Jump to content
CyReN

Halo 5: Guardians Discussion

Recommended Posts

This has to be the most incorrect statement I have ever seen. How about almost every single one of them that I can think of? Ogre 1 and 2 were worse at Halo 3 comparatively to their individual rankings in Halo 1, Walshy, Legend wasn't even good at Halo 3 really, or at least he was not successful on a team other than the one event you mention. 

 

I don't think there is any Halo 1 pro that is better at Halo 3 other than Tsquared arguably, and he was never a top tier player in Halo 3...I'm not sure how he was regarded in Halo 1 among pros but I am pretty sure he was up there right? I mean that statement is so wrong it's crazy. 

 

 

Edit: Also sorry if I am coming off like I am talking shit, but I just have to vehemently disagree with you on that point. Also on the Tsquared point, he I want to amend that to...he was not someone who was a top 10 individual player in Halo 3 when all was said and done, I don't think at least.

Halo 1 puts way more emphasis on individual performance than Halo 3 does because it's utility weapon empowers individual players to be able to get kills on their own in a timely manner without having to rely on team-shooting. Halo 3 puts way more emphasis on team-shooting than it does on individual performance because of how weak it's utility weapon is. Comparing a player's individual performance in Halo 1 to their individual performance in Halo 3 is just an asinine thing to do. Of course a Halo 1 player's individual performance in Halo 3 isn't going to be on par with their individual performance in Halo 1 because Halo 3 limits what an individual player is capable of doing.

 

Anyways a 4v4 format doesn't put much emphasis on an individual player's performance compared to smaller player formats such as 1v1 and 2v2. This is why I strongly believe that the main format for competitive play in Halo should be 2v2 and not 4v4. A strong utility weapon akin to Halo 1's pistol really complements a 2v2 format.

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

Wow really? That would make no sense to just do the random stuff especially if recoil is in place.

 

Curious, is there any gameplay videos to be found of the Reach Beta? I didn't yet have XBL at the time.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Also for everyone else: I really only want subtle recoil on certain weapons, specifically for my preferred design of the Magnum, autos, and the BR, to permanently replace the random spread/bloom mechanic.

 

I otherwise don't want recoil on most weapons. I would also prefer that all this go hand in hand with proper projectile weapons as well.

Share this post


Link to post

 

Halo 1 puts way more emphasis on individual performance than Halo 3 does because it's utility weapon empowers individual players to be able to get kills on their own in a timely manner without having to rely on team-shooting. Halo 3 puts way more emphasis on team-shooting than it does on individual performance because of how weak it's utility weapon is. Comparing a player's individual performance in Halo 1 to their individual performance in Halo 3 is just an asinine thing to do. Of course a Halo 1 player's individual performance in Halo 3 isn't going to be on par with their individual performance in Halo 1 because Halo 3 limits what an individual player is capable of doing.

 

Anyways a 4v4 format doesn't put much emphasis on an individual player's performance compared to smaller player formats such as 1v1 and 2v2. This is why I strongly believe that the main format for competitive play in Halo should be 2v2 and not 4v4. A strong utility weapon akin to Halo 1's pistol really complements a 2v2 format.

 

Okay, let me first address that I am not trying to argue the skill gap of Halo 1 and I have already conceded multiple times that Halo 1 has the highest skill gap, though I do think it is overstated in comparison to H2/H3 but that is not the point here. 

 

I was simply responding to a statement in Teapot's post where he said every H1 player was not worse at H3, who played competitively. That is simply not true imo and I think it is objectively not true. Sure, you can say Halo 1 puts more emphasis on individual skill, and of course that would be the case in 2v2 formats....obviously, but according to that statement Ogre 1 and 2, Walshy, Legend etc. should all be considered top 10 players individually in Halo 3. That is not the case...clearly Ogre 1 and 2, and especially Walshy were worse compared to their peers individually on Halo 3 skill wise (not to say they were bad). 

