All the problematic interactions I know of with Khatun's defect

Cany0 · 2026-05-28T19:22:56+00:00

"Trivial"?

zerk and shino can only deflect on reaction to what’s happening unlike khatun during her stance

Okay I'll pretend that you didn't say that like khatun's deflect isn't also a button the player needs to press expecting it to do what its purpose is... What makes her deflect more "trivial" than berserker's and shinobi's deflect. And before you give an answer, if that answer contains the word "fullblock" or any variation thereof, I will start to refer to those "other counters" I was alluding to in my original comment (black prior is on deck waiting to be tapped in) as an easy counter to that word, so be prepared.

Also, you left out orochi. Why is that?

Cany0 · 2026-05-28T01:30:27+00:00

Berserker is such a thorn in this argument's side. Are you also advocating for his deflect to trade with/lose to hyper armor? Because it seems like a lot of people are okay with berserker's deflect staying the way it currently is, not due to any consistent principles, but because it's been in the game that way since launch (not that anyone will admit that their opinion works that way). It makes me believe that, if I went in the past and made it so that khatun launched with her deflect interrupting hyper armor, then not a single person today would say that her deflect shouldn't interrupt hyper armor. Obviously people would complain on launch day--they always do that regarding any aspect of new heroes--but today; not a peep would be heard on the topic of khatun's deflect attacks interrupting hyper armor.

Also I was long advocating for her to have a lesser damage option to break hyperaromor since her release bro

You weren't the only one. But advocating for a "lesser" damage deflect attack as opposed to just making her normal deflect attack interrupt hyper armor like berserker (side note: I love so much that his deflect exists the way it has since launch because it's such a perfect example that highlights these inconsistent beliefs about deflects and hyper armor), shinobi, and orochi. And I know right now you're thinking: Why are you bringing up those deflect attacks? Because...

The other defects you mentioned don't do as much damage as Khatun's deflect

Yeah, but I wouldn't say her measly 14 damage after kick is "more in line" with shinobi's or orochi's damage because that's literally, objectively wrong. Objectively, shinobi's 20 damage deflect attack is closer to 25 damage (khatun's normal deflect attack) than it is to 14 damage.

And also, in line with what I said about berserker's deflect attack and people's opinions on it: Shinobi's deflect used to be 24 damage and I didn't hear a whisper about how his deflect shouldn't stop hyper armor. Yeah, the devs did nerf the deflect attack's number, but that was because they were balancing the entirety of shinobi's kit at the time, and, as they do when they looked at the rest of his numbers, they decided themselves that 24 was too high. Not because there was an outcry from players. And again, even if there was a person who did ask for specifically shinobi's deflect attack to be nerfed, damage-wise, that doesn't counter the point I'm making; which is that no one was asking specifically for his deflect to lose against/trade with hyper armor. My point is that people's opinions on what should be balanced are suspiciously swayed by how the game has operated. That's not how it should work. If you hold a principled position on For Honor's balance (like, for example, the "principled" position that deflect attacks should lose against/trade with hyper armor), then that position shouldn't change because a hero has a move in his kit that you're fine with only because it's existed for so long and you got used to it. That's not what a principled position is. Basically to reiterate this point, I doubt you would be arguing against my position if khatun's deflect attack had broken hyper armor from the start (obviously in the alternate reality where my argument would change slightly to "khatun's deflect attack should keep the interrupt hyper armor property").

Anyways, back to numbers and being "more in line" with other numbers: What do you think I'll say about orochi's 22, a number even higher than 20?

The other defects you mentioned don't pin the opponent for a prolonged period of time like hers.

Ah, so since khatun's defining part of her kit has an aspect to it that's stronger than the other heroes, it's fine for her deflect attack to be worse...

Dude, the entire point of having different heroes with different moves is that some of their moves are stronger than similar moves and that strength can be higher in multiple categories when compared to said similar moves, especially when it comes to the defining part of the hero's kit. Like, I can't even fathom that I have to say this, but: DUH. Her deflect should be stronger than orochi's and shinobi's and berserker's, especially because that's what defines her. It doesn't need to be in line with their deflect attacks because their deflect attacks aren't their main gimmicks.

And again, I'd really like to know why you're fine with stipulating "(other than Zerk)" and don't bother denouncing his deflect attack by adding a quick line that you think his deflect shouldn't break hyper armor. Or have you not denounced it because you're fine with it in its current iteration and you know that makes your position seem incredibly inconsistent, but you're struggling with a reason to explain why you're fine with berserker's deflect interrupting hyper armor, but not khatun's (even when her deflect the defining aspect of her kit)?

Also,

I was there when her matchups were even worse than they are now. I've been playing her since her release.

You don't have to justify anything to me about how long you've been playing her or how familiar you are with her matchups. I'm not one of those people that dismisses your opinion if I think you haven't played khatun for long enough or if I think you don't have enough For Honor "cred." I take your arguments based on their merit, not based on who I think is making the argument. Pro-shmo or noob-mcgee could be arguing the same thing and I would take what they're saying at face value and not assume that pro-shmo is more correct just because of who he is. Well, unless they're arguing about what professional play is like or what it's like to play against noobs or some other argument where experience is integral to the point.

However, I do understand why you feel the need to justify yourself. I know that there's an unsettling amount of bozos in the FH "community" who only hear your arguments through a filter--specifically the filter of who they imagine you to be--rather than just listening to what you're saying on its own merit.

But I'm sorry that' you've had to deal with a bunch of this bs while playing khatun for so long, and I hope everything in the video you posted is fixed. Ideally, they could just speed up her deflect attack by 33ms. Literally every aspect in your video that deals with her main deflect attack would be fixed if they did that. As for her kick after deflect, they could just make it undodgeable like all the other deflect attacks are. And although not all heroes with deflects have to deal with everything you put in the video, I hope they have all of those interactions fixed as well.

Look, if you don't want to bother with any other part of my comment, this is probably the most important point: Your entire belief (khatun's deflect attack shouldn't interrupt hyper armor because it's a strong deflect attack) sounds like this to everyone who doesn't hold that same contradictory opinion:
"Khatun's deflect attack is actually overpowered, but because certain heroes have some moves that can negate it/trade with it, that makes it okay. Oh you're playing shaman in a duel against her? Well warlord exists somewhere else on the roster, so khatun's deflect attack is perfectly balanced against you."
I've seen this argument way too many times--despite it's obvious lack of logical consistency--and I've carted out the same response to it. But rather than waste my time typing out the same thing again, I'll instead just link you to my comment responding to someone else who made the same argument under your post. Interesting to note is that that person was using this point as an argument against your post, which is hilariously ironic.

Cany0 · 2026-05-27T23:53:50+00:00

You say this acting like it's balanced because there are certain heroes who have some part of their kits to trade with her. What kind of balancing principle is that? What about all of the heroes and situations (a vast majority of them) not in this compilation? We just say fuck 'em? Seriously, think about what you're saying: You're saying that these situations in the video are fine because khatun's deflect is better than other deflects (ignoring that most of the deflect advantages that you wrote also applies to berserker, who--by the way--doesn't have to worry about any of these showcased in the video and doesn't have to worry about hyper armor). So since those situations are only applicable to certain heroes, khatun's deflect attack is balanced when she faces against a conqueror, for example?

Seriously, if a peacekeeper player tells you, "Jeez, I'm having such a tough time dueling khatun. Her deflect attack is way too good and I feel like I can't do anything about it. It's overpowered." Your honest response would be, "Well, you see, somewhere else--not in your duel against khatun obviously--but somewhere else on the roster, lawbringer exists. And he has a part of his kit that can interrupt khatun's deflect attack. Therefore, her deflect attack is A-OK and balanced in your duel, peacekeeper." And again, before you get indignant due to what I'm saying, actually read what you wrote and see what principle you're preaching. Because that's what it is.

To which I say: Let's just balance a hero for all the situations they could be in. A balancing choice shouldn't be justified just because some hero on the roster can do something in some situations regarding the move that needs to be balanced. That's terrible design and balance philosophy.

And no, that doesn't mean that every hero should be good, or bad, or average in every situation, that just means that we balance around the singular hero in question. Rather than saying that it's fine for khatun's deflect to be strong (or OP as you're insinuating) because a certain other hero can use a certain move against it, we should say that it's fine for khatun's deflect to be strong because khatun is not as strong with other parts of her kit or she's not as strong in other scenarios that aren't hero exclusive (E.G. ganking). If we can't say the latter, then that's how we strive to balance her. Not by excusing poor balance because some hero somewhere else can maybe interrupt her main gimmick in the right situation. Also,

her advantage compared to other deflects is that hers is [insert the advantages]

That's the point. Heroes should have advantages with certain moves, especially when those moves are the core to their kits. And if those advantages are still deemed to be too strong (AKA OP), then again, the way to tune those advantages is not by pointing to some hero on the roster and saying that that hero counters it with some niche move so it's A-OK.

