Jump to content
CyReN

Halo Infinite Discussion

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, S0UL FLAME said:

Quake.

Quad damage?

Share this post


Link to post

The Ammo Pack pick up provides one magazine of modified ammo for the weapon the player had equipped on pick up.  Each weapon is modified in a unique and different way.

 

The Quad Damage Power Up quadruples the damage output of every weapon for 30 seconds.

 

@S0UL FLAME :

XFqHtXE.jpg

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Downvote (-1) 1
  • Fire (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

I’m curious, how many of you actually think no sprint might happen and if it doesn’t how many of you won’t buy the game?

Share this post


Link to post

I hope for no sprint but not confident in it. I'll play the game (via game pass) just for the Campaign, probably play multiplayer and give it a try but if it's anything like the last couple games it'll die quickly for me. 

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Arlong said:

The 1-50 ranking system. There’s basically no one who plays other games that would prefer that over division ranking. Division ranking is far more balanced in the sense it puts you where you belong after ten matches. Why should we have a guy like Orge 2, Roy, etc be allowed to stomp all the way up to 50? And when they’ve made it to that rank what then? There’s no incentive to stay on that account. With division ranking you need to keep playing for a decent period of time or risk losing that max rank. 343 literally did division wrong by implementing it the wrong way, it also doesn’t help that they don’t have party matching, this would of changed the accuracy of placements. 

On 6/24/2019 at 12:57 PM, Apoll0 said:

I would prefer the visible rankings of 1-50, with modern placement and matchmaking.

 

Ah, yeah I thought me saying "Modern placement and matchmaking" covered that. Placement matches and smarter matchmaking/team building are needed. Re-certification and high-level rank decay optional but welcome.  I'm purely talking about the visible ranks of 1-50.  Throw some symbols on there like they used to do with Halo 2 once you get into the 50+ range.  There is nothing wrong with a little nostalgia when done proper, in this case being purely symbolic and frankly a heck of a lot easier to compare players.

1 hour ago, Exidrion said:

I’m curious, how many of you actually think no sprint might happen and if it doesn’t how many of you won’t buy the game?

0% chance there won't be sprint. Nothing would make me happier than to be wrong, but I have no hope for it.  I have game pass anyway, so i'll give it a shot regardless but my playtime might be incredibly short.

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

One reason I didn’t give Halo 5 a chance is that I didn’t want to buy an expensive paperweight (xbox) to play it. If I got Halo 6 for PC and didn’t enjoy it, I would only be wasting $60 instead of hundreds.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

@BoyoYou know there's also the molten nail ammo in that one DLC for Quake1.  You thought you were slick, smh.

Anyway...

Used to be if nothing else I could justify buying the games for the campaign even if the multiplayer sucked.  But lately the campaign has been a dumpster fire too for a variety of reasons.  Probably a no-buy from me the moment I see Sprint unless people I actually trust are giving the campaign rave reviews.

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
18 minutes ago, Gobias said:

One reason I didn’t give Halo 5 a chance is that I didn’t want to buy an expensive paperweight (xbox) to play it. If I got Halo 6 for PC and didn’t enjoy it, I would only be wasting $60 instead of hundreds.

or better, get game pass for one month for $15, try it, then cancel if it sucks.  Now you're only out $15 instead of $60.  By then they might have a PC only version that's only $10.

Share this post


Link to post

Don’t pretend like you don’t want to shoot a Wraith mortar from your plasma pistol or get a 50 foot lunge with the sword.

Share this post


Link to post

I have gamepass, so trying the game is a given. Odds are high though my tolerance for any mobility based bullshit will be low. If its mobility based, I'll probably try to force myself to like it or find anything to enjoy about it, at first. But if Halo 5's any indication, I'll eventually just reach a point of indifference and disinterest in the game that it very much will deserve. A feeling that I hope will spread throughout the fanbase. If, its mobility based, that is.

