Should Feinting Have A Cooldown?



  • Just as the title says. I think adding a cooldown would be a more effective way to eliminate feint-spam than increasing stamina cost. Simply increasing the amount of time between two feints would stop people from using the mechanic as a crutch for their low skill level and double or triple feinting over and over. I find it incredibly hard to fight someone who spams feints, because even if I know he’s a feint spammer, half way through the fight after seeing through his bullshit feintspam, he closes the distance, feints once, feints twice, fucks me up so I block, and hits me. Then he comes in again after I’m nice and pissed, feints once, feints twice, feints three or four times like a motherfucker, and kills me with a bullshit tactic. Even though I know he’s probably feinting me, the fact that he’s running in and charging up an attack 2 or 3 times in a one second window, over and over, just screws me up and kicks in the instinct to block, which basically punishes me for having good reflexes. It’s a cool mechanic to have, but there are people who rely on it as a common tactic fight after fight, and those people make me want to punch kittens. [Samuel L. Jackson] ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! I’VE HAD IT WITH THESE MUTHAFUCKIN FEINTS IN THIS MUTHAFUCKIN GAME! [/Samuel L. Jackson]



  • Feinting currently has a .2 to .4 second cooldown depending on weapon and attack used.



  • @SlyGoat:

    Feinting currently has a .2 to .4 second cooldown depending on weapon and attack used.

    The fact that you can feint 5 times in one second means that the cooldown obviously isn’t long enough.



  • @Oy:

    @SlyGoat:

    Feinting currently has a .2 to .4 second cooldown depending on weapon and attack used.

    The fact that you can feint 5 times in one second means that the cooldown obviously isn’t long enough.

    Only a dumb ass would feint 5 times in a row and end up with zero stamina.



  • @Hitom:

    @Oy:

    @SlyGoat:

    Feinting currently has a .2 to .4 second cooldown depending on weapon and attack used.

    The fact that you can feint 5 times in one second means that the cooldown obviously isn’t long enough.

    Only a dumb ass would feint 5 times in a row and end up with zero stamina.

    I think you missed his point… He was just pointing out how tiny that cooldown is, not suggesting that 5 in a row is a good idea.



  • I want feints to be tweaked too but this proposal does not address feinting’s main gameplay flaw.
    The primary issue people have against feints is that at facehugging ranges, predicting a well-executed feint from a real attack is guesswork at best as it requires superhuman-like reaction times.

    One of the best solutions would be to decrease the ‘feint window’ - the shorter it is, the more you give the defending player sufficient reaction time.



  • To clarify, can you specify whether you mean a cooldown between 2 consecutive feint actions, or the actual cooldown between the feint and the attack as SlyGoat pointed out already exists, along with the current timings. I can understand you mean the former, but it would probably be less confusing to other people if you specifically mentioned it in the original post.



  • Delete it



  • I don’t get it… A cooldown or change suggested but no actual reason behind it other than “you can do it a bunch of times in a row.”

    Doesn’t sound like sound design or balance considerations.

    Perhaps you can state why someone feinting a bunch of times in a row is a bad thing? If you anticipate a feint and counter it (with an attack) it doesn’t matter how many times they feint. In fact, it just drains more stamina.

    @Sir:

    I want feints to be tweaked too but this proposal does not address feinting’s main gameplay flaw.
    The primary issue people have against feints is that at facehugging ranges, predicting a well-executed feint from a real attack is guesswork at best as it requires superhuman-like reaction times.

    One of the best solutions would be to decrease the ‘feint window’ - the shorter it is, the more you give the defending player sufficient reaction time.

    This baffles me… True predicting and reading is ALL ABOUT guesswork. That’s where the mind games come in. The feint concept works 100% fine even if you couldn’t react to it in any way at all. Someone feints in order to TRICK you into putting your guard up at the wrong time which leads to you taking damage from the delayed attack. That is the point. Don’t sit and wait to react. If you come across something that you can’t react to and you are aware that it’s in your opponents arsenal then adjust your gameplan to defeat it.

    You know feints exist.
    You know how to beat them.
    Leave your comfort zone (where you think you should be able to see and respond to everything) and attack.

    Super simple.

    Feint forces a decision to be made on defense. Do I block now or block later? Guess work is IMPERATIVE for any game to have any real strategy behind it. From football to RTS’s to Chess. Read your opponent. Read your situation. Make a decision and do it. If you get tricked you got tricked. That’s strategy. Not aiming your block when you see someone move and thinking you should be able to have a chance to block anything thrown at you.



