issue such as revenge, Guardian buffs, and certain feats. And again, a damage nerf would solve the Raider problem.

High stamina costs for certain moves are counter-intuitive overall since stamina is a shared pool. If one move has a high cost, it leaves little room for the rest of the kit and goes against the goal behind removing the stamina penalties we used to have for parries, blocking, etc. There are more appropriate ways to balance/nerf moves such as damage, speed, hit-stun, recovery, trajectory, special property, etc.

@nydardoloth Honestly, I prefer better matchmaking. Low reps that lack skill and experience shouldn't be matched with the high reps.

@deathtocakl
As for you high rep haters, this rep 900+ player may not be a pro but is far from bad and is also fed up with being matched with 0-50 players that are clearly inexperienced and lacking in skill, players that don't know what they're doing, players that just want to goof around, and complacent players that expect to be carried by the high reps.

@picoancus Remember to report them for 'griefing' when they do that. I believe Ubisoft eventually takes action; it's a long wait but worth it.

Solder_of_Dawn
EU/UK
MAY 2022(Continued)

21st May 2022 @ 18:06 Breach high activity

18:36


24th May 2022 @ 10:04 Breach high activity
In this match, the Orochi on my team ignored the ramparts by playing 'Skirmish' and gave an easy win to the opposition.

10:22


25th May 2022 @ 09:03 Breach high activity
09:32


26th May 2022 @ 19:20 Dominion very high activity

19:32


26th May 2022 @ 19:48 Dominion very high activity
20:00


27th May 2022 @ 09:05 Breach high activity

09:32


28th May 2022 @ 11:35 Breach high activity

11:50


28th May 2022 @ 12:29 Breach high activity
On paper, this was a bit of a mismatch but we defended well initially but in the 2nd phase, I had to repeatedly nag the rep 60s to defend the ramparts.

12:53
Perhaps I'm partially to blame but as you can see, the end result is embarrassing when you think about it.

Solder_of_Dawn
EU/UK
MAY 2022
(Continued)

17th May 2022 @ 20:44 Breach high activity
Here, the Shinobi on my team was griefing by not pushing the ramparts which added unnecessary pressure for the rest of the team.

21:05


18th May 2022 @ 10:34 Dominion very high activity

10:42

10:43


19th May 2022 @ 12:06 Dominion very high activity
I felt the skill rating was inaccurate as I wasn't vastly superior in skill to most of the players in the lobby. I was mostly equal with them. In the next match, when I switched to Nuxia, I could only get 1 takedown.

12:16


19th May 2022 @ 12:28 Dominion very high activity
I did question the presence of the rep 0 but at least he/she didn't come last. The player did defend well to a degree when outnumbered.

12:39


20th May 2022 @ 09:35 Breach high activity
09:54

@mayan_master Thank you but the truth is it's more of an addiction than dedication. I doubt I would have the stamina without it. On a more general note, I want good and unique IPs to do well and reach their potential.

@ubi-perseids Thank you for getting back to me and giving my feedback about the issue to the FH team. If possible, if the team can't or won't do anything about the matchmaking, could they explain in full detail the reasons why?

Poor matchmaking has been an issue at least since Year 3. Even with crossplay, poor matchups where there is a significant disparity in reps, skill, experience, game sense, or a combination of these still occur.

If For Honor wants to be a competitive fighter, that encourages good & competitive play which makes players improve over time, matchmaking needs to be a lot better.

See my matchmaking diary which spans over 6 months.
https://discussions.ubisoft.com/topic/121795/matchmaking-diary/63?lang=en-US

Below is a quote from one of my previous posts about the issue.

FIX THE MATCHMAKING

WHY?

Low reps & high reps players, and various skill types are mixed too often
This is not a good experience for anyone and is also a common complaint. While some veterans and higher-level players may enjoy the easy wins, poor quality matchmaking doesn't encourage good or competitive play for the competitive fighter For Honor wants to be.

