-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Halo 3 Multiplayer Official Thread
- Thread starter Stinkles
- Start date
The Lamonster
Member
Oddball with MLG settings.DD-11 said:
My guess is no radar and BR starts.
BladedExpert
Member
DD-11 said:
If its MLG then expect there to be less rules and more BR. Amiright
Super Johnson
Member
Can anyone tell me the secret to winning a Swords match? The gametype shows up way too much for my liking and it is by far my weakest game. I'm only hitting LT to attack, should I be using the B button as well? It just always seems like my opponent can strike faster and further than I can, especially after a sword clash. Any help would be appreciated.
BladedExpert
Member
Super Johnson said:
Im ridiculously mediocre with a sword but if you use your trigger for the first strike (you seem able to lunge further when using the trigger) and start mashing B if you get into sword clash situation (you recover quicker and therefore swing again quicker using melee button) you shouldn't go too far wrong.
Thats my technique which only seems to fail due to my lack of skill with a sword, but my friend swears by it and always seems to dominate with it in team swords.
Super Johnson said:
I had a lot of trouble with it too but I've gotten a lot better at it by being more tactical.
You mean you're using just the right trigger? You want to wait until your reticule turns red, which means you're in lunge range, if you pull the right trigger you'll lunge and hit them. I almost never use the lunge though, unless I'm coming up behind a guy. If I go one on one with a someone (like we're both charging at each other) I will lose every time, maybe it's my connection, I don't know. So I try and avoid those situations and try and find a way to flank them or use corners to keep yourself safe until you're ready to strike. And then I use the melee attack almost exclusively, it's still a one hit kill and it's much faster. If you ever lock swords just continue facing the guy and keep mashing your melee button. It's still surprising how few people seem to know about this because I win like 95% of my battles where there's a sword clash.
ToyMachine228
Member
BladedExpert said:
That's how I do it as well. Use the trigger for the first, MAYBE the second attack depending, and then mash the B button. In Swords, also use your grenades wisely. Throw grenades at the feet of two people deflecting each other and score that lucky double kill. Sometimes I feel bad about giving my strategies because they'll come back to haunt me and I'll get pwned by people that I've advised:lol
ToyMachine228
Member
Here's the article I just finished on Halo 3's melee system. I posted it in the Official Thread as well.
Halo 3: The Melee Sit-Rep
Written by ToyMachine228
Those of you who play Halo 3 on Xbox Live have heard the moaning. We have all
witnessed it happening to ourselves, our friends, and our enemies. When you read an online
Forum, it comes up in every topic about Halo 3. It's the melee system implemented by
Bungie. It's the single largest cause of frustration on Xbox Live right now, and
I'm here to clarify exactly what's going on every time you press the B button, why it's
happening, and what can be done about it.
The Reason
At some point in the development at Halo 3, Bungie Studios decided that action should
be taken to eliminate lag from playing a part in Halo 3's online multiplayer. Specifically,
Bungie was most concerned about the host of each game having a slight advantage as
his connection is running the fastest with everyone else's game running a tiny bit behind
as their connection is being relayed to the host's. It's how Halo 3's Matchmaking works.
Anyone who played Gears of War on Xbox Live has seen how much of a difference
host advantage can make. In Gears of War almost always, whichever team had the
hosting player on their side, won. Bungie wanted to assure that hosting advantage did
not come into play in deciding the outcome of games in Halo 3, so they took a step
and implemented a new melee system different from that of Halo 2.
To explain exactly how Halo 3's melee system works I will refer to one player as Player X,
and the second as Player Y. In most games, including Halo 2, when two players get close
in the heat of battle, whichever player melees first, wins the battle. May the person with
the faster reaction time win, and whoever times their melee attack first and connects wins,
and lives to fight another day. Hypothetically, the host of the match should have a microsecond
quicker of a connection and should win the melee battle most of the time. We'll get back to that
later.
The System
To combat this "host advantage", Bungie decided to implement a new melee system which
actually decides the outcome of melee battles in a completely different way. I like to call it
a turn-based melee system, but that's just my own way of complaining. In Halo 3, when
Player X and Player Y begin shooting each other and are closing in on one another both
players in most cases know that once they are in range, they will attempt to melee the opposing
player. It's a Halo player's nature. Instead of the "whoever swings first wins" melee system
that seems obvious Bungie decided to give both players a short window...It may be around
half a second. In the real-world, half a second is nothing, but in the Halo universe, a half a second
can mean everything. When Player X and Player Y get into melee range, if they BOTH melee
within this estimated half a second window, the player with more health "wins". It almost sounds
fair, but let's analyze the situation a bit further.
The Problem
I personally have built a lot of my "Halo skills" around my quick reflexes and my ability to melee
quicker than most other players. If you take a look at my stats you will see that I rely on my
melee quite a bit. It is my strength. Often times in Halo 2 I would rush right into the heat of battle
without any precations. I'll make quick work of the first opposing player and head into a head on
battle with a second player before my shields even come back up. Call me dumb but due to my
quick reflexes, in Halo 2 I was able to win this second battle many times due to my quick and
properly timed melee strikes. This has backfired on me, and thousands of other Halo players
out there in Halo 3.
In Halo 3 when this situation happens, all the opposing player that I'm charging after my first
battle has to do is melee me within a half second of my melee to kill me because I have less
health than he does. Is that fair? I am taking on two people and I got the drop on him, but
he has the advantage from the start of the battle because he has more health than I do. Halo
to me has never been a game about choosing my battles and strategizing. It's about quick
reflexes, fast fingers, and heroic efforts. How many times have you pulled off an Overkill
due to a grand strategy? You get Triple Kills, Overkills, and wipe out enemy teams about
to score your flag due to crazy acts of desperation, luck, and taking chances, and Halo 3's
melee system is huring those chances at creating heroic memories because even before you
melee, the outcome is already decided.
