Jump to content

Xandrith

Member
  • Content Count

    145
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

Recent Profile Visitors

2,085 profile views
  1. I was going to respond with my perspective, but then I finished reading tell me how I am even supposed to respond to someone who STARTS a conversation with defacing anyone who might disagree... in advance I'll just hand you this downvote and move on lol
  2. Well you said that boyo never gets an explanation from me, but that's all I do! I'm probably one of the few who actually tries to answer his questions, so that's just completely unfair to say. Just because he's adamant that I don't explain myself doesn't mean it's true. I think my paragraphs on paragraphs in response to him speak for themselves.
  3. Do you really think I just never explain myself? Man that's really all I do in this place. But, then I call one point about OS obvious and suddenly I never explain? You know what's especially funny about this is that I literally did explain what I meant about OS previous to this here reply after boyo prodded. I'll admit, you dudes have found a super meta way to counter my arguments with "you don't explain anything". You don't have to contend with arguments if you deny they exist, so props for creativity I guess, but at least this is public so I can feel somewhat vindicated knowing that someone out there understand what I am saying.
  4. Yes, instant killing someone is faster than using OS to kill them, but what I am saying is that the kill with the OS is even easier to achieve and more guaranteed. So as a baseline, both resolve fights. Okay, now we can address your assumption that killing someone instantly is objectively better for gameplay than taking time. This is an absurd stance with any amount of reflection. What about average vs optimal ttk? What about the alternate fire modes with strengths and weaknesses you like so much? What about just missing shots because guns are hard to use? What about strafing? What about all of the movement ability ideas you've had, all of which would inevitably extend fights? Clearly you don't actually believe that extending fights is always a bad thing, and yet the foundation of your current argument is just that. So that's just wrong from the beginning, but what you've then said is that pulling out powerups is worse (and different) than pulling out weapons because one of those powerups, namely OS, could make a fight last longer than an instant kill with a rocket or sword would. So your entire argument against this entire new system, and your reasoning as to why it is completely different than pulling out weapons, is the effect and balance of one item. Are you kidding me? Real quick, imagine 343 added a gun that prolongs fights by giving you extra health like OS when you swap to it, like a gun shield from Apex. Would it now be reasonable to use the design of this new weapon to argue against the ENTIRE 2 weapon system in Halo? No, of course not. You don't like the design of one item, fine, but to stretch the supposed negative effects of an item to argue against OR FOR a system is plain silly. Not to mention that an overshield is an overshield, whether or not it's activated mid fight or instantly applied when walking over it. It still "prolongs" fights when in play, and yet you seem perfectly fine with it in the context of the previous pickup system. How does that work? Gonna be honest, unpacking all of your tangled logic is getting tiresome. Anyone can see that pulling out stowed items that are not communicated well introduces randomness, which is what I assumed y'all rightly disliked about this new system, but I guess I was wrong in Boyos case. Funnily enough as the cherry on top to all of this, with that light trail effect, powerups in the pocket of spartans might be even easier to see than what secondary weapon is on their back or side, making it actually less offensive than the two weapon system when it comes to predictability and knowing what you are facing.
  5. Because to win a fight you must live. OS makes you effectively invincible in a 1v1 scenario, which is why even against power weapons it probably has the advantage. Am I really explaining to you right now why an overshield helps one person kill another in Halo This has been a massive waste of time Anyways, the brute cyclone cannon is a multi-leveled mobile ballista that
  6. They don't. Are you under the impression that I like this system? I have said from the beginning that I don't like it, but that the problem with it is principally the same as the problem I have with someone pulling a sword out of their ass and killing me. I like neither. I dislike both. Both should be addressed, not just the new thing. Beyond that, the last few messages have been about how you said (referring to the difference between swapping to a weapon vs activating an OS) and I quote, "One pushes the match forward by securing a kill. The other prolongs an engagement with no benefit to the flow of the match." Then what I tried to point out is that an overshield activated mid fight absolutely WOULD secure a kill, even more effectively than most weapons, thereby (according to your reasoning) pocket OS benefits flow by resolving the conflict just like switching weapons would, as the OS player would kill the other easily. And of course after that we got lost, thanks to your addiction to asking pointless questions that have obvious answers over and over and over and over and
