DiamondDayblade

That's not a bad idea for those who use vehicles on a significant basis. But I into jacking vehicles more-so than using them. It is amazes me that players drive Warthogs around the map without a passenger and/or a gunner.

I am still against a ranking system. This "CSR" is doing little to change my mind. I have had my issues with boosting, deranking, selling accounts and the like on Halo 3. It got really annoying there for a while. It was at least every other match in Halo 3 I played where randoms would quit out from the start, mixed rankings and the constant spam of people trying to sell their accounts. Another issue I had with ranking on Halo 3 was the Highest Skill on a player's Service Record. I had an issue with this for many reasons, the biggest probably being that there was really no incentive in keeping your fifty once your reached it. It really did not accurately track down any given player's skill at any given time. All it showed that was that player got to a fifty somehow. I would be more open to a ranking system if it was more "current". Besides, how should a player's "skill" be determined? Should it be based on playlist? Should it be based on individual statistic? Playlist based ranking can bring problems such as those I have mentioned in the first paragraph. Individual stat-based rankings can bring the potential of players not leaving their spawn for the reason of K/D ratio, which could make for some very boring matches. I just see a lot more downside as opposed to upside regarding ranked playlist. It would be cool to have something cool to brag about. But if it is anything like I experienced on Halo 3, even getting a 50 would be nothing to brag about. I guess I will find out like everyone else. Mayble I will change my mind. Maybe I will find some other game to play.

The Boltshot bothered me in the beginning when I started playing Halo 4. Now, it is a non-issue. I hated using it more than getting killed by it. I am glad I mastered it. I had more fun mastering the Plasma Pistol.

I hope there will not be any new specializations. There are enough Tactical Packages and Support Upgrades as it stands in my opinion. I also happen to think they balance out well enough.

@Oophilly215oO: That is nice and all. But I do not consider that rushing. It is an effective tactic however. But I have been on both sides of a rush on that map in which the game was over in half the time without anyone going for the reactors. I'm not trying to knock on your video. I just don't consider that rushing. That's all. How is attacking the player who isn't ready not strategy? How is that not strategy when that same player has the same option to do that very same thing right from the start? Is every player in the match supposed to be ready for it to be called "strategy"? Does every player in the match have to be max population and fully upgraded before they are allowed to make a move for it to be called stategy? I am not saying that there is anything wrong with being passive in regards toward building up population and upgrading that population. But to say that rushing is not strategy is just wrong, especially since it has been prevalent long before Halo Wars. By the way Bacon, you are not the only player who doesn't rush. I know a few players who refuse to rush. The problem with them is that they usually go straigt toward upgrading their units before they start actually constructing units. It can be ten minutes into the match and they will not have one unit out on the battlefield. Then they resign because a small army of Banshees are taking out their double reactors or their Vehicle Depots while they are researching Cannister Shot or the like. I'm just saying rushing the opposition, if anything, can slow them down to the extent where you and your team has the advantage. Is that not strategy?

Halo Wars, while not the best RTS console game, was above average at the time of release. Nearly four years later, it still is a solid game. I still play it on a daily basis. When I compare Halo Wars to other RTS games on the 360, I like Halo Wars for the same reasons I dislike it. Compared to titles such as Command and Conquer and Supreme Commander, Halo Wars is significantly more limited in regards to units, unit abilities and structures for example. Overall, there is not much one can do in Halo Wars. However, it does make playing more simplified and streamlined. For that reason alone is why I still enjoy playing Halo Wars. There are only a few RTS titles on the 360 to begin with. Out of those few titles, Halo Wars was not a port from the PC. It was built for the console. I will close by saying Halo Wars does offer a nice change of pace compared to the other RTS games I have played. Should they release a Halo Wars 2, I would buy it.

I do like a lot of these suggestions for Halo Wars 2 in this thread. I wouldn't mind seeing Halo Wars 2 take a step toward more traditional RTS ports on the 360, like Supreme Commander and Universe at War. Instead of choosing a specific leader on Halo Wars like the Arbiter or Captain Cutter, I would like to be able to choose a faction, like the UNSC or Covenant. If I were to go Covenant, I could build a Temple to spawn any leader I choose. This would work like "Heros" off of Universe at War. They would be strong. But they would take significant time and resources to spawn. They would be potential game-changers. This would wipe out leader rushing at the very start of a match. While I don't mind leader rushing, I know many people do. One can still rush, but it will be with the same caliber of units. It would make it more challenging in my opinion. I would also like to see a balanced blend of 1v1, 2v2 and 3v3 maps. There is no reason to have at least double the amount of 1v1 and 2v2 maps each than 3v3, especially since the 3v3 playlists online always have more population. I wouldn't mind a "tab" bar like on Command and Conquer. With the tab bar, one could construct units and the what not while managing units on the battlefield. One wouldn't always have to jump back to their base to construct more tanks for example. These are just a few out of many suggestions I have for a Halo Wars 2. I have played every RTS on the 360 I think. There is not many to start with. The problem is I like them all. From Supreme Commander 2 to Halo Wars, they are great games. I like Halo Wars because it was built for the console instead of being a port from the PC version, like Supreme Commander, Command and Conquer and the like. With that being said, Halo Wars is limited compared to those same ports that I enjoy. Halo Wars feels very limited, almost to a playlist extent, compared to the previously mentioned RTS titles. Regardless of how Halo Wars 2 is done, if done, it needs to be done right. There are no guarantees for Halo Wars 2. Let's hope it is done right.

