Jump to content
CyReN

Halo Infinite Discussion

Recommended Posts

What if the ball respawned instantly, but the team who played it couldn't pick it up for a duration equal to the current respawn timer?

 

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, Boyo said:

But you can’t win from penalty points.  You still need to get one second of ball time to seal the deal if you’re over the limit due to penalty points.  

By the time my team respawns and gets into position to break their setup, they would have already gained those 20 seconds and possibly more. So the obvious choice is still play the ball. I think it would work better if your team loses time. Then you would have some options to weigh.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
8 minutes ago, Sitri said:

What if the ball respawned instantly, but the team who played it couldn't pick it up for a duration equal to the current respawn timer?

Doesn’t seem significant enough to really make a difference.  You could give the player who played the ball a long respawn penalty.  Play ball will become a last resort if your next death knocks you off the board for 30 seconds.  

7 minutes ago, TeeJaY said:

I think it would work better if your team loses time.

I agree.  Giving the other team time just prevents extending games to stomp in MM ie you can’t be about to win then throw it off to artificially delay match end.  

3 minutes ago, RatherSilentMr said:

What do y'all think about being able to throw the ball?  I think it could make for some interesting game play.  

In 4v4, no.  I don’t believe the maps are big enough to properly support ball throwing.   

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Boyo said:

In 4v4, no.  I don’t believe the maps are big enough to properly support ball throwing.   

What about BTB?

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, RatherSilentMr said:

What about BTB?

Oddball for 4v4.  
Ricochet for 6v6.  
One-Bomb for 9v9.  
 

That’s where I think the ball-style gametypes would play best.  

Share this post


Link to post

Giving the opposing team points instead of simply taking them off the offending team's points is a giant no-no. 

Share this post


Link to post
49 minutes ago, Boyo said:

Oddball for 4v4.  
Ricochet for 6v6.  
One-Bomb for 9v9.  
 

That’s where I think the ball-style gametypes would play best.  

Are you assuming 6v6 for ricochet because ricochet should be played on a larger map than oddball? (f you are assuming the same size map, it isn't clear to me why 4v4 wouldn't be ideal, just like oddball.)

And doesn't 9v9 one-bomb dilute the concept of the carrier makes the team one man down through out flight?

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Boyo said:

Is switching between two firemodes preferable to an instantly accessible alt-fire?  Mapping the swap button to the down directional doesn’t encourage mid-firefight usage so the weapons are essentially still limited to one type of fire per fight.  This doesn’t provide the same benefits as an instantly accessible fire and alt-fire.  

Choosing which fire mode, just like choosing which weapon, is more of a situational decision made prior to engaging rather than one that you should generally be swapping on a moment-to-moment basis.

4 hours ago, BigShow36 said:

That's great, in theory. The problem is that playing the ball is rarely "strategic", it just means you're the last man standing and you're in a bad spot. This could be remedied other ways, like better map design, but the decision to play ball is rarely a super involved strategic masterpiece. 

Playing the Ball is the First-Order Optimal strategy -- it's an easy response to a common trigger that is almost always a net positive...but that doesn't mean it is always the best choice.  Higher level teams are much better about this, and you'll see it more if you watch closely (except on Lockout in RARE occasions) that, depending on the timing of a set-up breaking, timing of respawns, location of respawns...teams will actually pre-emptively rotate toward spawners as set-ups start to break, or drop and fight a lot sooner in order to prevent going down numbers in the first place.

There's a lot of options that you'll catch teams exploring more the better their teamwork and awareness are, while you'll see good-not-great teams opt for the play ball option, even if it's not necessarily the best play, because it is a consistently safe one.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
On 7/12/2021 at 2:17 PM, _Synapse said:

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. 

It doesn't feel cheap to me at all. At a certain skill level, you just know it's coming, and you have your rear-most player already anticipating the ball's respawn. It's not like it's a surprise that he's gonna do it. You just play around it, and it's fine. And then there's those times where someone clutches up and kills him before he can even do it, and it's a big play because you inherit their setup and save a ton of time. I don't want to get rid of that. And it beats the alternative.

