Jump to content
CyReN

Halo 5: Guardians Discussion

Recommended Posts

73d8c7e3b4884a98b9faa9f347c5c244.png

1389370691929.jpg

I was reading that thread and was just as confused.

 

His only real supporting argument for Halo 5 in that thread is that the levels are more dense with objects/bits of scenery, and that this somehow makes movement more deliberate, and the denseness of the spaces somehow give you more choice than previous games in terms of how you approach encounters. The thing is that with the larger spaces in the older games, your choices weren't as linear as they are in Halo 5. Halo 5 has much more strict and much more defined pathing in many of the game's arenas, which present defined approach options to the player. The game's level design controls movement much more than the arenas in older titles, which were more freeform in terms of potential engagement opportunities.

 

Plus, he doesn't really explain in depth as to why or how the older games had worse on-foot combat in general, which makes his point harder to accept.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

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.

 

Honestly, I don't know where you get the notion of how strongholds plays, but at a remotely competent level you're not going to be constantly rotating SHs over and over again in a circle with the current setup. A team will never have 3 people guarding 3 different hills because spawn collapsing is still important in SH, you want to push where the other team is spawning to press your map advantage. If you give the other team too much time to form a push, you're running the risk of losing a point to numbers alone.

 

Also, I don't understand where you guys get your notion of randomness from. 3 caps are hard to break because generally speaking, the team that is 3-capping you knows where you are spawning. If they know where you are spawning, then they know where you're coming from. Plaza and Eden SH both exhibit this behavior and even at the pro level we see long 3 cap runs on those maps because spawn prediction is simple enough in obj games.

 

You start increasing the amount of SHs then you start diluting the value of each individual point, pushes for points become easier because you have to be spread way too thin, and you cause issues with asym maps being used for SH. 

  • Upvote (+1) 4

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

And yet, it works great.

 

So much for your theory.

  • Upvote (+1) 3
  • Downvote (-1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Honestly, I don't know where you get the notion of how strongholds plays, but at a remotely competent level you're not going to be constantly rotating SHs over and over again in a circle with the current setup. A team will never have 3 people guarding 3 different hills because spawn collapsing is still important in SH, you want to push where the other team is spawning to press your map advantage. If you give the other team too much time to form a push, you're running the risk of losing a point to numbers alone.

 

Also, I don't understand where you guys get your notion of randomness from. 3 caps are hard to break because generally speaking, the team that is 3-capping you knows where you are spawning. If they know where you are spawning, then they know where you're coming from. Plaza and Eden SH both exhibit this behavior and even at the pro level we see long 3 cap runs on those maps because spawn prediction is simple enough in obj games.

 

You start increasing the amount of SHs then you start diluting the value of each individual point, pushes for points become easier because you have to be spread way too thin, and you cause issues with asym maps being used for SH.

Your entire justification relies on spawn trapping to create any sort of predictability, which is a practice COMPLETELY independent of strongholds. You could put 500 strongholds on a map and if you could predict spawns it would "play well"by your very own definition.

 

I've ranked onyx consistently every season I've played and how I described strongholds is exactly how it plays out. Even if I were a bronze 5 that would change nothing when I can sit here and explain to you why exactly it won't ever work. How often do pro teams triple cap rig? Never, because it breaks the spawning and you have no clue where they'll spawn, it just becomes random.

Plaza and Eden are difficult to break on account of the maps having bunkers that lock teams in once they spawn there.

 

If you put your objectives in such a way where they can all be contested from each other to create spawning predictability it's going to play like Empire. Aka, dogshit. There is no universe where strongholds will ever play well and controllable in a 4v4.

And yet, it works great.

 

So much for your theory.

Wow, incredible. Never thought of that.

 

If you're going to make idiotic comments about how great anything in Halo 5 plays I'm just going to sit here and cite population numbers at you.

 

Ie: "Most people must think strongholds is awful considering Halo 5 is #21 on most played".

See how stupid that sounds.

  • Upvote (+1) 5
  • Downvote (-1) 4

Share this post


Link to post

I'd only want to see fall damage if they're actually capitalizing on the fact that it exists.

 

If the one and only reason you have fall damage is to prevent people from going from top to bottom on one of your maps (I.e. it outright kills them if they try) then there's other ways of accomplishing that. Such as fencing around the ledges that doesn't block bullets.

