Jump to content
CyReN

V5 Discussion Thread

Recommended Posts

He's not referring to the glitch.

 

There are two types of KoTH (actually a third but I'm excluding that)

 

-Single Scoring

-Everyone Counts

 

In single scoring, its designed so that everyone can stand in the hill... but the timer only adds points for 1 player. This is the version that has always been in Matchmaking, and it is the version Quinn is referring to. However, it is currently glitched so that (if you are lucky) if two people walk in at the same time the hill might start counting double points, and quite sporadically.

 

In everyone counts scoring, it doesn't matter whether you do the glitch or not, it is DESIGNED to count for every player in the hill (as long as they are on the same team)

Thx for the info dude!

Share this post


Link to post

What ever happened to Landfall? It was cut last minute for v4, is it ever getting looked into again? Same with KoTH? What happened to everyone scores?

 

Also, is the scatter shot ever going to be replaced with the shotgun? With how random that thing is, and how strong the BR is as a 5sk, the 1 clip shotty isn't as OP as its made out to be, especially when the only way to get it would be back beach on abandon (even though I'd prefer something more powerful there) and bottom mid on simplex. 

Share this post


Link to post

 

 

Extremely happy to see that Pitfall and Vertigo will get more time for testing.

 

What's up with that Hill variant you mentioned earlier? What exactly is the hill variant (everyone counts or something else?) and will it make it into v5 or future TTD settings? Ark Hill is quite enjoyable and wouldn't have the problems of Ark EXT (very few conversions).

 

Has Unity's Landfall variant been tested? Link

 

Also, can you give this Haven EXT variant a shot? It uses exts at the back of open ramp and the bottom of each lift, rotating 1-2-1-4 style. Link (v4 Haven with previously mentioned exts)

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Isn't Vertigo a bit too big for 4v4 or is it going to get cut off like Landfall did?

Share this post


Link to post

Glad to see that Pitfall and Vertigo will have more time to be tested and worked on for spawns. 

 

Also I think the Ark should be considered for slayer and koth as well.

 

Looks like testing is going pretty good so far. Props to ghost and everyone who has been testing gametypes. 

Share this post


Link to post

 

  • I will be testing a 90-second Overshield in the coming weeks
    • We will eventually decide upon either a 2-minute Overshield or a 90-second Overshield - it cannot be both, i.e. 90-second for TS, 2-minute for OBJ

 

Antonio-Banderas-computer-you-got-me-yos

Share this post


Link to post

 

  • The Ark is a new map that has been receiving its fair share of testing for Extraction
    • It will eventually go head-to-head with other potential Extraction game types (Station 9, Dispatch, Vertigo, etc.) in order to decide which one is best-suited for our community
  • Orion (v3.2) has been downloaded to my console and is currently receiving a standard weapon and spawn overhaul
    • I will be contacting the creator in the new future in order to get everything finalized for future testing
  • Orion TS will be a "toss-up" among the v5 Team Slayer game types
    • It will eventually go head-to-head with other potential Team Slayer game types (Vertigo, Pitfall, etc.) in order to decide which one is best-suited for our community

I think it's awesome that you're testing the new maps.  Whether or not they actually get put in is less important to me since that obviously depends on how well they play- I'm just glad that you're at least taking time to try them and see if they do work or not.

Share this post


Link to post

This has been brought up the last time around but I'm just going to throw it out there again:

 

Obviously it's important that Throwdown contain all the most up to date maps and gametypes being used in current competitions, BUT I don't see why that's ALL it has to contain. Say these two new forge maps being considered don't get into the magic 11, I don't see why that has to mean they don't get into the playlist.

I think it's important that we continue to support the forge community so that they in turn continue to support the pro gaming community. A good way of doing that would be to have the MM cutoff be more like 15 gametypes/maps. That way there could be 4 prospective maps and gametypes you could get all sorts of useful feedback on before they are even directly implemented into the pro lineup.

As for voting, simply only have them occasionally appear as a third option, that way the occasional team that is stuck using throwdown for practice rather than customs has no fear of playing one of the maps that is not in the 11 gametypes, becuase as long as they are playing as a full team and they all vote it will be impossible for that 3rd option to win at the voting screen.

 

This would be a great way to encourage the forge community as well as providing a healthy change of pace for those who play throwdown recreationally. It may even help expand the playlist numbers slightly if people are well informed that Throwdown is the playlist to play inorder to play new competitive forge maps. Eitherway I don't see why anyone would have a problem with it.

 

Thanks!

  • Upvote (+1) 8
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Am I the only one that hates the rush for OS off the start being a staple in 3/4 of our gametypes?

 

Gets old really fast. Maybe time for a change?

  • Upvote (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post

The model of 11 gametypes needs to change badly, the only reason we are using it is because it is what MLG used to do, not because its the best. The model of 5 slayers was only used because MLG had to run tournaments quickly, so slayer got used more, which we can all agree is understandable. However, this no longer applies, and it needs to be reviewed.

