Halo: The Master Chief Collection Discussion

[II7 HUNTER II7]

Qutting penalties should heavily affect the first quitter, the 2nd guy should get a light punishment, but nowhere as harsh as the first. After 2 people quit, the remaining people should have the option to surrender and take the loss or if they feel like coming back they can fight it out.

 

why should you have to take a loss if you're down 2 teammates?

[Apoll0]

why should you have to take a loss if you're down 2 teammates?

If it didn't count as an L you could abuse the shit out of it. Party of 4 enters matchmaking. They're about to lose. Player one quits and takes the L for the team. Next game you're gonna lose you rotate which player quits thereby ensuring that each player ends up taking only a quarter or half as many losses (depending on implementation).

 

You could do something like prorate the amount of rank lost as a function of how long into the game the first player quit and individual performance but not counting as a loss at all is a bad idea.

[Basu]

why should you have to take a loss if you're down 2 teammates?

 

Umm you still lost the match? It sucks to lose due to a quitter, but statistically there's the same chance that the enemy team gets a quitter/griefer (technically bigger if you aren't a quitter, since there's 4 enemies and 3 teammates but I digress). You could cancel the entire match if someone quits during the first 15 seconds or something, other games do that already.

 

If having a quitter meant you wouldn't get a loss, people would abuse the shit out of it. Parties would just pair up with booster accounts (already a huge issue in H3 and H5's ranking system) and then when they see a loss coming up the booster would simply quit and the rest walks free.

 

As I said, if you're good enough you can still win that 2v4. Unlikely, but I've seen it happen. Unless you want JIP in ranked or find a way to make a better system then this is a good as it gets.

[II7 HUNTER II7]

If it didn't count as an L you could abuse the shit out of it. Party of 4 enters matchmaking. They're about to lose. Player one quits and takes the L for the team. Next game you're gonna lose you rotate which player quits thereby ensuring that each player ends up taking only a quarter or half as many losses (depending on implementation).

 

You could do something like prorate the amount of rank lost as a function of how long into the game the first player quit and individual performance but not counting as a loss at all is a bad idea.

True, yeah I think having a surrender system with a minor hit to rank compared to quitting early would be a good idea.

[Apoll0]

True, yeah I think having a surrender system with a minor hit to rank compared to quitting early would be a good idea.

Totally yeah. It would still need to function as a loss but at least it would end the pain and let everybody requeue. It would also curb teams that just stat all game.

[theslatcher]

If it didn't count as an L you could abuse the shit out of it. Party of 4 enters matchmaking. They're about to lose. Player one quits and takes the L for the team. Next game you're gonna lose you rotate which player quits thereby ensuring that each player ends up taking only a quarter or half as many losses (depending on implementation).

 

You could do something like prorate the amount of rank lost as a function of how long into the game the first player quit and individual performance but not counting as a loss at all is a bad idea.

Could just add a parameter to check if you entered the game in a group or not.

[Apoll0]

Could just add a parameter to check if you entered the game in a group or not.

That can still be abused by smaller parties and lead to players that are at the bottom of the scoreboard getting harassed and/or griefed even more than they already do, trying to force them to quit first.

 

A loss needs to count as a loss period, regardless of 'why'.  The odds of an unfair loss happening at the same for everybody and over the long term should come out in the wash anyway.

[Supermelee24]

If losses are going to count as losses either way then certain points need to removed DEPENDING on game time. It’s reasonable to assume early quit was disconnect, or something else. But if it’s mid-late game and your teammates quit on you then you should receive a full loss, since most likely that guy rage quit which meant your team wasn’t that great. Sure comebacks are possible but they’re unlikely and it’s better to go off the likely method that your teammate rage quit and you were probably going to lose.

[Botheredhat360]

uhhh can I get a CE Multiplayer remastered?

 

just visual enhancements? 

 

no?

 

understandable have a nice day 

[Slayer]

Why do they keep putting h3 hardcore on as the only ranked playlist? Tired of playing h3 every damn weekend lol

[Supermelee24]

Why do they keep putting h3 hardcore on as the only ranked playlist? Tired of playing h3 every damn weekend lol

maybe because majority who play mcc want h3?

[Botheredhat360]

maybe because majority who play mcc want h3?

we really should let them try h2 more

[theslatcher]

Why do they keep putting h3 hardcore on as the only ranked playlist? Tired of playing h3 every damn weekend lol

Only Sunday was H3 Hardcore, friday was H3 Dubbs however so that's 2/3 of the weekend having H3 ranked playlists.

