Jump to content

_Synapse

Member
  • Content Count

    953
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    32

Recent Profile Visitors

4,509 profile views
  1. Yes. Quality over quantity. Beam rifle functions more or less how it currently does but with the ability to pop off 3 quick shots before overheating - the beam itself rebounds from a surface it meets at any contact angle and continues to move and rebound till it contacts 6 surfaces or leaves the map. It leaves a trail marking the beam's path from the point of firing. The beam is a 2SK with bodyshots prior to a ricochet, but a 1SK with bodyshots after. Like a dedicated bank shot sniper rifle.
  2. Best part of Halo OSTs are the orchestral and ambient tracks, the rock/metal is usually cringe with a small handful of exceptions
  3. Yes. Something that pushes people out, kills them for entering an area, or completely closes a room is bad for both map flow and design. A power drain can be either hard AoE or soft AoE, depending on the size of the area it restricts, the map it's placed on, and the severity of the punishment for walking into it's EMP field. Hard AoE = You can't walk into this part of the map at all for whatever reason, for however large or small a segment of time without dying to things that are beyond the direct action of some player. Soft AoE = Anything offensively oriented and AoE-related that doesn't fall into the above threshold. The alt fire on the Gravity Bow you're proposing would be fine. Players are responsible for their own awareness and not getting hit by projectile weaponry. Not that I'd implement something like this, though. Damage hitmarkers on anyone who isn't in LoS while they take said damage is autopilot. Not only is it autopilot, it's free information. One of the softer guidelines I planned to include later. I expected this response for strafe. "Player randomness" is specifically a concern with regards to mental skill, not mechanical skill - a completely different type of skill that can't be reduced to mental skill and vice versa. Besides, a crisp strafe isn't particularly amplifying randomness. Players can still strafe in only 5 cardinal directions on an opponent's screen. Amplifying randomness would be something like giving them forge monitor-esque movement to strafe with. The acceptable threshold for mechanical randomness isn't something I've pondered on just yet though. Maybe I'll put it in the next thing I write.
  4. I think some barriers should be set before any real discussion on sandbox mechanics takes place. There are several things we already know to avoid: 1) RNG: Mechanics that directly or indirectly rely on algorithmic randomness should be avoided. These are bad because they can't be predicted or mastered, and only introduce chaos to the game. 2) Hard Movement-based Crowd Control: Mechanics that don't allow targeted players to move, jump, crouch or turn at their default sensitivity should be avoided. These are bad because while they can be predicted and mastered, they're not symmetrical and don't allow targeted players a fair opportunity to retaliate, usually by directly affecting their capacity to escape/strafe. 3) Hard AoE: Mechanics that restrict significant portions of map area should be avoided. Maps are usually designed with each area playing specific and important roles, and the ability to shut off routes or deny access to rooms has massive ramifications with regards to map flow. You can't design maps for hard AoE without forcing some level of redundant pathing and sightlines. 4) Stalemate: Mechanics that induce stalemates should be avoided. They are bad because they break game pacing to accomplish no real purpose. They also lower skillcap. 5) Skill Asymmetry: Mechanics that don't allow targeted players to fight back - on a mechanical or mental level, should be avoided. They are bad because, they don't allow targeted players a fair opportunity to retaliate or counter. 6) Autopilot: Mechanics that directly play the core aspects of game for the player (legal aimbotting, wallhacking) should be avoided. They are bad because they're taking away some component of player agency/accountability and doing it for them. Note: Core aspects refers to specific mental and mechanical skills that aren't menial. Highlighting where an item spawns is fine, since you're getting rid of menial memorization - something not crucial to the game. Telling the player that an item's ready and to pick it up is not fine, because you're now directly giving the player awareness on an item and mentally handholding them. 7) Non-RNG RNG: Mechanics that directly amplify player randomness (as opposed to computationally generated randomness) should be avoided. These are bad because they erode the predictability that's essential in preventing information asymmetry and consequently, other forms of asymmetry. Note: This one was fairly grey compared to the rest, because there's a lot of prediction and intuition that's the result of player randomness. However, the way I've thought about it - prediction and intuition are emphasized when randomness is removed to the largest extent possible, and players are given a small handful of choices to make at any point, as opposed to an overwhelming amount of them. Consider pathing on Amplified VS pathing on Chill Out, for example. These are the hard guidelines I could come up with, but there's a lot of soft guidelines and other grey areas that are also pretty significant when it comes to design. I'll post some of them later. Thoughts?
  5. You think they'll let us have different types of pings? There's 2 free buttons on the D-Pad (3 if we only restrict grenade inventory to two types at a time). Ping 1: Get to this place ASAP. Ping 2: Enemies here, keep an eye out and don't walk facefirst into several of them. Ping 3: Item here now/soon. I'm curious about a few other things too. How many active pings can a single player place? How long does it take for a ping to disappear? Is it a FIFO system where upon reaching a team ping limit, the game clears out older pings from memory and replaces them with new ones? Also it's ridiculous to suggest that a ping system influences map design substantially. 343i aren't hyper-analytical nerds like us, they just add random shit because it looks fun and worry about consequences later. On the topic of non-shield armor pickups, just make the game have non-resetting health and let players spawn with a default 50% or 33% of max health, being able to pickup small health powerups scattered throughout the map. Cloak the players in a greenish hue that varies in intensity to represent their health vitality. Of course, whether it's a good idea in the first place is a question worth asking. It'd somewhat fuck with sandbox design, for sure.