To put this into perspective, when Player X melees first, Player Y should be dead...Right?
This is not the case this time around. Player Y who just got melee'd and should by all rights
be dead has that tiny half-second window to melee for himself. Now this is where things get
mathematical. Whichever player has more "health" wins the face off and goes on to fight
their next battle, the other player is left staring at their dead Spartan. The problem is, as I
mentioned above, technically, Player Y should have been dead and not been able to melee
in the first place since Player X melee'd first. But to combat any possible advantage in the
connections of either Player X or Player Y, Bungie implemented this system to force so-called
connection issues out of the picture.
This melee crisis plays into the game with more than straight up melee against melee battles as
well, affecting both the Energy Sword and the Gravity Hammer since their attacks do qualify
as beat downs, and logically thereafter, melee attacks. Say Player X is holding one of Halo 3's
proudest new toys, the Gravity Hammer. Let's say he's hiding somewhere on Guardian. Player
Y comes around the corner, Assault Rifle leveled, and spraying bullets at Player X. Naturally,
Player X stands up, gives a battle cry loud and proud and swings away with his Gravity Hammer
once in range. Player X hears the Gravity Hammer's sound effect, and awaits his glorious results.
Player X instead sees that he has been beat down by Player Y. What happened? Because Player
Y had more health and melee'd at the same time as Player X, he wins the battle. Forget the fact that
Player X isn't using a gun and can't do anything to drop Player Y's health so he does win the melee
battle if he understands the melee system...Forget that the Gravity Hammer was supposed to kill
the opposing player upon swinging it on top of his head, crunching his spinal cord downward.
Instead, the player with the Assault Rifle was given the victory since he got a few desperate shots
off and melee'd at the same time as the opposing player about to crush his skull with a one-hit
one-kill weapon. The same situation applies to the Energy Sword.
Why?
The question that I raise next is one that has yet to be answered. Why was this melee system
implemented to begin with? I played a lot of Halo 2 on Xbox Live...3,672 to be exact. I killed
racked up nearly 40,000 kills in Halo 2. I'm not claiming to be a godsend of a player, but I am
claiming that I played Halo 2 quite a bit and know the in's and out's of the game. In all of my days
of playing Halo 2, not a single-time did I feel like I was being cheated in-combat by connection
issues. The problem with "Standby" aside, not once when I won, or lost a melee battle, or any
other kind of battle in Halo 2 did I step back and say "Host!" There may have very well indeed
been instances where I lost fights because I wasn't host, or won fights because I was host, but
it wasn't an obvious issue.
Halo 3's melee system would effectively eliminate host advantage if it existed but let's think
about it. In a standard Team Slayer game on Xbox Live, let's say there are four melee
battles about to go down at once. In a game with a "host advantage", one of the four battles
is affected. The host may have a slight advantage, but if his opponent is skilled and got the upper
hand in the fight to start, the host's opponent still stands a good chance. In Halo 3 when this
situation occurs, all four melee battles are affected by this new system that has been implemented
and the outcomes are all decided by whichever player has more "health".
The Resolution?
Being the fan friendly developer that Bungie Studios is, Bungie has acknowledged people's pain
and commented on various Forums and through the Bungie Weekly Update that they are hearing
our cries. Bungie gave an official statement in one of their Weekly Update's stating that the
situation "looks worse than it is." By what I can tell, they are referring to the frustrating fact that
even when you lose a melee battle, you still melee, and even HEAR the melee attack connect
yet your opponent melees you, kills you and appears to be unaffected by the melee that you
heard connect that you believe should have killed them. Bungie has stated that they're looking
at the issue and looking for a possible resolution that likely lies somewhere in changing some
animations so when you lose a melee battle, you don't melee and see it connect being left to
think you should have killed your opponent.
Options?
The issue I take in this is that Bungie is effectively hiding the problem. What we're seeing is
actually what's happening, and Bungie is looking for a way to stop us from seeing what's
happening in order to keep their melee system intact because they feel it's justified. Maybe
in development, Halo 3 really was facing major host advantage issues around melee, and
that's why Bungie made this decision. If that's the case, then so be it, and gamers will have
to deal with it. My issue is that it was never a problem in Halo 2, so I personally doubt that
it was an issue in Halo 3 so this new "turn-based melee system" was uncalled for. I personally
would like to see the old melee system return where the quicker player won. I can recall
instances in Halo 2 when you would both melee simultaneously and both players would die,
and as far as I'm concerned, that's fine. I would much rather get my kill, and die doing it then
simply die for nothing like I am in Halo 3 and I think a lot of gamers would stand with me on
that issue.
Giving Credit Where It's Due
In conclusion I would like to acknowledge Bungie for creating the game that Halo 3 is. The
game's campaign is by far the best of the trilogy, and the multiplayer is once again the hottest
thing on Xbox Live. Granted Halo 3 has it's issues, the melee situation being one of them,
but I applaud Bungie in their constant dedication not only to Halo as a series, but to their
fans. There isn't a developer out there that's more loyal and responding to their fans than
Bungie Studios. I am glad to know that someone at Bungie will very likely read this article
and take it into account. However this situation is addressed I have faith that Bungie will
address the situation and Halo 3 will continue to entertain gamers on Xbox Live for years
to come.
Halo 3: The Melee Sit-Rep
Written by ToyMachine228
Those of you who play Halo 3 on Xbox Live have heard the moaning. We have all
witnessed it happening to ourselves, our friends, and our enemies. When you read an online
Forum, it comes up in every topic about Halo 3. It's the melee system implemented by
Bungie. It's the single largest cause of frustration on Xbox Live right now, and
I'm here to clarify exactly what's going on every time you press the B button, why it's
happening, and what can be done about it.