Share this post


Link to post
32 minutes ago, The Tyco said:

I have gamepass, so trying the game is a given. Odds are high though my tolerance for any mobility based bullshit will be low. If its mobility based, I'll probably try to force myself to like it or find anything to enjoy about it, at first. But if Halo 5's any indication, I'll eventually just reach a point of indifference and disinterest in the game that it very much will deserve. A feeling that I hope will spread throughout the fanbase. If, its mobility based, that is.

Wait you WANT people to be disinterested in Halo? Because you don't like the game? Weird. 

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Boyo said:

Don’t pretend like you don’t want to shoot a Wraith mortar from your plasma pistol or get a 50 foot lunge with the sword.

I hope proper mod support on PC lets you do shit like that because it is fun in small doses.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I think there could be a sort of compromise with divisions and using the "Grandmaster" bracket with H2 rank symbols (and/or Reach level ranks.)

I personally dont find an issue with using divisions given the matchmaking (the part that matters most) has features like party matchmaking.

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Apoll0 said:

Ah, yeah I thought me saying "Modern placement and matchmaking" covered that. Placement matches and smarter matchmaking/team building are needed. Re-certification and high-level rank decay optional but welcome.  I'm purely talking about the visible ranks of 1-50.  Throw some symbols on there like they used to do with Halo 2 once you get into the 50+ range.  There is nothing wrong with a little nostalgia when done proper, in this case being purely symbolic and frankly a heck of a lot easier to compare players.

0% chance there won't be sprint. Nothing would make me happier than to be wrong, but I have no hope for it.  I have game pass anyway, so i'll give it a shot regardless but my playtime might be incredibly short.

The problem is how do we sort this out correctly?  Based on placement matches is someone level 33 or something? 

Rge wisest decision is simply your typical bronze to champion. This is based on an ELO rating. We don’t kids who’s skill is of a silver in platinum. 1-50 is literally for the people who hate how they can’t play once in a blue moon and not be at max rank anymore.  

  • WutFace (+0) 1

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, Arlong said:

The problem is how do we sort this out correctly?  Based on placement matches is someone level 33 or something? 

What's the difference between some placing in X (say Platinum or Diamond) or placing at level 33?

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, My Namez BEAST said:

Wait you WANT people to be disinterested in Halo? Because you don't like the game? Weird. 

I want Halo to improve itself, that's why. Mobility based Halo is not an improvement, and therefore the community will reflect that, just like Halo 5's underwhelming mediocrity. It's less of a wish, and more of knowing it will happen if 343 refuses to learn their lesson, again.

  • Like (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Arlong said:

The problem is how do we sort this out correctly?  Based on placement matches is someone level 33 or something? 

Rge wisest decision is simply your typical bronze to champion. This is based on an ELO rating. We don’t kids who’s skill is of a silver in platinum. 1-50 is literally for the people who hate how they can’t play once in a blue moon and not be at max rank anymore.  

Why should it matter if you haven't played in a while? Rank is just as much a trophy as it is an identifier of your skill. Nothing more annoying than logging on and seeing your hard earned rank read as "unranked" because it's a new season.

 

I also think half the battle of rank systems is seeing your rank go up as you climb, placement matches takes that away because you're usually placed right at your threshold with an intelligent system. Not a fan at all of the current rank system used in basically every game out right now.  

Share this post


Link to post
35 minutes ago, MultiLockOn said:

Why should it matter if you haven't played in a while? Rank is just as much a trophy as it is an identifier of your skill. Nothing more annoying than logging on and seeing your hard earned rank read as "unranked" because it's a new season.

 

I also think half the battle of rank systems is seeing your rank go up as you climb, placement matches takes that away because you're usually placed right at your threshold with an intelligent system. Not a fan at all of the current rank system used in basically every game out right now.  

So you want the ranking system to be a show of your skill level, but you also want the battle of climbing through the lower ranks, where it isn’t an indication of your skill? 

 

I think ink placements are needed so people are matched where they need to be. Your want for the climb and grind can be done in a few ways. One is add back what Halo 3 did with the playlist ranks, so you can grind to get a 5 star general rank. There’s also the system rocket league has where to get your rewards for the season you have to win 10 games from your rank and above, and need to do air 10 times for every rank. So if you want goo rewards, you need 10 wins at bronze or higher, 10 wins at silver or higher, and 10 wins at gold or higher. Another thing could be that placements don’t place you above, let’s say, rank 30, so you’d still have to grind up, but I dont like that too much because it doesn’t represent your skill.

