Jump to content
CyReN

Halo 5: Guardians Discussion

Recommended Posts

What's wrong with Strongholds?

 

It's better than king iMO. King devolved into a lot of mindlessly throwing yourself into the hill. And it often resulted in the final minutes being pointless as one team had already mathematically lost.

 

It was also really hard to play with random because going in the hill often means death and people wouldon't do it.

 

Strongholds lends itself to comebacks better. It plays better in a MM setting. It's morecsyructured (empire is the only mindless rush version).

  • Upvote (+1) 5
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

If KotH and Oddball had a built in endgame trigger for winning mathematically, that'd be pretty cool. Especially if you had like a 10 second warning or something, similar to GoW's.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

If KotH and Oddball had a built in endgame trigger for winning mathematically, that'd be pretty cool. Especially if you had like a 10 second warning or something, similar to GoW's.

I like the way Black Ops 2 handled that issue in Hardpoint. The ingame timer would simply stop when someone is in the hill. Now that wouldn't be ideal in Halo where the timer is actually really important.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I couldn't think of a more generic game mode than strongholds if I tried. Everything unique like oddball and koth are gone. Both of which are way more competitive gametypes.

Strongholds is very similar to Domination from Cod or territories from older Halos, the only difference is the size of the territory and that you have to have 2 to point.

Share this post


Link to post

Strongholds is very similar to Domination from Cod or territories from older Halos, the only difference is the size of the territory and that you have to have 2 to point.

Yeah...that's what I'm saying. It's unoriginal.

Share this post


Link to post

What's wrong with Strongholds?

 

It's better than king iMO. King devolved into a lot of mindlessly throwing yourself into the hill. And it often resulted in the final minutes being pointless as one team had already mathematically lost.

 

It was also really hard to play with random because going in the hill often means death and people wouldon't do it.

 

Strongholds lends itself to comebacks better. It plays better in a MM setting. It's morecsyructured (empire is the only mindless rush version).

Basic game design tells me that having 3 objectives split between 4 players is probably not ideal. King works infinitely better for 4v4

  • Upvote (+1) 2
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Basic game design tells me that having 3 objectives split between 4 players is probably not ideal. King works infinitely better for 4v4

King has the same problem as Slayer: once one team gets a large enough lead, they've won the game.

 

You can comeback from a 20-99 Strongholds match. You can't do the same for KotH.

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

It's 2017, and I just had to QTB because I couldn't start up a matchmaking, custom, forge, or theater game. Great game

It's hacker attacks on a number of games, not just Halo. Has nothing to do with Halo. Hold the salt.

Share this post


Link to post

Basic game design tells me that having 3 objectives split between 4 players is probably not ideal. King works infinitely better for 4v4

3 obj allows a team to not instantly know what the other is going for in most situations. 4 just splits the attention too much and would just involve constantly rotating around in an endless loop. I don't really see your argument.

Share this post


Link to post

Who knows how Strongholds would even play on a good map...

 

For real though, I like KoTH infinitely more than Strongholds, and the argument about comebacks doesn't matter to me. Once the game is mathematically over, it should just end. 

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I can see why 343 put more emphasis on Strongholds as it is 100% more acessible for the general gamer: Constantly holding the ball or standing in the hill to score is also admittedly harder to do than just capturing and holding two strongholds. Plus it is a very well known gametype from CoD/BF/TF. But it's still unacceptable that they 1) Claim it's a new gametype and 2) Cut Oddball, KoTH and all Territories variants (good riddance on these IMO) to make room for Strongholds.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I'm surprised to see so much dislike of strongholds. Its not original but its actually a very intelligence oriented objective gametype. Its slightly mind boggling to see people say koth was more competitive when there really isn't a comparison. I'll shit on 343 for a lot of things but this setup for strongholds is the best competitive gametype to be added post CE. You'll also find a lot of pro players talking about how hard it is to make the right plays and calls and you'll see how rewarding it is when you do make them if you watch.