The Reason
At some point in the development at Halo 3, Bungie Studios decided that action should
be taken to eliminate lag from playing a part in Halo 3's online multiplayer. Specifically,
Bungie was most concerned about the host of each game having a slight advantage as
his connection is running the fastest with everyone else's game running a tiny bit behind
as their connection is being relayed to the host's. It's how Halo 3's Matchmaking works.
Anyone who played Gears of War on Xbox Live has seen how much of a difference
host advantage can make. In Gears of War almost always, whichever team had the
hosting player on their side, won. Bungie wanted to assure that hosting advantage did
not come into play in deciding the outcome of games in Halo 3, so they took a step
and implemented a new melee system different from that of Halo 2.
To explain exactly how Halo 3's melee system works I will refer to one player as Player X,
and the second as Player Y. In most games, including Halo 2, when two players get close
in the heat of battle, whichever player melees first, wins the battle. May the person with
the faster reaction time win, and whoever times their melee attack first and connects wins,
and lives to fight another day. Hypothetically, the host of the match should have a microsecond
quicker of a connection and should win the melee battle most of the time. We'll get back to that
later.
The System
To combat this "host advantage", Bungie decided to implement a new melee system which
actually decides the outcome of melee battles in a completely different way. I like to call it
a turn-based melee system, but that's just my own way of complaining. In Halo 3, when
Player X and Player Y begin shooting each other and are closing in on one another both
players in most cases know that once they are in range, they will attempt to melee the opposing
player. It's a Halo player's nature. Instead of the "whoever swings first wins" melee system
that seems obvious Bungie decided to give both players a short window...It may be around
half a second. In the real-world, half a second is nothing, but in the Halo universe, a half a second
can mean everything. When Player X and Player Y get into melee range, if they BOTH melee
within this estimated half a second window, the player with more health "wins". It almost sounds
fair, but let's analyze the situation a bit further.
The Problem
I personally have built a lot of my "Halo skills" around my quick reflexes and my ability to melee
quicker than most other players. If you take a look at my stats you will see that I rely on my
melee quite a bit. It is my strength. Often times in Halo 2 I would rush right into the heat of battle
without any precations. I'll make quick work of the first opposing player and head into a head on
battle with a second player before my shields even come back up. Call me dumb but due to my
quick reflexes, in Halo 2 I was able to win this second battle many times due to my quick and
properly timed melee strikes. This has backfired on me, and thousands of other Halo players
out there in Halo 3.
In Halo 3 when this situation happens, all the opposing player that I'm charging after my first
battle has to do is melee me within a half second of my melee to kill me because I have less
health than he does. Is that fair? I am taking on two people and I got the drop on him, but
he has the advantage from the start of the battle because he has more health than I do. Halo
to me has never been a game about choosing my battles and strategizing. It's about quick
reflexes, fast fingers, and heroic efforts. How many times have you pulled off an Overkill
due to a grand strategy? You get Triple Kills, Overkills, and wipe out enemy teams about
to score your flag due to crazy acts of desperation, luck, and taking chances, and Halo 3's
melee system is huring those chances at creating heroic memories because even before you
melee, the outcome is already decided.
To put this into perspective, when Player X melees first, Player Y should be dead...Right?
This is not the case this time around. Player Y who just got melee'd and should by all rights
be dead has that tiny half-second window to melee for himself. Now this is where things get
mathematical. Whichever player has more "health" wins the face off and goes on to fight
their next battle, the other player is left staring at their dead Spartan. The problem is, as I
mentioned above, technically, Player Y should have been dead and not been able to melee
in the first place since Player X melee'd first. But to combat any possible advantage in the
connections of either Player X or Player Y, Bungie implemented this system to force so-called
connection issues out of the picture.
This melee crisis plays into the game with more than straight up melee against melee battles as
well, affecting both the Energy Sword and the Gravity Hammer since their attacks do qualify
as beat downs, and logically thereafter, melee attacks. Say Player X is holding one of Halo 3's
proudest new toys, the Gravity Hammer. Let's say he's hiding somewhere on Guardian. Player
Y comes around the corner, Assault Rifle leveled, and spraying bullets at Player X. Naturally,
Player X stands up, gives a battle cry loud and proud and swings away with his Gravity Hammer
once in range. Player X hears the Gravity Hammer's sound effect, and awaits his glorious results.
Player X instead sees that he has been beat down by Player Y. What happened? Because Player
Y had more health and melee'd at the same time as Player X, he wins the battle. Forget the fact that
Player X isn't using a gun and can't do anything to drop Player Y's health so he does win the melee
battle if he understands the melee system...Forget that the Gravity Hammer was supposed to kill
the opposing player upon swinging it on top of his head, crunching his spinal cord downward.
Instead, the player with the Assault Rifle was given the victory since he got a few desperate shots
off and melee'd at the same time as the opposing player about to crush his skull with a one-hit
one-kill weapon. The same situation applies to the Energy Sword.
Why?
The question that I raise next is one that has yet to be answered. Why was this melee system
implemented to begin with? I played a lot of Halo 2 on Xbox Live...3,672 to be exact. I killed
racked up nearly 40,000 kills in Halo 2. I'm not claiming to be a godsend of a player, but I am
claiming that I played Halo 2 quite a bit and know the in's and out's of the game. In all of my days
of playing Halo 2, not a single-time did I feel like I was being cheated in-combat by connection
issues. The problem with "Standby" aside, not once when I won, or lost a melee battle, or any
other kind of battle in Halo 2 did I step back and say "Host!" There may have very well indeed
been instances where I lost fights because I wasn't host, or won fights because I was host, but
it wasn't an obvious issue.
Halo 3's melee system would effectively eliminate host advantage if it existed but let's think
about it. In a standard Team Slayer game on Xbox Live, let's say there are four melee
battles about to go down at once. In a game with a "host advantage", one of the four battles
is affected. The host may have a slight advantage, but if his opponent is skilled and got the upper
hand in the fight to start, the host's opponent still stands a good chance. In Halo 3 when this
situation occurs, all four melee battles are affected by this new system that has been implemented
and the outcomes are all decided by whichever player has more "health".
The Resolution?
Being the fan friendly developer that Bungie Studios is, Bungie has acknowledged people's pain
and commented on various Forums and through the Bungie Weekly Update that they are hearing
our cries. Bungie gave an official statement in one of their Weekly Update's stating that the
situation "looks worse than it is." By what I can tell, they are referring to the frustrating fact that
even when you lose a melee battle, you still melee, and even HEAR the melee attack connect
yet your opponent melees you, kills you and appears to be unaffected by the melee that you
heard connect that you believe should have killed them. Bungie has stated that they're looking
at the issue and looking for a possible resolution that likely lies somewhere in changing some
animations so when you lose a melee battle, you don't melee and see it connect being left to
think you should have killed your opponent.
Options?
The issue I take in this is that Bungie is effectively hiding the problem. What we're seeing is
actually what's happening, and Bungie is looking for a way to stop us from seeing what's
happening in order to keep their melee system intact because they feel it's justified. Maybe
in development, Halo 3 really was facing major host advantage issues around melee, and
that's why Bungie made this decision. If that's the case, then so be it, and gamers will have
to deal with it. My issue is that it was never a problem in Halo 2, so I personally doubt that
it was an issue in Halo 3 so this new "turn-based melee system" was uncalled for. I personally
would like to see the old melee system return where the quicker player won. I can recall
instances in Halo 2 when you would both melee simultaneously and both players would die,
and as far as I'm concerned, that's fine. I would much rather get my kill, and die doing it then
simply die for nothing like I am in Halo 3 and I think a lot of gamers would stand with me on
that issue.
Giving Credit Where It's Due
In conclusion I would like to acknowledge Bungie for creating the game that Halo 3 is. The
game's campaign is by far the best of the trilogy, and the multiplayer is once again the hottest
thing on Xbox Live. Granted Halo 3 has it's issues, the melee situation being one of them,
but I applaud Bungie in their constant dedication not only to Halo as a series, but to their
fans. There isn't a developer out there that's more loyal and responding to their fans than
Bungie Studios. I am glad to know that someone at Bungie will very likely read this article
and take it into account. However this situation is addressed I have faith that Bungie will
address the situation and Halo 3 will continue to entertain gamers on Xbox Live for years
to come.
BladedExpert
Member
MaX_PL said:
Haha, thought id gotten away with that one. I was just kidding, I actually admire MLG for what its done for competitive gaming. I also like to take the piss out of everything. I thought it was funny......
Striker said:
Lone Wolf. I'm just playing with who ever's on.
And my roommate and I FINALLY got overkills (I got two of them
). I almost got 5 but the person I killed was 1 second too late.I am now officially annoyed with people who beg for overkills. If I can get it, anybody can :lol
Hmm, from what people tell me, it's very easy to level up in Lone Wolves. I have barely played, so I can't give my view on that. It is easy to level up fast in Double Team, though...MIMIC said:Lone Wolf. I'm just playing with who ever's on.
And my roommate and I FINALLY got overkills (I got two of them
I am now officially annoyed with people who beg for overkills. If I can get it, anybody can :lol
I really wish "Good Connection" actually meant "Low Latency".
We played 7 games tonight, and all but two of them had some really annoying lag going on. Not to the level of glitching, but enough latency difference between the teams that made it impossible to win any 50-50, except in one game where we seemed to host and the other where all players were from Europe.
This is the only thing I really want Bungie to fix in a patch, if it's possible. I'd much rather wait in the lobby for ages if it means I get a game where all players are 100ms away from each other at most.
We played 7 games tonight, and all but two of them had some really annoying lag going on. Not to the level of glitching, but enough latency difference between the teams that made it impossible to win any 50-50, except in one game where we seemed to host and the other where all players were from Europe.
This is the only thing I really want Bungie to fix in a patch, if it's possible. I'd much rather wait in the lobby for ages if it means I get a game where all players are 100ms away from each other at most.
Photolysis
Banned
What sucks is that the host can be so one sided.
After some little shit used a networking exploit on me in Double Team, it fucked up my host record big time, and I've only just started to get host again.
The thing that pisses me off, is that when I host, everyone's bullets count, compared to a lot of US hosts which disregard bullets, melee attacks, grenades. Pretty much anything actually. When we don't host, we get crap. When we do host, everyone's connection works perfectly, with no packet loss. Hardly ever will anyone have to experience a fraction of the shit we go through when playing on a host the other side of the Atlantic.
I mean, I actually got beat down by someone before I saw the melee animation, on my host no less. Yet I can hit a guy a full second before he sees me on their host, and have it not count.
The packet loss on oversaturated US networks is unbelievably frustrating, and leads to so many problems. Gravity Hammer hits that send them flying but don't do any damage. Sword hits that don't count. Headshots that don't register. Grenade sticks that blow up on them but don't do anything.
This is why we need a low latency filter, more than anything. Having to constantly fight with 2 arms tied behind my back, with a broken leg, whilst dazed, and with only a broken toenail as a weapon is so enraging, I wouldn't be surprised if I have a stroke or heart attack at some point.
