Jump to content
CyReN

Halo: The Master Chief Collection Discussion

Recommended Posts

And yet we still have games that end with less than 30 kills

the vast majority of pro halo slayers go to 50 kills tho

 

(i wonder what insult you will come up with this time)

Share this post


Link to post

the vast majority of pro halo slayers go to 50 kills tho

 

(i wonder what insult you will come up with this time)

Holy shit a response that has nothing to do with the post again damn you keep on surprising me. Thanks for a wonderful pointless fact man! I'm glad one team getting 50 kills after 12 minutes of gameplay is considered good. Slayer is still the shallowest gametype. Slayer still requires the least amount of teamwork. Slayer is also (in H5) the most snowbally gametype. Great point man I'm glad games go to the score limit! That's really cool!
  • Upvote (+1) 4
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Let's not forget how low damage slayer games are in relation to obj either. That's the biggest determining factor on pace. Slayer games can go up to 12 minutes with only 1 dude breaking 2k damage. CTF? Shit after 12 minutes you have everyone over 3k. But gunskill matters more in slayer.

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

imagine being such an angry person that you can even have a discussion about team slayer on a halo website without foaming at the mouth

 

@My Namez BEAST take my +rep and feel better man

Share this post


Link to post

imagine being such an angry person that you can even have a discussion about team slayer on a halo website without foaming at the mouth

 

@My Namez BEAST take my +rep and feel better man

 

Imagine having so few coherent arguments, that you constantly resort to "lol why so angry" whenever anyone explains how fucking stupid the post you just made was.

  • Upvote (+1) 5
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Winning TS doesn't require a different skill set though. They're historically the most inconsistent gametype. It's the one gametype AM teams (or just lower skilled teams in general) seem to be able to take off pros. It's a wildly inconsistent gametype.

 

And as I've stated before there's a difference between "encouraging" and "forcing" map movement. Slayer does not force map movement on its own even with Power weapons. Power weapons act as an incentive to move and half TS time it's the ONLY time people move. Even then someone can come in and burn a power weapon/up and make a standoff for another 2 minutes. Or, in the case of maps like Sanc even with Power weapons people still don't move. But aside from power weapons why is playing a gametype where the strategy for most of the game is just "stay alive don't move too much" good? Slayer ONLY worked on maps where sitting back just wasn't possible. Warlock, Middy, And Amplitude are the only maps I've seen that can play slayer decently. And even then many people considered those maps pretty much RNG.

CS FORCES a team to go to the objective or they lose. That's a huge difference.

Not sure I can agree without seeing some kind of stats.

 

I'm not comparing CS to Halo, its apples to oranges and they work completely different from each other.

 

EDIT:

Even still I understand incentivizing vs forcing. However I don't see games ever ending in regulation time (outside of the awful Lockout H2A games) or a team not reaching 50. I don't ever see stalemates happening or people really camping around. You have to fight for map control to keep power weapons and keep your advantage on the enemy. Slayer games might be slower, but they aren't slow. We've already discussed that I want to keep slayer limited to certain maps.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

imagine being such an angry person that you can even have a discussion about team slayer on a halo website without foaming at the mouth

 

@My Namez BEAST take my +rep and feel better man

Damn those counter-points are good af but hey I'm sooo angry haha!1!1!1!1!1 like I'm over here fuming! Talking about slayer just makes me so mad!1!1!1!1!1
  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Winning TS doesn't require a different skill set though. They're historically the most inconsistent gametype. It's the one gametype AM teams (or just lower skilled teams in general) seem to be able to take off pros. It's a wildly inconsistent gametype.

 

And as I've stated before there's a difference between "encouraging" and "forcing" map movement. Slayer does not force map movement on its own even with Power weapons. Power weapons act as an incentive to move and half TS time it's the ONLY time people move. Even then someone can come in and burn a power weapon/up and make a standoff for another 2 minutes. Or, in the case of maps like Sanc even with Power weapons people still don't move. But aside from power weapons why is playing a gametype where the strategy for most of the game is just "stay alive don't move too much" good? Slayer ONLY worked on maps where sitting back just wasn't possible. Warlock, Middy, And Amplitude are the only maps I've seen that can play slayer decently. And even then many people considered those maps pretty much RNG.

CS FORCES a team to go to the objective or they lose. That's a huge difference.

 

We agree that TS is suboptimal, but I feel like we disagree that Slayer could be a good gametype with better settings.  How would you feel about Slayer if it had 1 minute powerups with instant pickup/activation, 5 second spawns, and a spawn system that depended on an aggregate of your team's position with limited spots (like maybe 5) to give a random spawn per map?

