TerribleTimbo

Not bad for a fan's vision of the first level.

The extend of loadout customization will most likely be something like choosing what mid-long range weapon you want (or maybe just a primary weapon in general), a sidearm, and what armor ability to use. They wouldn't be dumb enough to let us choose power weapons. Or maybe we all can wait until actual information about it comes out before people decide whether they like it or not.

What was halo 2's population about a year and a half after halo 3 came out?

Agreed. It also makes it that much tougher to stop the flag guy and makes ctf games faster paced.

Most likely will be announced at E3 somewhere, either on the stage or in an interview. I'm hoping there is no day 1 dlc unless it is actually finished between the time when the game goes gold and when the game is released. I'm also hoping there is no stupid online pass crap that games have been liking to have, though people who actually buy it new usually get the code.

I always prefered sidewinder over blood gulch. You could actually get somewhere on that map if the other teams sniper was good.

I wouldn't be sad at all if no Halo 3 maps were remade or able to be remade via forge. The best map in the game in my opinion is Heretic which is a remake of Midship (and a very good remake at that).

There aren't any that I wouldn't mind being remade. If they did a Halo 1 map pack then I would like to see Chill Out, Sidewinder, Rat Race, and Derelict.

If they made a Halo 2 map pack I would want to see Lockout, Midship, Colossus, and Terminal remade. Other than those I'd be indifferent about a lot of them being remade and really hoping that a few of them were never remade.

One that definitely won't be in: Modder - any shot landed counts as a headshot but your HUD is disabled.

My ratings for every Halo 3 map from what I can remember based off their name (I highly value competitive play btw, so that affects my ratings): Assembly - 6/10 Avalanche - 6/10 Blackout - 2/10 Citadel - 7/10 Cold Storage - 6/10 Construct - 5/10 Epitaph - 2/10 with shield doors, 6/10 without Foundry - 2/10 for default layout Ghost Town - 0/10 Guardian - 5/10 Heretic - 9/10 High Ground - 4/10 Isolation - 4/10 Last Resort - 5/10 Longshore - 6/10 Narrows - 6/10 Orbital - 4/10 Rat's Nest - 7/10 Sandbox - 5/10 for default layout Sandtrap - 4/10 Snowbound - 3/10 with shield doors, 6/10 without Standoff - 1/10 The Pit - 6/10 Valhalla - 5/10 I still had fun in Halo 3, don't get me wrong, but I just thought the map design was trash for the most part. Bungie tried to one-up themselves or something and lost touch on how to make a good map. I don't see any reason why the majority of them should come back.

The whole problem with vehicles pretty much only being vulnerable to the laser or rockets is that those weapons are ALWAYS in the center of the map. If you can't leave your base then you can't get a weapon to deal with vehicles around your base/spawns, and if you can't leave your base then you might as well quit because they will kill you long before you can reach one of your own vehicles.

I don't know the exact details but I think I know enough to give a decent run down on everything. Before I start though, this kind of system would need to be implemented in practically every ranked playlist which may cause some problems on 343's end. But everyone starts off playing placement matches (most likely wouldn't be in Halo 4 for obvious reasons) and depending on how well you play, you get an initial placement into a league (bronze, silver, gold, platinum, diamond, and "newly" made masters and grandmasters). From my understanding, there is only one masters and one grandmasters division per region for sc2 (since it has american, european, and asian...uh...player bases I guess you'd call it, in order to avoid major lag I think). But all the other leagues have a ton of different divisions. Each division holds 100 players, each of whom are ranked within their own division which doesn't necessarily reflect their ranking in the league though. You move up in leagues by climbing to the top in your division, and then I think you start getting shots to play against people in the league above yours to see if you move up. If you get to move up then you get placed into a new division in that league and start the process over. If you do bad then you start to climb down in your division and will eventually get placed in the league below yours. Now masters, I think, and grandmasters only have one division for each league (I know it's true for grandmasters but unsure about masters). The people in these leagues can pretty much consider themselves the best of the best. I think the whole process of ranking up/down is based off of a point system. You get points for winning (more if the person is ranked higher or in a higher league than yours) and lose points if you lose (more are lost if the person is ranked below you or in a league below yours). Now starcraft doesn't really have any major stats besides win/loss so this system works fairly flawlessly for the game. Since stats in halo can be fairly bad at determining a players skill more so than their win/loss, I don't see why this system wouldn't be good for it. It's simple, you play well and show you can beat people "better" than you then you'll rank up faster and if you play bad then you'll derank. People are never "locked" in a certain league and can always rank up or rank down depending on how well their points are at a certain time. There you have it from how I understand the system. I may be wrong about a couple things but for the most part it's a decent brief explanation of the system.

