gollum385

After saying that, many people now voiting in favour of the halo 3 way. That was what i was expecting when i set the poll up, but still suprised at the number of reticule bloom fans.

Thanks for the voting. Just to let people know they can pick up to 6 options out of the 10. This is alot, but i'd like to get people to select the things they like from each section (the map styles they like, the previous game maps they like and what they'd like to see in reach). So i also made revoting on so if anyone didn't realise this they can change it. Nice to see that most people liked the halo 3 maps. I loved all of these maps with the exception of one or 2. They played well, were symmetrical mainly, so good for teamplay, and the fact there was alot of them at then end was also great as it meant we had a wide variety. I personally also loved most of the halo 2 maps. Although some of those greats were remade in halo 3 (didnt quite feel the same imo tho).

Yea definately I agree the reach system was awful. The credit/armory idea isn't bad, but that shouldn't be how you determine your rank. I like the exp system from halo 3. It meant social games also had a meaning, and were still competitve, as there is still something to fight for. I also agree that halo 3 there were too many 50's. Halo 2, you'd be lucky to get to the 30's, it was that competitive. My system is kind of a combination of both, with an evolved exp system to also show the more skilled/better players in a game. My rank system from 0-9999 would use calcultions which could in a way be seen to the people playing how well people have done. To get to the top you have to do consistently well, against any opponent, proving you should be there. And if you do get to the 9999 limit (something which i think should be very hard, limited to the best of the best) there is still this method that means you have to continue to play at that level, or risk going down after so long (stops this stupid 50 business we got in halo 3). Also your overall rank being an average of all the ranked playlists would encourage everyone to play every playlist if they want the best rating, something that only the best players are good at doing.

Yea i think 12v12, or possibly 16v16 is what people would want to see generally. Obviously this wouldnt be for every gametype, but would be good for larger maps and things like invasion, which currently there just aren't enough people to make it an epic battle.

I was going to right a big thread on how i'd love halo 4 to have all of maps from previous halo games, and allow them all to be forged on (and possibly make the maps out of forge objects too), but i mainly wanted to discuss the map styles of the previous games. I personally found the maps in halo reach terrible in comparison to the other. In fact the best ones where the remakes, and community made maps. They all were based upon maps which in no way were symmetrical (with the exception of a couple), and lead to unbalanced spawns etc. They had no character and didn't play that well. The addition of armour abilities (removing things like equipment and camo/ovy) removed the impact of map control too, something i hated. I found that rather than halo 2/3 where there were only a few maps i disliked, in halo reach there were only a few i liked. Just wondering what people's opinions are on this issue, and what they'd like to see in halo 4. There are multiple options available, so just tick the boxes that you think best highlight your views.

Interested in how you would combat this problem twinreaper, or if you would at all, and what you think of my other suggestion.

interesting to see many people want to keep it as it was in reach. I only thought this idea up because i thought the concept was ok for bloom, but was a bit flawed, but i generally thought people hated it. I much preffered the halo 3 version over reach.

Could you explain what you mean by only on 5x forge world maps? Do you mean maps 5x the size of forge world? Because i'm sure that would be far too big for a single map. I'm pretty sure haemorrhage could easily support 24 maybe even 32 players, so just a map twice/ three times that size would probably be able to support 64 players, and that definately isn't a third of the current forge world. I personally think 24/32 would be the best size as 48 or 64 would probably be too much for the system.

I'm interested in your idea of armour, not heard of that before. Surely if the shields have popped, the covenant weapons would penetrate the armour though (i mean it's plasma), and i'm sure bullets are solid enough to pierce the armour once the shields have gone down? So how would it work? would shields need to pop and then it be 1 shot, or would armour need to break too? Would maybe if armour breaks it falls off, and unlike shields and health where they return armour wont, meaning that area is vulnerable next time you lose shields (ie it goes straight to health)? Personally i think the shields health system is solid, its just it's implementation that is the key.

It needs simple features which would save loads of time. tools/commands: Undo and redo ability to select multiple objects (merge into one object) Copy and paste (for multiple objects) Rotate selected objects together. ability to mirror objects (something really annoying about reach, i want stairs that go up the other way!) ability to change terrain type ability to change terrain ability to change an object in same way (make parts of it higher/lower, could turn a wall into a unique structure) ability to change weather object settings: ability to resize objects? not just forunner but covenant forge equipment (maybe other kinds too, could be done by just having skins for each object (ie forunner, covenant, human, flood etc)) types of objects: doors/controls/lifts (moveable objects) more room types, (curvy rooms (covenant like), curcular rooms) Objects to use as central structures (ornamental objects) Trees/scenery objects if you have curved structures, make walls which are curved aswell! finally make sure every map is forgeable. Was frustrated in reach when i couldnt forge on the basic maps to change them. also forge for firefight maps.