 

Also, what are your thoughts on Beaver Creek? I feel like it's a very good Slayer map given two very important things: delayed item spawns, and neutral host.

Share this post


Link to post

Not sure I can agree without seeing some kind of stats.

 

I'm not comparing CS to Halo, its apples to oranges and they work completely different from each other.

Well it's the same thing in comparing obj to slayer. One forces movement the other encourages it. Have you ever seen a team with less caps win CTF? No, but you have seen teams that grab less power ups/weapons win slayers. But I've already stated all the arguments in my recent posts at the end of the day it's just the most basic and slow paced gametype in competitive Halo. It should without a doubt NEVER be played more than once in a Bo5.

Share this post


Link to post

We agree that TS is suboptimal, but I feel like we disagree that Slayer could be a good gametype with better settings. How would you feel about Slayer if it had 1 minute powerups with instant pickup/activation?

 

Also, what are your thoughts on Beaver Creek? I feel like it's a very good Slayer map given two very important things: delayed item spawns, and neutral host.

I mean slayer could 100% be better but to me it will always be the weakest gamtype in a series. But it should definitely be improved. Faster spawning stuff helps a ton but we haven't had a starting weapon good enough to contest power weapons in a long time. Especially in H5. And I think Beaver Creek is just too red heavy. It's pretty easy to hold that and it can get kinda slow. But the delayed spawns help a ton with balancing issues. More slayers should take advantage of that.

 

If anything, slayer could just be used as a game 5 after 4 objs. Could be like a one last slugfest kinda thing.

  • Upvote (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post

i could feel your blood pressure rising just by reading that

 

rock solid argument btw

Could you elaborate how CS:GO doesn’t emphasize gun skill in its own game mode compared to halo then? Then again, you didn’t like CS:GO at all because of its “0.2 kill times” and lack of social game types in spite of the existence of a server browser, correct?

Share this post


Link to post

I mean slayer could 100% be better but to me it will always be the weakest gamtype in a series. But it should definitely be improved. Faster spawning stuff helps a ton but we haven't had a starting weapon good enough to contest power weapons in a long time. Especially in H5. And I think Beaver Creek is just too red heavy. It's pretty easy to hold that and it can get kinda slow. But the delayed spawns help a ton with balancing issues. More slayers should take advantage of that.

 

If anything, slayer could just be used as a game 5 after 4 objs. Could be like a one last slugfest kinda thing.

 

I edited my post hoping you'd see it in time but it looks like i was too slow. How do you feel about this H1 style hybrid for a spawn system designed for 4v4:

 

-A dead player spawns on the spawn point most equidistant from every living teammate, regardless of context. This creates an incentive to spread out, and encourages a "surround and contain" meta in slayers, as well as fast paced spawn decisions on the fly, where suddenly everyone is more responsible for how they spawn their dead teammates.

 

-As a way to alleviate endless trapping, every quadrant of the map and bottom middle will have a place on the map you can stand to give any dead teammate a random spawn. This place would not be safe. If you want to random out of your dilemma, you wouldn't have a ton of cover while you do it. Also, unlike Halo 1, it would only take 1 teammate standing on a random to give a random.

 

I like the surround and contain meta of H1 4v4 TS, but it had two huge problems:

-You spawned on a randomly chosen teammate

-Every living teammate had to stand on a random to give a random

 

This system solves both problems. How do you guys think this would play with 5 second respawns and 1 minute powerups in the context of H5 HCS settings?

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Learning how every weapon works in CS is without a doubt the first thing you need to understand before you improve your skill. I personally don't like playing comp in CS, but I can undoubtedly say it deserves the reputation its earned. Very fun to watch at a competitive level. Also as Tryhard said, CS does have a server browser followed by many hilarious social modes and mods which I have enjoyed playing in the past.

Share this post


Link to post

Well it's the same thing in comparing obj to slayer. One forces movement the other encourages it. Have you ever seen a team with less caps win CTF? No, but you have seen teams that grab less power ups/weapons win slayers. But I've already stated all the arguments in my recent posts at the end of the day it's just the most basic and slow paced gametype in competitive Halo. It should without a doubt NEVER be played more than once in a Bo5.

CS is fundamentally different in the fact that you don't need the objective to win the match. Not to mention the core differences between the two.

 

None of that shows me that Slayer is inconsistent nor does any of it show me that Slayer is a bad competitive option.