Well one way is to strictly leave ranking to just win/loss. Make the ranking progress similar to Starcraft 2's would be a big plus as well. If you're doing great in your "division" you play people in the division higher to see if you need to be moved up. Though there would be no placement matches to throw you in a beginning division. That post is kinda all over the place but I'm trying to type quickly since I'm in class. Oh and each division has multiple leagues or something (I may be confusing the terms) that each have 100 players I think. So someone could be ranked 23rd overall in _____ league in the bronze division, if that makes sense to anyone.

Unfortunately for people who like smaller maps, the average map size seems like it has been increasing with each halo game. Hopefully by focusing on competitive map design Halo 4 will reverse this trend.

If covenant weapons aren't in multiplayer then I expect the forerunner weapons to pretty much function almost identically to them. But if covenant weapons are included then I have no idea what to expect.

Using RB to melee allows you to turn and melee at the same time which is a huge advantage against someone using B to melee (unless they're "clawing", of course).

Alrighty, I don't like the idea of dividing up "bonus exp" among winning team members based on their k/d ratio. You win as a team or you lose as a team. I would much rather have a team with guys whose k/d + assist spread went something like 15 - 10 with 8 assists 13 - 5 with 7 assists 12 - 10 with 8 assists 10 - 11 with 6 assists than 15 - 2 with 1 assist 12 - 5 with 0 assists 12 - 10 with 2 assists 11 - 14 with 0 assists Granted the second team might have some good people but none of them are team players. But based off the way suggested, the 15-2-1 guy from the second team would get more exp than the 15-10-8 person, which doesn't quite make sense since I'd consider the latter to be the more valuable player. There would have to be some other determining factor other than strictly k/d to divide up bonus exp if there is a system like that in Halo 4. As for this, why are assists frowned upon in everything except regular team slayer? If you helped kill someone in swat/snipers why should you be penalized for it? Yeah someone should probably be getting headshots in swat or be able to pick someone off before help in snipers, but you shouldn't be frowned upon for helping the team in those gametypes. In FFA, all that matters is if you win or not (or in some tournaments, place high enough to go onto the next round). Granted you probably will have a positive k/d but assists shouldn't matter.

It would be a huge gift if they made the br or a br/ar combo the starting weapons for each gametype. I prefer to have the ability to defend myself from any range off the spawn and a short-mid range weapon just doesn't cut it by itself.

If bloom is implemented to the point where it actually separates the good from the bad (ie Shadowrun, not Reach), then it can be really good. But for Halo I would prefer recoil if we had to choose between the two just because it can be controlled easier.

If their internal/private testing is big enough to get all the data that would normally be collected by a beta then I don't mind not having one. We will no doubt have leaked gameplay footage sometime before the game comes out and/or testers opinions on how the game feels/plays to dissect.

As long as you don't play as the arbiter I wouldn't mind if he made an appearance. That was one of the things I liked least about Halo 2's campaign.

Agreed.

Not to rain on your parade but I really can't think of a single reason why a player would need to dual weild swords...like it would be cool but I just don't see a use gameplay wise.

Hologram is hilarious to use in double team, though I never use it anywhere else. I personally think invis should return as a power up instead of an armor ability and armor lock needs to be toned down a ton to make it back. The picture below from the trailer picture thread had me wondering whether someone on the red team was using hologram. They don't appear to be too far apart and yet one is really dark and the other looks like it's somehow in the sun.