Twinreaper, I am definately not a fan of reticule bloom. would you care to clarify, that it is just a graphical representation of weapon spread then? Because although i know it is shown graphically, i thought it was implemented instead of bullet spread as a method of stopping spamming, and reducing the effectiveness of the dmr etc, by making the spread of bullets larger from spamming. therefore my reasons for just changing how it increases (increase in rate rather than fixed amounts), and to what size it reached for persistantly fast shots. Or arey you saying that is exactly the same as weapon spread in halo 3, but just shown graphically? Just am also wondering your opinion on hitscan then, and whether you think halo 4 should or shouldnt have it (seeing as you seem to know what you are talking about).

Thanks for the comments. I definately like the idea of a needle shrapnel grenade. I think the spike grenade had a unique characteristic, not just sticking to people, but also walls ceiling floors. I think with a bit of tweaking it could be made better to match the plasma, as you'd definately choose the plasma over it based on halo 3. I agree they are overpowered in reach far 2 much. Halo 3 grenade power was perfect in my view. I also like in halo 3 that once shields pop you still take some of the damage, i can see where they were coming from with reach but it was a bit annoying at times. Maybe with my suggestion of half damage soaked up by shields popping would help make it work best, as it stops people beating down too early, like in halo 3, but does give a small window of opportunity unlike reach, where the shields have to have popped. BudbudHOOD, do you think swat would have been better with recharging health though? I personally like the idea of seeing your health, as even in halo 3 it existed, and agree after a battle it shouldnt recharge as quick as halo 3, but should recharge eventually. Maybe at least the custom options to do so would be good.

Rafter, thanks for your comments.I can see where you come from, in that bullets damages do not change close up, (in fact the would be more) or even further away (as long as the bullet has enough velocity). But obviously my idea is to make a games console balanced, so that the weapons up close would do less damage, as a balancing idea. thanks twinreaper for your really insightful criticism. You broke it down great for me to see. I can completely agree that the calculation time could be an issue, and i know the xbox 360 is being maxed out (when will they release a '720' with better graphics, processors, and a blu ray drive!?) so i could see why maybe this system wouldn't be optimal for performance. Thankyou for at least viewing my idea from a different perspective. Based on your comment on damage, do you just think the br was too powerful then, from a terms of bullet damage, even in it's optimal range? It would be great for several other features like you documented, gravity angle trajectories etc being able to be put in place in halo, to make the skill of shooting from further away harder (again no hitscan in this case). However i agree it could strain the console/network. I also played around in my head the idea that the bullet can fire at a certain angle from any position from the head of a gun. The point at which it is in the centre of the reticule is in the optimal range (pretty much). This would again be affected by bloom in that the angles and places in which the bullet could fire from could be even less accurate (crossover point changes ie solving bloom problem). Therefore too close up and the bullet will more thank like not be at the centre of the reticule (the target) and afterwards the same, meaning outside the optimal range the chances of hitting are less. However the idea of bullet firing at random angles struck me as a bit flawed. Would like to think what you think about this idea, and whether that would be a good implementation or solution? Obviously again if you think this would would also be hard to achieve let me know

l mj l thanks for posting. and fair enough if you disagree, just wanted to clarify that my idea was put across correctly. The only thing that i can also post to try and get you on my side, is that the method of being skilled at spamming shots ie making it so they hit often does sound very skilled, and something i had not heard of/tried in halo reach before reading that in these forums. However, with my method, aswell as allowing controlled spamming, there is no reason this method couldnt also be manipulated for skilled players to control their spamming to hit players. Where the difference is is that with an increasing rate of increase in the reticule, it would become increasingly harder to do, meaning only the best players could do it at the latter stages, again leading to a tiered skill gap (something i approve of in a game). Rafter yea i have made alot of comments, but most of these are in my own threads, which I think i havent made more than 10 for just something that i thought about for a long time even before reach and my hopes for that, and then when it came out i was really disappointed and again focused on how to take the good ideas and rework them. Doesn't take too long really, most of them are just replies to the posts made. Thanks for all your comments btw! As for your views on bloom. I have heard many people say bloom was incorporated in other games, for example in the bullet spread of the br, or just the fact it was hidden. Whilst i agree this was true, i think how the system works, as well as it's visualisation of it has changed. The system i am proposing is an expansion of that, making it so spamming is ok in small controlled bursts, but the rate at which the reticule increases (and the total size it increases to) gets larger. AS for calling it recoil, bloom is the idea that the spread of bullets increases with persistent shots. Recoil is the kickback from the gun, and so the moving of the gun (usually upwards). This is present in other games with the smg and i think the pistol in reach does this. I think recoil should also be present btw.