 

Would anyone consider Walshy a top 5 or top 10 individually skilled player in Halo 3? No, unless they are being irrational or fanboys. Meanwhile he was a top tier player easily considered top 5-10 in Halo 1 and 2 correct? So therefore he is worse at Halo 3. And he had success at Halo 3, he had great strategy, leadership, and played objective roles well, but he did not have a top 10 sniper or a top 10 BR, he was worse in terms of mechanical skill and there were many others who were pro at h1 and h2 who competed in Halo 3 that were worse comparatively to their past skill levels, that is just a fact.

 

You say Halo 3 limits what an individual can do...well obviously when you can 3 shot someone with a magnum across the map and control power-ups and weapons in a cascading fashion, or insta-kill someone with a button glitch, have a host or non-host sword with a huge lunge, etc. How does it limit the individual in terms of mechanical skill with the sniper? I believe sniping in Halo 3 takes the most skill out of any title, why weren't Walshy/Ogres/Carbon members/Ant/Legend even close to being considered the best at sniping? I don't think any of their BRs were considered top class either, sure they were obviously good but not among the best.

 

Also Halo 2 emphasized team shooting as well, long range with hitscan...I'm aware Halo 3 furthered it but it's not like it wasn't present. It's only focused on because the ttk with a magnum in H1 is so small.

 

I don't want to write blocks of text every post, but to briefly address your other points...1v1 and 2v2 are just completely different than 4v4. It doesn't necessarily equate to more individual skill, especially in recent Halo titles, and the pace of play and entertainment value would suffer. I don't think Halo 5 2v2 would be more skillful or entertaining at all to apply it to our current shitty game.

Share this post


Link to post

What? How have time and perspective not been kind to Halo 3? It still feels pretty good even on broken-ass MCC. It plays so much better than Halo 1 and Halo 2 do on MCC (which is not the fault of those games) so I don't see how time has not been kind? The exact same thing could be said of H1 or H2 or any older title, I really don't understand that statement. 

 

"Shallow game" Dude come on, you are saying Halo Reach is better and it disempowered the individual more than Halo 3 did and the vast majority of matches were played on two robo-cock silver forge remakes on Sanctuary and Pit, or you could play mediocre Zealot/Countdown which were scaled for sprint as someone already stated. Reach was literally the most shallow Halo title ever. 

 

As I have already said in response to something Teapot said, which is completely false, tons of Pros and top tier pros from Halo 1 and Halo 2 were worse at Halo 3 (Walshy, Strongside, Ogre 1/2, Tsquared, Shockwave, Bestman, Defy, Gandhi, Legend, Ant, etc.). Now don't get me wrong this doesn't necessarily mean anything, as players who were great at prior, more skillful titles (h1-h3-Reach even) have dropped off on the individual rankings in Halo 5. 

 

But, Halo 5 is clearly a completely different game, similar to Halo 4 and even more amplified, where as Halo 3 did not incorporate sprint/thrust/abilities/etc.etc.etc. and clearly had the most skillful sniping in the entire series, can we at least agree to that point? So it had straight up BRing, where players like Walshy for example had weak individual skill at BRing and Sniping in comparison to the prior titles. It's not like everyone is spawning with an AR, sprint, radar, thrust, slide, embarrassing ass game mechanics, in Halo 3. Clearly the skill gap was there and respectable. 

 

Time and perspective have not been kind to Halo 3 because when you go back and play it now, you really see how ineffective the BR really was, how bad the registration was, and how little unique depth the game had. Comparing it to two broken ports doesn't help that, especially when you consider that the port you're referencing has even worse registration than 360. And no, you can't say the same thing about H1 or H2. In fact, you might even say the opposite for H1 at least. And that's because those games offered unique experiences with unique depth. Halo 3 takes what other games do in the series and imitates it with mixed results at best.

