-
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 |OT2| Hyper-Athletic Speed And Mass And Weight and Power
- Thread starter GhaleonEB
- Start date
Franklinator
Member
Definitely. I have a friend who's not very good, so I always get matched with derps when I play with him. Then when I play with you guys I play against Jedis. Although matchmaking still screws up a lot though
Devolution
Member
Did you forget how fun they were in 3?!!!!
Demoncarnotaur
Member
I can't recall.. Do we know whether or not Halo 4 will be present in any shape at GDC?
Didn't they match you up based on the highest trueskill of an individual player (as opposed to the average of the group) in one of the games?
those are the speakers and their sessions. Technical Artists Rejoice!
bobs...onGaf
Member
Oh right, my mistake. I misread and assumed that you were saying that the system was too easy. I agree with you, the idea of rank locking was downright insane.
thezerofire
Banned
we got Standoff Heavies yesterday. Dear god. All it takes is one idiot to lose the gauss hog for the game to be over.
I will never forget the time it was me, you, and 6 randoms against an entire party of inheritors/reclaimers/forerunners.
Ideally... whose ideals? Why should there be an even spread of players in each rank? This is not a lab setting or math problem. In the real world there can be all sorts of "clumps" of skills. The vast majority of the population simply is not that good... truly. There is no way there can be, or should be an even distribution of skills.
What there should be is a system that matches appropriate skills together, which ensures likes play with likes. In H3 the system couldn't do that because it could be manipulated. Now in Reach it can't be done because of population and some bewildering emphasis on search times.
If there is going to be a representation of that skill in a team game, it should only be predicated on wins and losses against a small window of similarly ranked opponents.
bobs...onGaf
Member
That game was so bad, I was having a pretty rough run of games, and when that came up I was pretty close to throwing my xbox out the window.
Franklinator
Member
That was the worst. In that game we were the derps
Plywood, Barrow, and Heckfu - really sorry I left so quickly, but I've been up for 36 hours now and it was making me play like crap. I'll jump in another time once I'm out of exam hell. Pretty sure my echo issue is from this old controller I was using, sorry about that.
Also, Super Slayer seems to have inherited the latent shittiness of Team Slayer.
Also, Super Slayer seems to have inherited the latent shittiness of Team Slayer.
So more of a bell curve? maybe.
I did a post a long time ago on b.net for halo 3 and it didn't fit that either.
Hydranockz
Member
Thread is impossible to keep a track of lol. Yay for Halo 4 
thezerofire
Banned
and then my xbox froze. Even it had had enough.
lol ya. I'm sorry but I'll wait an extra minute or so just so I don't have to play a 10 minute bore fest against complete scrubs.
HiredN00bs
Member
Has anyone considered that most people (i.e. the general populace) played ranked matchmaking in Halo 2 and 3 because it was directly tied to the main incentive system in those games?
Tie the incentive system to ranked play by rewarding ranked play time (either exclusively or more heavily) rather than the rank itself. Having heavily and diversely populated ranked lists will improve skill matches for everyone.
Tie the incentive system to ranked play by rewarding ranked play time (either exclusively or more heavily) rather than the rank itself. Having heavily and diversely populated ranked lists will improve skill matches for everyone.
StalkerUKCG
Banned
Finished up mass effect 1 the other day again, seen Kiki wolfkill listed as the lead artist?
Halo 4 is in good hands.
Halo 4 is in good hands.
Coming from the Inheritor just for perspective.
Speaking of which Mass Effect 3 is really good so far, pick it up.
Rickenslacker
Banned
I really like the general look of the multiplayer footage we've seen. I don't know how someone can say Reach 1.5 or anything like that. Everything about it looks visually different from something that Bungie would do, the character models, the HUD, the general aesthetic of the levels. It's a refreshing change, and one I'm open to considering it's a whole new team at the helm.
