RedStarRocket91

It's not that I want more AR starts, it's just frustrating that I'm frequently only allowed to choose between DMRs and objectives. The fact that I don't believe the DMR to be particularly skilful is irrelevant, as I know a lot of players think differently and they should still regularly be given the chance to play with it from spawn, if that's what they want. I just feel that it's unfair that players who don't like the DMR often get forced into using it. The system I've suggested ensures that there's always at least one DMR start (even if it's just Pro) for those who like it, and one AR/Elite start for those who don't. Everybody has a chance to vote for a game mode that they will enjoy, so it's a fairer system.

Something that's really been bugging me lately is just how frequently Slayer DMRs is appearing, especially in Doubles. For those who aren't familiar, in Doubles players are always offered a choice of two Slayer variants and an objective. No problems there: most people prefer to play Slayer, and it's never the case that we're stuck with a game variant and are choosing only the level to play on. Of late, it seems like the frequencies have been tweaked though: in my last ten games in Doubles, on FOUR occasions we were only given DMR variants for Slayer, despite voting for a second set of maps on three of those matches. Having only a choice of DMRs or objectives can be frustrating, particularly if you like the AR or don't have a great connection. It seems strange to me that even though the DMR already has two playlists to call its own (Arena and MLG), it appears so frequently in Team Slayer and Doubles. I know a lot of players like to show off how 'Pro' they are, and claim that winning DMR duels is the best way to show it, and DMRs can be fun to play: however, why don't these players just use Arena/MLG, and get a guaranteed DMR start? That way they'd be matched against people closer to their own skill level, making their own victories more satisfying and opening up more Slayer variants for the rest of us. It's a real rarity to see Elite Slayer up for vote anymore, even though most of the times I've seen it come up it's been chosen. In short, I suppose what I'm suggesting is a reduction in DMR start probability, or a new system whereby players are given a choice of AR start, DMR start, and Pro/Elite start in Team Slayer, and ensuring at least one AR start in Doubles with the other being taken up by a Pro/DMR/Elite gametype. Your thoughts?

Yep, that's exactly what I mean. The front half of Forward Unto Dawn crashed onto Earth, so what if the back part got sent to exactly the same spot in Earth's orbital pattern, just 100,000 years previously? There's no reason that the Earth would be at the exact same spot in its orbit, which could explain why the back half of the Dawn is seen floating in space.

With the release of the new book series, we know at some point in the past there was a Human-Forerunner War. We also know that it's possible to have minor spacetime anomalies in Slipspace (things getting sent backwards in time, etc). What if the Arbiter and Chief both got sent to the exact same place, just at different times?

I want to be able to dual-wield Rockets with the Shotgun.

Sword base can be an awesome map... provided you spawn on Red Team. You know, the team that has immediate uncontestable access to the 'Nade Launcher, the Shotgun, and the high ground, as well as vantage points over the rest of the level. From the word go, this is not a balanced map. Countdown is more balanced, but it still plays terribly: the main room, constituting 50% of the playable area, is far too open, while the rest of the level is totally at the mercy of the shotgun and energy sword. There's no real balance between close quarters and open areas. Why can't it be? Graphics do not determine the quality of a game, otherwise Crysis 2 would be a game infinitely better than Halo or CoD, and it simply isn't. Just because we have new Forge toys to play with doesn't automatically make a map better either, as the map hasn't been rebuilt to properly support Reach's new engine: the spawning is some of the worst I have ever seen in a videogame, even with the updates, and the lack of a Banshee really has a negative impact, as it provided a nice counterbalance to the sniper rifles and rockets. The point I made was that Bungie were lazy with the multiplayer. We either get unbalanced or badly designed levels ripped straight from Campaign, or poorly-made Forge remakes. There are only two initial maps Bungie put in that were made from scratch for multiplayer (The Cage and Paradiso), and one was so broken that they had to alter the level geometry in order to make it slightly less unplayable while the other hardly ever appears anymore and features horrendous team imbalance (the team attacking toward the Coliseum is at a horrible disadvantage due to the cliff overlooking their spawn zone being completely inaccessible from their side). When you paid for the game, you doubtless paid expecting a complete multiplayer package, when in fact what you actually have are two terrible levels. That's why I resent buying map packs, as I'm effectively purchasing something that, by rights, should have been included in the purchase price.

