Jump to content
TheSimms

Halo 5: Guardians eSports/Arena Weapon Starts Poll

Arena Starting Weapons (constructive post gamescom thread)  

850 members have voted

  1. 1. Exports/Arena Starting Weapon Choices

    • Pistol + AR
    • Pistol + AR (AR nerfed)
    • Pistol + AR (Pistol patched to 4SK)
    • BR + Pistol
    • BR only
    • BR + AR
    • BR + AR (AR nerfed)
    • DMR Only / With AR (Is it viable over any of the above?)
    • Pistol Only


Recommended Posts

what's the point of having a 343 pro team if not for situations like this? The pro team has had and will have the most time played on the H5 builds and since all of them were former pros they should be giving their insight on what they think on topic of discussions like these, the fact that their not might be because they might not be allowed too but which is also why we are having so many differing opinions.'

 

Looking at the poll from this community at least we want either Pistol or BR start, that much is obvious. Can I ask though why is secondary being debated on at all? We've never had a secondary except on halo 1 so do we need a secondary or do we just want one because we have such a huge sandbox to choose from?

People have said this for many many years now and I still stand by it. 

 

 

Pros don't know shit or they don't care.

  • Upvote (+1) 2
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

we just want one because we have such a huge sandbox to choose from?

Yup. Two main arguments are weapon diversity and casual transitioning.

Share this post


Link to post

People keep saying that the DMR was easy at close range. I must have forgotten every beyond player is a halo god.

 

I fully believe that a DMR-only start would be reasonably viable.

 

Nah, DMR is like a mini-sniper or support weapon. Because it's easy to use at long ranges is precisely why it wouldn't work as a starting weapon.

  • Upvote (+1) 1
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Pros just don't know much. Halo doesn't require you to be scientific about the game unlike other competitive games. Some games require you to understand the engine really well to be good but Halo doesn't need that. Not to mention anything that's not familiar to them they completely disregard (trying Android only for 30 seconds, cynosure, dmr, asymm maps in general, constant 2 base 2 tower maps, etc)

 

The only ones I'd say actually sort of know their stuff are Walshy and Ghost (even if I disagree with him),

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Pros just don't know much. Halo doesn't require you to be scientific about the game unlike other competitive games. Some games require you to understand the engine really well to be good but Halo doesn't need that. Not to mention anything that's not familiar to them they completely disregard (trying Android only for 30 seconds, cynosure, dmr, asymm maps in general, constant 2 base 2 tower maps, etc)

 

The only ones I'd say actually sort of know their stuff are Walshy and Ghost (even if I disagree with him),

I disagree, it has been said multiple times that the 343 pros are not there to simply be good at the game and to use over powered things, they are their to test every facet of the game to find out what is weak, what works here, what doesnt and what needs to be tweaked. Honestly I would take their opinion about this subject a lot more serious then anybody elses seeing as they've probably had more than 100 hrs of Halo 5 under their belt.

 

You have one guy that studies a map to a mountain everyday for an entire year and then you have the other guy who climbed the mountain everyday for an entire year.

Who are you going to trust to take you up the mountain? The guy who climbed it obviously. Works in this case as well.

Share this post


Link to post

People have said this for many many years now and I still stand by it. 

 

 

Pros don't know shit or they don't care.

Pro's know best though, they just don't care since they believe that what they say wont make a difference and they don't want to criticize 343i now that they are hosting tournaments.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Pros just don't know much. Halo doesn't require you to be scientific about the game unlike other competitive games. Some games require you to understand the engine really well to be good but Halo doesn't need that. Not to mention anything that's not familiar to them they completely disregard (trying Android only for 30 seconds, cynosure, dmr, asymm maps in general, constant 2 base 2 tower maps, etc)

 

The only ones I'd say actually sort of know their stuff are Walshy and Ghost (even if I disagree with him),

Yeah and you who are nowhere near as good as them no more than the Pro's? Pro's hate using forums because of people who think they know a lot, but don't know almost anything. Pros know the game the best, that is why they are the best. They should be the ultimate voice in every facet of competitive play, I honestly hate those people on the forum who think they know more than them.

