Jump to content
CyReN

Halo 5: Guardians Discussion

Recommended Posts

If you want to add an OBJ to Slayer I think you merge it with KOTH or Oddball. Say you get 2 points for a kill instead of 1 if you control the objective. The problem with that would be that it only encourages the down team to play even more passive, and the team with control would effectively have one less player to make pushes with.

 

Maybe you do a single territory/stronghold that moves once captured and the team with the most recent capture gets the bonus points.

 

343 have been there, done that. Strongholds isn't that good.

 

Slayer is worse but it's so ingrained in the average players mind and their perception of what is and isn't "Halo" that it would be a PR nightmare to remove it. And the changes the game itself would have to go through to make Slayer better without altering the gametype are significant and in some cases unrealistic.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Adding an objective to slayer is stupid. The primary goal in all the objective games is the objective. This is achieved by slaying the enemy to create an opportunity to achieve the objective. Every game mode at its core IS slayer.

We don't need an objective that gives extra points for slaying in slayer. It makes no sense when you already are expected to slay to get the objective in the first place. Just bring back Oddball, King of the Hill, and even Extraction (Where the hell did that go anyway, it was a good gamemode) and drop slayer from competitive play

Share this post


Link to post

As a player that almost exclusively plays Slayer/deathmatch gamemodes, I have also been thinking about how to make Slayer a better gametype. Personally, I don't think adding objectives, especially ones that single out sections of a map, improve the "point" of Slayer. Adding elements from oddball or Koth removes slaying from the focus, to a tertiary goal. The central objective of Slayer is to kill your opponent more than he kills you, and someone already pointed out, Slayer is one of the few gamemodes (if not the only one) where raw gunplay matters the most.

 

What I propose is we overhaul how Slayer is scored and won. And the best way to go about is a simple game of Tug 'o' War.

 

Imagine, if you will, 2 teams of 4 pulling on a rope with a flag in the middle. The ground is marked with a red and blue side and a maximum range the flag can move. A short timer is in place, and the goal is to make sure the flag is on your side when it ends. Reaching maximum range does nothing, it's there to ensure a comeback potential for the losing side.

 

What if slayer scored you higher for style points, and we had a UI bar with a flag that shifted over to your teams side the more collective score you got. The bar can be "maxed" out but flawless or more stylish playing from the opposing side can very quickly shift the flag to their side of the bar. The winning team is decided by which side of the UI bar the flag is sitting on when the timer goes out.

 

We now have a gamemode with:

 

1. Constant comeback potential.

2. Utilizes the medal system in a meaningful fashion for the first time.

3. Slaying is still the central objective, with raw gunskill being the most important aspect of its gameplay.

 

We can even adjust the scoring system for teams down a teammate so they're not at a disadvantage, or even create special scoring scenarios.

Share this post


Link to post

Define stylish playing please. Do you mean getting killing sprees and double kills gives additional score?

Share this post


Link to post

Define stylish playing please. Do you mean getting killing sprees and double kills gives additional score?

Yes, everything is scored. Headshots, medals, damage dealt. Even assassination's could have a purpose if they gave your team a shit load of points for completing one. How you kill becomes important.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm late, what's the issue with Slayer we're trying to resolve here? Stagnant gameplay?

Share this post


Link to post

Playing slayer on movement incentivizing asymmetrical maps instead of stagnant symmetrical maps might be a good start.

Absolutely.

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, everything is scored. Headshots, medals, damage dealt. Even assassination's could have a purpose if they gave your team a shit load of points for completing one. How you kill becomes important.

Feels kind of convoluted and random to me. Reminds me of power slayer from Reach, do we really want to give players an incentive to go for Assassinations and Ground Pounds instead of just killing their enemies? The momentum / tug of war mechanic is pretty cool though.

Share this post


Link to post

343 have been there, done that. Strongholds isn't that good.

First part is true.

 

It's pretty good, imo. Better than slayer without question.

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, everything is scored. Headshots, medals, damage dealt. Even assassination's could have a purpose if they gave your team a shit load of points for completing one. How you kill becomes important.

Bulletstorm was campaign only but scored your kills based on style. It was pretty fun. Based on the Gears engine I believe.

Share this post


Link to post

Feels kind of convoluted and random to me. Reminds me of power slayer from Reach, do we really want to give players an incentive to go for Assassinations and Ground Pounds instead of just killing their enemies? The momentum / tug of war mechanic is pretty cool though.

We can keep it simple. Get a kill, 1 point. Get a medal, 1 point. This system recognizes players skills by giving out points accordingly.

 

Take this scenario for example. The bar has a 21 point range, with a 10 point max for either side and 1 neutral point (flags gotta start somewhere). Blue team is maxed out, but the timer is left with 30 seconds and sniper just spawned. Red team makes a risky play to secure snipe, succeeds, and manages an 4 headshot extermination.

