Jump to content

FREE AUGUST TOURNAMENTS 

APEX LEGENDSROCKET LEAGUE

CyReN

Halo: The Master Chief Collection Discussion

Recommended Posts

Ok, you explain it's popularity then. Good luck not using the phrase "less to think about". What words would you use to describe a group of people that will be damned if their playlist of exclusively the simplest gametype gets sullied by filthy objective gametypes, in an effort to find those gametypes a home in a dwindling population?

 

Remember the situation here. Low population. No way to play 4v4 social obj. We know a social skirmish couldn't stand on it's own (for reasons that will forever elude me). But here we have a nice chunk of the population sitting comfortably in the TS playlist. It's population could support social obj if it took them in. But a large number of people would freak the fuck out if they ever had to play an obj, and would rather it be impossible to play, so long as they can keep playing the simplest gametype exclusively. I don't like, respect, or understand that way of thinking. It seems selfish and lazy to me.

 

The TS playlist came about initially as a way to bypass Bungie's horrendous obj modes. With the right settings (NOT Bungie's God awful settings), obj deserves to share the spotlight. I think a social and ranked 4v4 playlist that includes all standard gametypes should be the standard in all Halo games going forward, and TS should be a rotational ranked playlist. And that opinion is based on principle. It's ignoring the TS playlist's popularity in an attempt to achieve something better.

Way behind on this convo but I wanted to say I think this is BS. Most popular fps games right now have objectives. Overwatch and CS GO come to mind immediately. PUBG is massive and is more than just killing people. I think objectives can help even more stupid people as it gives them direction. They don't have to think about where to go.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

The notion that objectives add significant complexity on their own as opposed to through interaction with different map layouts is utter nonsense. If anything, slayer requires MORE map-specific knowledge at the most basic level, because you lack the one or two clearly marked focal points that are the objectives. Objective games provide immediate and blatantly obvious direction. You know that both teams will be coordinating (perhaps badly) either for the neutral objective or for their opponent's objective. If you can't figure that out from the opening description of the game type and the clear markers on your HUD, you're probably an idiot. In slayer solo queue, you have a bunch of players wandering around looking for kills. You only get some semblance of structure out of that when the players actually know what they're doing; paying attention to power-up/power weapon timers and understanding the spawn system.

​Basically, I think people are overthinking unthinking players. Objective modes are blatantly more straightforward in structure and more predictable at lower levels. Stop making excuses for assumed and irrational casual fear of them.

  • Upvote (+1) 5

Share this post


Link to post

Once again, 4vs4 is not the optimal Halo experience. With 4 people, you have to have a combination of weapon strength and health that enables a single player to not get melted across the map by a team of 4 instantly. On the flipside, this combination makes it so you can't efficiently kill someone by yourself further than close/medium range, leading to high degrees of teamshot that we've seen in Halo 3 and Halo 5.

 

 

Furthermore, 4 people is too much for a single player or 2 players on the same team to manage when it comes to halo gameplay. At that point, your skill is heavily reliant on teammates. Slayer sucks in Halo 5 because a single death really isn't that important or detrimental. If a player dies, its still 3vs4 which isnt a huge disadvantage. You cant consistently get back control or make plays 3vs4. It does help though. When its 2vs2, a single player dieing is a huge deal. Now its 2vs1, or 1 team has twice as many players. It would have to essentially be 6vs3 to have the same effect in Halos past Halo 1. Halo 5 is slayer where individual lifes aren't that important in the grand scheme of things. This all leads to the constant stalemates in Slayer and all the lone flanking solo kills we see.

 

This all carries over to objective as well. People hate 4vs4 objective in Halo because you have to have teammates that are all doing the correct plays because once again, a individual player is so limited, even more than slayer. Try running a flag on Truth in Halo 5. If you dont have atleast 2 teammates blocking either bubble spawns, you'll literally have enemies spawning looking at you and instantly cutting off your flag routes. People hate objective because they play solo with no mics and often times with teammates that have no clue how to play the kill/block/rotate meta.

 

Slayer sucks for solo players/teams of 2 in Halo 2-5, but it doesn't suck as bad as objective. Teams of 4 is a different story, but most people search 1s/2s, so this is why you see the objective hate.

Share this post


Link to post

2v2 objective is asscheeks. People like 4v4 because it can offer more variety in experiences and gametypes.

Yeah, I wasn't promoting 2vs2 obj, but rather how 4vs4 obj simply isnt enjoyable for the majority of the population due to the reasons I stated above. Halo 1 was great because it was slayer but the constant camo/os/rockets acted as mini objectives in slayer with far more individual options/choices.

 

And yeah certain people like OBJ for the change of pace, teamwork, etc, but it has always been the least liked/played by the general population in every single Halo. Should we cater to noobs? Probably not, but there's a lot of things that prevent it from being enjoyable for people.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Once again, 4vs4 is not the optimal Halo experience. With 4 people, you have to have a combination of weapon strength and health that enables a single player to not get melted across the map by a team of 4 instantly. On the flipside, this combination makes it so you can't efficiently kill someone by yourself further than close/medium range, leading to high degrees of teamshot that we've seen in Halo 3 and Halo 5.

 

 

Furthermore, 4 people is too much for a single player or 2 players on the same team to manage when it comes to halo gameplay. At that point, your skill is heavily reliant on teammates. Slayer sucks in Halo 5 because a single death really isn't that important or detrimental. If a player dies, its still 3vs4 which isnt a huge disadvantage. You cant consistently get back control or make plays 3vs4. It does help though. When its 2vs2, a single player dieing is a huge deal. Now its 2vs1, or 1 team has twice as many players. It would have to essentially be 6vs3 to have the same effect in Halos past Halo 1. Halo 5 is slayer where individual lifes aren't that important in the grand scheme of things. This all leads to the constant stalemates in Slayer and all the lone flanking solo kills we see.

 

This all carries over to objective as well. People hate 4vs4 objective in Halo because you have to have teammates that are all doing the correct plays because once again, a individual player is so limited, even more than slayer. Try running a flag on Truth in Halo 5. If you dont have atleast 2 teammates blocking either bubble spawns, you'll literally have enemies spawning looking at you and instantly cutting off your flag routes. People hate objective because they play solo with no mics and often times with teammates that have no clue how to play the kill/block/rotate meta.

 

Slayer sucks for solo players/teams of 2 in Halo 2-5, but it doesn't suck as bad as objective. Teams of 4 is a different story, but most people search 1s/2s, so this is why you see the objective hate.

 

 

:wutface:

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, I wasn't promoting 2vs2 obj, but rather how 4vs4 obj simply isnt enjoyable for the majority of the population due to the reasons I stated above. Halo 1 was great because it was slayer but the constant camo/os/rockets acted as mini objectives in slayer with far more individual options/choices.

 

And yeah certain people like OBJ for the change of pace, teamwork, etc, but it has always been the least liked/played by the general population in every single Halo. Should we cater to noobs? Probably not, but there's a lot of things that prevent it from being enjoyable for people.

Alright yea I get what you mean.

Share this post


Link to post

The notion that objectives add significant complexity on their own as opposed to through interaction with different map layouts is utter nonsense. If anything, slayer requires MORE map-specific knowledge at the most basic level, because you lack the one or two clearly marked focal points that are the objectives. Objective games provide immediate and blatantly obvious direction. You know that both teams will be coordinating (perhaps badly) either for the neutral objective or for their opponent's objective. If you can't figure that out from the opening description of the game type and the clear markers on your HUD, you're probably an idiot. In slayer solo queue, you have a bunch of players wandering around looking for kills. You only get some semblance of structure out of that when the players actually know what they're doing; paying attention to power-up/power weapon timers and understanding the spawn system.

I couldn't agree more. Slayer done right can have the same, if not more, depth and complexity as an objective gametype. Just think of the opposing players as flags... that move... and have guns... and are trying to kill you! In all seriousness though, anyone that can look me in the eyes with a straight face and tell me that a game of CTF on midship has more depth to it than a game of slayer on prisoner just because there is an objective on the map is either a filthy liar or batshit insane.

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

Would be cool to see a "Perfect" medal added to MCC C.E.
3sk's already feel great.  It would just be a cherry on top.

Share this post


Link to post

I couldn't agree more. Slayer done right can have the same, if not more, depth and complexity as an objective gametype. Just think of the opposing players as flags... that move... and have guns... and are trying to kill you! In all seriousness though, anyone that can look me in the eyes with a straight face and tell me that a game of CTF on midship has more depth to it than a game of slayer on prisoner just because there is an objective on the map is either a filthy liar or batshit insane.

It's kind of cheating using CE as your baseline for slayer, considering the game in and of itself has more depth than any other title in this franchise by a sizable margin. I would argue however that a game of CTF on Middy has more depth to it than a game of Slayer on Warlock, for example.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

It's kind of cheating using CE as your baseline for slayer, considering the game in and of itself has more depth than any other title in this franchise by a sizable margin. I would argue however that a game of CTF on Middy has more depth to it than a game of Slayer on Warlock, for example.

CE style Slayer should be what we strive for going forward. Strong utility and fast powerups will make it play so much better.

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

It's kind of cheating using CE as your baseline for slayer, considering the game in and of itself has more depth than any other title in this franchise by a sizable margin. I would argue however that a game of CTF on Middy has more depth to it than a game of Slayer on Warlock, for example.

If using CE as an example when discussing Halo is cheating then we're all doomed. CE is thee example. The gold standard. If slayer works in CE then slayer works.

  • Upvote (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post

CE style Slayer should be what we strive for going forward. Strong utility and fast powerups will make it play so much better.

I mean I don't disagree, but realistically speaking Halo is already so far gone from even the original trilogy, let alone CE itself. And even if a CE style TS were to make a return, things could get fairly hectic, as I can't imagine competitive Halo ever shifting away from 4v4 at this point. 

 

If using CE as an example when discussing Halo is cheating then we're all doomed. CE is thee example. The gold standard. If slayer works in CE then slayer works.

That's not what I'm saying. In this example you're using CE to represent Slayer as a whole. The implication is that because Slayer on Prisoner has more depth than CTF on Middy, that Slayer itself is what's credible, when in reality it's CE with the depth to it, and not specifically the gametype itself. The point I'm trying to make is that just because CE Slayer is extremely deep, that doesn't mean that that depth necessarily exists within slayer across multiple games. If we're comparing gametypes, we need to measure their validity against other gametypes within the same game. 

Share this post


Link to post

That's not what I'm saying. In this example you're using CE to represent Slayer as a whole. The implication is that because Slayer on Prisoner has more depth than CTF on Middy, that Slayer itself is what's credible, when in reality it's CE with the depth to it, and not specifically the gametype itself. The point I'm trying to make is that just because CE Slayer is extremely deep, that doesn't mean that that depth necessarily exists within slayer across multiple games. If we're comparing gametypes, we need to measure their validity against other gametypes within the same game.

I know what you meant. I'm not really trying to say that slayer in general has more depth than objective game types in general. I don't even believe that. I was just pointing out that slayer done right can have just as much depth as objective depending on the game and the map. Besides it's hard to compare slayer against objective within the same Halo because the best examples for slayer are in CE while the best examples for objective are in the Halos after CE. I'd compare slayer to objective within CE but objective is ass in CE. I'd compare slayer to objective within the other Halos but slayer is ass in those titles.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I mean I don't disagree, but realistically speaking Halo is already so far gone from even the original trilogy, let alone CE itself. And even if a CE style TS were to make a return, things could get fairly hectic, as I can't imagine competitive Halo ever shifting away from 4v4 at this point.

 

That's not what I'm saying. In this example you're using CE to represent Slayer as a whole. The implication is that because Slayer on Prisoner has more depth than CTF on Middy, that Slayer itself is what's credible, when in reality it's CE with the depth to it, and not specifically the gametype itself. The point I'm trying to make is that just because CE Slayer is extremely deep, that doesn't mean that that depth necessarily exists within slayer across multiple games. If we're comparing gametypes, we need to measure their validity against other gametypes within the same game.