  • Upvote (+1) 1
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

All this talk frightens me.

 

If Towey was able to help EG master the barebones H2A they are going to be damn scary with a more complex game like H5.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah and you who are nowhere near as good as them no more than the Pro's? Pro's hate using forums because of people who think they know a lot, but don't know almost anything. Pros know the game the best, that is why they are the best. They should be the ultimate voice in every facet of competitive play, I honestly hate those people on the forum who think they know more than them.

It's been a long time since I even thought about Halo but I remember some of the stuff they said that made me not give them as much credibility because they seriously made no sense

- H4 > H3 > H2 > H1

- no bloom no skill

- h3 br was 5sk

 

There's a lot more but I forgot about them. Not to mention when I at least played, the top players completely disregarded anything new. New maps in Reach were incredibly evident about this. "Wow lets create a forge map of The Pit! Not like we haven't played that for 3 years already!" or how in AGL they remade Onslaught and Narrows lmao. and it was heavily favored by top players  rather than new maps which were actually good. But since top players really don't want to test new stuff out, the maps never got much light. Does H2A even have any maps that aren't remakes? Lol

 

Pros are good for giving empirical evidence on what works in top play but some of their opinions are mad janky. If I could have Ogre 2 or Chaos Theory in 343i for giving well thought out opinions on how the game is, I'd pick cT 10/10 times. However, I'd pick Ogre 2 10/10 times for playing the game and abusing everything about it since he can show whats abusable, weak, etc. 

 

I remember also that in h4, they all said the BR was harder to use when if you literally look at their stats and their hit rate, DMR always had a lower hit rate than the BR. Not to mention the BR had spread so the stats showing that was really ridiculous

 

I disagree, it has been said multiple times that the 343 pros are not there to simply be good at the game and to use over powered things, they are their to test every facet of the game to find out what is weak, what works here, what doesnt and what needs to be tweaked. Honestly I would take their opinion about this subject a lot more serious then anybody elses seeing as they've probably had more than 100 hrs of Halo 5 under their belt.

 

You have one guy that studies a map to a mountain everyday for an entire year and then you have the other guy who climbed the mountain everyday for an entire year.

Who are you going to trust to take you up the mountain? The guy who climbed it obviously. Works in this case as well.

Oh. were we just talking about the pro team? I agree they're a good asset to abuse the game but i was more just talking about the top players as a whole

  • Upvote (+1) 7

Share this post


Link to post

Pros just don't know much. Halo doesn't require you to be scientific about the game unlike other competitive games. Some games require you to understand the engine really well to be good but Halo doesn't need that. Not to mention anything that's not familiar to them they completely disregard (trying Android only for 30 seconds, cynosure, dmr, asymm maps in general, constant 2 base 2 tower maps, etc)

 

The only ones I'd say actually sort of know their stuff are Walshy and Ghost (even if I disagree with him),

 

Response to Bold:

To piggyback this, when I was working with Ghost in Halo 4 on the settings that would become the Team Throwdown settings... he didn't know what Spring Jumping was.  Spring Jumping existed throughout the entirety of Halo Reach (and continued to exist in H4 and H2A)--but someone who played the game at the professional level had no idea what it was -- and even some other pros that he'd brought in to show/test the maps had no clue.

 

Response to Italics:

I'd argue part of that, though, is just the decline of competitive interest in the series as it has gone on.  In HCE, pros / people who still LAN the game know how to force Randoms like the back of their hand.  They know all the grenade spots for getting power weapons where they need them.  In H2C, pros needed to be able to double/quad/BxR/BxB to keep up.  It's an arms race of knowing how to abuse the engine properly.  When those features were cut, really all that was left to learn was jumping...which, people knew a few neat jumps in H3, but we rarely saw pros attempt most jumps -- with only hidden ledge ones really getting attention.  The only ghost jumps I remember seeing a pro pull off was bottom mid -> top mid on Onslaught and Cuts -> Plat on Pit.

 

Response to Underline:

Android was on the circuit for two events, wasn't it?  A big part of that map's problems (despite it's actual FANTASTIC design, sightlines, and general flow) was less the map itself and more related to Reach's spawn system having Death as the strongest weighting in the game other than direct sightlines.  Since Death outweighed ally influence, players often spawned away from their allies (and by extension, directly behind you).