More to the point, Elite Slayer is just more fun than regular slayer. It's nice to actually get to use the Plasma Rifle once in a while, instead of that... thing... they replaced it with.

Let me know if it works out, I'd like to see this map when it's done.

I think he means to use in Custom Games. OT: When I was a kid, just about every game with multiplayer mode had some form of AI bots in it: think of TimeSplitters, Quake III, or Star Wars Battlefront. With the later instalments of TimeSplitters, there was also a 'Mapmaker' function analogous to Forge, and it was entirely possible to set up matches with bots on custom content maps, so it's not as though you'd only be able to play against bots on 'official' maps. BOps and Gears have also shown us that it's entirely possible to have proper multiplayer-style games with bots on current-gen games, rather than just Firefight/Horde style combat, and the 'Ghosts' seen on Halo 3 (for example, the Ghost of Blackout) are clearly indicative that coding for multiplayer bots may well exist in Halo's coding already, albeit in a damaged/unfinished state. In short, I don't think we're likely to be seeing bots in Reach or prior games any time soon, as the way the game is built probably wouldn't allow for it to be installed. That said, I see no reason why it couldn't, or indeed shouldn't, be included in future titles.

Have you tried setting it so there have to be a minimum number available at all times? That should force debris to spawn out to make room for a new one.

The initial maps shipped with the game are mind-bogglingly awful: maps like Sword Base and Countdown are literally ripped from campaign and thus either boring or hideously unbalanced, while maps like Uncaged or Pinnacle are either poor-quality remakes or just outright awful. In short, Bungie DID NOT put in nearly enough effort with the initial multiplayer experience, to the point where it's arguable that the map packs provide the only fun multiplayer experience. Some players just don't feel like paying again for the multiplayer that they believe they'd already paid for when the game was released. I personally would love to see more map pack levels in Matchmaking, but I refuse to pay 800msp for something that really should have been shipped with the game in the first place. At the very least, every time they release a new map pack, they should make the previous one free.

"You Just Got Sarge'd" Earn a 'Close Call' medal with the Shotgun. (Daily, 1,500cR) "Fair Play" Play at least 25 games this week and do not earn any "Rejection" medals. (Weekly, 25,000cR)

Why not have Spartans keeping their Campaign colours, and have Elite colours tied to their character models? So Elite Minors are cobalt, Officers are orange, and Ultras are white? As already stated, the differences between models are sufficient that players won't go around team-killing (accidentally, at any rate), and altering the colours to Campaign style would allow customisation, but retain the feel of an all-out battle.

Something similar has happened to me. I use a CQB helmet with Tier 1 attachments, and while everything was fine right up until the blackout, when the screen returned for Halsey's epilogue my helmet had Carter's earpiece attachment instead, which isn't even supposed to be available for the CQB helmet. As to what caused it, I'm afraid I can't help.

But surely that's just situational factors rather than the actual gameplay mechanic?

343 suggested that they might include Kinect features in an interview at some point, however they haven't given out any details of what or how yet.

I'm just wondering, does it bother anyone else that when you pick up a health pack, in addition to your health instantly being fully restored your shields start coming back up too? I just noticed it today in a game of DMRs, I had blue health and was thus unable to pick up a health kit, and was shot through the head after four seconds without shields, despite being sat right beneath a health kit. Later on, I was killed again when someone I'd been shooting was able to get around a corner 2 or so seconds ahead of me and use a health kit, thus meaning he had more shields and so was able to finish me off when I got around said corner and resumed firing. So my question is, why have Bungie implemented a system that seemingly actively rewards health damage over covering once shields are down in the middle of a fight? Does everyone feel that this is an acceptable gameplay mechanic? Should players with damaged health be forced to wait until their shields would normally start coming back up (i.e. 5 seconds after last point of damage received) before they do so, or should players on blue health also be able to pick up health kits and immediately start recharging their shields? Opinions, anyone?

To be honest, I agree with you. The Halo formula has always been based around the 'guns, grenades, and melees' idea, supported by balanced weaponry sets and vehicles. AAs add a whole new element, and while it's good to refine gameplay or add new aspects, they actually feel more like they were added in order to try and fix the issues created by the slowing down of gameplay and the weaker players, rather than as an idea on their own merits.