  • Upvote (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post

I'm surprised to see so much dislike of strongholds. Its not original but its actually a very intelligence oriented objective gametype. Its slightly mind boggling to see people say koth was more competitive when there really isn't a comparison. I'll shit on 343 for a lot of things but this setup for strongholds is the best competitive gametype to be added post CE. You'll also find a lot of pro players talking about how hard it is to make the right plays and calls and you'll see how rewarding it is when you do make them if you watch.

 

This. Who cares if it's generic? 3 plots is a good shooter gametype across pretty much all shooters. But Strongholds is the only one to use a really good scoring mechanic. I think it's the best version of this gametype that I've ever played.

 

However, I also think it's different enough from KotH that there shouldn't be a comparison. And the whole comeback argument in KotH is, first of all, bogus. I've seen plenty of comebacks in KotH, and they're exciting as hell.  But secondly, it could be completely undone by using the scoring mechanism we should have been using from the beginning, which is Everyone-Counts scoring. You wanna risk sticking 4 people in the hill? Then you'll get 4 points per second. Boom, comeback city. It's simple risk/reward, it leads to more dynamic games, and more strategies available. It's nothing short of stupid that we haven't been playing by those rules all this time.

  • Upvote (+1) 9

Share this post


Link to post

i think people would like strongholds better if we had better maps. i think eden sh plays fine for the map structure, but empire is not good. its so small that it becomes a grenade spamfest. maybe the middle sh should be moved from pit to outside to help, koth definitely plays better on a smaller map where sh seems to need a larger map.

 

as to mathematical wins, that doesnt bug me too much. we have flag games that end quickly because of perfect set ups and runs. the game rewards a fast start where sh is much more forgiving

  • Upvote (+1) 1
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Basic game design tells me that having 3 objectives split between 4 players is probably not ideal. King works infinitely better for 4v4

Well 4v4 Halo sucks anyway. 6v6 Strongholds is pretty cool though. 

  • Upvote (+1) 1
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

KoTH and Strongholds are literally nothing alike other than the fact that there are zone(s) on the map.

 

I hope with the next update they reduce the number of playlists. Half the shit should just be in Actions sack, and the other shit should be rotational again.

 

Retweet

Share this post


Link to post

For social playlists Triple Team, and Super Fiesta should be rotational playlist and Shotty Snipers should be removed because there is no point for two snipers playlists. Team Skirmish should stay but you should get OBJ gametypes more frequently. I feel like it's just a social slayer playlist right now.

 

For ranked it's pretty good, but I would prefer they made the FFA social. The current FFA feels like social rumble pit like in previous Halo games with all the power weapons, and power ups. Maybe in the future they can make a competitive FFA with no PU and PW and it comes down to raw gun skill.

 

Warzone, just have one Warzone Firefight mode please. Why separate it it different difficulties? Also increase the party sizes back to To12. Max To6 is just dumb.

 

This is just my opinion though.

 

Also, I like what @@Moa said too to get rid of Action Sack since we have a custom browser. I just don't see that happening though.

 

 

Also the aiming system in Halo 5 is still complete dog shit.

  • Upvote (+1) 1
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

For social playlists Triple Team, and Super Fiesta should be rotational playlist and Shotty Snipers should be removed because there is no point for two snipers playlists. Team Skirmish should stay but you should get OBJ gametypes more frequently. I feel like it's just a social slayer playlist right now.

 

For ranked it's pretty good, but I would prefer they made the FFA social. The current FFA feels like social rumble pit like in previous Halo games with all the power weapons, and power ups. Maybe in the future they can make a competitive FFA with no PU and PW and it comes down to raw gun skill.

 

Warzone, just have one Warzone Firefight mode please. Why separate it it different difficulties? Also increase the party sizes back to To12. Max To6 is just dumb.

 

This is just my opinion though.

 

Also, I like what @@Moa said too to get rid of Action Sack since we have a custom browser. I just don't see that happening though.

