Jump to content

Gobias

Member
  • Content Count

    2,263
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Everything posted by Gobias

  1. A lot of characters have some really good moves, but I feel like they also have big weaknesses imo. What specifically is bugging you?
  2. Regarding the Fortnite discussion and how it’s still popular despite the relatively high skill floor... I think at least one difference is that the main goal in Fortnite isn’t to be good at the game, it’s to win at it. You can win the game without getting any kills or being good at building. And besides just winning, you can get close to winning pretty easily if you’re dealt the right hand. Do you think the majority who gamble at poker are actively trying to get better? There’s definitely a skill floor to overcome, but I think they’re just in it for the excitement and the stakes. Same with Fortnite. It’s really easy to brush off your shortcomings because losing is really quick—you can just blame the hand you were dealt, maybe they found better weapons idk. In Halo, your shortcomings can snowball repeatedly and in quick succession against just slightly more experienced players, so you are more likely to get frustrated at obstacles to your success. And I think many people, even those competent with the movement mechanics, would agree that Halo 5 is frustrating in part because of them. In Fortnite, or a more competitive example like Rocket League, those initial hurdles build into fundamental skills that are relevant to high level play and that aren’t just add-ons to keep your thumbs busy. From what I can see, the general consensus among non-competitive Halo 5 players is that the game feels sweaty. Usually this is attributed to the game supposedly being catered towards the competitive community. It’s kind of sick because clearly we also want a game that can just be enjoyed casually. I think the sweatiness is a direct result of the weapons and abilities, since it’s easy to deal damage at any range but harder to finish kills before someone thrusts away. Your second paragraph is an interesting concept. But you did answer what I would have brought up, that those low-level plays interfere with higher-level play. A prime example is how easy snapshots are with the sniper. That’s something that should be a “big play” for every Halo player, not just the ones who can barely hit a scoped-in shot anyway. Previously if arena gametypes seemed to bland for a player because they weren’t good enough to use the precision weapons or control the map, they could just go into BTB. I think that’s a perfectly fine solution that 343 unfortunately removed from the game at launch. And if we ever want our version of Halo to thrive, we’d better hope some new people out there find it at least remotely fun. I think it’s more effective to make an experience that gets better as you improve, rather than one that has a sweet spot right after you learn how to be competent with the movement but before you get bored of how the game plays when people get sweaty. Part of the reason why Halo 2 was addictive for me back in the day was that I could feel myself improve every time and get closer to my friends who had played way more Xbox. That’s still why I play (H1 these days), except now I’m better than my friends.
  3. Yeah. My point was that the two movement systems accomplish essentially the same thing—getting you to where you want to be—but one has extra hurdles thrown in. I’m kind of perplexed thinking about what is the audience that complicated movement is marketed to. It’s clearly not the beginners since the extra button presses raise the skill floor without benefit to them. It’s clearly not the pros because they’ve never been in favor of it. And I’m led to believe it’s not the mid-section of the skill distribution because then we might have a healthy, vibrant online game. I honestly don’t know. There’s no way this was appealing to new fans, though.
  4. But doesn’t driving manual require more skill than an automatic transmission?
  5. Relevant https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/forums/6e35355aecdf4fd0acdaee3cc4156fd4/topics/difficult-to-have-fun-in-halo-5-due-to-the-magnum/b79318f5-3548-42d2-93c9-e79279ceec38/posts
  6. I think you’re missing the point. How are new players supposed to have fun with the sniper when someone with an OP battle rifle is descoping them from across the map?
  7. You could tie the wall kick to releasing the jump button near a wall, so you would just hold it after jumping. At that point, I would just choose one of the mechanics and ditch the other, though.