4v4 TS in CE is not as bad as it’s being made out to be. The problem is with the spawn system, in that you spawn on a randomly chosen teammate instead of an aggregate, and all teammates need to be on a random instead of just one. That and the 50 kill limit most of you have played instead of the 100 kill limit that NHE offers. The pacing is great. The powerup usefulness is great. The teamwork/individual power balance is great. It would be pretty easy to take what was great about CE 4v4 TS and apply it to future Halos.

 

I’ve pitched an idea for how to make the CE spawn system work in 4v4 several times but no one seems interested in discussing it.

 

And regarding obj in CE, @@Devilman, what are your thoughts on making the Hill rotations non-random, and making the oddball spawn instantly instead of 30 secs after a Play Ball? Those are by far the biggest problems with H1 obj imo.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm trying to think of a way to make 4v4 Slayer work for modern Halo games. Aside from the obvious fixes of a more skill-based, powerful utility weapon and better powerweapon/powerup, what if at the loading screen of each game, you assign "Spawn Influence" rankings to each of your players. The player ranked "1" would influence all of the teams spawns while they were alive, the player ranked "2" would influence spawns only while player "1" was dead, and so on. This might allow much more interesting strategies with spawning without the confusion of 4 players all influencing the spawns equally.

 

Not sure if it would work well, but it might create some interesting dynamics.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

@@Hard Way I've heard of that spawn idea for 4v4's before and like it. I just am curious to see how it plays out. I wonder if it can create some divide and conquer like control that is overwhelming. The upside is that the defensive teams have some sort of control to break the set up.

 

@@BigShow36 I haven't heard of that spin on it yet, interesting but I would probably prefer having it so each team has two groups. Player 1 and Player 2 effect each others spawns where player 3 and player 4 effects theirs.

Share this post


Link to post

@@Hard Way I've heard of that spawn idea for 4v4's before and like it. I just am curious to see how it plays out. I wonder if it can create some divide and conquer like control that is overwhelming. The upside is that the defensive teams have some sort of control to break the set up.

 

@@BigShow36 I haven't heard of that spin on it yet, interesting but I would probably prefer having it so each team has two groups. Player 1 and Player 2 effect each others spawns where player 3 and player 4 effects theirs.

Only issue is that a dev would want a spawn system that works for all team sizes, not just even numbers.

Share this post


Link to post

Being able to set the score to 100 would do absolute wonders for 4v4 slayer even with the spawn system being broken in 4v4. Another thing that would improve objective in CE would be getting rid of auto pickup on objectives.

Share this post


Link to post

@@Hard Way I've heard of that spawn idea for 4v4's before and like it. I just am curious to see how it plays out. I wonder if it can create some divide and conquer like control that is overwhelming. The upside is that the defensive teams have some sort of control to break the set up.

 

@@BigShow36 I haven't heard of that spin on it yet, interesting but I would probably prefer having it so each team has two groups. Player 1 and Player 2 effect each others spawns where player 3 and player 4 effects theirs.

What if instead of pairing players, we put the death screen to use and whoever you're watching when you're about to spawn is the player who influences you?
  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

What if instead of pairing players, we put the death screen to use and whoever you're watching when you're about to spawn is the player who influences you?

That’s pretty great. Predictability on the other team’s part might be an issue though. From their perspective it might as well be as random as the current system.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Funny story. My Halo 2 Final mod is live on Project Cartographer. I left the project a while ago, so I didn't know it was public. Features include

 

Complete Weapon Rebalancing:

- 3sk BR

- Faster BR rate of fire

- Reduced bullet mag across all weapons

- No dual weilding

- Plasma rifle stun

- Many misc changes to balancing to add more niche to weapon choice

 

Gameplay Changes:

- Frags behave like h1 frags

- Quick Camo

- Static Weapom Spawns

- No Melee Lunge

- No spawn invincibility

- Static player Spawns (needs some adjusting)

 

I'm pretty proud of it, despite abandoning it. I'm going to get windows 10 again, so I will probably pick it up again.

  • Upvote (+1) 5

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.