I think we're going to have to disagree there, mate. In previous Halos, kill speeds were high enough and weapons effective enough in their intended role that it was entirely possible for one person to make a real difference, provided they knew how to use their weapons correctly. Reach is the exact opposite, weak and inaccurate weapons have made it really difficult for even veteran players to take on groups of multiple enemies and win.

I fail to understand why the abilities to sprint or roll need to be add-ons at all. Stick them both in as one function and remove AAs: just set it so you hold down LB to sprint, and tap it to roll. Or alternatively, just balance the damn things properly and have them as a sort of bonus, as opposed as necessary in certain situations (I'm looking at YOU, grenades. It shouldn't be the case that players are utterly incapable of clearing the blast radius/surviving a frag with just their basic health and movement stats, rather than needing a Jetpack or AL).

Agreed, the framerate in Reach is really bad compared to previous titles as it is, it'd outright collapse with 50+ infection forms on screen at once!

First off, I'd like to say I agree with SaintCT: well-developed ideas that could really turn the balance of AR/DMR battles at close range, an issue that's really bugged me since release. All I can think to add is that bloom should still reset at the same rate proportionately, as otherwise the DMR could become even more effective at long range than it already is: the decrease in firing rate could also perhaps be lowered a little further, maybe 0.15/0.2 or so: this would increase kill times to the point where the DMR becomes effectively only at medium/medium-long ranges, rather than essentially replacing the AR as Halo's general purpose weapon, as it essentially has now. Anyway, I'd like to suggest a few alterations to Armor Lock that could be made realistically during the TU, as they don't involve any new coding, just changing existing values. Although I personally dislike it, I do believe that as a concept, AL is a good one: it provides an effective defence against vehicles and power weapons and can tip the scales in what would otherwise be one-sided battles. However, I also believe it's accurate to state that most players feel it is overpowered, and has been poorly implemented, expanding well beyond its original specifications and becoming a device that provides far too much of a boost in close quarters and severely slows the game down. In short, rather than outright removing it from the game, I'd like to see it updated so that it returns to its intended role, and to that effect I've come up with a few ideas. First off, let's address the issue of slowing the game down, perhaps the biggest complaint about AL after 'it exists'. AL is supposed to provide an emergency escape route, a chance to survive otherwise catastrophic damage, in order to compensate for Reach's reduced movement speed and jump height: in this manner, it's similar to Sprint and Jetpack. However, in order to survive a grenade detonation/splatter attempt, both of which deal damage over the course of a single instant, the user does not need five seconds of invincibility, rather just enough time to survive that instant of damage. A reduction in the amount of time a user can spend in Armor Lock increases the pace of the game and prevents the user from simply wasting time forestalling the inevitable: similarly, a recharge system akin to Drop Shield, where the ability can only be deployed when it's fully charged, prevents spamming, increasing the pace of the game and preventing power weapons becoming wholly ineffective. I would therefore suggest a reduction in active time from 5s to 1.5s, and a recharge time of 10s (from fully empty to fully charged). While I feel that invincibility is a key part of AL (as opposed to, say, simply reducing damage), another oft-complained-about factor is its EMP and stunning effect/shield damage to anyone who attempts a melee while the ability is active. A key update is the outright removal of damage to meleeing players: that's the whole point of the EMP. However, while I firmly believe the EMP should remain in place, its effects should be extended to the user: this promotes the idea of an 'emergency' ability, in which shield loss is preferable to an otherwise almost certain death, and which has the dual gameplay bonus of either providing an easy kill for alert members of the enemy team at the expense of power ammunition or vehicles, or forcing the user to seek cover. This also has the added benefit of giving other players a chance to defeat users in close-range engagements, whereas in its current state even swords, shotguns, and hammers - three weapons that already require extreme personal risk to effectively deploy - are regularly overpowered by something that any player can possess from the start of the game, a situation that makes little sense in writing and even less when you're waiting to respawn, opponent running off with your weapons despite your executing an otherwise flawless strike. Anyway, that's my thoughts: feel free to criticise or expand at leisure. tl;dr Reduce time a user can spend in AL, reduce frequency with which it can be deployed, and extend EMP to the user.