And anyone that uses Comcast's internet should be shot. Worst ISP ever. Try playing on the other side of the Atlantic and watch as Comcast randomly lose half your shots because they can't prioritise time-sensitive traffic over fucking HTML web page requests properly.
After some little shit used a networking exploit on me in Double Team, it fucked up my host record big time, and I've only just started to get host again.
The thing that pisses me off, is that when I host, everyone's bullets count, compared to a lot of US hosts which disregard bullets, melee attacks, grenades. Pretty much anything actually. When we don't host, we get crap. When we do host, everyone's connection works perfectly, with no packet loss. Hardly ever will anyone have to experience a fraction of the shit we go through when playing on a host the other side of the Atlantic.
I mean, I actually got beat down by someone before I saw the melee animation, on my host no less. Yet I can hit a guy a full second before he sees me on their host, and have it not count.
The packet loss on oversaturated US networks is unbelievably frustrating, and leads to so many problems. Gravity Hammer hits that send them flying but don't do any damage. Sword hits that don't count. Headshots that don't register. Grenade sticks that blow up on them but don't do anything.
This is why we need a low latency filter, more than anything. Having to constantly fight with 2 arms tied behind my back, with a broken leg, whilst dazed, and with only a broken toenail as a weapon is so enraging, I wouldn't be surprised if I have a stroke or heart attack at some point.
And anyone that uses Comcast's internet should be shot. Worst ISP ever. Try playing on the other side of the Atlantic and watch as Comcast randomly lose half your shots because they can't prioritise time-sensitive traffic over fucking HTML web page requests properly.
Diablohead
Member
For a while now my connection was up the duff, the ISP deal this block of flats has is extremely lame but they know you will pay for it, as it's £120 to get a BT internet line installed before you then pay monthly for a BT line, anyway.
Got back into the MP, very first wolves swords game I got my triple sword kill achievement that I was lacking on my old live profile, so glad I got that one out of the way already. The lower chances of getting oddball now have turned the two for one achiement into a longer slog to get again :lol but i'll get there in the end.
My connection is always yellow so i'm use to grenades not appearing when thown for a 1/3rd of a second, or seeing the enemy die a second after you landed that headshot. It will feel so different when I get to play on my parents connection over christmas
Got back into the MP, very first wolves swords game I got my triple sword kill achievement that I was lacking on my old live profile, so glad I got that one out of the way already. The lower chances of getting oddball now have turned the two for one achiement into a longer slog to get again :lol but i'll get there in the end.
My connection is always yellow so i'm use to grenades not appearing when thown for a 1/3rd of a second, or seeing the enemy die a second after you landed that headshot. It will feel so different when I get to play on my parents connection over christmas
This sounds far too close to a stupid Bungie.net kid's whining, so I'll rephrase:alisdair said:
Lots of my 4v4 games are against people on other continents, where there is inherent lag due to the stable but substantial latency. I would prefer, if possible, to only play games with lower latency between all players than what I am currently experiencing. If you can fix this, Bungie, please do
Even though everyone was on full green bars last night, I had an instance where someone on the other team threw a frag at my feet *after* I had already jump-strafed and stuck him. Despite being a clear 10 feet away from it, and in the air, when it detonated I lost all my shields and about five rounds from an AR killed me. Then I noticed that the sticky went straight through his chest.
I went -7 in that game, but someone else on my team was about +10, so I know the deaths were partly down to my poor play. Doesn't make it any less frustrating, though.
Edit: I would also like to say that I have played almost 1200 games, and enjoyed almost all of them. This is definitely the best game I've ever played, and if anyone from Bungie reads this, thank-you very much for creating it
Diablohead
Member
If you go to network settings ingame you can change that filter for what type of game you want, by default I think it's set to fast find or something.
Might help with a good connection you lot hunger.
Might help with a good connection you lot hunger.
RocketMoose
Member
alisdair said:This sounds far too close to a stupid Bungie.net kid's whining, so I'll rephrase:
Lots of my 4v4 games are against people on other continents, where there is inherent lag due to the stable but substantial latency. I would prefer, if possible, to only play games with lower latency between all players than what I am currently experiencing. If you can fix this, Bungie, please do
Even though everyone was on full green bars last night, I had an instance where someone on the other team threw a frag at my feet *after* I had already jump-strafed and stuck him. Despite being a clear 10 feet away from it, and in the air, when it detonated I lost all my shields and about five rounds from an AR killed me. Then I noticed that the sticky went straight through his chest.
I went -7 in that game, but someone else on my team was about +10, so I know the deaths were partly down to my poor play. Doesn't make it any less frustrating, though.
Edit: I would also like to say that I have played almost 1200 games, and enjoyed almost all of them. This is definitely the best game I've ever played, and if anyone from Bungie reads this, thank-you very much for creating it
In the matchmaking lobby, hit the "X" button, then select "Prefer good connection". It will take you longer to match, but the connection quality should improve a lot. For those living in the states, the difference will probably be less noticable, and it may be best to go with default settings for faster matchmaking.
Seriously, people, I mentioned "Good Connection" only six posts up. I know about it. I use it every time I play. If someone else is party leader and they start search without it on, I scream "GOOD CONNECTION GOOD CONNECTION GOOD CONNECTION" until they go back and change it.
It doesn't work. This is what I am complaining about.
It doesn't work. This is what I am complaining about.
Photolysis
Banned
The latency filter on "Prefer Good Connection" is 200ms (Source: contact at Bungie).
This value is so large that the filter is essentially worthless, other than filtering out a handful of places (from the UK, such as Japan, Singapore, Australia).