 

4 points for the kills.

4 points for the headshots.

4 points for the additional medals (double, triple, over, exterm).

 

This leaves us a total of 12 points earned by Red team, moving the flag 12 points across the bar, crossing the neutral point, and into Red teams side. Timer runs out, Red team wins.

 

Slaying is the sole focus of the gamemode. The points are just a bonus for killing players outside the norm, and allow room for massive momentum swings at all times.

Share this post


Link to post

Bulletstorm was campaign only but scored your kills based on style. It was pretty fun. Based on the Gears engine I believe.

Bulletstorm is an amazing game, and is somewhat what inspired the idea.

Share this post


Link to post

We can keep it simple. Get a kill, 1 point. Get a medal, 1 point. This system recognizes players skills by giving out points accordingly.

 

Take this scenario for example. The bar has a 21 point range, with a 10 point max for either side and 1 neutral point (flags gotta start somewhere). Blue team is maxed out, but the timer is left with 30 seconds and sniper just spawned. Red team makes a risky play to secure snipe, succeeds, and manages an 4 headshot extermination.

 

4 points for the kills.

4 points for the headshots.

4 points for the additional medals (double, triple, over, exterm).

 

This leaves us a total of 12 points earned by Red team, moving the flag 12 points across the bar, crossing the neutral point, and into Red teams side. Timer runs out, Red team wins.

 

Slaying is the sole focus of the gamemode. The points are just a bonus for killing players outside the norm, and allow room for massive momentum swings at all times.

So I'm gonna stop shooting a dude in order to let my teammate get a double kill? Doesn't sound super competitive or fun to watch. Wasn't this a gametype in H4? Medal Madness or something.

 

But speaking of Tug-of-War how about this (not even a slayer replacement. just a new gametype idea):

  • Best out of 5 rounds
  • Rounds last let's say 2.5 minutes
  • There is a central hill and standing in the hill moves it closer to the enemy side along a set path
  • Hill moves faster with more people in it
  • At the end of the round, the team that pushed the hill into enemy territory wins
In my head I see a constant back and forth of slaying and getting into the hill to push it, with potential for clutch plays when you get 4 down and your entire team gets into the hill to push it across the middle line right as the clock runs out.
  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Just to weigh in on the whole slayer thing....

 

Slayer blows.  "A 49-49 game is so exciting though!!!"

 

Yeah, for about 90 seconds every 5 games.  Other than that slayer has nothing going for it. And yes yes, i know you could make that argument for any of the gametypes if you really tried BUT at least other gametypes have things going for them over the course of the game.  If they insist on keeping slayer in rotation i would handle tournaments like this:

 

Multiple feature stations that can be switched to at any time.

Slayer game is happening on main stage??

"We're going to send you to a feature station and bring you back when there are 90 seconds left since we know none of you actually want to watch this shit until then"

 

That last bit is sarcasm btw, my real answer is to just get rid of it (once we have more proper gametypes of course)

Share this post


Link to post

I just got a new big ass ultrawide monitor and it is awesome for PC gaming.  But the best part is it can do PiP so I can see my PC and xbox at the same time.  So now I can post about how terrible H5 is in between games very easily. H5 might finally be playable!!!  I'll have an outlet after every game to release my anger and disdain. 

  • Upvote (+1) 5

Share this post


Link to post

Absolutely.

Asymmetrical maps are the worse for slayer. They encourage camping and stagnant gameplay.(guess you don’t remember lockout slayer or stuff like that) the lack of pushing is too insane sometimes. Symmetrical maps was all h3 had(except guardian of course but that we had oddball on so it worked fine), and it was considered one of the best mlg halo games and the reason is the maps!
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Asymmetrical maps are the worse for slayer. They encourage camping and stagnant gameplay.(guess you don’t remember lockout slayer or stuff like that) the lack of pushing is too insane sometimes. Symmetrical maps was all h3 had(except guardian of course but that we had oddball on so it worked fine), and it was considered one of the best mlg halo games and the reason is the maps!

 

Someone needs to...

 

380.gif

 

...Chill Out.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

4v4?

 

When comparing CE to every other game, people conveniently forget this fact. 4v4 slayer in CE is bad too. 2v2 is excellent.

 

But 4v4 is where halo lives now and thats not going to change. Personally i don't want it too. 4v4 is definitely my favorite team size

Share this post


Link to post

4v4 slayer in Halo 1 is intense. You just can't play it on Hang Em (red spawn death trap) or Prisoner (size).

 

Honestly anyone rallying to add a hare-brained objective to slayer has lost all right to criticize Reach, Halo 4, or Halo 5.

Share this post


Link to post

Furthest I would probably go is adding 3 plots and just rewarding more points per kill based on how many of the plots you currently control. At that point you would just use the location of each to funnel the focus of the match in whatever way you thought was healthy for that map

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.