Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by makeitstop

  1. I disagree with this. If you are shooting a DMR against a BR you have every reason to keep your distance, and vica-versa. With the DMR you have more of an advantage in staying back than you do rushing like with the BR. I specifically use dmr for btb and br for 4v4s because my playstyle is different in the two gametypes. The loadouts are what in my mind make halo no longer an arena shooter but rather a class-based shooter even if the classes are only minor differences. I do not agree that movement speed has to be changed between classes in order for there to be classes. Regardless of the semantics of what "arena" "class" symbolize, the point is as follows: Traditionally in halo every single player started off on the same exact footing with the same exact weapons and had to fight to aquire those powerweapons/powerups/equipment. No player off of the spawn was different from any other. That's what I define as "arena". (the only difference was, of course, spawn location. But that's kind of difficult to work around.) With non-mlg halo reach it became a "class" shooter (by my definition) in that now players are no longer starting the exact same, but rather have differences in armor abilites. You can approach one person off the spawn and he will jetpack up with the DMR, and a different person and he will have a plasma repeater and a drop-shield. There are now gameplay-affecting features of players that are different than one another other than just spawn location. Halo 4 took this a step further by now also having perks and even more weapon choice customization. Whether or not you agree with my definitions of "arena" and "class" shooter is irrelevant. My point is that I do not want halo to have separations in starting attributes other than spawn location- since this leads to "rock-paper-scissor" aspects, regardless of how minor they are. This leads to having to deal with enemies who just spawned differently based upon what they chose to spawn with, and it removes the predictability aspect that traditional halo had where if the enemy has a different weapon, it can be predicted because they took it off the map and it has a defined timer. Now there is an unpredictable aspect where you cannot know everything about an opponent before they come to face you. This problem is only exacerbated by the fact that you cannot see AAs on a person until they use them, as opposed to say, being able to see a rocket launcher secondary on someone's back. However the problem would still exist even if you could see them.
  2. Was watching goofy's stream but he got off for a bit. formal is on now though, i'll be in there.
  3. I loved the halo 2 ending. Totally left me pumped to "finish the fight". One of the coolest lines he ever delivered.
  4. Neither move was questionable. Legit joined the goat team of halo 4 that dropped 1 event due to not practicing/ heinz's personal problems Ambush dropped their most inconsistent player to pick up one of the top 4 in the game. Ambush now has a raw slaying power that will simply destroy everyone (except for maybe reality check).
  5. well damn no need to neg me to. this guy's going wild over here with that big red button. He's like fucking DeeDee on dextar's lab.
  6. Should've kept ambush. Like honestly. LOL @ instinct receiving 2 votes. Probably was snip3down and formal who voted it.
  7. well yeah, that's more or less what I just had. psych. I'm just tired of twitch trolls ruining it for the rest of us.
  8. makes perfect sense to me. Of course he'd rather team with pistola,formal, and snip3down.
  9. completely disagree. ambush was 10X better than instinct for them. INstinct does not fit at all.
  10. I love having productive conversations in twitch chat.
  11. Yes, I know how slayer works. Point still stands thought that the above method completely removes the initial advantage (with the exception of a tie) whilst still keeping all of those positive attributes that you talked about.
  12. They work great in BF3 because 1. the maps are absolutely massive so it represents realistic bullets- which is fun for a semi-realistic game. 2. killtimes are significantly quicker.
  13. I guess I'm the only guy to think this was a good change for both ambush and legit. Yes, legit won the last tournament, but do you really think ambush was going to let that happen again? Ambush played terribly that event since they weren't well practiced, *especially heinz*. That's why legit will trade- in his eyes formal,snip3down,pistola are better than ninja, ace, and derkeezy. I'd have to agree with legit. Also in my eyes, yes heinz is objective yatta yatta yatta, but I mean if your team has the 4 best slayers in the goddamn game (for 4v4s) I don't see how you can go wrong. I can easily see anyone of those players picking up objective slack if need be. Ambush will win. I don't see anyway around it. It's as inevitable as halo 5 having armor abilities.
  14. I still hate the windows 8 look for anything other than a touch screen though. So much more annoying than having cataloged tabs. Perhaps it has to do with kinect functionality.
  15. well yeah, I'm obviously speaking about currently though.
  16. yeah thanks haha. It actually took me like an hour to create this gif with the right quality/size/no watermark so it's nice to know that my efforts were appreciated. Also, he could be an alt account for coachmayne, so that would explain the choking.
  17. In regards to the first half of your post- basically we agree completely, but we are arguing semantics. I am differentiating the terms "imbalance" and "advantage" whereas you are equating the two terms. In other words, I believe that you can have an imbalance (on one side of the scale there are 10 apples, but on the other there is a watermelon), while still maintaing that there is no advantage (the 10 apples weigh the same as the watermelon). Whereas you are using the more literal definition of "imbalance" where the 10 apples and the watermelon are not "imbalanced" but rather perfectly balanced. Basically we are using different terminology to describe the same exact thing (which often happens). On the second part of your comment, where you mention highground, you actually just made me realize that this 2 round idea *could* make maps like highground actually playable, in the same way that 1 flag makes these maps playable. So at least it's useful for something even if people would rather not have it be used for say, Abandon. I just find it really hard to objectively quantify the imbalances/advantages that asymmetric maps give: (how do we know that the fusion coils on construct perfectly balance that spawn? Is it possible that one team still has a slight theoretical advantage assuming both teams use best play?) So for that reason I'd still like to see a 2-round system used even with maps that are asymmetric but do not noticeably give one team an advantage, such as abandon. Simply because I don't see a downside and only the upside that now it is perfectly balanced (using my definition of the word where imbalances ≠ advantages).
  18. I would argue that while the advantage may be extremely slight, and is certainly outweighed by other factors such as simply which team has better shots, there is slight imbalances nontheless that could be completely removed with this system. (kind of like how in sports they switch halves even though the asymmetries are practically nonexistent.)
  19. Only because I think it's relevant, you guys should check out this idea for asymmetric slayer and tell me if you like it/ if it's completely stupid/ whatever your opinion is: http://teambeyond.net/forum/index.php?/topic/2876-idea-for-slayer-on-asymmetric-maps/ Basically I think it's just a way to have all the good aspects of asymmetric slayer (the cool power-positions struggle/ how you react off the spawn to your situation) while making it completely balanced for both teams with the exception of a tie.
  20. What did you guys talk about? Did you talk about specific gameplay mechanics like descope/sprint/etc. or were you mostly talking about stuff like spec mode/ balancing competitive and casual communities, etc ? Basically I'm just curious as to what your conversations entailed- and what exactly the guys at 343 seemed to learn coming off of halo 4.
  21. If the skill of playing on an asymmetric map comes from seeing how teams start on it, then wouldn't having two separate starts where they get to trade places to see if one team is better than the other at both starts be better? Also, I'm not sure why it would hurt more than say, switching halves for halftime in soccer or something. - it seems to be a common occurrence in sports do to slight asymmetrical variations, so why not halo? After all, surely Abandon is more asymmetrical than a basketball court.
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy.