Jump to content
chaosTheory

Dedicated website for tracking Halo CE gameplay issues in MCC

Recommended Posts

or you play a map twice with each team having to host once, score then is combined to determin the winner of that map

ofc with a lower map coun then, eg best of 3

 

In my opinion this is the most fair way to run a tournament but the least efficient. It's how we determine 1v1s for MNC, and how we ran our most recent Quake Arena Arcade tournament despite people being a bit confused by how it worked.

 

Best of 3 is what people prefer, but we were still doing best of 3 with what you suggested. So team A hosts map 1 round 1 on Prisoner. Game finishes 50-40 for team A. After the match, Team B hosts map 1 round 2 on Prisoner. Team B wins 50-20. You add up the scores and team A has 70 where as Team B has 90. Team B takes Map 1 and the then go on to play Map 2 Round 1. If Team B goes on to lose Map 2, then the teams will play Map 3 to finish out the best of 3.

 

The only issue we ran into is what if there happens to be 2 ties on the maps, but that's kinda rare. The issue with this is its very time consuming for rounds. We played for Quake 5 min time limit no frag limit and we're looking at about 30 minutes of gameplay per round since most games ended up going to map 3.

Share this post


Link to post

In my opinion this is the most fair way to run a tournament but the least efficient. It's how we determine 1v1s for MNC, and how we ran our most recent Quake Arena Arcade tournament despite people being a bit confused by how it worked.

 

Best of 3 is what people prefer, but we were still doing best of 3 with what you suggested. So team A hosts map 1 round 1 on Prisoner. Game finishes 50-40 for team A. After the match, Team B hosts map 1 round 2 on Prisoner. Team B wins 50-20. You add up the scores and team A has 70 where as Team B has 90. Team B takes Map 1 and the then go on to play Map 2 Round 1. If Team B goes on to lose Map 2, then the teams will play Map 3 to finish out the best of 3.

 

The only issue we ran into is what if there happens to be 2 ties on the maps, but that's kinda rare. The issue with this is its very time consuming for rounds. We played for Quake 5 min time limit no frag limit and we're looking at about 30 minutes of gameplay per round since most games ended up going to map 3.

 

I think this has potential. Playing (best of 7) x 2 is going to be waaaaay too time consuming. Best of 3 or best of 5 would be ideal. Maybe using the SC2 method of map vetoing or something to that effect could be worthwhile? 

 

Team 1 vetoes one map from the pool of 5 (Chill, Pris, HEH, Dammy, Derelict, Not putting in Creek because most people seem to dislike it)

Team 2 vetoes one map from the pool of 5

Play best of 3 and switch host each match and add up the scores.

Share this post


Link to post

I dont like that method because of how much better some hosts feel then others. If this is the method that is used its going to suck if you have a really good host and a disadvantage for your team. I realize the same can be said for just doing it by total wins like it is now. Sometimes you can pull off a win on a bad host but scores will be closer and makes your method kind of flawed. A win is a win in my opinion whether it is 50-49 or 50-25 and should count as one point like it does now.

Share this post


Link to post

Well... I mean, this is with the assumption that both hosts are playable. But there is generally at least one person on a team who can host decently well. I've played on a bunch of different hosts and I've had problems with maybe 2-3 of them to the point where I didn't want to play on them anymore. I know that purely anecdotal but as it stands the host disadvantage is huge; as you're well aware.

 

Playing two full series switching hosts is probably the most ideal way but I'll be damned if I'm playing ~4 rounds of potentially 14 games. That's nuts.

 

But at this point I really don't see another way. Whoever ends up hosting the most is probably going to end up losing the most.

Share this post


Link to post

Well... I mean, this is with the assumption that both hosts are playable. But there is generally at least one person on a team who can host decently well. I've played on a bunch of different hosts and I've had problems with maybe 2-3 of them to the point where I didn't want to play on them anymore. I know that purely anecdotal but as it stands the host disadvantage is huge; as you're well aware.

 

Playing two full series switching hosts is probably the most ideal way but I'll be damned if I'm playing ~4 rounds of potentially 14 games. That's nuts.

 

But at this point I really don't see another way. Whoever ends up hosting the most is probably going to end up losing the most.

That was the whole reason for my chill out post. I dont find it to be much of a disadvantage on that map. I have hosted 4 series since the patch and have done well on the co all 4 times and in alot of those series I went negative the rest of the games. I mean can I get any others that regularly run on and off host series opinion on this? Maybe I just run co better then other maps I dunno just would like hear other's opinions about it.