I played a lot of H3 Throwback in Halo 5, and they had ball on some whack ass maps. They were bad for ball because they had both of these traits: Lack of circular flow, and no way to play the ball. Ghost Town, the ball never leaves the pipes behind the score spot in 1 Flag. High Ground, the ball never leaves the SAM site at the back of the base. Citadel, the ball never leaves the shotgun hall (oddly enough this map would be amazing for Ball if you blocked off the shotgun halls).

So then you might say, "well that's a problem with the map, not the gametype." Well okay, but then you force yourself to play on a fraction of the maps that might play it well. All because we can't wrap our brain around the fact that the ball guy is probably gonna play it before he dies, in a gametype that's been trusted to be played for tens of thousands of dollars for 20 years. This is a classic case of "if it's not broke, don't fix it." It ain't f'n broke.

15 hours ago, Apoll0 said:

We hashed this out pages ago.  The ball time is set to 60 seconds, so its a decent chunk and it only ticks down while you are scoring with it. It doesn't reset every minute of game time, it resets every minute of objective time.  The reset points also rotate in a linear fashion with each reset, so its not always coming up in the same spot, but you should know where it is coming up each time.  Its not a "Free chance" if you are in control or not, stay in control and get the next ball. But it does stop teams from just being able to just sit in snipe tower for 10 minutes straight. The current gametype style shouldn't go anywhere, but this would be a variant worth trying.

 

The forfeit prompt only comes up once certain conditions are met which is what I meant by "After that you can prompt on the death screen if the score disparity is over a certain amount."  Once 5 minutes has elapsed AND your team is down by a certain amount of points, you get prompted on your death screen to initiate a vote to forfeit.  While the option would be available after 5 minutes in the game menu, there would be no automated prompt unless its a clear slaughter.

I would be open to trying this as a variant, but you absolutely cannot make it require you to hold the ball for every last second before it respawns. Maybe if it's not being held, the time remaining on it reduces at half the rate, but you can't expect teams to send a guy to go get the last 2 seconds of the ball in a soon-to-be irrelevant spot, just so the next ball will spawn. We saw this in H4 KotH on Complex, with the hill above the garage, before they changed the Hill system. It was AWFUL. No one would touch it because they didn't want to sacrifice position when the next hill came up.

But at the same time, I think if a team can't crack a single setup when one of the enemy players can't even fire their weapon, they deserve to beat their head against the wall until they lose. The only value I see in this variant is artificially encouraging players to hold setups in unconventional places by spawning the ball there. But even then, I think regular Oddball does a pretty damn good job of this naturally on maps that are good for the mode. Maybe this could be the solution for making maps like Ghost Town and High Ground and Landfall great for Oddball, but I don't see a ton of a value in it for maps like Lockout and Guardian.

I think Smite handled vote to forfeit perfectly. You can't do it for the first 5 minutes of the game, bc you just know kids would be throwing up the vote after losing the opening rush. But after 5min, it's readily available from the pause screen. But that's it. I don't think kids need any help finding it. Just put it next to the option to quit.  Maybe you could flash a quick 5-10 second reminder prompt during the player's first death after someone on his team quits, but that still feels insulting to me. Players are going to see the vote prompt often enough from their teammates. They won't need any help from the game to remember the option exists.

9 hours ago, Boyo said:

Mapping the swap button to the down directional doesn’t encourage mid-firefight usage so the weapons are essentially still limited to one type of fire per fight.  This doesn’t provide the same benefits as an instantly accessible fire and alt-fire.  

Seems to work pretty well in Gears of War.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

When you pick up the oddball, you get teleported to the octagon. One enemy at a time can choose to challenge you to a 1v1 BR duel. 10 points per 1v1 BR duel won, winner stays in the octagon.

  • Like (+1) 1
  • Upvote (+1) 1
  • Toxic (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, Shekkles said:

When you pick up the oddball, you get teleported to the octagon. One enemy at a time can choose to challenge you to a 1v1 BR duel. 10 points per 1v1 BR duel won, winner stays in the octagon.

Lol this some boyo shit but honestly this be a neat action sack mode 

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, TiberiusAudley said:

Choosing which fire mode, just like choosing which weapon, is more of a situational decision made prior to engaging rather than one that you should generally be swapping on a moment-to-moment basis.

You originally said alt-fire is what made Unreal play better than Halo but what you’re suggesting now is akin to allowing the player to hold four weapons, not the same as alt-fire.  You think weapons that can toggle between two firemodes are superior to an instantly accessible alt-fire or you are just settling for that because you think that’s the only mechanic the control scheme can support?  
 