 

Yes, Halo 3 is a shallow game. You trying to defend that by comparing it to Reach doesn't change that. At their best they were both pretty shallow. And before we go any further, I can't emphasize enough that I'm ONLY referring to MLG v7 Reach.  When you just say "Halo Reach" it always makes me wonder if you're understanding me, or if you're trying to strawman me. MLG H3 v8 and MLG Reach v7 are remarkably similar games, each with their strong points. It's highly debatable which was better.  I preferred v7 Reach largely because of the starting weapon and the plays that it enabled. And before you bag too hard on Reach's mediocre map pool, remember what H3 was working with. Most of the maps were "hold forward and push as a team". Guardian Ball, Construct TS (after they added that long custom camo), and Construct King are the only truly unique gametypes offered in the rotation, and I'm being kind with Guardian Ball bc we both know it's a poor man's Lockout Ball. Reach's most unique (in a good way) gametypes were Nexus King and Battle Canyon TS and KotH. Penance was unique too but for bad reasons. I give Battle Canyon a lot of credit bc I think it played better than Beaver Creek, with the rockets spawning in the middle on a static timer, and H2 never used KotH bc you couldn't unrandomize the hill rotation........annyyyways I'm rambling. The point is that comparing H3 to Reach doesn't mean it's not shallow. They're both shallow. One just has a better starting weapon.

 

There's tons of reasons why those guys didn't show up as well in H3. For a lot of them, it was lack of interest (Ghandi, Ogre 1), but for many others, it was because a Halo 3 didn't allow for much skill differentiation like H1 and H2 did. Look at Karma for crying out loud. Perfect example. Dude wins every single individual event in 2006, and then only wins one event at all in H3. That's what happens when you take away a player's ability to distinguish himself.

 

Yes, we can absolutely agree that Halo 3 had the best sniping in the series. Halo 1 is damn close though. Like, almost tied, close.

 

Yeah of course H3 had a BR skill gap. I absolutely agree that *in it's intended range*, the gun is pretty skillful and fun to shoot. But I think Walshy gets a bad rap in H3. In H2 him and the Ogres and Saiyan/Strongside could just out-skill almost everybody (and don't even start with the small pool of competition. MLG routinely sold out 250+ team tournaments in 05 and 06). When that skill gap was compressed and their tools taken away from them, Walshy had to resort to other means to separate himself. He kind of fancied himself as a team strategist and coordinator, and I think that's why he lacked slaying power. He was focusing more on big picture stuff, communicating, and filling whatever hole needed to be filled to win. Shockwave was pretty similar.

 

 

 

Anyways man, this back and forth we've had today, please don't take it personal. I enjoy your posts and I like you. I'm just passionate about Halo. I've been around through literally all of it, I've played all of it thoroughly, I think I know what works and what doesn't, and I'm not shy about articulating it. Mostly because I still don't think we've had a perfect game yet, and I'm still holding out hope for one someday if the community can just know what the fuck to ask for.

  • Upvote (+1) 5

Share this post


Link to post

Top CE players competed in Team BR Halo and still remained on top for years. Put Halo 2/3 pros into a CE match against top CE players and they'd get 50-0'd it's not even a comparison.

  • Upvote (+1) 8

Share this post


Link to post

-All the stuff you said...

 

 

Anyways man, this back and forth we've had today, please don't take it personal. I enjoy your posts and I like you. I'm just passionate about Halo. I've been around through literally all of it, I've played all of it thoroughly, I think I know what works and what doesn't, and I'm not shy about articulating it. Mostly because I still don't think we've had a perfect game yet, and I'm still holding out hope for one someday if the community can just know what the fuck to ask for.

I don't take any offense man, it's cool. I know I am being passionate in debating/arguing this as well so I don't mean to offend you or anyone else either.

 

To the shallow point, I was not sure whether you were referring to the entire game of Reach v. Halo 3 or solely the MLG variants of each, but I was focusing on the competitive modes of each I think. When focusing only on the "MLG" variants of each I don't see why Halo 3 is significantly more shallow than H1, H2 or possibly Reach to be quite honest. Sure it didn't expand on much after Halo 2, and it did remove button glitches, but other than that I don't know why it would be considerably more shallow. Compared to Reach I do not see how Halo 3 could be more shallow in any regard unless you consider using sprint/bloom/evade-other abilities in the earlier iterations of the game. 

 

Halo 2: Midship, Lockout, Sanctuary, Beaver Creek, Warlock. 5 maps

 

Halo 3: Narrows, Guardian, Pit, Construct, Heretic, Amplified, Onslaught. 7 maps, but two were forged and one is a remake...but good. 