 

I agree with Cynosure being a good map though. :(

 

Response to last line:

Again, part of this is just a lack of necessity for pros to learn the game anymore, due to the low level of competitive interest.  Players don't learn anything new, so the ones at the top don't have to push their knowledge further to really stay that far ahead.

 

Some pros are active students of the game -- from what I've seen/heard, Blaze and Naded both try to learn all the tricks of the game.  Munoz put in a lot of time in H2A learning/practicing spring jumps and nerdy grenades.  Ryanoob definitely tries to learn the game he plays in addition to learning his opponents (I'm not sure if Lethul was ACTUALLY serious when he said Ryanoob has a notebook that he writes down what players' response to him doubling back on Warlord portals, but I wouldn't be surprised.)...but they aren't necessarily good at articulating their thoughts (see David Sirlin's Balancing Multiplayer Games Part 4: Intuition regarding Mental Iceberg).  I'm the opposite -- I'm not at their level of play, but I'm fantastic at translating what they're doing into something that can be understood with fundamental comparisons.

  • Upvote (+1) 7

Share this post


Link to post

Response to Bold:

To piggyback this, when I was working with Ghost in Halo 4 on the settings that would become the Team Throwdown settings... he didn't know what Spring Jumping was.  Spring Jumping existed throughout the entirety of Halo Reach (and continued to exist in H4 and H2A)--but someone who played the game at the professional level had no idea what it was -- and even some other pros that he'd brought in to show/test the maps had no clue.

 

 

 

Response to Italics:

I'd argue part of that, though, is just the decline of competitive interest in the series as it has gone on.  In HCE, pros / people who still LAN the game know how to force Randoms like the back of their hand.  They know all the grenade spots for getting power weapons where they need them.  In H2C, pros needed to be able to double/quad/BxR/BxB to keep up.  It's an arms race of knowing how to abuse the engine properly.  When those features were cut, really all that was left to learn was jumping...which, people knew a few neat jumps in H3, but we rarely saw pros attempt most jumps -- with only hidden ledge ones really getting attention.  The only ghost jumps I remember seeing a pro pull off was bottom mid -> top mid on Onslaught and Cuts -> Plat on Pit.

 

- I think you might be right. But yeah, the games (now at least) don't let you mess with the engine a lot. In other games like SF4, you can cause reset combos that are incredibly ambiguous (and some literally teleporting you) but to actually get an ambiguous one, you need to learn hitboxes and the property of the game with a bunch of stuff.  There's not much of an equivalent to that in Halo these days at least. And for h2, did you really need to know Double shotting and quad shotting and practice it? Honestly I rarely saw the two button glitches used in top play besides maybe Ninja the Eli. Jumps were rarely abused to the extent they could have been (even in Halos prime) I see your point though, maybe its just more the game limiting you in creativity now. 

 

Response to Underline:

Android was on the circuit for two events, wasn't it?  A big part of that map's problems (despite it's actual FANTASTIC design, sightlines, and general flow) was less the map itself and more related to Reach's spawn system having Death as the strongest weighting in the game other than direct sightlines.  Since Death outweighed ally influence, players often spawned away from their allies (and by extension, directly behind you).

 

I agree with Cynosure being a good map though. :(

 

- Honestly I don't remember the issue with that map but I was more referencing how top players would generally not give new maps the light of day unless completely forced to by MLG or whatever. I honestly didn't see a lot of test by good players running new maps that were potentially in. And I think Android was really in because of Anakin IIRC.

 

- RIP Cynosure and Oversoul (I also liked Awesometown) 

 

Response to last line:

Again, part of this is just a lack of necessity for pros to learn the game anymore, due to the low level of competitive interest.  Players don't learn anything new, so the ones at the top don't have to push their knowledge further to really stay that far ahead.