  8. This idea would replace sprint and/or thrust. If you’ve never played a shooter with strafe running, it’s pretty cool. You run about 40% faster diagonally because your speed is not normalized. This means you can essentially sprint in four directions with a single input and without any animation. But the more interesting part is that you have insane strafing capability. You can outstrafe two people at the same time if one is in front of you and the other is to the side, since you appear to be moving at “normal” speed from both perspectives. It’s super useful in FFA when someone tries to get an easy kill from the side. If you have a really slow RoF weapon or are reloading, you can also strafe 45 degrees to your opponent to buy a little time. Since being able to move that much faster would still stretch the maps and have a lot of the negative effects of sprint (which is about 10% faster than running in H5), you could restrict the speed to be constant in all directions but leave the acceleration untouched. This means you could still have a very effective short strafe as viewed from two perpendicular directions. Alternatively, you could separate this acceleration feature from the WASD system and add it as an acceleration buff that works at all angles on the control stick. When you accelerate in any direction, the game would ask how perpendicular that direction is to your current speed (a cross product, for people who remember math), then apply a proportional buff. This would make circle strafing much snappier, for example. This would be great for helping make maps ability-proof. I was in a Discord server where someone was asking for advice on a map he thought was pretty polished, and one guy said “yeah, found a way to get out of the map where you sprint slide jump thrust ground pound stall thrust cancel stabilize mason jump clamber.” I would not want to be a forger in Halo 5 lol.
  9. I guess I didn't describe it exactly how I imagine it. Your vertical momentum would be preserved at all times. The wall kick would just add momentum in the horizontal direction. This still prevents you from getting to any higher areas than a normal jump would allow, so map designers don't have to worry about things breaking. @@Cavik when you split up every reply into 5+ quotes, it becomes tiring to continue replying to you. Especially when a lot of your responses consist of exaggerating some point in a ridiculous way while missing the point expertly. If you still can't see the crux of the argument, that thrust is fundamentally unbalanced in the context of Halo, then there's really no need to nitpick with people's sentences to continue the facade of productive discourse. There's only so much value in this theoretical talk once the fundamental ideas are laid down.
  10. @@Cavik You seem to be missing the point of my suggested compromises. They’re meant to complement the basic movement, not overtake it. The wall kick would offer you more combat strafing options while having zero negative impact on the game. When you jump near a wall, you can kick off of it at any point, or choose not to. It’s situational enough so that it doesn’t happen all the time—just like crouching or jumping in a gunfight in the original Halo games. Is it “too situational”? That’s impossible to quantify, really. I personally think it would be a useful mechanic as is, but making the speed increase be twice that of base movement would probably still not break map pathing nearly as much as thrust, and using it for escape or faster traversal would still not be viable since the fastest routes run parallel to walls, not perpendicular. Better air control would mean increasing it to something still less than grounded acceleration. It’s enough acceleration to alter your trajectory significantly without being ridiculous like the scenario you imagined. You might be able to accelerate to full base movement speed from a standing jump. I think the upper bound would be the ability to accelerate to full base movement speed by the time you reach the ground after running and jumping in the opposite direction. Obviously you playtest this so it feels good. For good measure, I’ll clarify that the air control would not make you go faster if you’re already at full base speed. Thrust will always be inherently out of place in Halo. Anything that has a cooldown timer will feel that way. Anything that removes your ability to deal damage will feel that way. Halo is based on balancing factors that feel organic and situational. It’s like if 343 realized no-scopes with the Halo 4 beam rifle were too easy and, instead of removing the bullet magnetism, decided to “balance” it by adding a charge meter that only fills up when you scope in. Not only would this not solve the problem (the feeling of noscope hits being undeserved), it would restrict players and make the game clunkier, less fluid. What possible balance could there be to thrust that doesn’t feel as unnatural as the mechanic itself? Each band-aid solution has its own negative. Halo is about seamless combination of movement and combat. Thrust is about increasing the separation between movement and combat.
