gollum385

Do people think that the halfway point cutoff, or chooseing whether to join a game are good ways to counter the problems of join in progress. Whilst i agree with the first, the second may actually slow down a players matchmaking, whereas if they just join, then it will definately speed up the process. Also not many people would probably want to join a game where the team you are put with are losing. Maybe some custom options you can set before searching allow you to specify what games you would join in progress if any. Criteria such as game length remaining (time or score wise), player count in comparison to other team etc.

Not sure if armour abilities will be in reach (personally whilst i am unsure about the issue i'd probably side with no), but i like the idea of a rage or charge armour ability. If you've played previous halo games, where the brutes throw down their weapons and charge towards you. Maybe not for general matchmaking, but i like the idea of being able to charge at my opponents (maybe getting bonus in melee damage etc if you drop your weapon.). would kind of be the brutes version of sprint (spartans), and evade (elites). Also would love to see a few more brute style weapons (maybe if carbine and needler rifle return, a brute version of one/both (use spikes instead of needles). Would love to see a return of brute shot, mauler and spiker as well as grav hammer, and also the brute plasma rifle too (maybe different in how it works compared to normal plasma rifle).

Does anyone have any other ideas for dual wieldable weapons? i think the pistol grenade thing in the halo trailer could be a cool idea, as long as it isn't as powerful as the normal grenade launcher/brute shot/concussion rifle and definately not as powerful as grenades. Would kind of be a human version of the mauler, but would have some splash damage to go with it. Maybe it's single wield advantage could be a slightly larger splash damage range, or the ability to make stick to walls if you hold the right trigger (kind of like the different grenade launcher firing mode).

I also agree that especially spartan 2's are super soldiers, things like recoil etc or the blooming effect shouldn't have to big an impact on them. This is why i think that the increasing bloom effect makes more logical sense. Again i think the benefit is that as long as you keep timing your shots, this won't occur, but should you choose to fire a couple of quick shots to finish an enemy off, you can do this, but may suffer reduced accuracy in future shots.

Does anyone have other ideas on how to combat weapon balance? Obviously bungie felt that reticule bloom was the way to try and achieve this, but i think a solution similar to mine would mean that whilst hitting an enemy at that range is achievable, the chances of success are severely reduced. combine this with things like weapon spread, or my ideas on reticule bloom (http://www.343industries.org/forum/index.php?/topic/338-reticule-bloom/) and i think it would really add to the tactical elements of the gameplay.

Interesting to see that nobody likes the halo reach map styles, and would definately want remakes of some maps in the newer games. One thing that reach did provide, despite it's poor maps, was a couple of remakes, but most importantly through forge, the ability to remake most maps.

What gametypes to people think will most benefit from this (apart from obvious ones like big team)? I personally don't think rumble pit or something like that would, but definately games like invasion, multi team and custom games would. Games like griffball and other sport like games like revball would definately benefit from more players.

Thats fair enough. I do like the extra medals reach had, and hope newer halo's have even more, to better reflect the gameplay, and also allow people to show off their kills better (i'd love a cone kill medal for example). I think things like more weapon spree medals would be cool, aswell as funny things like a groin shot kill. Also cool things like getting a kill whilst on a grav lift or going over a mancannon would be good, as that can be hard to do.

Thanks for the replies. as for double beatdown txspartan, i think the concept, like many bungie implemented is sound, but the execution is poor. I think with the system that i propose for shields and health etc, the result should be calculated based on the combination of remaining health and shield points. Whoever has the lowest will lose (assuming both people beat down at the same time). The difference should then be taken off the other player (if they have 2 points of health only left, then lucky them. Obviously they have to have a time window to determine if too people beat down at the same time, but there was lag. Whilst i agree they should have this, i believe it is a bit too lenient. No worries baykem. I think although the health wasn't shown, i should clarify that it was present in halo 2 and 3, and did require recharging, although it was very quick once your shield had recharged. Of course in reach it only recharges to the nearest third, so you need health packs etc. I like the idea of seeing your health, but it should definately recharge all the way, although maybe at a slower rate than halo 3. this mans if it was like the above and you only have 2 points of health left, the recharge rate will mean you do maybe have to be cautious in your next fight, if it hasnt recharged fully. Of course you can see this process in action, so having it being shown allows you to calculate appropriately.