 

also you can combat rank decay by instead doing what Rocket League does. If you’re inactive for too long, you would need to replay a certain amount of placement games to slightly re evaluate your skill level and re place you.

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, andregr said:

So you want the ranking system to be a show of your skill level, but you also want the battle of climbing through the lower ranks, where it isn’t an indication of your skill? 

 

I think ink placements are needed so people are matched where they need to be. Your want for the climb and grind can be done in a few ways. One is add back what Halo 3 did with the playlist ranks, so you can grind to get a 5 star general rank. There’s also the system rocket league has where to get your rewards for the season you have to win 10 games from your rank and above, and need to do air 10 times for every rank. So if you want goo rewards, you need 10 wins at bronze or higher, 10 wins at silver or higher, and 10 wins at gold or higher. Another thing could be that placements don’t place you above, let’s say, rank 30, so you’d still have to grind up, but I dont like that too much because it doesn’t represent your skill.

 

also you can combat rank decay by instead doing what Rocket League does. If you’re inactive for too long, you would need to replay a certain amount of placement games to slightly re evaluate your skill level and re place you.

Well eventually everyone would settle at their skill regardless. The first month or so of ranked might be a bit messy but it would calm down after that, arguably more accurately than placements ever would. Because I've never once seen a placement match algorithm that was actually accurate, which is perhaps an even bigger issue than people being represented as less skilled as they are which the H3/2 system does. 

 

I also think that the placement matches do a lot to disincentivize people playing the game. The idea is that it resets and you feel obligated to get back on and play more but in my experience it's usually the opposite where I just get annoyed and don't want to reearn it because you're constantly stripped of what you had. Like I said, it's as much as a trophy as it is a representation of skill. You wouldn't take away a world cup medal from a team that won in the 90's even though they're old and retired. Same should go for ranks. Resets are just frustrating and make you stress out and never enter ranked without a full team in fear of screwing up your placement marches. Which, again - are never going to be accurate because there's no perfect way to actually identify someone's potency in a match, especially objective. I'd rather just let people start at the bottom and fight their way up. 

 

Also no one cares about playlist ranks and XP ranks because everyone knows exactly what they're based on. Play time, not skill.

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, MultiLockOn said:

Well eventually everyone would settle at their skill regardless. The first month or so of ranked might be a bit messy but it would calm down after that, arguably more accurately than placements ever would. Because I've never once seen a placement match algorithm that was actually accurate, which is perhaps an even bigger issue than people being represented as less skilled as they are which the H3/2 system does. 

Well the placement system doesn’t need to be perfectly accurate, just a good ballpark guess to get you going, and it helps avoid all of the mess of everyone starting at the same level.

1 hour ago, MultiLockOn said:

I also think that the placement matches do a lot to disincentivize people playing the game. The idea is that it resets and you feel obligated to get back on and play more but in my experience it's usually the opposite where I just get annoyed and don't want to reearn it because you're constantly stripped of what you had. Like I said, it's as much as a trophy as it is a representation of skill. You wouldn't take away a world cup medal from a team that won in the 90's even though they're old and retired. Same should go for ranks. Resets are just frustrating and make you stress out and never enter ranked without a full team in fear of screwing up your placement marches. Which, again - are never going to be accurate because there's no perfect way to actually identify someone's potency in a match, especially objective. I'd rather just let people start at the bottom and fight their way up. 

With a good system, there will be season rewards and a history section in your player profile where you can show off your previous achievements. This way starting a new season brings with it a hope at re doing placements and placing better with a soft mmr reset, as well as grinding wins to get the new season rewards. This way it incentivized people to come back each season and grind for that high rank again. In the current system, if 343 wanted to use seasons to keep interest in the game high, most people would be mad that they have to start all the back at 1.