The value is far too large though; 200ms is an eternity in online gaming, and it's more than enough to get to the East Coast of the US. The packet loss en route there don't bear thinking about.
The fact is, is that prefer good connection barely does anything. I play with it on ALL the time, and the only way I avoid getting crap like magic disappearing bullets, beat downs, sticks, whatever is to host the game myself.
I pay a lot for my internet connection, and as such have high priority on my ISP (as well as tapping into the backbone network very quickly; 10ms ping to London). As the UK's infrastructure tends to be quite good - possibly because we don't currently have huge amounts of video on demand services tying up the same pipes - packet loss is not much of a factor for me. Tests have also shown it's not my end where traffic gets lost, but once it hit's US soil.
The US's infrastructure simply isn't up to dealing with such traffic in a consistent fashion, with a few exceptions. The overall quality of the internet connections over there varies massively. I just wish this were acknowledged. The average speed of connections may be some of the fastest in the world, but in terms of jitter, prioritisation, traffic loss, and the general integrity of connections, there is a hell of a lot of work needed to be done, particularly as services like TiVo and VOD become much more popular.
For those saying "I don't notice anything bad", the problems are there, but with lower latency, your packets still get there. When they come from across the Atlantic, they've already existed for a relatively long while, and any additional delay due to poor prioritisation means they exceed their time to live (TTL) and are rejected.
This value is so large that the filter is essentially worthless, other than filtering out a handful of places (from the UK, such as Japan, Singapore, Australia).
The value is far too large though; 200ms is an eternity in online gaming, and it's more than enough to get to the East Coast of the US. The packet loss en route there don't bear thinking about.
The fact is, is that prefer good connection barely does anything. I play with it on ALL the time, and the only way I avoid getting crap like magic disappearing bullets, beat downs, sticks, whatever is to host the game myself.
I pay a lot for my internet connection, and as such have high priority on my ISP (as well as tapping into the backbone network very quickly; 10ms ping to London). As the UK's infrastructure tends to be quite good - possibly because we don't currently have huge amounts of video on demand services tying up the same pipes - packet loss is not much of a factor for me. Tests have also shown it's not my end where traffic gets lost, but once it hit's US soil.
The US's infrastructure simply isn't up to dealing with such traffic in a consistent fashion, with a few exceptions. The overall quality of the internet connections over there varies massively. I just wish this were acknowledged. The average speed of connections may be some of the fastest in the world, but in terms of jitter, prioritisation, traffic loss, and the general integrity of connections, there is a hell of a lot of work needed to be done, particularly as services like TiVo and VOD become much more popular.
For those saying "I don't notice anything bad", the problems are there, but with lower latency, your packets still get there. When they come from across the Atlantic, they've already existed for a relatively long while, and any additional delay due to poor prioritisation means they exceed their time to live (TTL) and are rejected.
Photolysis
Banned
The following is a short saved film from my other account, which should demonstrate to those in the US just how bad their host is.
The user hosting the game is on a Comcast connection. In 3 or so minutes there are 3 clear examples of bullshit:
#1: A shield-less opponent takes a direct hit to the head with a BR without dying (the 2nd burst did kill though), after I took down his shields with a Sniper Rifle body shot. (0:52)
#2: A shield-less opponent gets sniped in the foot as he goes up the purple grav lift, which didn't give me a kill. The kill was actually because he landed on his own grenade. (2:25)
#3: I hit an opponent directly in the face with the Sword, doing no damage. The game then teleports me off the ledge once I am dead, after taking an entire assault rifle clip through a floor. (3:45)
Prefer good connection is on, there was no drop in the connectivity, and I had 5 green bars the entire time.
This is the kind of crap we get almost every single game. And these are all potentially game-losing situations at high levels.
Go ahead, and see for yourself.
http://www.bungie.net/stats/Halo3/FileShare.aspx?gamertag=A Small Mango
Slot #1
So please don't tell me to turn good connection on, and that it makes a massive difference, if you happen to live in the US. If it did, there would be no complaints about it.
FOR THOSE THAT HAVE COMCAST:
http://www.vbnmag.com/articles.php?article_id=5&issue_id=28
The article above is where people in the ISP industry do some tests on Comcast connections (and other ones).
In particular, 12.4% of Comcast traffic gets lost, and there's a shocking 1100 ms of jitter. In other words, your latency can fluctuate by over 1 second, and any traffic you send/receive has an extremely high chance of getting lost at some point. To put this into context, at MOST you should have 1-2% packet loss, and the jitter value should be about 30ms. This is for a mediocre connection. Professionals adequately described Comcast as "no better than 2 cans and a piece of string".
For an excellent connection, packet loss should be almost non existent, and the jitter value should be 10ms at most.
If you still want to stick with Comcast after reading that ... you need help. Likewise Comcast users should NEVER host. Ever.
The user hosting the game is on a Comcast connection. In 3 or so minutes there are 3 clear examples of bullshit:
#1: A shield-less opponent takes a direct hit to the head with a BR without dying (the 2nd burst did kill though), after I took down his shields with a Sniper Rifle body shot. (0:52)
#2: A shield-less opponent gets sniped in the foot as he goes up the purple grav lift, which didn't give me a kill. The kill was actually because he landed on his own grenade. (2:25)
#3: I hit an opponent directly in the face with the Sword, doing no damage. The game then teleports me off the ledge once I am dead, after taking an entire assault rifle clip through a floor. (3:45)
Prefer good connection is on, there was no drop in the connectivity, and I had 5 green bars the entire time.
This is the kind of crap we get almost every single game. And these are all potentially game-losing situations at high levels.
Go ahead, and see for yourself.
http://www.bungie.net/stats/Halo3/FileShare.aspx?gamertag=A Small Mango
Slot #1
So please don't tell me to turn good connection on, and that it makes a massive difference, if you happen to live in the US. If it did, there would be no complaints about it.