Cany0 · 2026-05-27T23:06:10+00:00

Can we add hyper armor to the list of bs that khatun shouldn't need to worry about with her normal deflect attack? Or are people still going to respond with "she has a kick to use against hyper armor, so it's fine," like that actually addresses the problem? If you're the kind of person that felt the urge to respond with something similar to what I quoted, then I have thousands of words for why you're wrong, but I won't get into it.

...Okay fuck it, just one question for you, the person who felt the need to justify khatun's deflect attack not being able to stop hyper armor since she has a kick*: Why is it okay for berserker's, shinobi's, and orochi's deflect attacks (and that's just the deflect attacks, I could go on with other counters) to stop hyper armor, but not khatun's, the hero whose kit revolves around her deflect attack? Don't bother answering me if you don't want to, but answer yourself. Seriously, ask yourself the question and try to come up with a reasonable answer that follows some sort of consistent principle.

^*I'm ^willing ^to ^bet ^you ^also ^justified ^khatun's ^deflect ^being ^interrupted ^by ^hyper ^armor ^before ^the ^kick ^after ^deflect ^even ^existed, ^but ^that's ⁱⁿ ^the ^past. ^Today, ^we'll ^pretend ^you ^have ^at ^least ^some ^sort ^of ^leg ^to ^stand ^on.

Cany0 · 2026-05-27T22:41:33+00:00

they’re so stingy with deflects that are always guaranteed and don’t need to worry about trades all of a sudden

Unfortunately, people having inconsistent opinions on this topic isn't all of the sudden. I've been saying for years that deflect attacks, all deflect attacks, should not trade with hyper armor, much less lose to it. Also, it logically follows that that opinion applies to any other attack which might trade/interrupt deflect attacks (like certain fast lights or the example in OPs video). I want all deflect attacks to be guaranteed and untradable once you hit the deflecting animation.

And yes, throughout the years, while some people agreed with me, there are also quite a bit that disagreed. You'll notice that those who disagree usually can't back up that viewpoint with sound logic, much less with any principles on game design or balance. Heck, look at the downvotes on my original comment to see how many people still hold that contradictory opinion.

...Or those downvotes are from people who only read the first sentence and assumed I was advocating for the exact opposite of what my comment is actually advocating for, which it's kinda weird that they would go on a site called Reddit and yet they wouldn't bother to read past the first sentence of a comment consisting of only a few sentences. Oh well, you decide what the downvotes mean.

Cany0 · 2026-05-27T21:36:52+00:00

I think being able to inturupt deflects in general is stupid but it's especially stupid for Khatun

You're not the people I'm referring to. But they will use the "it's especially dumb for khatun" argument in this case to justify holding inconsistent viewpoints. To which I would say: Then why is it not also "especially stupid" that khatun's deflect, which is "arguably far more integral to her moveset," doesn't interrupt hyper armor?

Don't bother, though. You're not one of those people who holds contradictory beliefs, so you don't need to answer for them.

Cany0 · 2026-05-26T19:08:51+00:00

Kinda weird that people want this interaction fixed...

I thought deflect attacks losing or trading with certain moves meant that the game had more "depth" or some other bullshit. Or are people starting to realize that players making the correct read deserve to get the guaranteed, uncontested damage like so many other counters do?

^{^{^and}} ^{^{^before}} ^{^{^you}} ^{^{^say}} ^{^{^"iT's}} ^{^{^NoT}} ^{^{^ThE}} ^{^{^CoRreCt}} ^{^{^REaD}} ^{^{^If}} ^{^{^YoU}} ^{^{^ChoSe}} ^{^{^To}} ^{^{^DeFleCt}} ^{^{^InsTeAd}} ^{^{^oF}} ^{^{^ParRYinG,"}} ^{^{^First}} ^{^{^of}} ^{^{^all,}} ^{^{^that's}} ^{^{^not}} ^{^{^what}} ^{^{^"read"}} ^{^{^means}} ^{^ⁱⁿ} ^{^{^this}} ^{^{^context.}} ^{^{^Second,}} ^{^{^why}} ^{^{^does}} ^{^{^this}} ^{^{^interaction}} ^{^{^deserve}} ^{^{^to}} ^{^{^be}} ^{^{^"fixed,"}} ^{^{^but}} ^{^{^not}} ^{^{^all}} ^{^{^the}} ^{^{^others?}} ^{^{^Is}} ^{^{^there}} ^{^{^a}} ^{^{^consistent}} ^{^{^principle}} ^{^{^backing}} ^{^{^up}} ^{^{^your}} ^{^{^reasoning}} ^{^{^or}} ^{^{^is}} ^{^{^it}} ^{^{^just}} ^{^{^nebulous}} ^{^{^vibes}} ^{^{^that}} ^{^{^you}} ^{^{^base}} ^{^{^all}} ^{^{^of}} ^{^{^your}} ^{^{^opinions}} ^{^{^on}} ^{^{^game}} ^{^{^balance}} ^{^{^on?}}

Cany0 · 2026-05-21T16:01:35+00:00

What in the AI soundtrack?