  11. There’s a simple solution to this: just increase the air control. Here are some reasons this is better than thrust.• Can’t be abused to escape battles • Can’t be abused to break map pathing, except if you incorporated some subtle trick jumps intentionally designed for it • Doesn’t rely on a cooldown ability, so it feels like a natural enhancement and doesn’t put you at a huge disadvantage getting into back-to-back fights • More subtle direction change makes aim adjustments less jarring and doesn’t overshadow strafing • Much simpler input so you don’t feel compelled to claw or buy a modded controller • I could go on. I don’t see how this adds any depth to the game other than the helpless feeling of “my ability is on cooldown now I have to play the game completely differently and hope I don’t get wrecked by someone who just came off respawn.” People jump so much even without thrust because they’re hoping the momentary lapse in target acquisition causes their opponent to windmill because of the aiming system. The problem is that thrust is fundamentally a different beast. It’s the only movement ability that can be used in every situation with absolutely no tradeoff. There’s never a time when using thrust puts you at a disadvantage—it’s straight-up better than any other strafing tactic. Jumping throws off your opponent’s aim at the cost of a predictable trajectory, and it’s best used in close range as a mixup. Crouching moves your head hurtbox really quickly at the cost of slowing movement, and it’s best used in close range. Thrust is good at every range and has no tradeoff other than the opportunity cost of using it a few seconds later. It’s a prime example of an overbearing mechanic. Not exactly. Looking outside the vacuum of your proposition, thrust still increases escapability and makes players move around the map faster, so map designers increase sightlines and open up areas to counteract thrust. The average engagement range increases, meaning opponents have to adjust their aim less to account for strafing. And a lower percentage of close-quarters engagements results in fewer viable strafing tactics. The expansion of maps just increases the reliance on thrust. This all boils down to the main idea in my post, which is that having two distinct speeds/accelerations will always result in something feeling off. You could decrease the delta between the two, much like with sprint, but it’s just a fact you can’t get rid of. You might be thinking, “wow, this guy won’t come to a compromise on anything.” But that’s not true. Besides increasing air control, which would be sick, I’m a fan of the wall kick idea that I’ve been bringing up for the last couple years. Here it is. Function • Press jump while airborne in contact with a wall • A wall kick instantly redirects your movement perpendicular to that wall to be equal to base movement speed Benefits • Doesn’t introduce a separate speed • Can’t be used for escape or to break map pathing • Situational rather than omnipresent/overbearing • Doesn’t require an extra button that clutters the control scheme • Improves the utility of jumping in fights • Doesn’t require a cooldown timer Hm, same benefits as increasing air control. I wonder if combining the two would make for a genuine improvement to Halo that doesn’t divide the community yet again....
  12. Improved? Certainly, but it’s a low bar. I don’t think a thrust mechanic will ever work well with Halo. A huge reason is the aim assist balance, as Hard Way mentioned. Let’s say you have the auto aim balanced perfectly for the strafe. Now you add thrust and have two choices: 1) change nothing; 2) increase auto aim to accommodate the effectiveness of thrust. If you don’t increase auto aim, thrust is now practically guaranteed to let you dodge a shot for free. At best, the firefight is now just prolonged artificially as both sides dodge a shot for free. At worst, this compounds the problem of thrust used as an escape option because it makes you far too hard to hit. If you increase auto aim (as they did in H5), you mitigate the escaping issue but now have invalidated the basic strafe. Unless thrust recharges insanely fast, you put players at a massive disadvantage in 2v1s, not to mention completely changing the rhythm of Halo’s “joust” (a term used by a 343 designer in one of the vidocs) to revolve around one singular mechanic rather than a variety of strafing techniques and mixups. Strafing in Halo 5 is literally defined by how and when you use thrust, it’s ridiculous. And thrust’s massive importance for both strafing and general map movement really highlights how modern Halo is all about tradeoffs between movement and action, whereas the defining aspect of classic Halo was the unity of the two. I could go on and on. I really don’t like the mechanic and I don’t see how similar mechanics in other games justifies its inclusion in Halo.
  13. I don’t know if I would prefer infinite sprint, but I hate having to spam a button just to move faster. It makes the experience a chore. It’s also a big reason why I prefer Quake to Unreal Tournament, because strafejumping/bunnyhopping feels way less ADHD than constantly dodging. Same reason I hate sprint/thrust/slide in Halo 5. Honestly, once you learn how to strafejump, every other movement system feels braindead and repetitive. Might as well just have basic movement. I know this post isn’t remotely constructive but I’m not at that point yet, still in vent mode.
  14. I wouldn’t call it disingenuous since all I’ve done is look for something encouraging in their history. No dice. Regardless of how close to classic they intended the experiences to be, there hasn’t been a true success in any of their attempts. I would at least expect them to show even a little attention to detail with the weapons. I’ve given them the benefit of the doubt on a lot of things so far. There’s just no reason to at this point, since I don’t think they’ve ever understood what people enjoy about the old games. We’ll see what happens, but the hype train is not leaving the station on my watch.