Would people like to comment on which health/shield system they preferred, and whether they like my idea of slowly recharging health, and damage absorbing shields (but not fully absoring like halo reach)

For those who says the system might need tweaks, do people know what tweaks these may be. It is interesting to see that people haven't commented on the fifa style points system to determine rank. Is that because people know it works well, or think it just makes sense?

Thanks for your comments. I agree that other games make it work. Obviously gears has bots in games to replace people leaving but i dont think halo would be able to have that, as the bots play so different from the players. as for xp and ranked and social check out my forum post on the rank and xp system i think should be implemented in halo 4 viewtopic.php?f=16&t=626. In this i state that the xp system would be similar to halo 3, in that your xp helps determine your rank. However unlike halo 3, it isn't just 1 point for a win, and 0 for a loss, it is up to 10 xp. Those 10 xp are calculated based on things such as winning the game, being the mvp for your team and overall, having most kills/least deaths/best kd etc. I also allocated an xp for completing a whole game. Although i didn't mention it there i would also think an xp for completing half a game would be involved, at least for social games if both systems were present, so those who join before the halfway mark (the time at which you cant join after i think should be the case) would also get an xp for finishing the game. Therefore in this example playing games will get you exp irrelevant of whether you win or lose, but winning and doing well counts for alot more, whilst people get exp just for not leaving and playing the whole game. Would this idea match you wants for xp being less in social (if you joined). Obviously the breakdown in ranked and objective would be similar (although with slight differences). But the exp is in reference to all your games, and your rank determines how good you are within the ranked playlists. Interested what you think this idea is like, and if you think the 2 would work well together (i have several threads with ideas that in my mind all link together, but obviously can only really get one idea in per thread).

Yea definately firefight versus had potential, but like many things in reach wasn't executed greatly. I also think it needs the benefit of an increased playercount. 2v2 wasn't enough. Would be cool if this gametype could also be introduced. Both teams have ai attacking, so kind of like an all out war between the two teams, using firefight waves/round systems. Thanks for the information, i cannot wait for gears 3, and whilst i knew they were doing a new beast mode, a feature which i was also considering making a thread on and would welcome into reach, i was unaware horde was being updated in this way. I'm not one of these people that wants halo to implement all cod features, but i'm all for a game taking the best bits from other games, and as the halo universe is so expansive, and the custom and forge options available are so great (and will hopefully get even better), i would hope that gametypes like those could also be in halo 4. Considering gears is also a microsoft game it would make sense for halo to be able to copy it !

Out of interest, does anyone think there could be a new type of melee kill medal/name? for example killing from above (ambushed?), or based on the weapon you used. for example new medal and title sliced for energy sword, or impaled for using a brute weapon with their bayonets on the end. or maybe even punched, when using your fists (could be used for some weapons ie in my thread on dual wielding viewtopic.php?f=16&t=622 i mention a jackal shield. If you just had the shield then you could use your fists to punch, or if you have the option to have no weapons). I definately hope halo 4 has a lot more medals, as they allow for a more specific analysis of how a person gets their kills, what they do most, and gives an indication of how good they are.

Just another idea, would people like the idea of being able to play as heretic elites, or flood in matchmaking too? Obviously these would be similar in characteristics too brutes, elites and spartans, but again would lead to different looks, and possibly customiseable options, or balanced tweaks between them. Would again be cool for gametypes, especially if you could specify what are allowed in a game or on a team (ie covenant vs heretics, all vs the spartans, flood vs brutes etc)

Why wouldnt you like the idea of dual swords? Obviously in normal matchmaking it would be hard to acquire 2, and the introduction of the energy stave would replace the sword. What do you think of jackal shield or other dual wield weapons then? Does the idea of making it have special abilities when single wielded (like pistol scope or plasma burn, needler lock on etc) interest you to make them more useable as a single wield weapon, or did you think halo 3 got the balance right, or this would make them too versatile etc?

Thanks spectral Jester. I do like the idea of big battles, with vehicles, or objective gametpyes could be fun too. There was a gametype called eliminatio in halo 3, which i found quite fun, although it wasn't really in the system for too long. Maybe with much larger teams it could be fun. If there was say 24/people, i would love gametpyes to be broken down into categories such as the ones belows singles (lone wolves, maybe 2 types for smaller and larger games (ie 8-10 and 16-20 people capacity) doubles (2v2) and multi team version (4/5 teams and 8-10 teams) triples (3v3) and multi team version (4 and 8 teams) teams (5v5) and multi team version (4) squad battle (8v8) and 3 way version big team (12v12) obviously would be great for other gametypes too like invasion, and interesting for objective games. also if there were 32 players the sizes might be different, and maybe an edition of a warzone for even larger groups, like you suggested.