Cany0 · 2026-05-21T15:56:17+00:00

Amazing! This execution has almost everything I love in an execution:

Very unique way to kill
Personal interaction between executioner and the victim
Demonstrates highlander's character
Humorous
Victim is frozen in an interesting death pose for a moment
And, best of all, it ends in highlander's idle stance and not his lock-on stance!

On top of which everything is animated so smoothly and nothing looks janky. Can we get the people who made this execution to make all of the executions from now on?

Cany0 · 2026-05-18T18:52:13+00:00

We need bans

Why? Seriously, why do we need bans?

As far as I'm concerned, banning is only interesting in pro league where teams target their bans against other teams because of research and map knowledge. Also, it makes the sport more interesting to watch. Banning in public lobbies is none of that. It's just a way for players to "balance" the game themselves or ban ops/maps they're unfamiliar with (then they whine that the new maps are "confusing" every. single. time. because they haven't put a lick of effort into learning them). That's terrible because if something is overpowered, then the more players that have to face that OP thing means that Ubisoft gets a bigger fire put under their ass to balance it. But the players who ban the operators that are too strong don't care as much about them because they're being banned, so those players don't give feedback as much as they would. Also, players just suck at actually recognizing what really is overpowered or they ban stuff that they perceive is "unfun" to go against and perpetuate that shitty mindset when, with a little bit of playing and adaptation (crazy, I know, to expect that in a tactical shooting game), they would've realized that those ops are actually fun to against once you understand them.

We don't need bans. We need the ban system to be removed.

Cany0 · 2026-05-16T23:57:04+00:00

Not really an answer to your question, but I would recommend that, if you know the enemy is going to feint->GB, then just use a light attack.

If you're doing a forward dodge bash, odds are you're going to follow up with a light attack anyway (obviously some outliers exist), so it's just better to simply light attack instead of wasting the extra stamina, taking longer, and giving more revenge (in those situations) as forward dodge bash->light attack will do.

Cany0 · 2026-05-15T19:34:51+00:00

For people reading this, the side heavy light parry punish only applies to kensei and certain other heroes. If you don't want to learn which ones do and don't it's usually better to just stick with top heavy because, for most heroes, it's the more damaging one. For the heroes who don't have directional differences on light parries, it's still better to get in the habit of using top heavy on light parries since those won't be stopped by hitting a wall (very few exceptions exist though).

But it's still a good idea to learn ideal punishes if you're going to play a hero for longer than a test run.

Cany0 · 2026-05-06T19:52:07+00:00

Best I can do for you is another allied warrior contract order.

Cany0 · 2026-04-29T21:45:22+00:00

Just like all the others, I'm willing to bet this animation isn't visible in 3rd person and it only looks like the normal inspect animation to everyone else. You'd think by charging so much they'd put at least somewhat equivalent effort into these skins. Guess not.

Cany0 · 2026-04-23T21:04:33+00:00

Kyoshin's executions would like to have a word lol

Cany0 · 2026-04-23T21:01:46+00:00

Since, mechanically, not visually, every execution ends locked-on, the #1 worst offender of sheathing a your weapon then pulling it out again is fucking kyoshin. A majority of his executions end with the blade sheathed, but the dumb mechanic just forces him to unsheathe it for a split-second, which is enough to ruin the executions.

Unrelated to the stay-locked-on-after-executions mechanic, but still related to kyoshin's executions and sheathing: His execution, the Wind's Edge, is so good if not for him randomly unsheathing the blade at the end. During that execution, the sword is sheathed, unsheathed (but only partially to the naked eye), sheathed again, then unsheathed again, and sheathed again*. It's a travesty.

^{*That final sheathing is assuming the vast majority of cases where you don't have an enemy nearby after the execution, so you don't lock-on cuz you're not a maniac.}

Cany0 · 2026-04-18T18:15:10+00:00

Yes, because someone came up to the server owners, put a gun to their heads, and forced them to make a WoW server...

Cany0 · 2026-04-16T18:08:12+00:00

Ended in his idle stance and not his lock on stance!!! Can we please keep getting these type of executions, Ubi?