 

Some pros are active students of the game -- from what I've seen/heard, Blaze and Naded both try to learn all the tricks of the game.  Munoz put in a lot of time in H2A learning/practicing spring jumps and nerdy grenades.  Ryanoob definitely tries to learn the game he plays in addition to learning his opponents (I'm not sure if Lethul was ACTUALLY serious when he said Ryanoob has a notebook that he writes down what players' response to him doubling back on Warlord portals, but I wouldn't be surprised.)...but they aren't necessarily good at articulating their thoughts (see David Sirlin's Balancing Multiplayer Games Part 4: Intuition regarding Mental Iceberg).  I'm the opposite -- I'm not at their level of play, but I'm fantastic at translating what they're doing into something that can be understood with fundamental comparisons.

 

- I actually remember Bravo, while not being a top player, showing a shit ton of nerdy nade spots on Sanc IIRC. Maybe for whatever reason the community in general doesn't know about it. It's at least a bit more open in other games and for whatever reason halo players are just really quiet about it. Maybe it's the mental iceberg but even if they don't articulate their points well, I think some of the stuff was pretty odd to say the least.  But yea I can agree that they're students of the game.

 

- Though I still think just because they're top players doesn't mean their opinion is what I would say as "good" as some people do

bawld

Share this post


Link to post

exactly why it's objectively the worse choice of the two, it's a crutch

 

Knowledge > Shot

Share this post


Link to post

Yeh I was referring to the 343 pro team not people who have influence on themselves because they still compete, the unbiased or mostly unbiased opinions should be coming from the 343 pro team who can't compete anymore while working for 343 so their input would help a lot

Share this post


Link to post

Yeh I was referring to the 343 pro team not people who have influence on themselves because they still compete, the unbiased or mostly unbiased opinions should be coming from the 343 pro team who can't compete anymore while working for 343 so their input would help a lot

 

Regarding Pro Team (343) and the subject of Pistol vs Magnum balance, I would think the best was for them to put it to the test is through rigorous Octogon sessions where one player spawns with the Magnum and the other with the BR. With their Opt TTKs and difference in ease of use (Avg TTK), I'd imagine that the BR would come out on top more frequently, or at best marginaly less than the Magnum. In either situation, that shows the Risk vs Reward of using the Magnum compared to the BR is skewered towards Risk greatly outweighing reward.

 

However, I doubt they're testing the weapons in a vacuum like that. :/

Share this post


Link to post

Regarding Pro Team (343) and the subject of Pistol vs Magnum balance, I would think the best was for them to put it to the test is through rigorous Octogon sessions where one player spawns with the Magnum and the other with the BR. With their Opt TTKs and difference in ease of use (Avg TTK), I'd imagine that the BR would come out on top more frequently, or at best marginaly less than the Magnum. In either situation, that shows the Risk vs Reward of using the Magnum compared to the BR is skewered towards Risk greatly outweighing reward.

 

However, I doubt they're testing the weapons in a vacuum like that. :/

 

This would be a terrible idea because octagon does not represent actual gunfights at all. How many fights take place on even elevation, with absolutely no place to hide, at a given range, with no teammates nearby? Not to mention you can't peek-shoot at all, something that plays differently burst vs single shot (granted the BR burst in h5 is fast, but it is still there)

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

This would be a terrible idea because octagon does not represent actual gunfights at all. How many fights take place on even elevation, with absolutely no place to hide, at a given range, with no teammates nearby? Not to mention you can't peek-shoot at all, something that plays differently burst vs single shot (granted the BR burst in h5 is fast, but it is still there)

 

Octagon isn't even about gun battles, it's about getting one kill and then spawn killing with the Sniper.

Share this post


Link to post

Knowledge > Shot

knowledge + shot= skill gap

you need both just as much as each other for the skill gap to be high. especially if you're trying to make arena gameplay

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Octagon isn't even about gun battles, it's about getting one kill and then spawn killing with the Sniper.

 

My point was there needs to be some form to empirically test weapon balance in a vacuum. Of course Octagon has its flaws, namely the one you pointed out, but that could be circumvented (possibly) if it was set to 1-kill rounds, that way each time the players are off to an even start.