I just like how clean everything looks, and there's a sort of Doom 3 quality to the environments we've seen so far. Very shiny looking industrial interiors. Also kind of reminds me of Perfect Dark Zero in a way, vibrant, clean, shiny.
I can stare at that BR kill gif all day.
Edit: Post 777 holla.
I just like how clean everything looks, and there's a sort of Doom 3 quality to the environments we've seen so far. Very shiny looking industrial interiors. Also kind of reminds me of Perfect Dark Zero in a way, vibrant, clean, shiny.
I can stare at that BR kill gif all day.
Edit: Post 777 holla.
It's all good. go ly dow
HiredN00bs
Member
I didn't get there playing Arena, but I definitely would have played more Arena if it had been worth significantly more credits.
Remember when the Super Jackpot was in Arena? The population increased by 3000%. Yeah.
The point is to encourage people to play ranked and win because that will yield better match results for all players.
bobs...onGaf
Member
What would the point of that be? Its not like time played = skill. You would just incentivise afk'ing. I know rewarding Skill opens the system up to abuse from boosters and the like, but to be honest I think I would prefer to go up against 'fake 50's' than to have afk'ers plague matchmaking.
Derankers are a whole nother issue, but that was more down to how trueskill worked, 1-50 with another implementation which didn't involve rank lock etc could work better there. (Not that im directly blaming rank lock for the cheating. )
Which is why I hope they're user editable, I'd be sad to see them go away, there's a lot of potential in them.
Nice to see the update go out. The majority of the maps submitted seem to have made it in for Heavies, so there's a mix of new FW maps and variants of DLC and disc maps.
I think at least one person from all the communities got a map in.
It is an exact duplicate of Team Slayer, just with TU settings
I think at least one person from all the communities got a map in.
It is an exact duplicate of Team Slayer, just with TU settings
I don't think it should look any certain way. The skill distribution is just a set of data points, and it will be in constant flux by the nature of the game.
I'm just not a fan of trueskill, or the hybrid system used in H3 because it was (and is) too easy to manipulate. I do not believe it is the best indicator of a player in a team environment beyond general terms.
HiredN00bs
Member
AFKers are already detected and banned. Winning should also be incentivized, but your actual rank should be just that. And players wouldn't need to AFK in a play time system if you also incentivized dedicated servers.
Rewarding skill doesn't make any sense. Recognizing it and encouraging players to improve, does. If you work really hard and get ranked in the 90th percentile, that's its own reward. Giving someone a gold star on top of an objective analysis of their performance is unnecessary at that point (which is essentially what Halo 3 did).
Rewarding players for playing the game makes sense because it improves the game. More players means a larger population, faster skill matches, better skill matches. This is also why it's important to encourage a diverse population in terms of skill.
that reminds me, did super slayer end up with a huge number of community maps, like its team slayer counterpart? did armor lock return too?
Of the games we played about half were community maps. Armor lock prevalent and used by others.
bobs...onGaf
Member
A separation of the two models is best in my opinion. Your probably saying the same thing right? Essentially I think both models fit into the game but should not interfere with each other.
Im all for the main ranking system to be separated from skill levels but I think skill levelling should still be a important part of the game and should require win/loss to go up/down.
The main ranking system would appeal to the mass market in that you rank up just for playing, that could copy the Reach model and would be fine. It would be an awful model for proving skill though. I mean why would more playtime give you a higher skill rank? Time played does not equal skill. And also skill should not stop people from going for Inheritor.
Essentially Reach did what im talking about by seperating Arena ranks and global ranks. Whatever the ranking system is in the next game I just hope its miles better than the arena lol. I think your saying that the ranking system should offer a good payout for the overall system, I would agree with that!
yay
Heavies in Halo 3 was a pretty bad experience, and with Reach's inferior vehicle sandbox and balance, I'm nervous about it in Reach. The test games I played were...unpleasant. But I'm going to hop on tonight and do a couple games, and see how it goes.
Don't make me do this alone, people.