 

Reach: Countdown, Zealot, Sanctuary, Pit, Nexus, Oasis?. 6 maps...I think, I don't quite remember if the last two forge maps were in rotation, Admittedly played Reach far less than H2/H3 and stop playing intermittently. I was around for NBNS but I don't remember v7 rotation. 

 

Either way, Reach has 4 maps that are forged, two being remakes...one being an H3 map. Most matches were played on Sanctuary and Pit from what I remember. Just from a map rotation stand point I don't see how Halo 3 is shallow, and how Halo Reach is not very shallow. Halo 3's maps played very well generally, The Pit is one of the best maps in Halo easily, Guardian is iconic, Narrows/Construct/Guardian are all original quality maps. Heretic was a remake done right, much better than Truth in H5 or the loose remake Zealot. Amp and Onslaught have flaws, registration-wise, aesthetically, but they played relatively well...better than Nexus and Oasis I am pretty sure. 

 

Reach relied on remaking two maps with forge as their best maps. Reach is battling Halo 4 for the worst launch/dev maps out of every Halo title, what is better Haven or Countdown/Zealot? Just from a map rotation standpoint Reach has to be considered extremely shallow, and the game play of v7 isn't more innovative than what Halo 3 did in anyway. 

 

I just have a problem with the word shallow here. You can really call anything shallow. CSGO is shallow then, but it's highly re-playable just like Halo 3 was/is. 

 

Share this post


Link to post

Top CE players competed in Team BR Halo and still remained on top for years. Put Halo 2/3 pros into a CE match against top CE players and they'd get 50-0'd it's not even a comparison.

Because game knowledge is so integral to Halo 1 and let's be honest here not many people played Halo 1 competitively, there was no xbox live, time lapse etc. 

 

Who were the top CE players who remained on top for years? Tsquared, Walshy, Ogre 2...? Other than those players who from CE was on top? Even with those players, at the end of the game were any of them considered top 10 at Halo 3 individually? Maybe Ogre 2 was, but the name value probably put him top 10 honestly, maybe Tsquared was early on when Str8 Rippin was the hot team. I'm not trying to shit on any players, or Halo 1, but I just don't see any facts here.

 

Name the best players from CE who transitioned to Halo 3 and were among the best players (top 10 overall, top 10 sniper, something). I can spot you Ogre 2 as arguably or probably top 10, but aside from him? 

 

And I know that this argument can be used for Halo 5 as well, someone can say oh Ogre 2 isn't a top 10 player individually in Halo 5, Halo X, but I think that A. much more time as passed (he is 30) and he clearly has much less interest in H2A/none for H4/ H5, B. Halo 3's core mechanics are not so drastically different like Halo 4-5 where there is a clear massive drop in skill or difference in gameplay.

 

Sure H1 and H2 had a higher skill gap and you can kill others much faster, but it isn't like Halo 3 has a super AR/ autos, with radar, huge hitboxes etc. Halo 3 had the highest skill sniper and BRing was skillful as well....Walshy's BR wasn't on the level of Pistola/Snipedown/Roy/many others, it's mechanical skill.

Share this post


Link to post

Can you even say someone had a better BR in Halo 3 when every pro played on 2sens because the aiming was shit

That's blatantly not true, most pros played on 3-4 sens, I'd say most on 4 sens...but the vast majority played 3 or 4. I think Roy played 3 but he may have played 2? Naded moved from 5 sens to 2 sens to who knows because he is a psychopath. 

 

Very few pros played on 2 sens.

  • Upvote (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post

Every time I see Reddit/Waypoint kids (henceforth referred to as Weddits) argue for the current strength of the AR over the pistol "because an assault rifle *should* beat a pistol", after I'm done screaming inside of my skull, I silently wish the pistol was just skinned as a rifle. I hate that argument, and I feel like a lot of the sentiments surrounding starting weapons in the casual community would be better if the starting weapons were DMR/AR from the start.

 

Point out that the Magnum fires Armour Piercing high Explosive rounds and the Assault Rifle does not, so the Magnum will be more effective than the AR agaisnt Spartan armour because it penetrates armour and then explodes.