 

Perhaps I'm just misreading you, but you make it sounds as if every slayer game is this dead crawl that is just taking forever to get over. Every slayer game I watched today in the tournament was slightly slower than an OBJ game. Its not like players are just sitting around upon spawn, instead of having to rush across the map to try and stop the cap they are still pushing teammates, trying to get angles, putting support shots in. Its definitely not slow, just slower.

 

The way you make slayer sound is like Swat/Infection to a competitive person, maybe I am that guy who just doesn't see it, but I don't. Unless someone else wants to try to explain this to me I'm just going to agree to disagree.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

CS is fundamentally different in the fact that you don't need the objective to win the match. Not to mention the core differences between the two.

 

None of that shows me that Slayer is inconsistent nor does any of it show me that Slayer is a bad competitive option.

 

Perhaps I'm just misreading you, but you make it sounds as if every slayer game is this dead crawl that is just taking forever to get over. Every slayer game I watched today in the tournament was slightly slower than an OBJ game. Its not like players are just sitting around upon spawn, instead of having to rush across the map to try and stop the cap they are still pushing teammates, trying to get angles, putting support shots in. Its definitely not slow, just slower.

 

The way you make slayer sound is like Swat/Infection to a competitive person, maybe I am that guy who just doesn't see it, but I don't. Unless someone else wants to try to explain this to me I'm just going to agree to disagree.

Look at the damage after a slayer game. Pace isn't determined by just kills alone. Slayer games are DRASTICALLY slower paced compared to obj. And here just answer this: what gametype is slayer better than? If you can't name one then bingo. And yet it takes up TWO spots in a Bo5. That's absurd. I understand the differences between the games but you keep trying to say how the bomb is irrelevant an you don't "need to obj to win" but you literally do. The entire game mode is built around the bomb sites. Slaying is 1 of 2 options and there's so much more to the game because of that.

Share this post


Link to post

Could you elaborate how CS:GO doesn’t emphasize gun skill in its own game mode compared to halo then? 

no because i never made that argument

 

It blows my mind that CS doesn't use competitive deathmatch. I mean it IS a FIRST PERSON SHOOTER.

that's what i was referring to

 

imo what cs does is irrelevant in regards to halo, they aren't even close to being similar games

 

Then again, you didn’t like CS:GO at all because of its “0.2 kill times”

fyi i love cs, i played 1.6 competitively and casually for years

 

i don't prefer watching CS > halo, and i don't even watch CS at all anymore because i find it incredibly stale and slow

 

i find watching halo gun fights a lot more enjoyable than csgo gun fights with ".2 second kill times"

 

and lack of social game types in spite of the existence of a server browser, correct? 

i literally quit playing csgo because i couldn't find a fun map server similar to the one i played on 1.6

 

 

btw thanks for not calling me a stupid no life neckbeard because i have a different opinion

Share this post


Link to post

I edited my post hoping you'd see it in time but it looks like i was too slow. How do you feel about this H1 style hybrid for a spawn system designed for 4v4:

 

-A dead player spawns on the spawn point most equidistant from every living teammate, regardless of context. This creates an incentive to spread out, and encourages a "surround and contain" meta in slayers, as well as fast paced spawn decisions on the fly, where suddenly everyone is more responsible for how they spawn their dead teammates.

 

-As a way to alleviate endless trapping, every quadrant of the map and bottom middle will have a place on the map you can stand to give any dead teammate a random spawn. This place would not be safe. If you want to random out of your dilemma, you wouldn't have a ton of cover while you do it. Also, unlike Halo 1, it would only take 1 teammate standing on a random to give a random.

 

I like the surround and contain meta of H1 4v4 TS, but it had two huge problems:

-You spawned on a randomly chosen teammate

-Every living teammate had to stand on a random to give a random

 

This system solves both problems. How do you guys think this would play with 5 second respawns and 1 minute powerups in the context of H5 HCS settings?

It sounds interesting but of course it would have to be actually played before a conclusion can be made. H5 mainly suffered from your main gun being easy an slow killing in relation to power weapons, and weak in relation to rifles. And that's not getting into autos. It's too easy to snowball your weapon advantage. And Spartan abilities allow easy collapsing. Of course I'd have it pistol only. 1 minute power ups might work but they might also end up giving too much of an advantage. Idk at the end of the day for it to be better than any other gametype is impossible but it's not bad enough that it shouldn't be at least a social gametype.
  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Lmao I made that response because Pyroteq literally tried to say "it's a first person shooter so it should have a shooting game mode" but of course Moses has no conprehension ability.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

 

Ugh, no thanks. Sick of this participation medal crap infecting FPS. The last thing I want is another Overwatch where the game is scared of telling you you're garbage.