Heavies on Standoff is still my personal bar for worst. Game. Ever. The map was specifically designed NOT to have a sniper rifle on it, and they put four down, along with the requisite array of heavy ordnance. It was pure, unmitigated misery.
Heavies is some horrible shit. At least based on one forged map (which too was horrible). It feels like there's 110-120% damage on, 'nades felt OP (well, more so than usually), vehicles felt... wrong, like they were Reach Beta vehicles (remember how weak those were?).
VivaciousJazzy
Member
I actually liked heavies in halo 3. Does that make me a bad person?
yes
Devolution
Member
My problem with time based ranks is they tell me nothing about the kind of player I'm going against.
The only good thing in Heavies in Halo 3 was the Gauss Hog. That thing is lovely, it feels so damn great. The rest, it was pure misery as Ghaleon noted.
Gotta say that i'd take Halo 3 BTB Heavies over Reach BTB... well, maybe not always but it is close.
Indeed. You generally higher ranked people are better, it doesn't really tell anything. Though arguably it is sort of good thing, people don't quit when they see full Inheritor team, unlike in Halo 3 where a full team of Generals would cause my team to quit...
They should have just been like objective/safe-zone/kill-zone objects. Create a single volume for the entire map, give it a specific label (callout). Create other volumes inside that volume that have a different value (callout superior) that overrides the call-out of the standard label.
Make it so that you can give each a name the same way you can name and edit the description of maps.
Boom, call-outs.
ElzarTheBam
Member
Yep, I find myself having a look at their halo 3 record of games played and their K/D to better gauge who I'm going up against.
Well, they tell you one thing.
HiredN00bs
Member
Yeah, I think our terminology may be causing some confusion.
When I use the term "rank" or "ranked", I'm using it in the sense of a competition, a ladder, in which everyone finds their place through their performance.
This could be confused with the military-style labels that were used in Halo 3 and Reach, because in reality, many of these labels are actual military ranks.
When I say the incentive system, I mean at the very least, what a player sees as a representation of their state, what kind of change takes place, and how the player reacts to those changes. In Halo 2, the only representation the player had was a number, specific to each playlist. Every player wanted to see that number increase, so they would search in these playlists and try to win. If a player saw the number go down, he might have been discouraged from playing that list. This is not a desired behavior. You want to stroke the player for playing in ranked playlists regardless of their progression on the ladder so they continue to stoke the population for the betterment of matchmaking. We should do this by rewarding them both for participation and for winning.
ElzarTheBam
Member
Hahaha omg, Robbert is gonna be pissed!
Anyway good game's EMP, been a long time since we last met.
Big fat fatties!
Hahaha omg, Robbert is gonna be pissed!
Anyway good game EMP, been a long time since we last met.
Why would he? Oh, wait, i betrayed him didn't i?
As for long hiatues... well, i need to keep long breaks or i burn out (EDIT and i think i didn't have Gold for a couple months last autumn). And then there's BF3 and Halo CEA and Skyrim... Next, Mass Effect 3...
bobs...onGaf
Member
I think we are nearly in agreement! I would argue that a more competitive environment dictates that there has to be losers and winners. A softening blow can be dealt by the incentive system, but the skill system needs to reward winning and punish losing. Otherwise a lot of the tension of a ranked match would be lost.
In social Halo like most Reach playlists, I have no reason to win/ lose so I spend most of my games in a weird 'cant be bothered' zone. Thats not a bad thing! When I just want to relax, the last thing I want is for Halo to punish me, but when I am in the mood for competition, its ranked play that provides the most fun, because something is on the line. I am going to step up my game, and I would hope the opponent is.
If the incentive system exists, and paid well for participating in ranked matchmaking, people would still have reason to play, even if they lost. The super competitive wouldnt really care about the incentive system though, and its the rank system they would care about. I think that would be a very good balancing act, and I think thats what Bungie had in mind for Reach.
ElzarTheBam
Member
I think you betrayed Xand, Don't worry about it, Robbert is just a drama queen anyway.