 

And yes, @@Nabster, engagements occur in dynamic environments in the game. One player may have superior positioning that offers them the advantage in a gunfight. You CAN'T test weapon balance in such an enviroment because such dynamics skewer the data. That's why it needs to be conducted in a vacuum where factors are diminished as close as possible to only the gun mechanics and player aim/movement skill.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Haven't read the entire thread but AR starts seems like an awful idea to me. Close quarters battles will result in AR spray and pray fights, which aren't competitive or fun to watch.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

You think BR starts will be any better homeslice? Read Infinity's post and educate yourself fool.

Link to his post? I haven't been around for months

Share this post


Link to post

Octagon isn't even about gun battles, it's about getting one kill and then spawn killing with the Sniper.

I just tell me friend to do 5min of br then 5 of sniper.

Share this post


Link to post

My point was there needs to be some form to empirically test weapon balance in a vacuum. Of course Octagon has its flaws, namely the one you pointed out, but that could be circumvented (possibly) if it was set to 1-kill rounds, that way each time the players are off to an even start.

 

And yes, @@Nabster, engagements occur in dynamic environments in the game. One player may have superior positioning that offers them the advantage in a gunfight. You CAN'T test weapon balance in such an enviroment because such dynamics skewer the data. That's why it needs to be conducted in a vacuum where factors are diminished as close as possible to only the gun mechanics and player aim/movement skill.

 

Maybe I didn't explain myself well enough.

 

You think by doing it "octagon style" you will create a sort of "controlled experiment" or vacuum as you call it.  In regards to the bold, this would only make sense if having an actual map in a game with other players was causing "randomness" in regards to what we are trying to find out. I think you can see yourself how absurd that sounds. What you think are "random effects" are actually "interaction effects" and disregarding them will skewer intepretation. This is because the average kill time is dependant on the situation you are trying to remove.

As an example,remember that video Simms posted where a guy starts running away and he completly whiffs all his pistol shots because of the difference in evelation? You aren't going to see that in octagon.

If your octagon test proved that the killtime of the pistol was faster than the BR if nobody can run away, but in real matches everyone who makes the effort can back down before the pistol kills them, your results now do not hold any merit.

 

Doing your "octagon test" will only provide information for what happens in octagon, and thus might provide some insight, but should absolutely not be overstated.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe I didn't explain myself well enough.

 

You think by doing it "octagon style" you will create a sort of "controlled experiment" or vacuum as you call it.  In regards to the bold, this would only make sense if having an actual map in a game with other players was causing "randomness" in regards to what we are trying to find out. I think you can see yourself how absurd that sounds. What you think are "random effects" are actually "interaction effects" and disregarding them will skewer intepretation. This is because the average kill time is dependant on the situation you are trying to remove.

As an example,remember that video Simms posted where a guy starts running away and he completly whiffs all his pistol shots because of the difference in evelation? You aren't going to see that in octagon.

If your octagon test proved that the killtime of the pistol was faster than the BR if nobody can run away, but in real matches everyone who makes the effort can back down before the pistol kills them, your results now do not hold any merit.

 

Doing your "octagon test" will only provide information for what happens in octagon, and thus might provide some insight, but should absolutely not be overstated.

 

That's entirely the point. Testing in a vacuum provides the base balance that is further altered by map design elements. It's the basis of building an empirical model. When you factor in map elements to the balancing of weapons, it complicates the process as you must account for other factors such as elevation, exposure, and player awareness. These factors can be replicated by the player/user of either weapon. Testing with these elements in play complicates the balancing process.

 

Also, no where in my post did I state "random". I'd appreciate it if you didn't put words in my mouth in an attempt to detract from my argument. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post

Do note, I am looking at this from the same perspective as I do economic modeling. You build a base theory that exists in a vacuum and then begin adding in other factors to test if the base holds up empirically. If weapon A is X percent better than weapon B in a vacuum, it should hold out as the better weapon in a game, all else equal. If map environment factor Y skewers favor of Z percent towards either weapon, it's modifying the base balance. If it's modifying weapon A, then A is now X+Z percent better than B. If its modifying weapon B, the greater of A+X(of A) versus B+Z, or A versus B+Z-X(ofA), is the superior weapon in that scenario.

 

Or am I overthinking this. Mathematically, it makes sense to me.

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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