Share this post


Link to post

The fact that you are somewhat forced to run around with shotty/sniper to be competitive on that map (as you say) should be enough reason for it not to be a solution to the problem. I understand playing differently off-host versus on-host but there needs to be a more objective solution.

Share this post


Link to post

I dont like that method because of how much better some hosts feel then others. If this is the method that is used its going to suck if you have a really good host and a disadvantage for your team. I realize the same can be said for just doing it by total wins like it is now. Sometimes you can pull off a win on a bad host but scores will be closer and makes your method kind of flawed. A win is a win in my opinion whether it is 50-49 or 50-25 and should count as one point like it does now.

 

No method is fool proof, but it certainly seems more fair to give another team a shot on the same map that they just got dominated on by the hosts. I personally think this method works better for 1v1 situations but for team games it's not ideal. There's plenty to discuss, but I think the major downside of this is how time consuming it is rather than the issues we face with having a good host but having a disadvantage because you are host.

Share this post


Link to post

I think it's an issue with bullet magnetism being greatly reduced (or nonexistent) when hosting, but I haven't done any side-by-side comparisons to check yet.

 

In the games I hosted, I saw a lot of shots missing by inches where they might have hit off host.

 

This might not be the best example because I was aiming on the wrong side for most of these shots, but these are the types of near misses I'm talking about:

 

If anyone has any better examples, post some links. And if anyone wants to help me record some on/off host tests, I'll be on later tonight.

  • Upvote (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post

I think it's an issue with bullet magnetism being greatly reduced (or nonexistent) when hosting, but I haven't done any side-by-side comparisons to check yet.

 

In the games I hosted, I saw a lot of shots missing by inches where they might have hit off host.

 

This might not be the best example because I was aiming on the wrong side for most of these shots, but these are the types of near misses I'm talking about:

 

If anyone has any better examples, post some links. And if anyone wants to help me record some on/off host tests, I'll be on later tonight.

that first bullet should have 100% hit, and the bullet at 32 seconds should have been missed, but been magnetized towards him.

Share this post


Link to post

If you do aggregate scoring then you will have an issue with mathematical impossibility once you go past a certain score. For example, if you win the first game 50-1, you will be guaranteed victory once you get just 2 kills in the second game.

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah I don't like doing aggregate.

 

And host definitely feels harder right now.... just did a long night of hosting and it felt like a lot of misses vs matchmaking I was on fire.

Share this post


Link to post

you do aggregate scores on CS for decades now, imo its a working system

if Team A wins 50-40 on their host but loses to Team B 10-50 on the other host then yes id say Team B is legitimately the better team (60-90 win for Team B overall)

Team A just lacked to adapt to the other hosts lead while Team B managed to hit on both hosts

(note: im refering to good hosts, so none has intense connection issues and drops which makes player models skip or so!)

 

something like this is inevitable anyhow, just think about what will happen when a tourney goes international

a US Team is facing an AUS Team, both will suffer greatly on the other teams host

however the team that gets more kills combined clearly managed to get more out of their games

and no theres absolutly no way both teams will agree on one person to host the entire series, thats impossible regarding the lag coming from the distance

 

if you regard two games combined as too time consuming you might as well reduce the score each game requires you to win

eg 2x Prisoner until 25 while each team hosts one 25 round

 

 

 

another suggestion:

 

you could use a host-weighting system that some esport games do use that have host advantages

win map X off-host = 3-0

win map X on-host = 2-1 (so one point goes to the loser)

draw regardless of host = 1-1

the team that has more points after 2 maps, 4 maps or 6 maps wins while the host alternates after each map (each map just played once!)

the issue is that this works better with CTF as there often are draws then that result the overall series in one team clearly winning

i brought this up though as you can built on this idea for a TeamSlayer model

  • Downvote (-1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

One thing all halos have in common is that host is an advantage. Right now on MCC it's a disadvantage. I'm okay with how its working but only if they make it just as hard to shoot off host. It's like switching from hardcore mode to rookie mode when going from on host to off.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I don't really understand why we are having this discussion of "who is better on who's host". The game is currently a shell of the original, at best. Melees are shit, plasma rifle is shit, rockets are shit, host advantage/disadvantage is shit, snipers are as easy as halo 2 (Which is shit), Derelict is shit, starting grenades are shit. Tons of little issues collectively make the game shit, in comparison with the original.