6 hours ago, MrGreenWithAGun said:

Are you assuming 6v6 for ricochet because ricochet should be played on a larger map than oddball? (f you are assuming the same size map, it isn't clear to me why 4v4 wouldn't be ideal, just like oddball.)

And doesn't 9v9 one-bomb dilute the concept of the carrier makes the team one man down through out flight?

Yes, Ricochet is for 6v6 because it is played on larger maps that can properly support the ball throwing mechanic.  

Yes, a higher player count decreases the significance of going a man down but the asymmetric nature of the 9v9 mode gives the attacking team enough of a challenge that this is minor reprieve is welcome.  

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Boyo said:

You originally said alt-fire is what made Unreal play better than Halo but what you’re suggesting now is akin to allowing the player to hold four weapons, not the same as alt-fire.  You think weapons that can toggle between two firemodes are superior to an instantly accessible alt-fire or you are just settling for that because you think that’s the only mechanic the control scheme can support?  

Sentence 1:

It's not the same as holding four weapons, because a person with a Battle Rifle will always have the same two options and then two more options dependent upon second weapon.  Holding 4 weapons gives the person with the BR three additional options.

Using Excel's Combination function (this statement is to absolve me from any math errors), this is the number of different possibilities a player is carrying with 2 weapons with Toggle Alt Fire versus 4 Weapons (Number of Weapons in chart = Number of Weapons that exist in the game's sandbox/on the map)

051945926f93b36d8a70dfdd286cffad.png

 

Sentence 2:

I don't think it's superior to instantly accessible alt-fire, but unless we all switch to Playstation controllers for the console, the XBox's controller isn't built to support the idea comfortably.  And the toggle idea worked fine in Perfect Dark on N64 long before Halo was born, so why not just revisit it?  Because regardless of whether it's superior to instant alt fire, it's still superior to a dull overloaded sandbox where you fill niches with brand new weapons rather than functions of different weapons.

 

Take the BR for instance -- if its default mode was a kicking burstfire (think H4/H2A, rather than H3 random spread version), but alt fire allowed you to switch to semi-auto single shot, you'd choose the alt-fire in instances where you're firing much longer range.  The kicking burst fire is better for medium range where you don't have to worry about shots missing.  An option like this could allow us to remove the DMR from the game entirely because its niche is now filled by a weapon that already exists.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
4 minutes ago, TiberiusAudley said:

I don't think it's superior to instantly accessible alt-fire, but unless we all switch to Playstation controllers for the console, the XBox's controller isn't built to support the idea comfortably.

Would you be opposed to mapping Scope to LT then giving scopeless weapons an alt-fire instead?  

 

6 minutes ago, TiberiusAudley said:

Take the BR for instance -- if its default mode was a kicking burstfire (think H4/H2A, rather than H3 random spread version), but alt fire allowed you to switch to semi-auto single shot, you'd choose the alt-fire in instances where you're firing much longer range.  The kicking burst fire is better for medium range where you don't have to worry about shots missing.  An option like this could allow us to remove the DMR from the game entirely because its niche is now filled by a weapon that already exists.

No offense but this sounds dull as dirt.  If Halo is going to feature alt-fires, I hope they don’t waste them on something as trivial as switching from burst to semi.  You know what’s another option for removing the DMR?  Just removing the DMR.  

Share this post


Link to post
14 minutes ago, Boyo said:

No offense but this sounds dull as dirt.  If Halo is going to feature alt-fires, I hope they don’t waste them on something as trivial as switching from burst to semi.  You know what’s another option for removing the DMR?  Just removing the DMR.  

It's a fucking battle rifle, what do you want it to do, fire circus clowns on unicycles that each hold out a never-ending handkerchief to snare the opponent in place?

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, TiberiusAudley said:

It's a fucking battle rifle, what do you want it to do, fire circus clowns on unicycles that each hold out a never-ending handkerchief to snare the opponent in place?

The Battle Rifle doesn’t need an alt-fire.  It is capable as is.  Autos would be a better fit for alt-fires since they are traditionally much less effective than precision weapons in Halo.  Do you think that giving autos an alt-fire would fit Halo better than aim down sights?  Do you think giving autos an alt-fire could tastefully increase their effectiveness?  

Share this post


Link to post
6 hours ago, Hard Way said:

I would be open to trying this as a variant, but you absolutely cannot make it require you to hold the ball for every last second before it respawns. Maybe if it's not being held, the time remaining on it reduces at half the rate, but you can't expect teams to send a guy to go get the last 2 seconds of the ball in a soon-to-be irrelevant spot, just so the next ball will spawn. We saw this in H4 KotH on Complex, with the hill above the garage, before they changed the Hill system. It was AWFUL. No one would touch it because they didn't want to sacrifice position when the next hill came up.

But at the same time, I think if a team can't crack a single setup when one of the enemy players can't even fire their weapon, they deserve to beat their head against the wall until they lose. The only value I see in this variant is artificially encouraging players to hold setups in unconventional places by spawning the ball there. But even then, I think regular Oddball does a pretty damn good job of this naturally on maps that are good for the mode. Maybe this could be the solution for making maps like Ghost Town and High Ground and Landfall great for Oddball, but I don't see a ton of a value in it for maps like Lockout and Guardian.

I think Smite handled vote to forfeit perfectly. You can't do it for the first 5 minutes of the game, bc you just know kids would be throwing up the vote after losing the opening rush. But after 5min, it's readily available from the pause screen. But that's it. I don't think kids need any help finding it. Just put it next to the option to quit.  Maybe you could flash a quick 5-10 second reminder prompt during the player's first death after someone on his team quits, but that still feels insulting to me. Players are going to see the vote prompt often enough from their teammates. They won't need any help from the game to remember the option exists.

Seems to work pretty well in Gears of War.

The ball would have a short reset time.

The reason I would prompt for a forfeit on the death screen after people quit or they are getting crushed is because well, players are stupid.  Most people don't even change their shit from default, especially on console, and rarely look at the menu.   You could make it be one of those tooltips on the loading screen I guess? Specifics don't really matter to me on this one as long as its an option that players actually know about, which i think they will forget in the moment.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
3 hours ago, Boyo said:

The Battle Rifle doesn’t need an alt-fire.  It is capable as is.  Autos would be a better fit for alt-fires since they are traditionally much less effective than precision weapons in Halo.  Do you think that giving autos an alt-fire would fit Halo better than aim down sights?  Do you think giving autos an alt-fire could tastefully increase their effectiveness?  

It's not really a matter of needing an alt-fire or not for the BR's case, but rather consistency-across-Sandbox.  All of Perfect Dark's weapon sandbox had secondary fire methods, though the VeryHuman™ weapons' alt fires were typically bland things like a pistol becoming burstfire.

I definitely think giving autos alt-fire would fit better than ADS.  ADS-for-autos doesn't make sense with Halo's pacing and larger (relative to 'realistic' shooters) TTK.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, TiberiusAudley said:

It's not really a matter of needing an alt-fire or not for the BR's case, but rather consistency-across-Sandbox.

Scoped fire is the BR’s alt-fire.  

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, Boyo said:

Scoped fire is the BR’s alt-fire.  

Then remove binoculars and just have non-scoped weapons toggle fire modes via scope button.

Share this post


Link to post
11 minutes ago, TiberiusAudley said:

Then remove binoculars and just have non-scoped weapons toggle fire modes via scope button.

You could do that.  What it boils down to is, you have three buttons to play with.  Here is what I think the ideal weapon controls are:

 

RT - Fire 

LT - Scope or Alt-Fire (on scopeless weapons) 

X - Reload, Toggle Firemode (on battery-operated weapons) or Weapon Ability (on melee weapons) 

 

RT is always fire, the primary attack.  

LT is either scope on precision weapons or alt-fire on scopeless weapons.  Since these are the second most important functions, they get the second most prominent button. 

X is a face button, better for quickly tapping, like to reload.  This is why functions like Toggle Firemode, which only need be quickly tapped, are mapped to it.  

Share this post


Link to post
1 minute ago, TiberiusAudley said:

You are literally a monster.

It’s the best way to incorporate true alt-fire into Halo.  

Share this post


Link to post
19 minutes ago, Boyo said:

It’s the best way to incorporate true alt-fire into Halo.  

Why does Halo need alt-fire? 

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.