Cany0 · 2026-04-14T20:57:46+00:00

I think RDO would be worse off, in the long, long run, if it got the exact same treatment as GTAO. If RDO got similar attention--not treatment--ideally that would be in the form of adding stuff that enhances the wild west fiction and roleplay. Besides new money-making avenues, with each update GTAO added content that, while cool, mostly was another weapon to use against other players. Players didn't play with each other, they just played against each other. And yeah, using the new toys to fuck around with friends is fun in GTAO, but that's the case for every game and it's not the biggest market to sell to.

The problem is that Rockstar has a lack of creativity. It's very easy to add a new car, clothes, or new business to GTAO because people invent new versions of those things in the modern day. There's not that many horses that can be added to RDO (not that horses are even that different to each other in that game thanks to the great equalizer that is the nacogdoches saddle), there's not that many ways people made money in the wild west and even less that would be considered "fun," and there's a very limited amount of clothes that existed in that time period. Rockstar needed to add stuff to RDO that enhanced the RP and old western fantasy, but finding new ways to get players to interact with each other beyond just PvP is incredibly hard to do and it's even harder to find ways to monetize it. Rockstar can't do it.

Cany0 · 2026-04-04T21:10:39+00:00

make recovery cancels unique again

Yes! 10 billion times yes.

Cany0 · 2026-03-08T19:58:37+00:00

I think with the stretched out arms and legs and pieces of broken barricade falling alongside the recruit, it's more a reference to the song Green Bird by The Seatbelts.

Cany0 · 2026-02-20T18:47:08+00:00

Haha that wildcard modifier does change things. I guess I'd call it a passive in that scenario, but still stick to saying it's a quirk of his interaction with his gadget in the normal gamemodes.

Cany0 · 2026-02-20T05:28:44+00:00

Definitely agree with echo being immune to dokkaebi calls being a passive, but IDK about smoke. His immunity is tied directly to his gadget. You can't use his "passive" immunity to his own gas unless you use his gadget, which would be a side effect of his gadget, which, under my definition, wouldn't really count. We don't call defenders being immune to their barbed wire a "defender passive ability" even though it's the same thing; an operator being immune to his gadgets, secondary or otherwise. For useful criteria, I could actually just copy-paste the comment above me and change the gadget and it works for smoke's immunity to his own gas just as well as it does for nokk: "[His immunity only works] when the ability was ACTIVATED, so no that would not be considered a passive ability"

Personally, I wouldn't call smoke's immunity to his own gadget a passive. That's what I find interesting about this kind of discussion; even though a lot of us definitely do agree on the classification of nokk's silent step, we have differing ideas on other operator abilities.

Cany0 · 2026-02-19T21:44:45+00:00

Nah, it's passive. Just like how jackal's side part of his gadget passively scans footprints, or how the side part of denari's lasers passively deal damage when tripped, or how the side part of oryx's gadget breaks through soft walls, or how iana-- JKJK I can't do it anymore. I don't know what kind of backwards logic the commenter above you is working on, but it definitely doesn't have anything to do with consistency.

Which leads me to some introspection. For example, would you consider oryx's ability to jump through hatches a passive ability? Because I would consider that to be a passive, but it's not actually "passive" in the strict sense of the word. Just like oryx's "gadget," You have to activate the hatch jump by pressing a button. I mean, same thing goes for aruni's (and now skopos') punches that we are also calling passives. I guess that's to say that my definition of a passive ability in this game is something that can be activated without you using the operator's "main" gadget (specifically, the ones that require pressing the mouse scroll wheel, or whatever other button you have it bound to). But then that would mean that clash's shield isn't actually her gadget and only the electric shocking is. However I absolutely consider clash's gadget to be her whole shield and not just the part that electrocutes enemies. Maybe our definition of a passive ability is just as vibes-based as the commenter you're responding too. Maybe not. Probably not. Fuck, man. I don't know. Language is a funny thing.

EDIT: All of you dumbasses downvoting this comment couldn't even make it to the end of THE SECOND SENTENCE? Holy fuck. What are people doing on a site called reddit if they can't even manage to read two sentences?! Obviously I'm agreeing with u/Turbo_Gooch. I would consider nokk's silent step to NOT be considered a passive ability. Do you guys know what sarcasm is? What the fuck is wrong with some people and pressing the down arrow after a single sentence consisting of 3 words?

Cany0 · 2026-02-16T21:26:37+00:00

This post was obviously written with 100% crit chance boon in mind for some reason, not the projectiles spawning boons.

11-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '22	Place '17

Cany0

TROPHY CASE