  15. Some people think the classic art style in the tech demo means that Infinite will have classic gameplay. That’s a doubly optimistic view: first, that enhanced mobility is gone; second, that 343 can properly deliver on this. My thoughts aren’t related to Favyn’s recent video, but I do recommend you check that out as it’s a good watch. I’ve been thinking recently about 343’s track record with classic gameplay, trying to figure out what we would most likely get considering past offerings. Here is the list of 343’s record with the classics. Reach, CE Anniversary: the pistol has bloom and a Reach-level of auto aim. No attempt to make the strafe not be sluggish. Halo 4 Legendary Slayer: sprint still exists. Originally AR starts, if I recall, leading to absurd snowballing. BR still has spread and high auto aim. Halo 2 Anniversary: sluggish strafe compared to the original. Just as high bullet magnetism despite modern connection speeds and a modern netcode. Grenade hitmarkers and indicators! Halo CE on MCC: actually a rip of Halo PC, which completely gutted the original weapon sandbox. Halo 5, CE Throwback: the pistol has bloom and a Halo 5 level of auto aim. Spartan abilities included. Strafing unmodified. Halo 5, H3 Throwback: Spartan abilities removed, but base movement speed decreased. Battle Rifle magnetism original at stock Halo 5 levels, subsequently decreased with introduction of classic random spread. Am I missing anything? Let’s not forget that Halo 5 itself was pitched as a return to form, with “equal starts.” The question is, if we do get a “classic” Halo in Infinite, will it be the crucial step the franchise desperately needs, or will it be another snorefest of a game with the same basic set of cookie-cutter aimbot weapons. Their track record doesn't inspire hope.
  16. They didn’t want H2A to have a map they were banking on to feature in Halo 5... twice.
  17. There's a certain point where theory only has so much value. The closest comparison is probably Reach GoldPro. There isn't much footage lying around, but from what I can tell, attempting to run away is still a pretty common option. @@AkaDemiK you seem to have played those settings a fair amount. Care to weigh in on this discussion?
  18. Reducing the ammo doesn't make it any less frustrating if it's too easy. Removing the crosshairs also doesn't change much at all, besides a couple of people putting tape on their monitors. The projectile speed is where you will see the most reductions in effectiveness. Here's some old Reflex gameplay where two highly skilled players (CPMA veterans) are trying out the stake gun, since removed. This is about the success rate I would want in a noscoped sniper, but the strafe is much better than Halo's, there's wicked air control, and the projectile speed is far slower than Halo 3's. https://youtu.be/vwFHlcCPVpE?t=45s
  19. Fortunately, 343 already has the perfect solution. The sniper on PC would be as you expect—hitscan or fast projectile, and pretty easy to land a body shot or headshot noscope with either using m+k. But here’s the catch: it’s the exact same experience on console. The bullet magnetism is even higher than Halo 5’s so it’s just as easy to hit noscopes with a controller. Starting with Halo 4, this is what they’ve been preparing us for, ramping up the bullet magnetism so it wouldn’t feel jarring. They also intentionally made the mouse aiming feel bad in Halo 5 PC to make sure the sniper was balanced. They knew Halo 6 would be coming to PC. They care about us.
  20. I think 1.2s still poses a slight issue with escapability. Based on your analysis, let’s assume that that’s the longest perfect TTK that prevents the average escape attempt in a game without thrust and sprint. Going with the generous estimate of 25% of kills being perfect four-shots, the disadvantaged player can safely abandon any isolated engagement and reset the battle because he has a 75% chance of staying alive (help from teammates notwithstanding). Those are great odds for someone who should theoretically lose that engagement. So unless you’re willing to rely on teamshot to negate that escapability and screw over every experience that isn’t 4v4, there needs to be a buffer zone that ensures a higher percentage of battles can’t be escaped because of a gamble. If the perfect kill time plus one shot equaled the “minimum escapable time” of 1.2s, then a larger portion of battles, we’ll say 50%, would be inescapable by default. At this point, disadvantaged players are better off putting out the guaranteed damage on their opponent even if they end up failing the reversal. In my opinion, 0.3s doesn’t feel spammy for a shot interval in CE. I think what sets the pistol apart from Halo 5’s Magnum in this regard is the amount of shots required for a kill and how often you need to reload. For example, a 4sk DMR with a 16-bullet magazine would feel significantly less spammy than Halo 5’s 5sk Magnum with its 12-bullet magazine, even with the same firing rate. I suppose it also helps that in CE you have more time to spare in securing a kill, so pacing shots is actually quite common when you’re up. 0.33 seconds would also probably be a fine shot interval, but any longer than that starts to slow the perfect kill time down unreasonably. Regarding having uncomfortably low amounts of aim assist, I’m with you, then. I would like to mention though that bullet magnetism is still an essential part of the game. Without it, long range encounters would drag on forever, or more likely would end in constant stalemates. The bullet magnetism brings parity to long range shooting so that your gun is actually a threat beyond mid range. Looking at Halo 1 as a guideline, the bullet magnetism dies down dramatically as you get closer to your opponent—there’s no chance for them to ignore you and escape at close range, so the game pulls back and just uses friction to smooth out the larger aiming corrections. But I would still be interested to see how a console Halo game would play with zero bullet magnetism. “Open” map design might be exploited to segment maps through distance like in Halo 3, just in a non-random and not terrible way. Edit: looks like I originally quoted you twice in the same post. Quite the double kill.