  6. Giving the opposing team points instead of simply taking them off the offending team's points is a giant no-no.
  7. IMO, the only real point in favor of keeping play ball as it is, is to prevent the ball from getting permalocked in a single part of the map due to constant collapses from alternating teams. Though, it's the map's fault and not the lack of ability to play ball - if this happens. You want natural and seamless ball turnover to occur as a function of who makes better plays, not for it to be randomly interrupted by the ball being tossed off the map.
  8. Yes. Not really? It's kind of like error handling in programming but for map design - you need something to happen if the ball gets tossed off, so respawning it in the centre seems like the most reasonable. The only reason it's stayed the way it is, is because Bungie were thinking of amazing and cool new innovations like armor lock and bloom and 343 are thinking of amazing and cool new innovations like sprinting with the flag and ADS on autos. You're not really "punished", you're just gambling score for whether your team can make another go at the ball. It's a cheap denial tactic to me because we'd be calling bullshit on it if it were in any other single item based OBJ mode. Tossing flag off maps in 1 flag, bomb off maps in assault, or basically having the ability to instantaneously burn a power weapon before you die are all things we'd be unanimously calling bullshit on. Whether you can reobtain the ball after it's played is immaterial, it's just cheap af to be able to deny the ball like that in the first place. Not that an opposing team can't retake the ball after it's played.
  9. Amazed that there hasn't been some sort of smart-handicap system implemented for matchmaking. Teammate quits, you get a score boost / lower score to win in order to keep your team on parity with the opposing team. For slayer, you could even make a conservative kills-per-half-minute calc for the quitter, find their predicted kills for the full game, and bump up their team's score to that much. We're getting bots so maybe that'll count for something towards this. I'm not too keen though, bad players (and poorly programmed bots) can easily weigh down a team a disproportionate amount by anchoring spawns in the worst places possible. OBJ couldn't really be helped like this though. Numbers disadvantages are amplified in OBJ so players on a quitters' team are kind of fucked unless they're assisted by a competent bot. I'm also really on the fence about being able to play the ball. You held control of the objective for whatever time period, and depending on how well your team played, you lost control of it. Throwing a ball off the map makes game flow more interesting but it also feels like a cheap denial tactic. In that case, "setups" where you can viably play the ball should be harder to maintain and defend than setups where you can't play the ball - making teams have to decide carefully where they want to hold out. If not, maybe a slight score penalty for playing the ball? It accomplishes something similar, where teams now have to gamble on whether the score penalty incurred is worth less or more than being able to reset the ball's position.
  10. I'd let zombies who score kills "rank up" and become progressively more dangerous. One kill earns a permanent speed boost, two kills earns a permanent 1HK melee, three kills earns a shield that can survive a single headshot from the survivors' secondary weapons, 4 kills earns a Reach-esque evade button, etc. I'd let zombies spawn with a single AOE-effect nade. All of this in addition to my own proposition for the sword redesign. I don't play any infection at all on the sole note that I find it unbelievably fucking boring to play as either a survivor or a zombie. I think the mode has some potential if you design it to encourage frantic run-and-gun play rather than the 7-players-jerking-off-in-the-corner play that it currently does. SWAT ideally wouldn't suck in a game where it was actually difficult to land a headshot and bodyshots didn't kill too fast. No major complaints here, though I hate SWAT as it exists too. Race is also largely fine, though your average Halo vehicle controls unacceptably badly for race, IMO. Any cross-bred minigames would probably be pretty fun too.
  11. To add (somewhat late) to the sandbox question from quite a few pages back, I don't want the core arena mode to have a gigantic sandbox. 6-8 weapons, and a few powerups are totally fine. The core arena mode provides a sterilized environment wherein the gameplay flow that makes 4v4 Halo "tick" is allowed to breathe without any gimmicks interfering. No, you wouldn't get a needler in 4v4 ranked. There's nothing preventing a large and expansive sandbox from staying in other social playlists, or maybe even other niche ranked playlists. There's a tendency on here to underestimate just how much Halo 5's sandbox appealed to nu-Halo players - even if it was pretty one dimensional - solely because most weapons were useful. There's also a tendency here to assume that a hyper-sterile, distilled competitive appeal is good for Halo. It's not. Halo's something that the vast majority of people who've had experience with and it's own playerbase - associate with dumb fun and screwing around with friends. It's extremely easy to facilitate this without sacrificing competitive integrity too, so there's no reason to slash shit that would otherwise have casuals putting in several hours a week.
  12. I like Slayer due to the inherent simplicity of the mode but I agree that it's a fairly non-cerebral mode. Really, just design slayer maps that place emphasis on cerebral play and punish the lack thereof. It's that simple.
  13. Not an unpleasant surprise but when exactly was it that you 180'd on TTK
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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