  7. If you really want proof my friend, we could load up some 1v1's in which I get an OS and you do not, and see how many times I can "secure a kill" on you. Or, you know, instead we could use our brains for 1.5 seconds and just guess what would happen. I don't pretend to understand how your brain works but I am supremely confident that you could make an assessment as to how that would inevitably play out.
  8. Oh Boyo. Can you not even agree that a person with OS kills a person without OS basically every single time in a 1v1? Have you ever played Halo my man? Straight up, if I had to pick one item to ensure that I win a 1v1 fight, it would be OS probably over any weapon except maybe like an incineration cannon. It's an absolutely free win against one other player and I don't think I have to convince anyone here of that, because we all play the game and know that it's true from experience after experience. How is it that something like this is even a topic right now?
  9. Getting an OS off in a fight is likely a more surefire way to kill your opponent than even switching to a rocket, and that really should be incredibly obvious. This means that both scenarios are good for "flow" as you describe, because they both result in a secured kill. So, really, this reply is a completely false dischotomy and isn't at all an explanation as to why what currently exists is good (swapping to stowed weapons) but what is new is bad (activating stowed powerups). They both result in a won fight. I don't like the lack of predictability with either thing, and that's the point. We stretch to great lengths to play devils advocate when it comes to something that already exists in Halo, but take the complete opposite path in the case of this "new" system, one that isn't a new game design at all within Halo. We can argue all day long that swapping to a weapon you picked up is coMpLeTeLy different than activating a powerup you picked up, but it's clearly, evidently, distinctly, plainly and undoubtedly not. Both should be talked about.
  10. There's plenty of nuance here, but the fundamental problem with either case, no matter which one is hypothetically worse or better, is principally the same. If you don't like people activating OS in the middle of the fight, you shouldn't like people doing the exact same thing with a weapon that wins them a fight by switching, because the only difference is how you ended up dead. Both are pickups, both can be stowed, and both can guarantee the win when swapped to/activated. Unpredictability is the fundamental problem here, and both situations create it. The kill feed is a good point, and helps in the case of weapons, but I don't think it's enough. Anyone who has ever played Halo 2 knows what it's like to have someone sword swap a few bullets into a fight, and if not you probably have experience doing it to others. Instant win. Point is this - our arguments against new systems often ironically work against wella accepted things that have been in Halo forever. It's a glaring blind spot, and Halo will stagnate for all eternity unless these things are realized @PolyG My bad, shouldn't have reacted like that
  11. This is the sort of idiotic reply I expected, and yet reading this it still surprises me just how stupid what you wrote is My man. You DO switch to power weapons to use them, which is the entire point of what I said. Pulling out a gun they didn't know I had is the same as using an OS they didn't know I had, and just as I predicted y'all are out here trying to say that these are two completely different things. Is not the entire meta game of using a sword the switching to it for the kill, then putting it away to conceal it from the next person you fight? That unpredictability for the receiving end is your advantage, and it's stupid. It's also stupid in the case of the new infinite system. They're the same. Dying to someone after they swapped to a weapon you didn't know they had (and could barely make out on their back even if you were looking for it) is the exact same thing as someone popping an OS they had. Except... you know what, that light trail could end up being even more visible than any weapon on someones back. It's the same fundamental problem, while you and others in this sycophantic community literally refuse to see one as a problem and not the other because it was always part of the game you liked, not because it's actually any different.
  12. For those criticizing the powerup system, I agree, but... we already experience that unpredictability all the time when someone swaps to a weapon you didn't know they had. It's the same problem, someone activating an OS after you shoot once, or someone pulling out a sword after a few shots. This is one of the of the many places Halo is flawed and could actually be improved. The (valid) arguments used against this new system can be applied to what already exists, but if my experience here tells me anything, y'all will find a way to defend it because it's always been that way
  13. the best thing any of you can do is move on, trust me
  14. Live is worth the living just because He lives. Happy easter guys.
  15. No. It was a co-forge, and I initially sketched it. Ask him, or read the thread. Even then, we've both made much better things since then. Goodbye boyo.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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