 

There's plenty of good ways to incentivise winning that doesn't make every player feel like they made an equal contribution to the team when one player went 30:1 and completely carried the game.

 

How about giving bonus REQ points for winning? And by bonus I don't mean an extra 5% for winning. By bonus I mean DOUBLE the amount of REQ for winning a game. Add on win streaks that ramp up REQ rewards for winning multiple games in a row.

 

Another method would be to offer bonus REQ points for players that play the objectives. Give a bonus 500 REQ points for a player that caps the flag or 500 REQ points for every 30 seconds they hold the ball in an Oddball game.

 

All of a sudden you'd have players fighting over running the flag instead of who picks up the next Sniper Rifle.

 

I'm all for Req incentives for winning, winning streaks, and even streaks of finishing games. But are you really going to take the position that the K/D statistic doesn't effect the way people play? Because my whole point is that this particular statistic, and its prominence in the in game career stats page that other players can check, creates a toxic playstyle that is particularly damaging to social obj. I want you to acknowledge this.

 

I feel like the K/D statistic could be replaced with something that can't be cheesed for an inflated self image, like damage per minute. Also, theres nothing wrong with making W/L the far and away most important statistic on the stats page. I'd like you to acknowledge this too. Perhaps something would need to be done to show/account for party size so that it's obvious that someone pubstomps with a full party for stats. I'm no math wizard but maybe something along the lines of (W/L) / Average party size? Or maybe wins while searching solo are worth more, in proportion to max party size (so a solo win in BTB is worth more than a solo win in doubles, etc).

 

I feel like other "pure", uncheesable statistics could be like average percentage of obj work completed. This would be super easy in Oddball and KotH, but gets a little more complicated in CTF. If someone gets the flag 99% of the way back and someone else punches it in, they would get all the credit. So maybe the CTF stat could be like, "distance to capture plate subtracted" or something, with max of 33% obj contribution awarded for any single capture in a game to 3.

Share this post


Link to post

So maybe the CTF stat could be like, "distance to capture plate subtracted" or something, with max of 33% obj contribution awarded for any single capture in a game to 3.

Brilliant. The "Flag Captured" medal should alway go to the guy that covered the most ground, not the opportunist that scores it after the carrier died right next to the capture plate. Would also eliminate betraying for the flag cap (yes this still happens).

Share this post


Link to post

How do you know they were on dedi's?  Unless you bridged connection with your PC and hooked up wireshark or something, there is no way to actually know that you were playing those matches on dedi's.  Even that method just allows you to make a "better guess" but isn't a guarantee.

 

And yeah, azure is enterprise-grade stuff and even though its a fair assumption to make that azure datacenters are used, its not a guarantee (though i admit its unlikely they are using some other infrastructure given they are a microsoft first party studio).

 

Number of hops to the datacenter and line quality are the 2 most important factors to a good connection.  There simply aren't enough Azure datacenters around the globe to guarantee that both of those criteria are met for a lot of players.  I happen to be lucky enough to live in the East US and have low ping (< 80ms) to 6 different Azure clusters so for me and most people in the continental US, Dedicated servers are better.  But for a lot of people around the globe or people that have to pass their connection through shitty ISPs, p2p would actually give them a better experience.

 

The Ideal best system would be a hybrid system that uses both.  One that can find you a fair match based on your preferred criteria (connection vs. skill, etc) using dedi's or p2p.  Unfortunately a system like that would need to really be architected and tested perfectly.

 

That launch-day MCC match felt the same as the Halo 5 beta matches I played, and Halo 5 is dedis only. Not to mention all the matches had a smoothness that I'd never felt in Halo before.

 

100% dedis makes a lot of sense for Xbox exclusives because the Xbox market is North America-centric. It's definitely a shame for the rest of the world, but new datacentres are being put up all the time.

 

around a couple weeks ago

 

I'm using the same update in that case, and while improved quite a bit since 2014, it's still not as snappy as 360 has been since at least 2008.

Share this post


Link to post

BTW, I realize the state of the game tends to make this thread play looser, but how many pages now have been spent on Slayer vs. Objective, something not at all MCC specific?

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

BTW, I realize the state of the game tends to make this thread play looser, but how many pages now have been spent on Slayer vs. Objective, something not at all MCC specific?

The discussion was about consolidating MCC playlists before it turned into childish name calling :(

 

I wonder why only 6 people use this thread...

  • Upvote (+1) 1

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.