 

 

Also the aiming system in Halo 5 is still complete dog shit.

Snipers shouldn't be ranked and both Snipers & Shotty Snipers should be in the social playlist. 

 

Warzone Firefight by default should be Heroic, Legendary needs to go. Mythic & Turbo should be rotating... rotational playlists every weekend. Maybe Mythic every three weeks, Turbo on the fourth, repeat.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

3 obj allows a team to not instantly know what the other is going for in most situations. 4 just splits the attention too much and would just involve constantly rotating around in an endless loop. I don't really see your argument.

Wait, hold on. So having 3 objectives isn't random, but having 4 is? You're argument is self defeating, your example of what 4 objectives would become fits EXACTLY what strongholds plays like. Most players, without extreme coordination AND a map with controlled enough pathing would have no fucking clue what objective will be contested next. You leave one stronghold to capture another, and while you secure it the one you left is being capped. It's too many objectives split between not many players.

 

If a team is playing perfectly and holds all 3 objectives, that means there's literally 1 player guarding each stronghold, with 1 left over. So a majority of the time gaining or losing a stronghold comes down to a 1v1 battle. That's it, every encounter (in theory) comes down to just individual battles + 1 roamer IF YOU PLAY PERFECTLY. With 2 strongholds you stack 2 to a zone but then it just seems like teams that play perfectly and 3x cap get punished because the game becomes unpredictable at that point. And randomness is shitty game design.

 

Obviously strongholds doesn't always play out like this because you don't NEED to stand in the zone to get points, you can play middle man and stand between two objectives- but I could make that exact same argument for Koth couldn't I. Koth has rotation of strongholds provided the Hill moves (which it does) but allows for way more interesting setups. As goat said, strongholds would work better as 6v6.

 

King has the same problem as Slayer: once one team gets a large enough lead, they've won the game.

 

You can comeback from a 20-99 Strongholds match. You can't do the same for KotH.

Not really an argument considering you could just halt the game timer when someone is in the Hill and give stacking seconds per player each player in hill, problem solved.

  • Upvote (+1) 3
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

If KotH and Oddball had a built in endgame trigger for winning mathematically, that'd be pretty cool. Especially if you had like a 10 second warning or something, similar to GoW's.

 

 

Or in CTF a way for overtime to end when the first team scores.  :holmes:

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Triple team and super fiesta aware the two best social playlist. They deserve to be permanent

 

What's wrong with Strongholds?

 

It's better than king iMO. King devolved into a lot of mindlessly throwing yourself into the hill. And it often resulted in the final minutes being pointless as one team had already mathematically lost.

 

It was also really hard to play with random because going in the hill often means death and people wouldon't do it.

 

Strongholds lends itself to comebacks better. It plays better in a MM setting. It's morecsyructured (empire is the only mindless rush version).

You serious? Strongholds is the worst to play with ransoms. It takes too much coordination

Share this post


Link to post

This. Who cares if it's generic? 3 plots is a good shooter gametype across pretty much all shooters. But Strongholds is the only one to use a really good scoring mechanic. I think it's the best version of this gametype that I've ever played.

 

However, I also think it's different enough from KotH that there shouldn't be a comparison. And the whole comeback argument in KotH is, first of all, bogus. I've seen plenty of comebacks in KotH, and they're exciting as hell. But secondly, it could be completely undone by using the scoring mechanism we should have been using from the beginning, which is Everyone-Counts scoring. You wanna risk sticking 4 people in the hill? Then you'll get 4 points per second. Boom, comeback city. It's simple risk/reward, it leads to more dynamic games, and more strategies available. It's nothing short of stupid that we haven't been playing by those rules all this time.

I think Crazy King had this rule back in the day, more people in the hill = you scored faster.

Share this post


Link to post

Or in CTF a way for overtime to end when the first team scores. :holmes:

Overtime should also be unlimited while we're at it.
  • 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.