Thanks for the comments shameful ninja. I am not saying the credit and armoury idea is bad, in fact along with commendations it is a good system, giving points for playing games, getting kills and reaching achievements. I hope these make a return, with a wider variety of armour (i disliked how the later armour just made your spartan look more chunky with stupid attatchments, rather than just cooler armour designs) and also allow for elites to be fully customised in the same way (and brutes or other playable characters. see my thread on this issue http://www.343industries.org/forum/index.php?/topic/313-brutes-and-playable-characters-in-halo-4/) I'd also like to see even more commendations, and maybe some which are harder to get (so there is something that you have to aim to get good at to achieve, rather than just having to play so long) I think the problem was is that apart from arena, this system dictated your rank. How long you played, or how good you were at collecting credits (farming etc) does not show this. Even in the case of social, the idea of a playlist rank based off exp (like halo 3) is appealing. Obviously my system changes the exp slightly. then the ranked system i proposed comes in. These playlists will have a rank based on your skill (a number), and this will contribute to your overall rank, which is based on an average of the points in each playlist, combined with your total exp. I think the rank system should also have a rank for that playlist, but maybe this is based on a combination of the rank in that playlist and your exp in that playlist. Maybe both could when matchmaking, your playlist rank (both symbol and number for ranked) in silver, and your total rank in gold. Obviously if people think this sort of idea needs tweaking, or how it could be better shown in game (things like win loss % and k/d ratios for ranked and social and overall are things i would love to see in your service record) please let me know.

Irelevant of which system is implemented, i think like many other things in the new halo it should be customizeable. Individual grenade types being customizeable, and alot more access to the base systems like shield and health.

I think the most interesting thing here is nobody thinks it should stay at 8v8. I think that the evolution in technology should mean that a higher player count is achieveable, even if it is just 12v12

Just interested to know what people's favourite maps are, and why they think that is. Would be good to have a place where a 343i member could come along and see what players want from a map. Not sure what bungie were thinking, the reach maps were pretty poor imo (best ones were the remakes mainly). My favourite map if i had to pick one would probably be midship. It's a small symmetrical map which is great for both slayer (team and rumble pit) and objective gametypes. It's size makes for fast intense gameplay, which i think is lacking on some maps. Generally i like small/medium sized maps which are symmetrical, for similar reasons to the above. Other maps such as lockout, ghost town, epitaph guardian etc are also great. My most disliked maps are the larger sort of maps. Usually even in big team (see my thread on player capacity http://www.343industries.org/forum/index.php?/topic/317-halo-4-more-player-capactiy-please/) these maps mean a death sets you a good minute away from reentering the battle. Things like sandtrap, boneyard etc.

Is there anyone who actually disliked the assasinations from reach (the animated kills). I personally didnt find them amazing, but definately didnt mind them being in the game. Not sure they quite lived up to the reputation of being a replacement to teabagging though!

Thanks for the positive comments. Again these are just ideas i thought up. Whether they could be implemented, or if they needed tweaking etc is up to the people who make the game. I just try to look at problems and think of how ways to solve them. Definately agree the bullets being reduced after a range makes sense. But whereas things like weapon spread on the ar already combat that problem, there is nothing to combat the br etc close up, which was the real reason i thought this up (to try and combat that sort of situation). What i personally like about my situation is aswell as nerfing weapons at inappropriate ranges (trying to anyway), it allows a skill gap to be produced, as those who can make their weapon work better than other out of range, against other weapons in range will be able to prove their skills. Twinreaper, i completely agree about change and how you handle it. See my thread on combat names, which definately reflects that (and thats not even gameplay!). http://www.343industries.org/forum/index.php?/topic/325-sort-out-the-combat-names/ Whilst i too hate change (disliked reach on many fronts), i think evolution is the key. I mean Reach did have many new good ideas though (although i felt many were implemented badly, and they were at the sacrifice of previous things, something i didnt agree on). Taking all the previous features weapons maps etc from previous games, and using them as groundwork is great. But a new graphical engine, refining those systems and bringing in interesting new concepts is definately something that will keep the game fresh. I think most of my forum posts (things such as new playable characters, gametypes, exp and ranking system and the reintroduction and evolution of dual wielding) try to summarise this. Looking at what is done, and errors made, and trying to improve the situation, whilst making it new and interesting. Obviously people may disagree with some of my ideas, but many are extra features i think would add things for those who want it, and change the gameplay in positive ways, making halo more tactical and competitive than ever before (something reach definately lacked).

Thanks for the compliment twinreaper. Again I was under the confusion that the bloom system. although shown in reach, was also different from previous games. I think the ideas i implemented were useful as they punish those who spam constantly, but i like the idea of a tactical spam (ala double shot in halo 2). I agree compared to reach i much preferred how halo 3 weapons functioned. But again this was the idea i thought up based on the reach system (again whether the bloom is shown or not is up to the developers.

When you say not for every weapon drexel. Do you mean any 2 weapons? or are there some dual wield weapons you shouldnt think should be dual wielded? I could see your point there starshot, but surely in halo 3 this was the case with smg and mauler?