no dont worry, i didnt get that impression. I think there are many weapons apart from dmr where reticule bloom is a good idea. Many of the automatic weapons and the sniper are all good places for it, as it does stop spamming too quickly. Again in the point of the sniper though, my idea would allow for 2 quick shots without much punishment in terms of bloom. However the third would suffer (unless you wait for bloom to retract) in comparison. This allows for a tactical 2 quick shots if a guy is trying to run behind a wall, but you are making a quick decision which could affect your next few actions based on whether you time your next shot, or risk the spam (which as said before would be less damaging if done intelligently). Again i agree with most people who dislike it, but with many aspects in halo reach (including aa's) whilst the idea is good, the execution was not as good as it should have been imo. Therefore i am suggesting a tweak to bloom to solve those issues, making it good at the job it was meant to do. Have just created another thread on the issue of how weapons work, in terms of firing out of range (think the pistol close up, or the br in previous games) viewtopic.php?f=16&t=772 Would be interested to see if you like this idea with or without bloom being in place.

Something that was clear with the br in previous games was that it was a weapon for all ranges, a feature which many hated about it and why it was removed in reach in place of the dmr and the addition of reticule bloom. I personally loved the br, it was an awesome weapon, but i agree it's ability to function at short range did spoil the balance of the games. Although this isn't the case for many other weapons, I have thought up a feature which i think would be awesome to have in any shooter imo as a balancing method. It involves the damage a weapon does based on it's range from the target. For example this is kind of already done in halo reach. Rockets and grenades have an explosive radius, the amount of damage you receive is reduced as you near the edge of the explosion. this will work in a similar way, but for weapon bullets. say there is the br. It is a mid-long range weapon. With a window of distance that it should be optimal at. My idea is that the br is maximum power at this optimum range. as you start to move outside of it, whether it be further away than desired, or closer than desired, the power of a bullet when it hits it's target begins to be reduced. slowly at fist, but at a quicker rate the further it gets away. this means just outside of the window it is ok to use although may take say a shot more than in optimal range, but go too far in and you lose it's effectiveness (ie it requires double the amount of hits to kill for example). This could be the case for all weapons. If you put all the ranges of weapons into groups (eg, close combat(beatdown sword), short range(shotgun), short-mid (smg), mid (ar), mid-long (pistol), long (dmr br), very long (snipers)) then it is easy to apply this feature to all suitable weapons. It would mean that there would be crossover points with other weapons where the effectiveness of your weapon becomes less useful, and so that is the point at which the cross over is recommended. Of course you could still continue to use your weapon, especially if you only had a br and ar (no pistol). This may need tweaking, ie, a weapon should cover a couple of ranges, so there can be suitable crossovers between weapons to groups apart, or the weapon can be a certain amount of range between say 0-100m (if sniper was max 100m). Ie br is best from range 50-75 metres, ar is best from 25-40 etc. Therefore a good crossover point for those to would be in the 45m range. Tracking this may mean the removal of hitscan from halo 4 (hitscan was in halo 2 and reach, but not halo 3. It means bullets travel at infinite speeds, so you don't have to aim ahead of your shots etc.) as the bullets would need to be tracked possibly to see how far they have travelled before the hit (don't think there would be many issues on the networking side of things). Hit scan also added an element of skill in caclulating the distance in which to aim ahead of a player far away moving in a certain direction. I must take note that weapons like the sniper probably wouldnt be affected by this system, as scoping close up is hard, and no scopes are cool/show skill (maybe non head shots are reduced outside of optimal range though? whilst no scopes are skilled, the snipe beatdown combo can be a bit easy to execute sometimes). I think this system allows for the effectiveness of these all round weapons to be reduced, but also allows for skill. If you are using an out of range weapon, attacking someone with an in range weapon, it means that the power of your weapon is reduced, meaning you are disadvantaged. Only more skilled players cna come out of a disadvantaged situation on top consistently, and so this allows for skill to be shown in halo 4. Would love to hear people's opinions on this, whether it is a stupid system, bloom is a good enough method of doing a similar thing or whether the br being an all round weapon was a good thing. please check out my other thread on reticule bloom viewtopic.php?f=16&t=689 this proposes to change bloom to affect how the game is played, punishing regular spamming, but allowing for control over when and when not to fire quicker shots. It would be interesting to see whether this idea of weapon damage would benefit my or the other reticule bloom system, or would actually mean we wouldnt need this system, if people think my idea is any good. Please feel free to leave constructive criticism, ideas on how to improve it. In the poll, there are 2 voting options. One of them is meant to be used in one of the last 2 options, saying if this system was implemented it would be better with or without the reticule bloom system (or another system like reticule bloom (see my linked thread for my idea on that)).

Great to see so many people keen on this gametype. Wondering if there are many battfront 2 fans out there!? One of my greatest wished for games is battlefront 3!