[BobbyBones]

What do you guys think about a boomerang style weapon that travels forward a short distance then returns to the user? On the outgoing trip, the projectile deals light damage but on the return trip it deals heavy damage. Hitting an enemy with the outgoing and incoming projectile is lethal.

 

The user can strafe to curve the projectile’s return trajectory. If the projectile hits a wall, it sticks into it for a short time, preventing the user from firing again.

[BigShow36]

Why do they keep putting h3 hardcore on as the only ranked playlist? Tired of playing h3 every damn weekend lol

 

I jumped on last night and was dismayed to see that CE was no longer an option. That ruined my play session real quick. 

[Slayer]

I jumped on last night and was dismayed to see that CE was no longer an option. That ruined my play session real quick.

I bet man. Cant wait till they fix this so i can stick to h1 and h2 only.

[xboxdigger 94]

Umm you still lost the match? It sucks to lose due to a quitter, but statistically there's the same chance that the enemy team gets a quitter/griefer (technically bigger if you aren't a quitter, since there's 4 enemies and 3 teammates but I digress). You could cancel the entire match if someone quits during the first 15 seconds or something, other games do that already.

 

If having a quitter meant you wouldn't get a loss, people would abuse the shit out of it. Parties would just pair up with booster accounts (already a huge issue in H3 and H5's ranking system) and then when they see a loss coming up the booster would simply quit and the rest walks free.

 

As I said, if you're good enough you can still win that 2v4. Unlikely, but I've seen it happen. Unless you want JIP in ranked or find a way to make a better system then this is a good as it gets.

 

I managed to win quite a few 2 vs 4 in Halo against levels 40+. I also managed to win 1 vs 2 against 50's in doubles. I have seen games where people have won 1vs2 50s in flag - That is insane. I think I have seen 1 game where 1 person managed to win 1 vs  3 50 TS game. 

[My Namez BEAST]

I managed to win quite a few 2 vs 4 in Halo against levels 40+. I also managed to win 1 vs 2 against 50's in doubles. I have seen games where people have won 1vs2 50s in flag - That is insane. I think I have seen 1 game where 1 person managed to win 1 vs 3 50 TS game.

OH SHIT GUYS WATCH OUT WE HAVE A GOD OVER HERE

[theslatcher]

Speaking of 2v4's and such, I just got a game which started 3v4 where the stat screen didn't even have the 8th guy who vanished.

[YGB Jammy]

Anyone think we'll be getting any news on the update at Gamescom tomorrow?

[Basu]

Speaking of 2v4's and such, I just got a game which started 3v4 where the stat screen didn't even have the 8th guy who vanished.

 

Yup, they somehow reintroduced that day 1 bug where games start 3v4 and other mismatches. Happened on multiple occasions.

[L377UC3]

What do you guys think about a boomerang style weapon that travels forward a short distance then returns to the user? On the outgoing trip, the projectile deals light damage but on the return trip it deals heavy damage. Hitting an enemy with the outgoing and incoming projectile is lethal.

 

The user can strafe to curve the projectile’s return trajectory. If the projectile hits a wall, it sticks into it for a short time, preventing the user from firing again.

I'm not sure this is the best page onto which to post this idea, but I kind of like it. What are your thoughts on its hypothetical range/arc?

[Basu]

I'm not sure this is the best page onto which to post this idea, but I kind of like it.

 

 

We need to revive the Great Halo Debate Thread for theorycrafting such things.

[BobbyBones]

I'm not sure this is the best page onto which to post this idea, but I kind of like it. What are your thoughts on its hypothetical range/arc?

I would say range should be something like two Warthog lengths. I am envisioning it as a kind of close quarters weapon. I wouldn’t have the outgoing projectile curve at all, it just goes straight at where you fired it. On the return trip is where the projectile would curve as it is trying to get back to you from where it is. The projectile would travel relatively slow so you would have a chance to move around and create an angle for it to curve back to you on.

 

I was even considering if you threw it at a wall, it would stick into it for a brief period, and you could jump up on it like a little ledge to make a higher jump off of but I’m not sure if that’s too abusable.

 

I’m also trying to think of a better name for it than a boomerang.

[Moa]

 

https://trello.com/b/WPZDzEBI/mcc-support-page

 

----

 

Really dope!