Rep doesn't equal skill but it does equal experience
The veterans are more likely to have a better understanding of the game modes, and a better grasp of the game's mechanics over a greater range of heroes and, thus, have an advantage over the newer players who are learning the game and lack the knowledge and muscle memory veterans would have.

The opposite also happens when the veteran is expected to carry a team of rookies in an objective-based game mode. As a result, veterans lose for the wrong reasons and are left frustrated.

Reduce unnecessary reporting of players
Poor matchmaking can also lead players reporting each other unnecessarily. Typically, a veteran would be tempted to report a newer player for 'griefing' for not doing the objectives, though not fulfilling objectives is common for new players as they are still learning. As a veteran, I've been in this position many times.

From the other perspective, a newer player may be tempted to accuse and report veterans for cheating as they may seem flawless in both their offense and defense. I see this a lot in the in-game chat.

Reduce the complaints
Not only better matchmaking bring a much need quality of life change for both veterans and newer players, but this would also help reduce the cries for nerfs for new heroes and reworks where, again, the veterans would have an easier time making the transition and take advantage of the newer players as a result.

https://discussions.ubisoft.com/topic/154880/a-core-gameplay-updates-aka-ccu-2-0-wishlist/5?lang=en-US

Solder_of_Dawn
EU/UK
MAY 2022

4th May 2022 @ 10:15 Breach high activity
PC,
10:33


7th May 2022 @ 16:35 Dominion very high activity

16:42


11th May 2022 @ 10:00 Dominion very high activity

10:08


12th May 2022 @ 10:39 Breach high activity

11:01


13th May 2022 @ 12:30 Breach high activity

12:45


13th May 2022 @ 12:47 Breach high activity

13:13


14th May 2022 @ 12:24 Breach high activity

12:46


16th May 2022 @ 11:15 Breach high activity

11:32

Solder_of_Dawn
PC, EU/UK
APRIL 2022

23rd April 2022 @ 19:09
This is an example of the type of matchups, in terms of reps/experience, I prefer. I was hoping crossplay would make this a regular occurrence but, so far, that's not the case.

Solder_of_Dawn
PC, EU/UK
APRIL 2022

17th April 2022 @ 11:49 Dominion very high activity

11:58


17th April 2022 @ 18:09 Dominion very high activity

18:21


18th April 2022 @ 08:55 Breach high activity

09:23


20th April 2022 @ 09:52 Breach high activity
10:13


21st April 2022 @ 08:39 Breach high activity

09:05


22nd April 2022 @ 11:02 Breach high activity
11:23


22nd April 2022 @ 11:25 Breach high activity

11:51


22nd April 2022 @ 11:58 Breach high activity

12:16


23rd April 2022 @ 10:05 Breach high activity

10:30


23rd April 2022 @ 10:34
This was a weird one in terms of rep and skill rating.


23rd April 2022 @ 17:17 Dominion very high activity

17:27


24th April 2022 @ 21:48 Dominion very high activity

22:00


24th April 2022 @ 22:55 Dominion very high activity

23:04


24th April 2022 @ 23:06 Dominion very high activity

23:17


27th April 2022 @ 11:09  27th April 2022 @ 11:09 Breach high activity

11:32


29th April 2022 @ 12:02 Dominion very high activity

12:14


29th April 2022 @ 12:28 Dominion very high activity

12:36

Solder_of_Dawn
PC, EU/UK
MARCH 2022(continued)

25th March 2022 @ 09:48 Dominion very high activity

09:58


25th March 2022 @ 12:04 Wyverndale high activity

12:18


25th March 2022 @ 12:21 Wyverndale high activity

12:34


27th March 2022 @ 10:10 Dominion very high activity

10:19


31st March 2022 @ 10:37 Dominion very high activity
10:48

@ubi-mark Hi there.

Thank you for getting back to me. The patch has gone through bug there are still bugs on Warmongers Confulgeo Chest armor. The standards and back are pixelated, they have poor resolution, and the personal customisation(the pattern) doesn't cover the entirety of the back.






Below, the Confulgeo Chest is on the right.