 

Ammo_-UNSC.png

And that by their logic, the AR should be better than the BR.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Point out that the Magnum fires Armour Piercing high Explosive rounds and the Assault Rifle does not, so the Magnum will be more effective than the AR agaisnt Spartan armour because it penetrates armour and then explodes.

 

Ammo_-UNSC.png

And that by their logic, the AR should be better than the BR.

Are there actually halo links that explain the cartridges that each of these weapons use in lore?

Share this post


Link to post

I don't take any offense man, it's cool. I know I am being passionate in debating/arguing this as well so I don't mean to offend you or anyone else either.

 

To the shallow point, I was not sure whether you were referring to the entire game of Reach v. Halo 3 or solely the MLG variants of each, but I was focusing on the competitive modes of each I think. When focusing only on the "MLG" variants of each I don't see why Halo 3 is significantly more shallow than H1, H2 or possibly Reach to be quite honest. Sure it didn't expand on much after Halo 2, and it did remove button glitches, but other than that I don't know why it would be considerably more shallow. Compared to Reach I do not see how Halo 3 could be more shallow in any regard unless you consider using sprint/bloom/evade-other abilities in the earlier iterations of the game. 

 

Halo 2: Midship, Lockout, Sanctuary, Beaver Creek, Warlock. 5 maps

 

Halo 3: Narrows, Guardian, Pit, Construct, Heretic, Amplified, Onslaught. 7 maps, but two were forged and one is a remake...but good. 

 

Reach: Countdown, Zealot, Sanctuary, Pit, Nexus, Oasis?. 6 maps...I think, I don't quite remember if the last two forge maps were in rotation, Admittedly played Reach far less than H2/H3 and stop playing intermittently. I was around for NBNS but I don't remember v7 rotation. 

 

Either way, Reach has 4 maps that are forged, two being remakes...one being an H3 map. Most matches were played on Sanctuary and Pit from what I remember. Just from a map rotation stand point I don't see how Halo 3 is shallow, and how Halo Reach is not very shallow. Halo 3's maps played very well generally, The Pit is one of the best maps in Halo easily, Guardian is iconic, Narrows/Construct/Guardian are all original quality maps. Heretic was a remake done right, much better than Truth in H5 or the loose remake Zealot. Amp and Onslaught have flaws, registration-wise, aesthetically, but they played relatively well...better than Nexus and Oasis I am pretty sure. 

 

Reach relied on remaking two maps with forge as their best maps. Reach is battling Halo 4 for the worst launch/dev maps out of every Halo title, what is better Haven or Countdown/Zealot? Just from a map rotation standpoint Reach has to be considered extremely shallow, and the game play of v7 isn't more innovative than what Halo 3 did in anyway. 

 

I just have a problem with the word shallow here. You can really call anything shallow. CSGO is shallow then, but it's highly re-playable just like Halo 3 was/is. 

 

 

"I don't see how Halo 3 is significantly more shallow than Halo 1..."

 

Please play the game with me. I will show you. After one series against similarly skilled opponents when you kinda know what you're doing, you'll get it. There's so much more to think about. Your decisions per second are ridiculous. All of your choices are punishable, as well as the enemy's. If you're on fire both mentally and mechanically you are fucking unstoppable. There's no feeling like it. No other Halo game lets you ride an insane wave of momentum like H1. In H3 when you're hot it's because your shot is on and you feel like you can't be fucked with. In Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory (tied with H1 in my mind for best multiplayer ever) when you're on fire you feel like a genius. In Halo 1, when you're on fire, it's both. You need to be both smart and accurate to succeed. And your correct decisions are massively rewarded in that game. Theres a reason it's played to 50 instead of 25, because when you're playing correctly the kills come pretty damn fast.

 

As far as depth goes, H2 barely beats out H3 imo because of button glitches and general map quality. It suffers from the worst weapon respawn system in the series, and its for that reason only that it's even close in my mind because engagement to engagement, H2 absolutely shits on H3 in terms of depth and individual potential. Another thing no one seems to remember with H2, you could crouch under melees. Add that onto the pile with everything else.