Slayer is the most uncompetitive and depthless gametype we have, and isint interesting from a spectator/commentator POV. The bigger problem is that it takes up 5 of the 11 spots. Now, most series last 3 or 4 games. In a 3/4 game series, 1 game is for 5 maps, whilst the other 3 are between 6 gametypes only (ext is in every 3 game series, but only has 2 maps). This creates a boring/predictable spectator experience, and the same maps get used over and over again.

It also prevents the community using good maps. For example, Ark and Vertigo are considered for ext, but we must lose one. Why should we do that? Both should stay.

My proposal is for a veto system to return, but much improved to the point that there is a strategy/sense of depth to the game. It would have to be more flexible, not like previous Halo veto systems where the same maps are seen, and still keeps the boring CTF, then slayer, then ext model.

For example, a team could choose any map gametype combo from the 15 (seems like a good number), the next team either vetoes that from the entire series, or selects a different gametype which isint the same obj/map. Im not sure exactly what the system would be, im sure others can think of a good system.

What this would do would give commentators something to talk about before the game. The veto should start at the beginning of the series, and all 5 gametypes would be selected before game 1 (not like previous systems where it was a game by game basis) They/teams would have stats of all the teams best/worst gametypes, and suddenly teams what be using strategies to avoid gametypes/keep gametypes. Do certain teams get their best maps in the first 3 matches, or are their best in games 5/4, thus building some hype in the first 3 games knowing they have to play their worst gametypes.

Teams could potentially win games by their smart selection in the veto series. An example of this is League of legends. Some teams are known for having an excellent champion select, and asian teams often win games before the match has even started. This amount of depth is more interesting for the spectator, players, commentators, and ensures we have a much more diverse map pool than what we currently have.

If anyone can create all the rules to ensure a good veto system, please do, or make a topic about it. Thoughts?

  • Upvote (+1) 6

Share this post


Link to post

Team should win if there better not if they got their favorite maps and game types when the other team didnt.

No veto system 

 

 

I say 11 game types 4 slayers 4 flags 3 extractions 

  • Downvote (-1) 7

Share this post


Link to post

Team should win if there better not if they got their favorite maps and game types when the other team didnt.

No veto system 

 

 

I say 11 game types 4 slayers 4 flags 3 extractions 

tumblr_m0c8vwV1VD1rqfhi2o1_500.gif

 

Dont think you got the point

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

The model of 11 gametypes needs to change badly, the only reason we are using it is because it is what MLG used to do, not because its the best. The model of 5 slayers was only used because MLG had to run tournaments quickly, so slayer got used more, which we can all agree is understandable. However, this no longer applies, and it needs to be reviewed.

 

Slayer is the most uncompetitive and depthless gametype we have, and isint interesting from a spectator/commentator POV. The bigger problem is that it takes up 5 of the 11 spots. Now, most series last 3 or 4 games. In a 3/4 game series, 1 game is for 5 maps, whilst the other 3 are between 6 gametypes only (ext is in every 3 game series, but only has 2 maps). This creates a boring/predictable spectator experience, and the same maps get used over and over again.

 

It also prevents the community using good maps. For example, Ark and Vertigo are considered for ext, but we must lose one. Why should we do that? Both should stay.

 

My proposal is for a veto system to return, but much improved to the point that there is a strategy/sense of depth to the game. It would have to be more flexible, not like previous Halo veto systems where the same maps are seen, and still keeps the boring CTF, then slayer, then ext model.

 

For example, a team could choose any map gametype combo from the 15 (seems like a good number), the next team either vetoes that from the entire series, or selects a different gametype which isint the same obj/map. Im not sure exactly what the system would be, im sure others can think of a good system.

 

What this would do would give commentators something to talk about before the game. The veto should start at the beginning of the series, and all 5 gametypes would be selected before game 1 (not like previous systems where it was a game by game basis) They/teams would have stats of all the teams best/worst gametypes, and suddenly teams what be using strategies to avoid gametypes/keep gametypes. Do certain teams get their best maps in the first 3 matches, or are their best in games 5/4, thus building some hype in the first 3 games knowing they have to play their worst gametypes.

 

Teams could potentially win games by their smart selection in the veto series. An example of this is League of legends. Some teams are known for having an excellent champion select, and asian teams often win games before the match has even started. This amount of depth is more interesting for the spectator, players, commentators, and ensures we have a much more diverse map pool than what we currently have.

 

If anyone can create all the rules to ensure a good veto system, please do, or make a topic about it. Thoughts?

Agreed, but you have to remember that Slayer is the easiest gametype to be understood up by a new spectator. If he's watching Halo 4 for the first time and there's an Extraction gametype going on, he's most likely not going to understand what's going on whereas TS is a simple, kill other people, first to 50 wins.

Share this post


Link to post

Agreed, but you have to remember that Slayer is the easiest gametype to be understood up by a new spectator. If he's watching Halo 4 for the first time and there's an Extraction gametype going on, he's most likely not going to understand what's going on whereas TS is a simple, kill other people, first to 50 wins.