FOR THOSE THAT HAVE COMCAST:
http://www.vbnmag.com/articles.php?article_id=5&issue_id=28
The article above is where people in the ISP industry do some tests on Comcast connections (and other ones).
In particular, 12.4% of Comcast traffic gets lost, and there's a shocking 1100 ms of jitter. In other words, your latency can fluctuate by over 1 second, and any traffic you send/receive has an extremely high chance of getting lost at some point. To put this into context, at MOST you should have 1-2% packet loss, and the jitter value should be about 30ms. This is for a mediocre connection. Professionals adequately described Comcast as "no better than 2 cans and a piece of string".
For an excellent connection, packet loss should be almost non existent, and the jitter value should be 10ms at most.
If you still want to stick with Comcast after reading that ... you need help. Likewise Comcast users should NEVER host. Ever.
BladedExpert
Member
Continuing the theme: last night we played Slayer at about the level 40 mark for a few hours solid with the good connection filter selected. Pretty much every game we played had a full green or nearly full green connections. In 95% of these games it was clear the Host was not anyone from the UK (my team) as the opposing team seemed to have a higher green bars than we did. I have given up on the Grav Hammer as it will connect with a guy and and half a second later he will mauler-beatdown me (FUCKING HATE the mauler now) and i will die! The shoe will be on the other foot and the Hammer will rape me and send me into the stratosphere! Fuck you Hammer/Mauler!
In general i can deal, and have dealt with, playing against opponents from across the Atlantic but the new melee system coupled with even tiny amounts of lag lead me to so much frustration that i have now given up on melee as a legitimate strategy. I will avoid it at all costs. To the point where i just run around stickying people instead of hitting them with the butt of my rifle, and getting killed because of it.
This is a whiny rant i know. I hate the fact that this bothers me enough to post about it and i doubt there is anything that can be done about it. Just thought id jump on the bandwagon and moan about you dam yanks and your host! Grrrr!!
In other news, why cant i get past level 45 TS
In general i can deal, and have dealt with, playing against opponents from across the Atlantic but the new melee system coupled with even tiny amounts of lag lead me to so much frustration that i have now given up on melee as a legitimate strategy. I will avoid it at all costs. To the point where i just run around stickying people instead of hitting them with the butt of my rifle, and getting killed because of it.
This is a whiny rant i know. I hate the fact that this bothers me enough to post about it and i doubt there is anything that can be done about it. Just thought id jump on the bandwagon and moan about you dam yanks and your host! Grrrr!!
In other news, why cant i get past level 45 TS
D
Deleted member 21120
Unconfirmed Member
Right now, in the middle of the night/early morning, Halo 3 has 91,786 players online.
According to this forum post, Halo 2 had 70,000 players online on an average Monday, one month after the game's release.
So Halo 3, two months after its release, in the middle of the night, has 91,000 players online. And Halo 2, one month after its release, in the middle of the day, had 70,000 players online.
I'd say Halo 3's population is doing better than Halo 2's was.
Also, Frank has outright said that the population is doing better, but since you were the one that asked him that question and you're asking it again now, I guess you thought he was straight up lying to you.
Well, looking at information not from Bungie (which you probably wouldn't believe), it turns out Frank wasn't lying. I think someone owes someone an apology.
According to this forum post, Halo 2 had 70,000 players online on an average Monday, one month after the game's release.
So Halo 3, two months after its release, in the middle of the night, has 91,000 players online. And Halo 2, one month after its release, in the middle of the day, had 70,000 players online.
I'd say Halo 3's population is doing better than Halo 2's was.
Also, Frank has outright said that the population is doing better, but since you were the one that asked him that question and you're asking it again now, I guess you thought he was straight up lying to you.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=8693745&highlight=population#post8693745Stinkles said:
Well, looking at information not from Bungie (which you probably wouldn't believe), it turns out Frank wasn't lying. I think someone owes someone an apology.
BladedExpert
Member
Cocopjojo said:
Pwnage :lol
Also...consider the big releases for the Xbox at the time Halo 2 came out. What was there? Splinter Cell and Rainbow 6? Look at the games now: Mass Effect, Call of Duty 4, Gears of War, Assassin's Creed, etc. There is a hell of a lot more competition right now than there was in 2004 on the Xbox/360 platform.
Diablohead
Member
Hey is there a mongoose map anywhere in lone wolves anymore? i'm trying to get achiements again and have yet to see any map with a mongoose on, you can only get the mongoose achiement in lone wolves right?
It's like they lowered some achiements when they made the sword one easier to get
It's like they lowered some achiements when they made the sword one easier to get
Yes, High Ground still comes up (Slayer gametype). I'm pretty sure Isolation was only ever ball/hill, and that was the other Lone Wolves mongoose map.Diablohead said:
It's the only achievement I don't have, and I've pretty much given up. No-one at level 35 is stupid enough not to jump over a speeding mongoose.
It's a sucky achievement, really, probably the worst one of the lot. I really can't think of a situation where you should be on a mongoose in a FFA match.