 

Now, comparing H3 to v7 Reach...its close. It's a legitimate debate. Reach has the better starting weapon, which is huge. H3 has a better sniper. H3 has marginally better maps (its closer than most people give it credit for). Reach has a jetpack pickup which I think is cool as shit (watch Ryanoob cap a flag on Countdown or Pistola Jetpack snipe on Sanctuary with it, or how it massively helps map flow on Penance if you doubt me). I've made a thread on this a few year ago that might be worth bumping. It really is a super close debate. Zealot Flag and Countdown Flag are underrated gametypes imo. They both ended up being pretty excellent. Nexus King was outstanding. You just need to get over the fact that the map was grey. The gametype was fun as fuck. Pit flag was Pit Flag, except you could crossmap, the rockets were actually dangerous, and overshield was lame as shit. Overall it was still a solid gametype. Battle Canyon TS and King were fucking excellent, by far the best gametypes in the rotation imo. Sanc TS and Flag were pretty bland but they were fundamentally sound. I always thought Reach's Sanc played a lot like Onslaught with Rockets/Camo.

 

Btw I just reread that. v7 was Zealot Flag and TS, Countdown Flag and TS, Battle Canyon TS and KotH, Sanc TS and Flag, Penance TS, Nexus KotH, and Pit Flag. They dropped Oasis after v6, sadly. I like that Oasis KotH quite a bit.

 

Yes, Reach's launch map pool was abysmal. Worse than H4 imo. The absolute worst in the series. However, you asked me what's better, Haven or Zealot/Countdown? Zealot/Countdown, easily. Zealot Flag and Countdown Flag ended up being totally respectable and fun gametypes in v7. I competed at Columbus '12 and my team of locals got together to practice twice a week, and we never got tired of those gametypes. They're just really, really fun. I have very fond memories of playing the absolute shit out of Zealot and Countdown.

 

But regarding the term "shallow", don't get hung up on the H3 vs v7 Reach debate. Both games are shallow. It comes down to some pretty minor differences. Do you value an excellent sniper? Do you value an excellent starting weapon? Do you value a few more colorful dev maps?  It's all pretty subjective. Anyone that's played a lot of both v8 and v7 should be able to admit that its actually pretty close between the two.

  • Upvote (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post

Please play the game with me. I will show you. After one series against similarly skilled opponents when you kinda know what you're doing, you'll get it. There's so much more to think about. Your decisions per second are ridiculous. All of your choices are punishable, as well as the enemy's. If you're on fire both mentally and mechanically you are fucking unstoppable. There's no feeling like it. No other Halo game lets you ride an insane wave of momentum like H1. In H3 when you're hot it's because your shot is on and you feel like you can't be fucked with. In Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory (tied with H1 in my mind for best multiplayer ever) when you're on fire you feel like a genius. In Halo 1, when you're on fire, it's both. You need to be both smart and accurate to succeed. And your correct decisions are massively rewarded in that game. Theres a reason it's played to 50 instead of 25, because when you're playing correctly the kills come pretty damn fast.

So I'm just a little curious. Relating to this notion of feeling unstoppable, some people have already mentioned the potentially snowballing nature with CE, especially amongst the top 2 vs the top 10 players of CE with possible score differences of 50-20. And I can totally understand why with the potential you have to be an absolute monster in that game without your teammate. My question is: what makes this situation of a snowballing game different than what is present in halo 5, especially among maps like Truth or Regret?

 

Could you actually link me some lopsided games between pros like this from the Beach LAN that you were fond of? That'd be greatly appreciated if you find the time.

Share this post


Link to post

So I'm just a little curious. Relating to this notion of feeling unstoppable, some people have already mentioned the potentially snowballing nature with CE, especially amongst the top 2 vs the top 10 players of CE with possible score differences of 50-20. And I can totally understand why with the potential you have to be an absolute monster in that game without your teammate. My question is: what makes this situation of a snowballing game different than what is present in halo 5, especially among maps like Truth or Regret?