Thanks for the comments starshot

Thanks for the clarification

Nice discussion about bloom therem thanks for clearing it up. If bloom is in fact only the visual representation then reaper, do you think that my system (even without the visual representation) would be a good way of changing how bullet spread works (maybe recoil could apply the same (fast 2 shots, not problem, more and kickback continues to increase)?

Thanks for the comments. Whilst i agree i much preferred halo 3 to halo reach, in some ways i preferred halo 2 to halo 3. I think what 343i needs to do to make this game great, is head back to halo 2/3 and take the ideas from halo reach/3 and incorporate those into the package, adding new features like this (which i think would just be a good addition, rather than a huge change in gameplay (especially if they are all equal). I liked the new weapons in reach for example, but would never have got rid of the ones from halo 3, as they were awesome. I liked the new gametypes, but again one's from halo 3 were taken away. As for other playable characters (apart from spartans elites brutes) i'm all up for that for specific playlists and gametypes, but agree that the general matchmaking shouldn't have these in.

thanks gray chill for your input. definately agree in now way is this stealing ideas from other games. Dual wielding was in halo 2 first, and the jackal shield being used by spartans is apparantly referenced throughout the books. Definately don't like the idea of using a knife in halo 3 for normal single wield melee (although it was ok for assasinations (but would lke other non knife assasinations, and weapon specific ones)). In most cases single wield weapons are still used as a melee weapon. Agree that dual wielding should have some sort of punishment in terms of recoil/bloom (if it returns). Again to make the weapons more appealing to be used in single wield, and to satisfy the wants for balanced weapons from people who don't like dual wielding, i have propsed this system of 'special abilities' a weapon has when single wield, but not when dual wielded. Definately wouldnt want being able to throw grenades in dual wield, as that is one of the trade off's. However halo 3 allowed you to use equipment, and i think that was ok.

Thanks for the comments. Is there any reason why you don't think they would work in multiplayer then (just assuming brutes here). What sort of tweaking do you refer to? I think there size is similar, so assuming all stats were the same it woiuld just be the brutes hud that would need to be set up, which is just another graphical thing, and then the animations for them, which should they be in halo 4 would be there anyway. In terms of all the races being slightly different in terms of stats (not physical size though), then yes it would need to be a bit of a balancing act. I could imagine brutes being better at melee, elites being slightly quicker, but spartans being able to jump higher, or things to that effect. Obviously unsure of what would make it balanced unbalanced, or what other things could change (suggestions welcome)

When you say track exactly how you got kills, do you mean in terms of whether it was a pummeled, beatdown or assasination? because again i think the extra medal was good, just there names were wrong imo. Also like he idea i previously posted about even more medals for things like the sword or with a weapon with a bayonet, would also give a good indication of how you got your kills. Maybe others for killing an enemy with a grenade (directly rather than explosion), or for using an explosive weapon like rockets etc. Or maybe when it says killed with put it there, otherwise it might get a bit confusing with a different name for each type of kill. Would be useful though, someone with a keen eye could realise that the person who died was killed by someone with an explosive weapon or sword. it can be frustrating when people in party chat/who dont talk dont give you information like this, can be valuable in competitve matches.

matt master i don't think everyone is trashing reach. I personally felt the game had good points. I think it's more of a consensus that halo 2 and 3 were much better in terms of multiplayer (definately the case imo). However i can see where some of the good ideas in reach were. The custom options were great I have no problem with the new weapons (except that there was a removal of all the old weapons (and dual wielding)) reticule bloom was a cool idea, but i think it should be tweaked. aa's were a reasonable idea, but there execution was bad. I much preffered equipment in halo 3. the new gamemodes were great (but again there was a removal of previous gametypes which was bad) the armoury was cool (but credits werent) I just felt that as a game for every good point there is a clear negative point. Map style was also a major problem, and the ranking/xp system also failed. The game didnt play like a halo game, it was more tailored to the casual audience, offering features like loadouts, which most players didn't want/don't like (again i think good idea for some circumstances, but implemented badly) spectral jester, i can agree that bloom was implemented to make people not spam etc, and in the general the people who time there shots will win. What do you think of my idea in comparison to reach's then? enry117 i can see why you'd say it slowed down gameplay. However i disagree bloom made the game harder. In fact i think the br battles in halo 3 were alot more competitve than dmr battles in reach, i found even though i was a pretty good players, the really good ones could always out br me. Also always like the idea of custom option to turn it on/off. Maybe you could incorporate mine into that, so you determine what it bloom's too, how it blooms. Would also love customisation on each weapon, changing damage, bullet speed (if no hitscan), shots per clip, total capacity etc and would be cool if this could apply to each weapon aswell. Interesting to see some people have voted in favour in my idea. Is there anything that people like about my idea, in comparison to reach the reach version, or having no bloom like halo 3?