ArmouredGRIFFON

I think the game relies on having good team-mates. That is the nature of Halo, always has been. Having guests in the game places deter in the game, it isn't, then, matchmade. But enough about that, have good team-mates, have a TEAM, and do call-outs. Call out if you are being shot, call out if you throw a grenade, if you do anything, call out. If you want grenades placing anywhere, call out.

Interesting but your team-mates weren't much of a challenge were they! I don't think it is unbelievable, pretty standard MLG Level 40-50 gameplay (which is still impressive)!

This is everything wrong with the game right now: do you not believe the game should at least do something about the cheaters?

Why are there guests in matchmaking? If 343 are going to introduce a skill level criterion then they cannot have guests in matchmaking! It not only makes it unfair on whatever team (to the extra two players) forced to play with somebody with a guest on their team (as Halo is a very finite game when it comes to each player in 4v4's on a high level) but it also allows boosting. My K/D has dropped from a solid 3 to a solid 2 because of guests being poor team-mates in matchmaking . You get the same thing in freeforall, players working together or boosting! It is very clear to me that this pretty much falsifies most of the data 343 may have collected, as I'm certain at least one team (not individual) will have played with guests. That being said, in any game I haven't seen a working ranking system since Halo 3/Starcraft 2. What happened after 2009 I don't know...

I think it is only justifiable in the first minute or ten kills of a game (if that). Any more, then when Team Red pits against Team Blue [A] but defeats a different team, Team Blue after some player switches. --- Concept 1) Team Blue [A] =/= Team Blue in Game 1. Team Red defeats TB not TB[A], match-made against TB[A] in Game 1 How is Team Blue [A] defeated? Are the players defeated or the team? How is Halo then a Team based game and not an individual based game [is this reinforced with the True Skill system]? Therein (a deeper problem within that problem) games are no longer finite games [players no longer adopt finite strategies in games of Halo throughout the whole game against other players who quit; fixed teams of three can have their strategies impeded on by additional random player #4 joining mid-game without concept of what is going on strategically].etc --- I can list out [really I can] about one hundred ways that the game is broken from this that I bet many of you haven't thought of but never-mind. Believe me. 343 will not make any changes to the game unless the majority of the player base votes against it [regardless of base-type on a fallacious assumption of what "appeals" in the long run]. Fat chance of that happening. To make the game "Good" I don't think they should be looking at the fan-base democratically to begin with, just have a team of human-beings with common-sense and the good rationality to poke holes in their own paradigms.

What exactly does the word team-mate mean to you people? JIP makes W/L ratio irrelevant: if JIP then Team Blue [A] in the same game could become Team Blue . So Team Blue [A] (the original) doesn't win at all, Team Blue wins. The issue with this is that in transitioning from A to B you can't say that well I won with my team. No. Each individual player gains a win but the teams (that did the winning) are arbitrary concepts. So it's hard to say who outright wins. You could say it was Team B's victory but then how do you justify the Win of the team as a team instead of a Win of the individual participants (given that it can switch from team A to team B at any moment)? You can't. Halo is no longer a team based game...

Halo MLG is dying because of bad decision making from the companies including but not limited to: bad matchmaking to separate players out (departing with a skill system similar to the 50 system which actually represents team skill [because halo is/was implemented "as a" TEAM E-SPORT AFTER ALL. I've noticed it so much harder to filter out the good and bad teams in these new systems]); implementation of controversial features such as instant re-spawning options (seriously) and kill-cams (seriously 343?). I think that MLG are making the right decision for their own reputation. Halo 4 is not ready to enter e-sports. I could list issues with it all day and provide extremely sound and valid arguments detailing, with maths, what they need to do and why, and they would never make changes because 343 seem too busy trying to cater for the non-competitive community, as if their decisions aren't even apt for valuation to competitive players (because they aren't focused on competition they're focused on appealing to the community as a whole). But developers herein are forgetting... If you are appealing to the community as a whole then why not adopt matchmaking features keeping the casual players on the bottom rung of players and the competitive players on a different rung i.e. via matchmaking or social/ladders (like Starcraft which keeps all casual players in the same league)? It doesn't make sense to rank TEAMS as INDIVIDUALS and INDIVIDUALS as TEAMS. Rank individuals as individuals (give them a hidden matchmaking rating) and Teams as Teams. Because that is how Teams operate. Here's an issue I would highlight with the 343's ideology of their features of what is supposed to be a team-based strategy game. Team Blue =/= Team Blue [minus one player, and adding a different player] It makes a different team blue... But don't mind me. I just use my brain a lot.

what do you mean... there is join in progress in halo... that truthfully defeats the whole point of working with your team during the ******* games 8| Instant re-spawning could be problematic because gaps in re-spawning allow your team time to settle down, shield regain, coordinate.etc. not sure if good thing Killcams give away map position in Halo and therefore should be removed. Seriously having a Killcam in Halo is like shooting yourself in the foot if you are trying to make the game competitive. If I was playing on my 50 account and always knew where there players were I'd just shout throw nades on [where the sniper was] and bang, power weapon down map control reinstated for the team without having to do any real work. Did 343 have the matchmaking designed by COD players or squirrels, or both?

In what way is the ranked (not social) competitive matchmaking system similar to the classic matchmaking system H2/3 on the surface level? My question is, if a team loses then can they lose XP [so de-rank]? If so what aspects of this system are visible to ALL possible players [as perceived ? Can we know what level our competitors are at and do we have standards to set by them that can attribute to how we judge those players without reasoning the paradigm: "I should have" the same level as them; therefore they are my equals? I literally once wrote a good article as to why this feature is necessary for the matchmaking system to work as provided either counter factual condition: a system where matchmaking skill is awarded per game; a system where matchmaking skill is awarded per won-game. It's very Rousseau, and the argument follows partially when people use rank to determine skill level they do not do it as motivated by the skill level but as motivated by the rank. Halo Reach conflated the conditions in assuming that human-beings perceive skill levels [hreach] the same as visible ranks [H2/3]. Lots of for and against but I won in the end. As somebody who knows what they are talking about on a high level of intense play, I will not be purchasing this game until my standards for a long lasting (in years) matchmaking experience has been posited.