 

Could you actually link me some lopsided games between pros like this from the Beach LAN that you were fond of? That'd be greatly appreciated if you find the time.

This is a very good and valid question. I kinda want to see the answer to this as well.

Share this post


Link to post

So I'm just a little curious. Relating to this notion of feeling unstoppable, some people have already mentioned the potentially snowballing nature with CE, especially amongst the top 2 vs the top 10 players of CE with possible score differences of 50-20. And I can totally understand why with the potential you have to be an absolute monster in that game without your teammate. My question is: what makes this situation of a snowballing game different than what is present in halo 5, especially among maps like Truth or Regret?

 

Could you actually link me some lopsided games between pros like this from the Beach LAN that you were fond of? That'd be greatly appreciated if you find the time.

 

Well for one, if you have time to pull out your pistol before you die, you always have a chance. You can shoot your way out of a lot of problems in H1. Secondly, Camo lasts 45 seconds and rockets spawn every 2 minutes with 4 shots each. Thats 1:15 seconds potentially that you have to work with to get ready for the next cycle. You might get your ass handed to you for a cycle or two, but if the game is reasonably close, you should get a few cycles like that of your own. If you're getting no cycles with camo/rocks, your ass is getting outplayed. You don't get to blame the game on that. You get too many chances in H1 to make shit happen and if you capitalize on none of them then you fucking deserve to lose. Just a few days ago OG Nick and I played a series against Killmachine and Matclan. Nick and I were up 4-0 in the series and we went into Derelict. We were up like 35-10. They took top control and bottom-fucked us for 40 kills. We just couldn't capitalize on our opportunities and they played it extremely well. It was NOT the game's fault. Even on the most snowbally map in the game, we had chances. Hell, THEY had chances, and they seized them. We didn't. We needed to communicate our way out of the problem, give top spawns, and focus fire the right guy, and we failed to do that for 40 deaths while they executed damn near perfectly.

  • Upvote (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post

"I don't see how Halo 3 is significantly more shallow than Halo 1..."

 

Please play the game with me. I will show you. After one series against similarly skilled opponents when you kinda know what you're doing, you'll get it. There's so much more to think about. Your decisions per second are ridiculous. All of your choices are punishable, as well as the enemy's. If you're on fire both mentally and mechanically you are fucking unstoppable. There's no feeling like it. No other Halo game lets you ride an insane wave of momentum like H1. In H3 when you're hot it's because your shot is on and you feel like you can't be fucked with. In Splinter Cell: Chaos Theory (tied with H1 in my mind for best multiplayer ever) when you're on fire you feel like a genius. In Halo 1, when you're on fire, it's both. You need to be both smart and accurate to succeed. And your correct decisions are massively rewarded in that game. Theres a reason it's played to 50 instead of 25, because when you're playing correctly the kills come pretty damn fast.

 

As far as depth goes, H2 barely beats out H3 imo because of button glitches and general map quality. It suffers from the worst weapon respawn system in the series, and its for that reason only that it's even close in my mind because engagement to engagement, H2 absolutely shits on H3 in terms of depth and individual potential. Another thing no one seems to remember with H2, you could crouch under melees. Add that onto the pile with everything else.

 

Now, comparing H3 to v7 Reach...its close. It's a legitimate debate. Reach has the better starting weapon, which is huge. H3 has a better sniper. H3 has marginally better maps (its closer than most people give it credit for). Reach has a jetpack pickup which I think is cool as shit (watch Ryanoob cap a flag on Countdown or Pistola Jetpack snipe on Sanctuary with it, or how it massively helps map flow on Penance if you doubt me). I've made a thread on this a few year ago that might be worth bumping. It really is a super close debate. Zealot Flag and Countdown Flag are underrated gametypes imo. They both ended up being pretty excellent. Nexus King was outstanding. You just need to get over the fact that the map was grey. The gametype was fun as fuck. Pit flag was Pit Flag, except you could crossmap, the rockets were actually dangerous, and overshield was lame as shit. Overall it was still a solid gametype. Battle Canyon TS and King were fucking excellent, by far the best gametypes in the rotation imo. Sanc TS and Flag were pretty bland but they were fundamentally sound. I always thought Reach's Sanc played a lot like Onslaught with Rockets/Camo.