Diablohead
Member
It's mainly annoying how weak hitting someone with the mongoose is, sometimes it feels like you done zero damage. Earlier I even rammed someone into a wall while their shield was down and it did nothing!alisdair said:
Last time I got this I use to drive into hill locations while people were shooting each other to take the spot, within the last second of the match my flying mongoose clipped an elite for instant ownage :lol
D
Deleted member 21120
Unconfirmed Member
Sure, I'd play.Nutter said:
sableholic
Member
MaX_PL said:
...
sixthsubset
Banned
i wish i wish i wish this game would get patched, but unfortunately its flaws are more than skin deep and only 1% of the community notices them or cares about bungie fixing them.
i feel pretty fucked right now. i wish i could go back in time to the launch of halo 1 to play a real competitive halo game at a tourney
i feel pretty fucked right now. i wish i could go back in time to the launch of halo 1 to play a real competitive halo game at a tourney
Domino Theory
Crystal Dynamics
Has anyone gotten more extremely frustrated while playing Halo 3 than any other game ? I don't think I have. I get extremely mad at almost every move that my enemy does on me. Whether it be jumping up and down constantly like a fool, frag grenade spamming until dawn, Mauleleeing while crouched at every square inch of each map, and of course: the melee. Everytime I die, I cuss endlessly into my mic (of course I mute it so my teammates don't hear it, but when I'm in a party with my friends, sometimes I get so mad I forget to mute).
Side note: I just noticed that the spike grenades are only available on High Ground and Isolation. Lame.
Side note: I just noticed that the spike grenades are only available on High Ground and Isolation. Lame.
D
Deleted member 1159
Unconfirmed Member
Rocket Race is my new favorite playlist. Teamwork is vital, usually guys on it are pretty cool, and it leads to some amazing moments (chasing down people at full speed, firing rockets at each other...somebody misses the checkpoint and you swoop in for the win...awesome!)
More people should play rocket race. And maps like snowbound should be banned.
More people should play rocket race. And maps like snowbound should be banned.
Domino Theory said:Has anyone gotten more extremely frustrated while playing Halo 3 than any other game ? I don't think I have. I get extremely mad at almost every move that my enemy does on me. Whether it be jumping up and down constantly like a fool, frag grenade spamming until dawn, Mauleleeing while crouched at every square inch of each map, and of course: the melee. Everytime I die, I cuss endlessly into my mic (of course I mute it so my teammates don't hear it, but when I'm in a party with my friends, sometimes I get so mad I forget to mute).
Side note: I just noticed that the spike grenades are only available on High Ground and Isolation. Lame.
I don't want to troll Halo because I still love the franchise and (obviously) still keep tabs on what's going on, but this is the reason I don't play it anymore. It's not worth the frustration.
After about a 3 week break from the game, playing all COD, I can't say I'm that frustrated with the game. If anything I appreciate how much more depth lies in the gameplay compared to what I was playing.
Things get sour from time to time, and I curse the game, but really, what game doesn't get that treatment from yourselves at some point?
Things get sour from time to time, and I curse the game, but really, what game doesn't get that treatment from yourselves at some point?
Yes, nothing like getting 3-shotted from a Pistol across a map.sixthsubset said:i wish i wish i wish this game would get patched, but unfortunately its flaws are more than skin deep and only 1% of the community notices them or cares about bungie fixing them.
i feel pretty fucked right now. i wish i could go back in time to the launch of halo 1 to play a real competitive halo game at a tourney
I'm more frustrated with a lot of Bungie's decisions with the game rather than the game itself. Sure, the melee is the ultimate problem. I don't like how Bungie keeps passing it off like it's nothing. I've been able to compensate, somewhat, by just back-peddling and shooting more instead of going for the melee. But in many instances, the melee is the only option. I don't care what the apologists say, it's broken.Domino Theory said:Has anyone gotten more extremely frustrated while playing Halo 3 than any other game ? I don't think I have. I get extremely mad at almost every move that my enemy does on me. Whether it be jumping up and down constantly like a fool, frag grenade spamming until dawn, Mauleleeing while crouched at every square inch of each map, and of course: the melee. Everytime I die, I cuss endlessly into my mic (of course I mute it so my teammates don't hear it, but when I'm in a party with my friends, sometimes I get so mad I forget to mute).
Side note: I just noticed that the spike grenades are only available on High Ground and Isolation. Lame.
I remember when Forge was announced and how it was trumpeted as changing matchmaking as we know it. There'd be forge variant maps in matchmaking. There'd be all kinds of insane gametypes to go with those maps. There'd be a whole new level of matchmaking like we didn't see in Halo 2.
Two months after launch...we're still sitting on the same gametypes we were using, with the exception of Rocket Race. And what's so great about rocket race? One, maybe two, teams actually play it. The others get off Mongeese and try to assassinate everyone. Why do we still not have a ranked BTB? It's one of the more popular playlists. Yeah, apologists say it's because of the guests. Why not rank it, while the population is at its highest, and see what happens?
Bungie made the mistake of adding playlists like Actionsack into Halo 2 after the population died down. Don't do that with Halo 3. The game is booming right now. This is when we should be seeing experimentation. Instead, it's the same stuff.
With the addition of all these new weapons, why aren't we using them? Where's the trip mine in Valhalla? Why can't we use it on Last Resort? Where are the flame grenades? Where are the prowlers? Where are the flamethrowers? Construct is actually one of the worst maps to have a flamethrower on because it just breeds camping. Trust me, I'm one of those who uses it. Why so many maulers? Why the lack of spike grenades? Plasma turrets, fuel rod guns, etc.
I love the game, it's a lot of fun. But it's nowhere near as fun as it used to be. That's why I'm not playing it as much. When there's some better playlists and more variety. I'll come back full-force.
sixthsubset
Banned
Striker said:
but you could've strafed and tsked them yourself...
does it bother you that it's a pistol? is that the problem? pretend it's not a pistol then
Eric WK said:
I feel the exact same way. I was getting far too worked up over a video game to continue playing it; I just wasn't having fun anymore. When you feel like just ramming your foot through your own TV, it's time to stop playing it for a while. I'm sure I'll go back and play Halo 3 multiplayer sometime, but it won't be in the near future.