  21. I’m resurrecting a recently deceased conversation since the forum ate my previous attempt a few days ago. I think a four-shot perfect kill time of 0.9s would be perfect for the next Halo. It would work just fine for all modes and it has benefits over 1.2s even in 4v4. I hope this doesn’t count as moving the goal posts since your post was against a 0.6s TTK, but there are some fundamental things I disagree with. The first thing is that I don’t think 343 should be going into this thinking, “How can we make a great 4v4 game?” They should just focus on making great 1v1 battles. If it’s not fun there, it won’t be fun when you add more players and reduce individual empowerment. Unrelated: I think the weapon balance would be a little more palatable if approached from the perspective of just one player fighting another, instead of the idea of team "roles" acquired through functional upgrades. Yes, a large disparity between perfect and average kill time is a huge factor in promoting interesting gameplay, but it’s not the only one. Being able to outshoot my opponent is an incentive to stay in the battle only if that battle is likely to continue. Let’s take a look at a common 1v1 exchange where player 1 lands a shot on player 2, who is previously unaware. Player 2 now has the choice to return fire or try to escape. If the perfect-average disparity is great enough, player 2 is more likely to stand ground in the hopes of winning the fight. But if the perfect kill time is slow enough, escape is still a viable option, and also an attractive one since player 2 is disadvantaged. To compound this, player 1 also has the option to back down at any point even if player 2 puts in better shots; he has the advantage of being aware of player 1 longer. This negatively influences player 2’s decision to hold ground since victory is less likely; player 1 could quite easily back down early, leaving player 2 with low shields and a high risk of being cleaned up. So the solution is both a high perfect-average disparity and a sufficiently low kill time, around 0.9s. 1.2s is clearly enough time for players to react and attempt escape, which reinforces defensive decision making in the two ways described above. And if the average kill time is extended by increasing the difficulty, the perceived (and actual) risk of dying while trying to escape a battle is naturally decreased—players will tend to run away more often and try to “call your bluff” that your shots are good enough to punish them. Responding to the bolded, I don’t think that’s a solid argument for making the kill time close to 1.2s than 0.9s or even 0.6s. All that accomplishes is making the game less fun for competent players in both close and easy matches. Furthermore, the kind of player that thinks the utility weapon (also known as the weapon that balances the sandbox) is overpowered is also the kind of player who thinks automatic weapons should kill faster than it. The beauty of balancing with difficulty is that a sufficiently difficult precision weapon will have a disproportionately higher average kill time at a lower level of play compared to automatics. But you also have to consider that players with worse aim also have worse strafes, so if they are playing competitively (i.e. against players of similar skill) they have no reason not to use the utility weapon. To enhance this effect, reticle friction (aim assist) could be increased while bullet magnetism (auto aim) is lowered, meaning that noobs have an easier time while pros are all but unaffected. TLDR: 4v4 Halo might need a slower perfect kill time than Halo CE’s, but it also needs to be faster than Halo 5’s so players have more incentive to play aggressively. 0.9s in four shots is the perfect recipe. Balancing this out with significantly more difficulty would produce good results at all levels of play, even allowing lower-skilled players to appreciate more of the automatic weapon usage they seem to prefer.
  22. So who’s hyped for the Halo 5 4v4 side event at Dreamhack?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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