  • @Dark:

    Perhaps you can state why someone feinting a bunch of times in a row is a bad thing? If you anticipate a feint and counter it (with an attack) it doesn’t matter how many times they feint. In fact, it just drains more stamina.

    Good feints are indistinguishable to real attacks and this guessing game becomes drawn out because feint stamina cost isn’t sufficiently high enough so you can pull a succession of good feints until you see your opponent prematurely parry.

    Good players may attempt to discern individual player patterns as to when they may or may not feint but this again is just a guess at best as skilled players tend to throw off expectations by varying it up with a double or even triple feint.

    Some people will argue that feint spamming is countered by leaving them wide open to attack but this again is just part of the guessing game that is feints. If your opponent has just parried your attack and you decide to swing again straightaway you are still guessing whether or not, at the same time, your opponent’s swing is a feint.

    @Dark:

    Guess work is IMPERATIVE for any game to have any real strategy behind it. From football to RTS’s to Chess. Read your opponent. Read your situation. Make a decision and do it. If you get tricked you got tricked. That’s strategy. Not aiming your block when you see someone move and thinking you should be able to have a chance to block anything thrown at you.

    Not when it comes to a melee online FPS: A 50/50 guessing mechanic that potentially takes away half your health bar is not conducive to skill-based gaming.

    I’m not saying everything in the game should be EASILY readable but feinting is an easily mastered mechanic that disregards a lot of player skill between opponents.
    I don’t support removing feints, but I do support making them less of a guesswork when defending against them by giving players a tiny bit more reaction time.



  • @Sir:

    Good feints are indistinguishable to real attacks and this guessing game becomes drawn out because feint stamina cost isn’t sufficiently high enough so you can pull a succession of good feints until you see your opponent prematurely parry.

    Yes. You could do that. If your opponent hasn’t learned how to ATTACK yet. Have you learned how to attack? The entire time I’m doing a succession of feints I am open to attack. Heck, I don’t think a stamina cost is even a big deal for feinting. It would be fine without it if it weren’t for the element of dealing with an opponent low in stamina and thus not being able to feint and thus being easier to read due to having less options due to being low on stamina AKA an element of depth in the game.

    Good players may attempt to discern individual player patterns as to when they may or may not feint but this again is just a guess at best as skilled players tend to throw off expectations by varying it up with a double or even triple feint.

    Which you can hit them out of. This is what you are not getting. Additionally you are not understanding that you are equating reaction and skill. It is not so. Prediction and reading are also skills that humans develop that go far in games of strategy. Throwing you off with double and triple feints because you are playing too defensively is a STRATEGY. It’s a strategy that is effective against you because you are refusing to step out of your comfort zone and counter-strategize, instead believing that you have a right to get a decent shot at parrying.

    It is a GOOD thing that this game has something that blows parrying up. Because parrying blows up regular attacking. Which blows up feinting. Which blows up parrying. And the payoffs for each move vary and depend on the circumstance. Welcome to strategysville.

    Some people will argue that feint spamming is countered by leaving them wide open to attack but this again is just part of the guessing game that is feints. If your opponent has just parried your attack and you decide to swing again straightaway you are still guessing whether or not, at the same time, your opponent’s swing is a feint.

    Yes. That is actual true prediction. That is actually getting a read on the situation. There are times where you will be WRONG. That is a good strategy game. Do you believe chess is unfair because I can set you up to lose without being ready to counter it? Is football unfair because you can catch a QB sleeping with a blitz?

    Name me another game outside of Chivalry that you think has strategic depth. And consider it. Are there elements that require prediction? I bet there are.

    You have made up your own rules on what is “strategy” and they fly in the face of what true strategizing is.

    Not when it comes to a melee online FPS:

    This is a 100% hollow and immaterial statement. Show me this rule that says an online melee FPS has to work in ANY particular way. Show me something that says that prediction can’t play a role. Again, you can’t just make up these random wannabe hard-and-fast rules. Which is the crux of your entire counterstance. “Some secret rule has been broken.”

    Trash your belief system and approach this from square one like I have. I have given you some basic parameters for true strategy. You have shown me that you believe you should be able to react to anything and if you can’t react it it then it is unfair. I give you example after example of games reknown for the skills and strats they require and even Chivalry is full of situations where you must PREDICT in order to profit. You say “oh, I should be able to react or it’s unfair.” I think the game is better off when you have ways to outthink your opponent as well as outmaneuver. Rather than rely on things like twisting the hitboxes into a cluttered mess that implodes on itself.

    A 50/50 guessing mechanic that potentially takes away half your health bar is not conducive to skill-based gaming.

    100% untrue. Another fake rule of yours. Do you have any counter points of substance that don’t require some random fake rule you made up?

    Chess has 50/50’s.
    The best fighting games have them.
    Counterstrike has them (though I’m hardly an authority on that game).
    Starcraft has them.

    Forcing your opponent into a position of limited options where they now have to guess or die is the height of strategy and awesomeness. Buttered by the delicious fact that you have ways to counter and even avoid being put in that situation in the first place. The game doesn’t start with some guy standing on top of you at close range swinging.

    I’m not saying everything in the game should be EASILY readable but feinting is an easily mastered mechanic that disregards a lot of player skill between opponents.

    Untrue. You simply define skill as “walking around stabbing high and low.” There’s another skill. Reading the opponent. I know that if I was fighting you and you were low on health and I was not I would consider feinting more because I can risk taking a hit. However you can use that fact to guess my tendency and counter effectively. The real determining factor would be things I’ve learned about your habits up to that point. That’s strategy. It’s outthinking. And there are people who have proven they can straight do it better than others. Even in situations that are ostensibly “50/50.” Why? Because it’s a skill. They are reading YOU. And I think you hate that.

    I can’t react to an arrow I don’t know is coming in Chivalry. Broken?

    I don’t support removing feints, but I do support making them less of a guesswork when defending against them by giving players a tiny bit more reaction time.

    No. The guesswork is what makes the mechanic successful. It is to KILL someone trying to parry. I don’t think you are intended to be able to react to it. It’s to make you flinch parry and get hit. Which means you need to anticipate and block later or attack. Otherwise you end up RIGHT BACK WHERE YOU STARTED. What the heck is the point of two approaches (attack and feint attack) that produce the same thing… an attack you can wait and see and block?

    I attack. You wait and block. That is a proper response.
    I feint and attack. You wait and block. Only you wait a little longer due to the visual indicators. Wow. That just accomplished the same thing. So what is the point?

    No. The game needs something that I can do to people that I think are going to be defensive. Tonight I kicked the crap out of a lot of back up shield users. And got my free hit (though the kick-shield stun is broken as in not working right). That’s the hard counter. Hard counters are awesome. But some people would trick me and attack at the last second and hit me. Strategy.

    Same works for feint.

    It’s 50/50 to you because you’re thinking about it from a very shallow perspective.

    TONS of good strategy games come down to 50/50. You really think “run or pass” is considered a blind 50/50 guess when it’s 3rd down and 16 on your own 25 yard line?

    You really think “pass or shoot” is a 50/50 guess in basketball when the offensive team is down by 1 and the game clock is at 1 second?

    It’s not simply a matter of “will he feint or wont he?” Why are you only thinking of this from a 100% percent defensive point of view? You don’t even have to wait for the opponent to oppose upon you. You’re thinking about this in a vacuum which is why your belief is flawed.



  • Here’s the summary of Chivalry The Game from the developers themselves. They don’t seem to be touting around the perspective that a lot of anti-feinters seem to share.

    Chivalry: Medieval Warfare

    What is it:

    • First Person Slasher

    • With a Multiplayer focus

    (A competitive multiplayer FPS).
    “You have a sword and you want to hurt some people.”

    • Basic concept of the game.

    And it works on that level but there is so much depth to the combat that you can become a master swordsman over time.

    The game is skill-based and controls like a FPS, but instead of guns and grenades, players are given swords, shields, maces, battleaxes and longbows. Set in a fictional yet gritty and realistic world, players will fight in fast paced online battles besieging castles, raiding medieval villages and fighting for glory in the arena with up to 32 players.

    Why did we make it?
    “To create the best melee combat game ever.”

    We wanted to capture the experience of truly being on a medieval battlefield. To accomplish this we drew on our inspiration from epic swordfighting movies such as 300, Gladiator and Braveheart. We seek to bring the chaos, intensity and epicness that those movies deliver to the hands of a gamer.

    We were also disappointed with melee in other games. We didn’t want to be locked in to a canned animation, see damage numbers above enemies heads or have quicktime sequences. We wanted the player to be in control and have the ability to adjust his attack in real time with the mouse.

    Why this is significant:

    You control the action. Not like assassins creed where you press one button to do a triple backflip and kill 5 guys, in Chivalry you individually select each action that your character performs and always retain full control. This allows the player to perform expert level manuevures, like ducking under or jumping over his opponents strike, but only if the player himself is good enough.

    (This is important because when you die, you die at your opponents feet. The game gives a true sense of competitiveness.)

    How is it different?
    “Fast-paced combat that ruthlessly portrays the intensity of medieval combat.”

    Chivalry brings a ton of unique and exciting experiences to the player, whether it’s the precision and responsiveness of the melee combat, the huge variety of effective playstyles and weapons, or the ability to besiege castles, raid villages and assassinate enemy royalty in an online setting.

    Chivalry’s combat system was designed from an interesting mix of First-person Shooter, RPG and Fighting genre game mechanics. As a result there is a blend of twitch-based reflexes with high-level strategy and tactics gameplay. This offers a variety of playstyles from the calm and accurate counter fighter (think Tristan in King Arthur) to the all out berserker that tries to overwhelm his opponents with repeated strikes (think William Wallace from Braveheart).

    We believe that a wide variety of gamers would enjoy Chivalry, especially fans of the Medieval and pre-Medieval Era, or First-person shooter gamers who are looking for something new but with a familiar control scheme and competitive environment.

    I see no signs of any of these rules about “reaction-skill based” etc. etc. in there.



  • @nomaq:

    Delete it

    Good idea.



  • A cooldown is actually one thing I think the feint needs. I actually find parrying feints quite easy if I suspect they are coming, but as MAA gambling with an attack is suicide. If I correctly do not get fooled by a feint the first time they shouldn’t have another attempt.

    Sure you can say “just attack” but then it really is just a guessing game. If I am good enough to react to feints (or lack of) then I dont think a second or third attempt is really fair.

    Then again, I don’t really think it’s broken or unbeatable. I just think it might make for a more skill based, less feint filled game.



  • @NabsterHax:

    A cooldown is actually one thing I think the feint needs. I actually find parrying feints quite easy if I suspect they are coming, but as MAA gambling with an attack is suicide. If I correctly do not get fooled by a feint the first time they shouldn’t have another attempt.

    Sure you can say “just attack” but then it really is just a guessing game. If I am good enough to react to feints (or lack of) then I dont think a second or third attempt is really fair.

    Then again, I don’t really think it’s broken or unbeatable. I just think it might make for a more skill based, less feint filled game.

    This doesn’t make sense at all.

    1: You put skill and feinting at odds without properly demonstrating why they are at odds.

    2: I get the feeling that you seem to, like many others, equate “reaction” with “skill.” This is also untrue.

    3: There seems to be no design logic behind why, if someone fails to fool you with a feint, they should not be able to try again. You are circling the game down into the “I want to be able to comfortably wait and see” drain that some people seem to love so much.

    Feinting is there to break you out of the comfort of waiting to react. Any game that supports any real strategy in regards to human vs human competition will include SOME element of prediction. Otherwise it risks being truly devoid of any depth.

    Where are you guys all getting this idea that having to read your opponent and make an educated guess as to the best move somehow is not a skill but being able to sit and wait and …

    That’s it! I just figured it out… The sense of unfairness arises from the feeling people get when someone does something and they respond with the wrong defense. This must be it. People feel that because feinting tricks you into putting up a parry at the wrong time and thus eating damage, essentially blowing up the reaction parry, that it’s unfair. Because it’s not just getting around their defense, it’s crushing it.

    Is that it? Is it people thinking they have a right to always respond with the right defense and then just have it be a matter of aiming? Is it that people think if they straight get outplayed and lose the exchange before they even hit the button because someone outread them that somehow they were faulted?

    Ha. “I should always be able to know what’s coming and then just aim” is not the cry of someone out in favor of skill.



  • Hey, don’t get me wrong buddy. I have little problem with feints how they are right now, and I certainly rarely have trouble taking down unskilled feint spammers.

    Honestly, you are taking the “guesswork” mechanic of feints to the extreme. I like being able to play mindgames with my opponent and trying to read them back myself, but if the other player is already in range and is swinging, they have pretty much won the fight (assuming I have no other means of escape, low stamina, etc). See me windup? Don’t feint. See me block? Feint. The ONLY way I can reverse the odds is by waiting and parrying their attack. The problem is they get 2, 3 or 4 attempts and tricking me out before they have no option but to get parried or back off. Sure, by the second time they do it I end up swinging at them anyway, but that usually leaves me with 10% health and them with 60%.

    All I’m saying is that adding a cooldown may make it so that very good players can squeeze themselves out of very tight situations, with skill and a bit of luck. Clutch moments like this can make the game so much more interesting and fun. Currently, if you get yourself caught out in a bad position you 99.9% of the time go down. In my opinion, it would be better (more exciting for comp) if this was more like 95%.



  • @Sir:

    @Dark Symphony:

    Perhaps you can state why someone feinting a bunch of times in a row is a bad thing? If you anticipate a feint and counter it (with an attack) it doesn’t matter how many times they feint. In fact, it just drains more stamina.

    Good feints are indistinguishable to real attacks and this guessing game becomes drawn out because feint stamina cost isn’t sufficiently high enough so you can pull a succession of good feints until you see your opponent prematurely parry.

    Good feints are indistinguishable because they simply wait for you to parry, before they decide to feint.



  • Every argument Dark Symphony has made would defend Chivalry if it were literally dudes in armor running around playing rock paper scissors. After all, paper has a counter! Stop throwing rock and throw scissors! The point Dark Symphony totally misses/refuses to address is that rock paper scissors is ultimately a skill-less game and not actually any damn fun - it’s also absolutely not worth 20 dollars for. And I also haven’t heard any response to the fact that the only people being forced to play rock paper scissors instead of being able to trust in their own skill are people who don’t have MaA dodge or a shield.



  • @Dark:

    That’s it! I just figured it out… The sense of unfairness arises from the feeling people get when someone does something and they respond with the wrong defense. This must be it. People feel that because feinting tricks you into putting up a parry at the wrong time and thus eating damage, essentially blowing up the reaction parry, that it’s unfair. Because it’s not just getting around their defense, it’s crushing it.

    Is that it? Is it people thinking they have a right to always respond with the right defense and then just have it be a matter of aiming? Is it that people think if they straight get outplayed and lose the exchange before they even hit the button because someone outread them that somehow they were faulted?

    Ha. “I should always be able to know what’s coming and then just aim” is not the cry of someone out in favor of skill.

    No, that’s not it. What it is that pisses me off about it is that there are people who rely on feint WAY too much. Feinting in and of itself is all fine and dandy, but most fights that involve feinting that piss me off go like this:

    1. Me and Enemy square off.
    2. Enemy pulls out one feint, two feints, goes for attack which I then proceed to block.
    3. I counter-attack him, doing about a third of his health.
    4. Enemy pulls out one feint, two feints, three feints, hits me while I’m in windup to break his feint spam.
    5. Now I’m injured and he currently has the upper hand. What does he do with his advantage? Does he use an accelerated swing to sneak another hit in? How about a delayed swing? A kick? A crouch attack? A mouse-dragged stab through my defenses?
    6. He feints once, twice at point blank, making me parry because I have good reflexes, which then causes me to take yet another cheap hit.
    7. At this point I attack back, now on the offensive because I’m severely wounded. We hit trade a couple of times, I’m re-gaining control of the fight and I’m going to kill him because I’m obviously a more skill swordsman. But wait, what’s this?
    8. Enemy throws more point-blank sprint feints at me, dodges around like a retard, feints some more and scores a lucky hit because I’m all clusterfucked and I assume he’s going to actually fight fair. I block, he feints and kills me. I have just lost yet another fight because the other guy won’t stop goddamn feinting.

    Countering this tactic isn’t just a matter of “HE’S WIDE OPEN SO ATTACK HIM WHILE HE FEINTS DERP A HERP”, because I don’t know he’s going to feint. After he does, the next time we go to attack each other I’m wary, but when I see his sword raise I assume he’s not enough of a bitch to feint me out again in the same fight, yet he does and I get fucked again. Sure, you can play aggressively and charge all your opponents, but the point is that if you play defensively, there’s no way to react to a feint all the time. There shouldn’t be, that’s the nature of feints, but that’s why you shouldn’t be able to feint ALL THE TIME. The fact that it gives you a good chance of scoring a hit if you feint someone is nice, it’s an advantage, but it’s able to be used over and over in succession, constantly during a fight, every time you go for an attack. This is why there should be a cooldown between feints. Similar to Left 4 Dead’s meelee cooldown, the feint cooldown should stack up longer and longer the more you use it in a given amount of time. This, I think, is a decent solution for the time being.



  • @Oy:

    The fact that it gives you a good chance of scoring a hit if you feint someone is nice, it’s an advantage, but it’s able to be used over and over in succession, constantly during a fight, every time you go for an attack. This is why there should be a cooldown between feints. Similar to Left 4 Dead’s meelee cooldown, the feint cooldown should stack up longer and longer the more you use it in a given amount of time. This, I think, is a decent solution for the time being.

    This is pretty much the same thing as I was saying. Feints should reward using the trick cleverly, not hundreds of times until it works.


Log in to reply