 

Want to know who is better? Play Halo CE on LAN. MCC is not the same game, at all. Any discussions of how a series should be ran are far beyond premature. Everyone wants this game to be a replacement for H1, including me. However, right now it is NOT.

  • Upvote (+1) 7

Share this post


Link to post

Ya I just look at it like I did xbc, games mean nothing. OG lan is all that matters as far as who is better then who. But like xbc its fun for people who cant lan. Honestly I would rather this game be exactly like xbc just Iintegrated into the xbox one. Because the only reason I would rather play MCC is for convience and amount of players.....XBC was actually more fun when a lot of people where playing it.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Ya I just look at it like I did xbc, games mean nothing. OG lan is all that matters as far as who is better then who. But like xbc its fun for people who cant lan. Honestly I would rather this game be exactly like xbc just Iintegrated into the xbox one. Because the only reason I would rather play MCC is for convience and amount of players.....XBC was actually more fun when a lot of people where playing it.

Well said.  I just don't want the focus of the "community effort" to shift toward determining a convention for dealing with the game in its current state.  There should not be a convention until this shit is fixed.  I literally don't melee anyone any more, and I haven't picked up a plasma rifle in over a month.  If this is supposed to be halo CE, why do I find myself playing it totally different?  The game has been gutted.  Is it entirely too late to bring the original xbox version in?  That's what we all wanted from the beginning.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

There's no way the netcode could be modified to work and not be shit.

Also I find the plasma rifle works a LOT better since the patch. Some guy ran almost head on with me when I head overshield, he stepped maybe a couple feet to my right and I could not get my reticle over on him. To me it's effectively fixed.

  • Upvote (+1) 2
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I don't really understand why we are having this discussion of "who is better on who's host". The game is currently a shell of the original, at best. Melees are shit, plasma rifle is shit, rockets are shit, host advantage/disadvantage is shit, snipers are as easy as halo 2 (Which is shit), Derelict is shit, starting grenades are shit. Tons of little issues collectively make the game shit, in comparison with the original.

 

Want to know who is better? Play Halo CE on LAN. MCC is not the same game, at all. Any discussions of how a series should be ran are far beyond premature. Everyone wants this game to be a replacement for H1, including me. However, right now it is NOT.

 

The game is nowhere near the original. Everybody understands that. There are also a lot of people interested in playing that are in the age range where work/kids/significant others just make lanning almost impossible. We would like to play a few competitive games every now and then without the time commitment of a LAN. So we might as well find the fairest way to run a series on MCC.

Its like comparing regular baseball to old man softball. The rules and play are very different but it is familiar enough to scratch the itch.

  • Upvote (+1) 6

Share this post


Link to post

Basically, if you don't like MCC you have two options:

 

1. Don't play it.

2. Complain constructively.

 

The "OG crowd" is so damn annoying. Everyone that plays KNOWS it's not OG. However, for a lot of us, it's the best option to play a solid, competitive FPS on console. Not everyone has a LAN community or the time/funds to travel to LANs. No one who is worth a damn in this game thinks that MCC's best can transition and dump on OG's best. It's silly to think that. For all intents and purposes, they are two completely different games.

 

But the constant reminding of "lol its not OG HURDURDUR" is tired. If you don't like it then don't play it. If you do play it, complain about it constructively.

  • Upvote (+1) 9

Share this post


Link to post

I think the discussion you guys are missing is that there is so many things wrong with it that it can't be played competitively and appeal to anyone other then the few people who have connections that for whatever reason doesn't have most of these issues. Issues like ghost rockets, ghost nades, rockets being on floor in front of you with no option to pick them up. My biggest gripe is the people my shots doesnt register as good on. Like Bobby blitz and TheBo are two that come to mind that im always having that issue with. I can be camo behind them when they are running a straight line fire a risky shot because I have such a huge advantage and easy shot. And even though the shot looks perfect it doesnt connect or register with this person and they turn around and hit me with their first 3 shots dropping me..... That stuff completely ruins the competitiveness of this game for me and these things happen to me alot. Cuz that one play I just mentioned can screw us out of getting the next power up that I should be able to get easily and potentially even lose the game for you if your playing good enough people. I watch toxin and sn1py on twitch alot and their shots seem to register fine on bobby and thebo.... these things dont happen to them. So I honestly feel like even if I had same skill as them(I dont think this btw) that I wouldnt be able to compete with them for unknown shot registering issues. 75% of series I run shots register better against one of my oppents then they do the other, which ruins my expierence more then any other issue.

  • Upvote (+1) 3

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.