Yeah, but slayer only appears once in the first 4 games, and has nearly half the gametype slots.

 

Even then, if we are dumbing down the game to make it as simple as possible, well, then gg.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, but slayer only appears once in the first 4 games, and has nearly half the gametype slots.

 

Even then, if we are dumbing down the game to make it as simple as possible, well, then gg.

Well, I didn't mean we should dumb it down as much as possible, there's just a fine line between making it simple for the new spectator but also keeping it as competitive as possible.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Well, I didn't mean we should dumb it down as much as possible, there's just a fine line between making it simple for the new spectator but also keeping it as competitive as possible.

Yeah I understand, but my proposal/system does not mean there are going to be more ext/ctfs to be played, I just mean there is more variety and choice, and the players have more power in selection them. Think you might have missed the point.

Share this post


Link to post

I'll explain my reasoning behind adopting MLG's system in a video in the near future - too many reasons to list through text.

 

Off, yet on-topic, I finished giving Orion the Ayame Overhaul last night in regards to spawns, weapons, and power-ups. However, when I finally tried to start testing the map, something very peculiar occurred...  When a player died, they would spawn outside of the controlled map, i.e. on top of another one of the Forge Islands. Has anyone experienced this issue before? I'm trying to figure out how to fix this problem because I'd like to test the map that I spent a few days working on...

 

-Ghost

Share this post


Link to post

Off, yet on-topic, I finished giving Orion the Ayame Overhaul last night in regards to spawns, weapons, and power-ups. However, when I finally tried to start testing the map, something very peculiar occurred...  When a player died, they would spawn outside of the controlled map, i.e. on top of another one of the Forge Islands. Has anyone experienced this issue before? I'm trying to figure out how to fix this problem because I'd like to test the map that I spent a few days working on...

 

-Ghost

 

Have you uploaded the map yet? if so I might be able to see what the issue is by looking at it in forge.

But if I had to just go off of what you posted I'd assume that the total weighting of spawns in the playable space isn't high enough to over-ride the fallback spawns of the base map. If that's the case you could maybe place a respawn zone or two over the entirety of the playable space so that the weighting for all the spawns on the map is increased by the same amount, leaving them in proportion with each other but much stronger than the outlying spawns.

Share this post


Link to post

I'll explain my reasoning behind adopting MLG's system in a video in the near future - too many reasons to list through text.

 

Off, yet on-topic, I finished giving Orion the Ayame Overhaul last night in regards to spawns, weapons, and power-ups. However, when I finally tried to start testing the map, something very peculiar occurred...  When a player died, they would spawn outside of the controlled map, i.e. on top of another one of the Forge Islands. Has anyone experienced this issue before? I'm trying to figure out how to fix this problem because I'd like to test the map that I spent a few days working on...

 

-Ghost

 

Are your spawns gametype-specific? If they are and you tried to play them with another gametype, none of the spawn points would load and the map would revert to the defaults (on the Forge Islands).

 

The above problem can also occur if the spawns are set to "asymmetrical gametypes only," "symmetrical gametypes only," or another setting that could cause a certain gametype not to recognize the spawn points on the map. This kind of stuff can occur when you duplicate one spawn and place it across the whole map.

 

Just throwing out a couple of ideas. :)

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

tumblr_m0c8vwV1VD1rqfhi2o1_500.gif

 

Dont think you got the point

Not sure if he is head desking because of the response or the mac  :kappa:

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

-The Ark could be in

-Orion could be in

-Station 9 could be out.

 

I have never been so hopeful.

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

Other than the Pit it doesn't sound like much will change so that is a shame, but if new maps have a chance I'd recommend Orion (KOTH/TS) and Landfall (KOTH or EXT/TS). Plenty of decent forged maps exist that others have mentioned but I haven't played them, only the ones I've mentioned.

Share this post


Link to post

Just curious Ghost, but have you asked or brought up to 343 the possibility of fixing and tightening the Bullet Spread on the Scatter Shot, as well as the Battle Rifle? I feel both weapons would perform so, so, much better if they were simply given a nudge in the more accurate direction, especially the Battle Rifle.

 

I want to see some clutch kills with the Scatter Shot's Bullet Ricochet function before its all over with, as I love its unique qualities and Forerunner design but feel it suffers so much from its inaccurate Bullet Spread, its Ricochet function especially suffers from it. I suppose if we wont see the Scatter Shot have that aspect upgraded, fixed, then I would rather see the Shotgun or a weapon that can fill the same role as the Scatter Shot, Shotgun, instead.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Sorry to be that guy who doesn't have Skyline, but yeah that's me. I never played it. I've seen it plenty of times and it looks good, but never felt the need to purchase it. Is it a stand alone map? Or part of a pack?

 

Surely you guys can't blame me for not wanting to give 343 and more of my money.

The map is not that good teapot, trust me lol. That map pack is no where near $10 worth,ttd isn't even using landfall

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

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