Hate to break it to you. But rushing is a strategy, quite a legit one to add. Granted, it is easier to rush an opponent on Halo Wars compared to other console RTS titles I have played. But in interest of fairness, Halo Wars wasn't a port from a computer version like Command and Conquer or Supreme Commander. There is a lot more going on there. Also, in the interest of fairness, it is not that difficult to combat a rush. From something as simple as building a couple of turrets to having an ally or even yourself attack the rushing opponent's base with a couple of Warthogs, it is not like there is totally nothing you can do.

The Beam Rifle is my all time favorite Halo weapon. It was savage in Halo 2 when it was first introduced. It is still savage today. The Sniper Rifle has always been and still is good. But it is generic. The Binary Rifle in my opinion is in a word, OVERRATED. The Beam Rifle is sleeker, speedier and more lethal than the Sniper Rifle and the Binary Rifle. The Beam Rifle doesn't need to be reloaded after a couple of shots and it is easy to keep from overheating. It is superior in zooming in and snapshooting to the Sniper Rifle and Beam Rifle. Seriously, who needs a Gauss Turret when you can use a Beam Rifle?

What is the best way to remedy bad teammates? Run in a full party with players that you know they know what they are doing. I know that last sentence is a grammatical nightmare. However, playing with players that know how to play Halo effectively and play together well is a sure way to improve personal statistics as well as embracing that so-called loss of "competitive" aspect of this game I've seen scattered among these forums. When you run into a "team" playlist solo, more times than none you will run into bad teammates. I know. I've experieced plenty of matches where I had to do some major backpacking just to end up losing by two or three kills. I would finish in the vacinity of thirty-five and five with most of what kills my teammates do have I assisted. I've also been on that opposite end of that spectrum where I would finish negative sixteen with two or three kills and maybe an assist if I am lucky. So I know and understand the frustration completely. I learned to accept when I playing with random teammates it is like running a gauntlet. I do what I can. I am not going to sit in the back of the map saving my kill/death ratio. I am going to do what I can to contribute to a win. It pays off more than one would think. But not enough to where I can say more times than none. I've played Halo enough to know when I am in a losing battle. Playing with randoms generally is a losing battle. Bad teammates, as frustrating as it is, really isn't something that should still be talked about. It is not like it wasn't prevalent in previous Halos or anything. I remember playing Team Slayer on Halo 3 getting frustrated with bad teammates all the time. However, I remember playing that same playlist with a full party and totally wrecking. We would be winning matches with everybody on our team finishing no more than three or four deaths with a ridiculous amount of assists. Of course there were plenty of dogfights where we would face a good team where everyone on both teams would be close to breaking even. I know this is a long post. But this is not something new. It has been discussed for a long time. Like the problem, the solutions have also been discussed for a long time. Hope this helps.

The Explosives upgrade has as much effect on grenades in Halo 4 as a Flamethrower did on someone wearing Flak Jacket Pro in Call of Duty Black Ops. Put simply, Explosives doesn't really have any effect in my opinion.

The Energy Sword owns in any Halo game. But Halo 2's sword was the best. I say that because of there was no ammo limit on the sword. It is definitely and will be in my top three Halo weapons period. I loved creeping around the map in Halo 3 for that Slice'n'Dice medal. Too bad that medal is not featured on Halo 4. Contrary to some opinions, I love going up against a Boltshot with the Sword. One of the funnest parts of this game is playing "chicken" against a Boltshot.