 

Btw I just reread that. v7 was Zealot Flag and TS, Countdown Flag and TS, Battle Canyon TS and KotH, Sanc TS and Flag, Penance TS, Nexus KotH, and Pit Flag. They dropped Oasis after v6, sadly. I like that Oasis KotH quite a bit.

 

Yes, Reach's launch map pool was abysmal. Worse than H4 imo. The absolute worst in the series. However, you asked me what's better, Haven or Zealot/Countdown? Zealot/Countdown, easily. Zealot Flag and Countdown Flag ended up being totally respectable and fun gametypes in v7. I competed at Columbus '12 and my team of locals got together to practice twice a week, and we never got tired of those gametypes. They're just really, really fun. I have very fond memories of playing the absolute shit out of Zealot and Countdown.

 

But regarding the term "shallow", don't get hung up on the H3 vs v7 Reach debate. Both games are shallow. It comes down to some pretty minor differences. Do you value an excellent sniper? Do you value an excellent starting weapon? Do you value a few more colorful dev maps?  It's all pretty subjective. Anyone that's played a lot of both v8 and v7 should be able to admit that its actually pretty close between the two.

Just to make counterpoints:

 

- Gamebattles/MLG doubles in Halo 3 was up to 50 kills and it didn't feel like it took forever. I've played Halo 1 on MCC, which might be the problem, against varying levels of competition...even former pro/semi pro level players (NKM Nakamura, Utah Noobs I believe...) and it often feels like it takes forever for the game to end. Maybe more so on maps like Hang em High and Damnation than Prisoner/Derelict. 

 

- I'm well aware of crouching under melees, I usually run with a guy who is very good at Halo 2, his name is Andyyx, he was in the 40s highly ranked in that champion ffa thing H2 had going on, up there with pros and he actually made it to the main stage during Halo 3 for the bic flex FFA in Anaheim I believe...Str8 Sick was up there of course. Also I'd point out that I'm better than him at Halo 3 and he is better than me at Halo 2 but on MCC the gap is not that wide really, but he's definitely better at H2 even without it's "true form". 

 

- I don't think the Reach DMR is better than the H3 BR at all, I still won't alter my stance here. I think most people would disagree with your statement that Reach's maps were only marginally worse than H3's maps. Reach's maps were terrible, and the maps you listed were almost all forged and mostly remakes as well...I don't know how that can be rewarded. 

 

- I mean the game is literally shallow, yes, if we focus on the competitive mode only. Even Halo 1 is, despite it's intricacies of random spawns, nadeing weapons, etc. Each game only had a 4-5 map rotation for competitive play on average, maybe 5-6 at most, and it's literally repetitions of the same modes on the same maps, so in that sense it is shallow. But then CSGO is shallow as well. But they are not actually shallow from my viewpoint because they offer unrivaled replayability, enjoyment, and fulfill the desire for competition. We are also selectively omitting the rest of the games substance...Invasion in Reach was fun, BtB was good in Reach, Halo 3 introduced a lot of new game modes and social and casual ranked was fun, campaigns in each game, custom games...

 

Forge! which Halo 3 introduced, you're welcome Halo Reach for saving your entire game because the dev maps were awful.

Share this post


Link to post

Point out that the Magnum fires Armour Piercing high Explosive rounds and the Assault Rifle does not, so the Magnum will be more effective than the AR agaisnt Spartan armour because it penetrates armour and then explodes.

 

Ammo_-UNSC.png

And that by their logic, the AR should be better than the BR.

 

promo-4.jpg?15330424049510940127

 

No thanks.

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

Are there actually halo links that explain the cartridges that each of these weapons use in lore?

yup, for example the ma5 series uses 7.62x51. In real life this is the round the m14 uses.

Share this post


Link to post

@@TryHardFan, enjoy my dulcet tones as I cast exactly what you're asking for.

 

Don't let the length of the vid fool you, the series ends in the 52nd minute.  The whole series is totally worth watching.

  • Upvote (+1) 6

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy.