Will we ever see immunities removed/changed to a fairer system?

I dont dislike the idea of immunities too much, and i have always liked the idea of the skilled combatants being able to effectively stay alive through rewards for having such skill.

My point is this, as we stand the immunity system is not a fair system, because its literally, best connection to the server wins, anybody that suffers latency has no chance.

Now, i know that since GU33, more people have been experiencing something which i have experienced for years on DCUO, general lag & the annoyance of the block/bb/lunge window seems to be broken. Playing from the EU on US servers, latency is something i have always worked around on any game i have played, but right now its so bad that its game breaking for me and others alike.

I actively avoid 1 vs 1s because the odds are stacked so highly against me its not even worth the hassle, 2 vs 2s are pretty much the same, sometimes i sit there and i see my toon hit the guy with a BB when hes blocking and again, and nothing happens, except 2 - 3 seconds later i get lunge when im blocking.... Its beyond belief, and when this happens in every single match it honestly becomes boring and to the point of unfairness where its just frustrating.

Im sure there are others who experience this through some means & id like to know if there has ever been any plans to change or update this system to prevent people from being beaten cheaply. Now by no means am i a skilled PvPer, i enjoy it and it can be fun some times, but id much rather have a fair match and be able to use what skill i do have to get wins, instead of getting beat by people who just have a lag/latency advantage and nothing more.

Or, if there is nothing in the pipeline, what are your opinions on what could be changed to make it a fairer system.
I have played many games for years on US servers and never had this kind of problem to the extent where i am effectively gimped going into a match.

+1. Amen to the OP for addressing major concerns about the "fairness" of the system.

Aside from connection speed, who has the fastest/cleanest route to the server etc. go ask the average DCUO gamer on the street if they even know what immunity is.

Man, I wish I got to play the game before the counter immunities existed. This is the first game I have played with that on and a lot of times seems the average folk is just trying for a counter for the sake of immunity then go rambo for a small period of time. I figured they did that to deal with bug issues and clipping added to latency (reason I was given, which makes me ask, check *), though--not that long ago I was in a batcave match where some dude was throwing moves at the speed of light (hacking), and the only reason I was winning was due to the counter system in place. I can also see having 2 on 1 being a bigger pain as you can't counter someone in order to outplay them (aka, a person BBs the target with MA or Rifle with a stun punch attached to them while the other lunges/block close range). Then again, never played the game without it :/

Maybe one day they can address bugs to where it can be a bit more fast paced like other PvP games.

* I was told the reason for the immunity system to be in place along with those RPS symbols and the delays/opportunity windows on them was to combat the disadvantage over people with faster speed vs those with slow speeds. From what I understand, in your OP, you state the exact opposite: the current system favors those with faster speed. Can you elaborate? I thought the whole point of the RPS symbols was as a track method for when someone is really blocking or block breaking even though tier toon show otherwise.

They have addressed this, it's called Counter windows. That's why you hear "GDI I got BBed but I wasn't blocking" well you weren't on your screen, but there's a window, and you were still in that window and on THEIR screen you were blocking.

Problem is the windows they put on BBs and what not are all FUBAR.

Brawling/shield BBs are basically without a window, countering them is more luck based than skill based. 1h isn't far off.

They really need to do a run over it all again and just make them uniform. If you BB you're vulnerable for 1s (believe tunso said it's avg .350 secs just to factor in general connection and communication time).If you Block, vulnerable for 1s. And for Lunge, you should have to be blocked when the attack is initiated IMO.

Yep, latency issues make the PVP system dysfunctional.

I pray to Crom (rarely) but when I do, I pray that he removes immunities from this game.

That's the fundamental flaw with counter system. When they designed it they didn't have the vision to see that in a 2 v 1 situation it wouldn't work. That's why we don't have guaranteed block breakers anymore and these vulnerability windows which are all whacked out depending on your connection/latency.

You are playing on the us server form an eu country.

Are you seriously complaining about lag? Seriously?

OHHH I had no idea man, thanks! No wonder shield users seem to be such a pain.

I promise Jeebie. I tried to like your post more but the silly "One Like Per User" thing stopped me.
As for immunity, I'm fine with it in it's current incarnation. 20% of your max health shield is fine. However, they need to remove this nonsense of a player with immunity granting a player immunity. Needs to go back to where if you had immunity you couldn't grant it to another. I really think it would fix a lot of issues.

Player1 blocks, Enemy1 BBs, player2 lunges Enemy1.

Currently Enemy1 and Player2 would get immunity, both executed the correct response for a counter. Only Player1 will be countered but both those players will get rewarded for the correct response. Enemy1 is shielded from the punishment.

Change it to not grant immunity Enemy1 would get immunity, Player1 would be countered, and that's it. No Reward for player2.

I see benefits to both sides. I think it can get a bit weird trading immunities, but I like the idea of being rewarded for counters anytime you get one.

But what if player 1 blocks, player 2 BBs, player 3 sees his BB and lunges, player two then blocks 3's follow up and refreshes his own immunity, player three then BBs player 2s block and refreshes his own....

Or this scenario that happens far too often, player 1 BBs, player two uses trinket and blocks and gets his own immunity. Player two doesn't deserve that immunity, he made the mistake first yet he's granted the immunity and will be able to damage his opponent before he can damage him.

This is where there's a problem. It can literally last forever. Counter someone who has immunity should not be counted as the correct response, because there's no benefit to countering someone with immunity (no damage, no CC).

The current system allows people to pick off other peoples correct moves, I get so many immunities from seeing someone who's BBd my friend and just lunging him for free immunity. This is rather cheap and should get changed.

I'm with you up to the point about having to block when the attack is initiated. I go back and forth on it, too. For example, whip thrash would be fantastic for PVP if the target had to block when I initiate it, as opposed to blocking on the third tick of WT damage. Moreover when I'm doing tap-tap-hold with martial arts, having the target sit down into a block as my foot hovers above his head can be excruciating.

That said, I think blocking on the contact helps balance harder-hitting, albeit slower combos and weapons - two handed is a great example, and helps for combat fidelity. If it hasn't hit you yet, you should be able to block it. In the hold-hold-hold spam-fest of 2H, where would the target get to slip his block in if he doesn't anticipate the combo right off the bat - especially if the opponent is a cheap M'F'er like I am with Steel and leads everything off with a clipped tap-range. So many people hate clipping as it is, now if they're getting crushed by stuff they can't see and should have blocked two moves ago? Yikes. I think the block-at-initiation mechanic could be potentially infuriating for people. Personally, I'd institute an Always Be Whipthrasing policy for arenas.

I'd also add, Jeebie, because I love your insight on this stuff, how about removing the CC effect on block-breakers? It's bad enough that rifle grenades hit like God-knows-what, are completely clip-able, and deal block breaks, but eating the push-back mechanic when you're trying to lunge the guy tap-ranging you to death is just too much, IMO. I'll actually get pushed out of hold-melee attacks by rifle 'nades, have to break out, and then launch into another hold melee to interrupt, meanwhile my target pelts me with a couple extra shots and I burn a little power. Block breaks are difficult enough as it is to counter at range - especially in flyer v. acro/SS situations - adding a CC effect that, by definition, cannot be blocked, is bad mechanics.

Your thoughts?

I get what you're saying, it's just a choice of "should you get a reward for doing the right counter move" or "should you only get immunity for getting an actual counter". I'm fine either way really.

Whips, Flurry, whatnot. All exceptions with being multiple hits and what not. More saying it since nothing is mroe frustrating than getting blocked after you're into your next combo! it's like WTF? It's one thing if I did Flurry/Whips or some other multi hit attack but like I do say a 2h lunge, then tap tap, power and blocked... what? I don't know if it's a latency thing, just saying I don't want a window attached to it like block/BB, but again multihits being an exception.

CC as a whole needs to be addressed. It needs to not be so... messed up.

The knockback on Rifle is definitely a pain, as even if you aren't blocking you're unable to lunge much of the time because you can't get the lunge off. It's nonsense. I'd like to see powers being more reliable on the stuns and other things less so. When I get stunned by a troller and I have to tap breakout I'm never like "GDI why does it work that way??" Its to be expected. But when I slide backwards for a second and I can't insta breakout and they basically get a free BB off without being countered even though I saw it and was trying to inturrupt.

You see a lot of grenade abuse in legends. teams of JS/TF spamming rifles on a guy, unable to breakout or do anything and dying... it's nonsense.

I like the idea of them being removed personally. At least for the standard holds/taps. HB solar flame combo, the combo should CC, the initial one no. If that makes sense.

Weapon CC is just so messed up right now, I'm not sure if it's broken or is seperate from regular control resistance for powers. When you breakout you are meant to get brief CC immunity and as a tank if I don't block I can barely stay on my feet due to constant weapon CC. Being instantly stunned or juggled immediately after using Burnout has me gnashing my teeth every day.

Seeing a lot of wierdness too. Sometimes - happens a lot when I'm juggled or knocked back - I need to double break out, the 1st breakout doesn't clear it. Other times I can be block countered and still keep hitting the enemy while I'm lying on the floor.

Back to the topic of vulnerability windows, I would like them to allow counter mechanics to work "on contact" because a lot of the time in situations where I know an opponent is going to block or bb I initiate my counter before the window opens. Even if the animation hits perfectly in time I don't get a counter and can often get punished just for knowing what I'm doing.

Having to pause and wait for the vulnerability window to open and then initiate the counter in a microsecond is a pain in the ****, especially with latency. I don't have a 500mb connection to play on...

People getting lucky block-breakers see...

I'm a bit lost, so there is me, Jonny, and Joe, versus Mary and Susy. If Susy block breaks blocking Joe (who's fighting Mary), and I see Susy's still block breaking (she has immunity), and I counter her with a lunge (of which she can block but didn't), should I not get immunity for reacting correctly? It sounds fair to me. Otherwise it feels like she can freely damage and screw people while immune because nobody could use that against her. The benefit of countering someone is being granted immunity, even if that person him/herself has immunity. I'm no FNL player, but it would really suck if I don't get rewarded for countering someone just because their immunity didn't run out yet.

What I would like to see is no knock down penalty for attacking someone that is blocking. I mean, how ridiculous is that? I fall on my butt if I shoot someone with a gun, simply because they are blocking? Give the blocker immunity, sure, but don't knock down the person attacking them simply because they are blocking.

Block breakers would still worth it if done before immunity, and the person blocking would take less damage because of said block. If you successfully block someone, you would gain immunity, and possibly gain a damage bonus for your next combo for a successful counter.

This idea that you are knocked down by someone blocking is old.

If that shooting is an interrupt/"lunge" (aka rifle)...it is how the system works and you should fall on your butt. If that doesn't happen, people may interrupt more often simply because they don't get interrupted themselves by being countered and falling on their ***. I agree with perhaps making it shorter *shrug*, or making it a different animation (a push back? a bewilderment emote?), but not removing it so you can still roam freely after doing "something stupid".

The damage bonus idea is nice, but the aggravating "falling on my butt because someone blocked" reaction causes a better conditional: it is aggravating enough to where you may be so inclined to pay attention and not do it again.

But the entire concept of falling over simply because someone blocked, is ridiculous. Like holding square on the rifle... it shoots BULLETS at your target, but they block, you fall down. Its entirely stupid, and should be change. Instead, if you block this ranged attack, you gain immunity, not knock that person down AND gain immunity.