I just gazed over the original post. Didn't take the time to read it thoroughly because I will be here all night. I felt that Boltshots were overpowered. But I don't so much now. It is not so much that I actually started to use the Boltshot more frequently here lately as much as I have found so many ways to deal with an opponent coming at me with a Boltshot. Faking them out with Holograms, breezing right by them with a Thruster Pack and even something as simple as stepping away from them are some my favorite ways dealing with an enemy Boltshot. As far as Armor Abilities go, Jet Packs do annoy me. However, Jet Packers usually end up on the losing end 90% of the time, at least in my playing. If I don't kill them, one of my teammates will or another opponent if it is FFA. Insta-Spawning makes no sense to me. It is frustating to have won a gun-battle with an opponent only to have that same opponent spawn right behind me to finish me off for an easy Revenge medal in a Regicide match. I am sure that same opponent got frustrated when I spawned right behind him. With that being said, a three or even five second wait will not hurt.

Halo 3 showed why TrueSkill is flawed. Gamers boosted, deranked and even bought their accounts just to get a fifty. Besides, TrueSkill is Microsoft's brainchild. Not Bungie's nor 343's. Microsoft implemented it into a lot, if not all of their games at one time. Not sure if they still do. Aside from the exploitation, I never felt TrueSkill was all that accurate anyway because after a player plays so many matches it becomes seemingly impossible to rank up or even down. Never thought of it as "current", focusing on how the player is playing at the time given a span of ten to fifteen games. I suppose I wouldn't mind seeing some kind of ranking system if it focuses more on current performance than overall performance. Reach featured a nice effort to emphasize current performance with their Rating system, but I didn't stick with Reach long enough to see otherwise. Even so, a ranking system focused on current performance still would probably be exploited. I joined a Regicide match on Solace earlier today that was nearly finished. I finished in the vacinty of three kills and three deaths. I wasn't in there long so I don't quite remember. What I do remember is that looking at the post-game stats, I noticed a player going six kills and thirty deaths. Twenty-seven of those thirty deaths were by one player. Twenty-four of those were by Assassination. The point is if players are boosting each other for Commendations and Armor/Emblem unlocks, then don't think they wouldn't do the same in a ranking system of some sort. I don't need a rank, number or the like next to my name that says how good or bad I am. I let my performance in any given match determine that. I've stated on other threads that a ranking system would give some players another reason to run their mouth. I've also stated that those same players run their mouths anyway. Don't get me wrong. I have no problem with players running their mouth, trash talking. However, if you need a cheesy-ranking system to talk trash, then you probably shouldn't talk trash to begin with. The post-game carnage report supplies the stat and number freaks with all the numbers they need to shout off at another player. Numbers don't lie but they don't tell the truth either. Interpret that however you will, as I am not saying anything more. See you in 2013. Have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. Good night.

This is without a doubt the funniest thing I have ever heard. This is why I cannot take the idea of "competitive" or even MLG seriously.

Like I have said in another thread, if Halo 3's TrueSkill wasn't so heavily exploited, this would not be in discussion. With all the boosting, deranking and bought accounts that was happening in Matchmaking, it made the very idea of a ranking system a joke. I played thousands of matches on Halo 3, rarely coming across any legit 50s on any playlist. All ranking systems do in Matchmaking is give reasons for some players to run their mouths, which is what they do anyway. So what is the point?

If TrueSkill wasn't so heavily exploited like it was on Halo 3, this wouldn't be in discussion right now. It probably wouldn't have in Reach as well.

I am on my last specialization and I am nearly through with it. I am on Pathfinder level 126. I went Pioneer first after I got my email for Fast Track. I know it seems cheap getting a little extra XP after every match. But considering you are using Fast Track in place of other Tactical Packages such as Mobility or Firepower it is not that big of a deal. I'm not going to have any need for it anymore here soon unless 343 does decide to make more Specializations.

I happen to love playing Regicide. It is by far what I most play, with Capture the Flag being a very distant second. I think it is great for Free-For-All, but not that good for team-based gamemodes. I like the idea of being able to win with less kills and lose with more kills than your opponent(s). The last sentence also applies to Regicides. One can win with less and lose with more. It is all about how one plays the bounty on the King. Does one keep that bounty low? Or does one max it out? That can also apply if you happen to be the King. But even that strategy can be thrown out the window. It is a great Free-For-All gametype that makes one think a little. All of that is not to say I do not have issues with this gametype. I think Kingtaculars/Overshield power-ups should happen at 45 seconds instead of 30 seconds. Also, as I feel with most Free-For-All gametypes on most shooters, I do not feel players should be able to party-up and/or split-screen. That is the one thing I did like about Halo 3's playlist setup. It had Lone Wolves and Rumble Pit. Everybody won.

Personally, I would like to see full-geometric remakes of Backwash, Burial Mounds, Containment and Relic off of Halo 2. I also would like to see from Halo CE full-geometric remakes of Chiron TL-34 and Prisoner. Any or all of these maps remade would be cool.

Hologram is the only Armor Ability I use. I don't really care for the others for the reason that I don't like them and/or they're redundant for how I play.