 

Unless there are weapons I can use to knock people to their death, or routes designed around taking a specific amount of health as a tradeoff for using them, then it's just not serving any real purpose in the game. Like they could add fall damage to Halo 2 and if you're someone playing a map like Midship you wouldn't even know fall damage was in the game because it's not even being used.

 

Regardless it's unlikely to return now that there's abilities designed around launching yourself downwards.

True... however at the same time, it'd be kind of cool to have to stabilize or Ground Pound hover momentarily to slow your fall and reduce fall-damage.

 

That's just me thinking out loud though... they'd have to make Ground Pound an even greater risk though. If you miss your target you take damage, relative to your height, for example.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Your entire justification relies on spawn trapping to create any sort of predictability, which is a practice COMPLETELY independent of strongholds. You could put 500 strongholds on a map and if you could predict spawns it would "play well"by your very own definition.

 

I've ranked onyx consistently every season I've played and how I described strongholds is exactly how it plays out. Even if I were a bronze 5 that would change nothing when I can sit here and explain to you why exactly it won't ever work. How often do pro teams triple cap rig? Never, because it breaks the spawning and you have no clue where they'll spawn, it just becomes random.

Plaza and Eden are difficult to break on account of the maps having bunkers that lock teams in once they spawn there.

 

If you put your objectives in such a way where they can all be contested from each other to create spawning predictability it's going to play like Empire. Aka, dogshit. There is no universe where strongholds will ever play well and controllable in a 4v4.

 

Wow, incredible. Never thought of that.

 

If you're going to make idiotic comments about how great anything in Halo 5 plays I'm just going to sit here and cite population numbers at you.

 

Ie: "Most people must think strongholds is awful considering Halo 5 is #21 on most played".

See how stupid that sounds.

It's a totally subjective discussion my man. I'm not going to put tons of effort in to a reply to you if you're acting like a child and dealing in ridiculous absolutes.

  • Upvote (+1) 1
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

It's a totally subjective discussion my man. I'm not going to put tons of effort in to a reply to you if you're acting like a child and dealing in ridiculous absolutes.

The discussion was whether strongholds is a good gametype fit for Halo. I've explained why in a 4v4 environment the amount of objectives is completely ridiculous, especially under the subpar level design of 343 (empire). Your response was "yet it still plays fine."

 

I'll try not to be so childish.

 

And yeah, everything in this world is subjective. Why ever talk about anything ever again then?

Share this post


Link to post

The discussion was whether strongholds is a good gametype fit for Halo. I've explained why in a 4v4 environment the amount of objectives is completely ridiculous, especially under the subpar level design of 343 (empire). Your response was "yet it still plays fine."

 

I'll try not to be so childish.

 

And yeah, everything in this world is subjective. Why ever talk about anything ever again then?

 

 

During H4 setting debates, were you an advocate for 1-Plot or 2-Plot Extraction?

 

Out of curiosity

Share this post


Link to post

During H4 setting debates, were you an advocate for 1-Plot or 2-Plot Extraction?

 

Out of curiosity

I stayed the fuck away from Halo 4, I have a loose understanding of extraction. It was a static point you had to capture, correct? I don't remember much else

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I stayed the fuck away from Halo 4, I have a loose understanding of extraction. It was a static point you had to capture, correct? I don't remember much else

Yeah, you walk up to it, hold a button to fill the capture meter, and then your team owns the beacon. You have to defend it for the full 45 seconds to earn a point. If the other team walks up to it and converts it, it becomes their beacon, and the clock resets to 45 before counting down again.  Regular MM had two active points at once, and AGL only used 1 active point.

 

2 Plots would almost always become staggered, and priorities would shift drastically. Players needed to make difficult choices on the fly, but sometimes people just felt like there was too much going on.

 

1 Plot played very similar to KotH, except you almost always need a 4 down to convert. It forced teams to orchestrate a very methodical, coordinated push.  A good gametype in it's own right, but it lacked the decision making and prioritization of 2 plots, in favor of a more disciplined, teamwork heavy style.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, you walk up to it, hold a button to fill the capture meter, and then your team owns the beacon. You have to defend it for the full 45 seconds to earn a point. If the other team walks up to it and converts it, it becomes their beacon, and the clock resets to 45 before counting down again. Regular MM had two active points at once, and AGL only used 1 active point.

 

2 Plots would almost always become staggered, and priorities would shift drastically. Players needed to make difficult choices on the fly, but sometimes people just felt like there was too much going on.

 

1 Plot played very similar to KotH, except you almost always need a 4 down to convert. It forced teams to orchestrate a very methodical, coordinated push. A good gametype in it's own right, but it lacked the decision making and prioritization of 2 plots, in favor of a more disciplined, teamwork heavy style.

Without ANY prior knowledge, experience, or history playing it, here's what I'm taking from that.

 

I think 1 plot would play perfectly fine, have good pushes, setup opportunities, all that jazz.

 

As for if 2 plots, I can see what you're saying about it offering the potential for split second decisions and decision making, but in my head I'm picturing a lot of standoffs where each team controls a point and won't push until they absolutely need to. I suppose it would depend where the plots were placed. 4 players between 2 objectives seems like a reasonable split though.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Strongholds is a pretty decent gametype. I do miss KotH as well though. There was a lot of great games that went down to the wire, and it made for some really intense finishes. At the pinnacle of competition, it makes for a terrific gametype, same as oddball.

 

No reason we can't have several gametypes co-existing.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Wow, H5 was pissing me off tonight... dude's just straight-up eating the final headshot, eating bullets while one-shot and not dying, bad spawns... my own grenades hitting grenade pick-ups on the ground, kicking back and exploding in my face (dead serious)...

 

Everything bad that could happen DID happen.

Share this post


Link to post

My only issue with Strongholds is the fact everyone and their mother acts like it's new to Halo. A fancy new name for 3-Plot Territories doesn't make it new.

 

Just a guess here, but didn't CoD take the idea from us and just rename it to Domination? It would be hilarious if that's the case.

 

Halo has 3 Plot territories, Cod takes it and popularize's it.

 

343 tries to cash in on that success by giving it an edgy name and masquerading it as new to the series, when Halo was in fact, the origin of the idea in the first place.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Just a guess here, but didn't CoD take the idea from us and just rename it to Domination? It would be hilarious if that's the case.

 

Halo has 3 Plot territories, Cod takes it and popularize's it.

 

343 tries to cash in on that success by giving it an edgy name and masquerading it as new to the series, when Halo was in fact, the origin of the idea in the first place.

CoD has had Domination since 2004. http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/Call_of_Duty:_United_Offensive

They've had similar game modes within the same year with halo 2.

Share this post


Link to post

You know what mildly pisses me off about Halo's gameplay from Reach, 4, and 5? There's little pieces of geometry everywhere that your Spartan can get stuck on. And it's not even important pieces of geometry, just little rocks, dips in the ground, a piece of metal on the floor that sticks up a little too high, an oddly shaped boulder that is difficult to walk up on/clamber because of it's shape(I'm looking at you Raid On Apex 7).

 

These are all things that Halo 1-3 didn't have an issue with. In fact it happens with Destiny as well. Honestly the only modern FPSs that I can think of that don't have this issue are DOOM, and Overwatch.

  • Upvote (+1) 7

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

Accidental neg :\

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

If you miss your target you take damage, relative to your height, for example.

You don't get how much I'd love this. Would stop stupid reckless "half hit" ground pounds that still punish you, even if you're not hit by them. Seeing someone off themselves because they missed a ground pound? Hilarious thought. Being able to actually survive a ground pound when you're not hit by it? Very enticing.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah, you walk up to it, hold a button to fill the capture meter, and then your team owns the beacon. You have to defend it for the full 45 seconds to earn a point. If the other team walks up to it and converts it, it becomes their beacon, and the clock resets to 45 before counting down again.  Regular MM had two active points at once, and AGL only used 1 active point.

 

2 Plots would almost always become staggered, and priorities would shift drastically. Players needed to make difficult choices on the fly, but sometimes people just felt like there was too much going on.

 

1 Plot played very similar to KotH, except you almost always need a 4 down to convert. It forced teams to orchestrate a very methodical, coordinated push.  A good gametype in it's own right, but it lacked the decision making and prioritization of 2 plots, in favor of a more disciplined, teamwork heavy style.

 

I like DOOM's take on Extraction: Instead of Beacons you have zones to capture like Strongholds and the timer only lasts 15 seconds. If an enemy walks into the zone the timer gets stopped until the zone is cleared. Makes for some really intense games.

  • 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.