1 hour ago, MultiLockOn said:

Also no one cares about playlist ranks and XP ranks because everyone knows exactly what they're based on. Play time, not skill.

I think many people cared about playlist ranks. Tommy Kost’s recent podcast talked a lot about these kinds of ranks and what it meant to players, even though it’s not completely skill based. With playlist ranks, you still had to be 50 to get general. And to get more starts, you needed wins, not just general play time, so it was a way to show off that you could constantly win at that high level.

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, andregr said:

With playlist ranks, you still had to be 50 to get general.

This is not true. Skill only affected your overall military rank, not individual playlist ranks. The confusion stems from the playlist and military ranks sharing names and symbols.

Honestly I've never liked seasons or the placement match system in general. Why should your first ten matches have a weight on your ranks that is orders of magnitude stronger than any game you play after? A sample size of 10 is just not enough IMO, it's just too easy to get screwed by a quitter, dumbass teammate, shit connection etc. These systems work under lab conditions but never in the real world. Then they also factor in individual performance which of course never works as intended and leads to hilarious differences in ranking even if you play all 10 placements as a team. I've personally observed this both in H5 and OW. H5's ranks are 100% meaningless anyways because of the lack of party restrictions.

The common criticisms of 1-50 that I see are:

Quote

Bro you just want to stomp on noobs for your first few ranks, think of the legit 1-10 ranks

This always struck me as odd. First of all, people who are not great at the game and also won't improve over time usually just don't play ranked anyways. Next, since we're using hidden MMR to form our lobbies anyways, why not extend the ranks further downward (not visually, behind the scenes) and therefore make sure these low-ranked people don't ever match a new level 1 account with the starting "neutral" ELO? They already do this at the top end anyways, according to Menke H3's ranks went far into the 70ies or 80ies even, so let's extend the MMR below the starting ELO as a noob protection.

Halo also has never had this INSANE skill gap where you can fly through the ranks and shit on people for an extended amount of games unless you're 1) literally snipedown and 2) playing as a to4 which again leads to the party restrictions argument.

Quote

Seasons are good because otherwise you can just play once and never lose your rank, plus there can be seasonal rewards

This a double-edged sword though. A good chunk of people think seasons are stupid because of exactly that: you lose your rank and have to play 10 matches just to grind it back every few months. I don't always have time or motivation to play the same game on end for years, so if I come back to Halo/OW/whatever after a few months and all my ranks are gone (on top of being unfamiliar with the game because I haven't played) it just makes me want to quit.

I think CSGO does it something like this: hide the rank after not playing ranked for a month and you have to win one game to get it back, that seems fair by me. But requiring me to play 10 sweaty matches all over just to get the same rank back just feels like work and not fun.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, The Tyco said:

I'll probably try to force myself to like it or find anything to enjoy about it

why would you do this to you?

It's a video game, it's sole purpose is to entertain you and if it fails to do so, why would you waste your time trying to like it?

I hope to get into those flights at some point, if the game is just the same advanced mobility shooter with a classic art style, then I'm out...

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Basu said:

This a double-edged sword though. A good chunk of people think seasons are stupid because of exactly that: you lose your rank and have to play 10 matches just to grind it back every few months. I don't always have time or motivation to play the same game on end for years, so if I come back to Halo/OW/whatever after a few months and all my ranks are gone (on top of being unfamiliar with the game because I haven't played) it just makes me want to quit.

I'm conflicted on this. I completely get your point; I have returned to play Halo 5 once in a blue moon, and when I have 0/10 placement matches I might play 2-3 games and then I never come back because I don't have the time to play 10 games in the game modes that I want and then try to rank up from there.

I also play a lot of Rocket League and I have no issues with their seasons at all. The 10 placement matches don't really have more impact on your rank than any of the matches afterwards (if you're not a new account), it's really just something to make a new season feel refreshing. 

IMO I think constant seasons and placement matches are good for players that are constantly playing the game to make it worth grinding again, but it could turn players away when taking long periods away. 

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

what about the halo 5 beta ranking system, that had something interesting going on as well, if I remember correctly

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

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