I don’t remember past Halo games having BTB multi-team playlist (4 teams of 4). In my opinion BTB multi-teams would be really nice new addition to matchmaking. Some of you might say it would be too chaotic but BTB map Longbow seems to be really big so I don’t think it would be too chaotic and if other BTB maps are going to be as big it’s not going to be problem.
By the way Longbow just happens to have 4 bases (actually 5 but one of them could be neutral). 4 teams of 4 would be ideal for it.
Having 4 teams of 4 also makes a whole pile of new game types available. And makes old ones much more interesting (like CTF).
Example: Siege (from GRAW II)
In siege 1 team has to defend their base while 3 other teams try to capture it. There would be 4 rounds so everyone would have to defend once. Now the interesting part is that those 3 other teams are enemies to each others as well. So while they have to capture the defenders base they also have to prevent any other team from capturing it. Team who captures the defenders base wins the round. But if defenders manage to hold back the attackers or attackers are too busy killing each others the defending team wins the round.
What do you think? Vote and discuss!
Update: Playlist would be called Multi Team Battle or something else than Big Team Battle as teams are not as big as in original BTB. 
agree it would be really chaotic. I love the idea. i always look forward to bigger crazier fights.
I know that I likely wouldn’t play it, as I tend to favor playlists that have a bit more structure. But, if other people would like to have it, then I would definitely support it. No reason for people to miss out on something they would like just because a few others don’t care for it.
> I don’t remember past Halo games having BTB multi-team playlist (4 teams of 4). In my opinion BTB multi-teams would be really nice new addition to matchmaking. Some of you might say it would be too chaotic but BTB map Longbow seems to be really big so I don’t think it would be too chaotic and if other BTB maps are going to be as big it’s not going to be problem.
>
> By the way Longbow just happens to have 4 bases (actually 5 but one of them could be neutral). 4 teams of 4 would be ideal for it.
>
> Having 4 teams of 4 also makes a whole pile of new game types available. And makes old ones much more interesting (like CTF).
>
> Example: Siege (from GRAW II)
> In siege 1 team has to defend their base while 3 other teams try to capture it. There would be 4 rounds so everyone would have to defend once. Now the interesting part is that those 3 other teams are enemies to each others as well. So while they have to capture the defenders base they also have to prevent any other team from capturing it. Team who captures the defenders base wins the round. But if defenders manage to hold back the attackers or attackers are too busy killing each others the defending team wins the round.
>
> What do you think? Vote and discuss!
I totally agree.
But with 24 players in all.
I like this idea, i think it would add a bit of variety to BTB.
Oh I totally support this indeed.
Perhaps…
Sorry, but I just have to bring this up. But it’s called Big Team Battle. These are not big teams.
So would it be possible to call it ‘Multi Team Battle’?
> Perhaps…
>
> Sorry, but I just have to bring this up. But it’s called Big Team Battle. These are not big teams.
>
> So would it be possible to call it ‘Multi Team Battle’?
A good point. Maybe Multi-Team Rumble?
I’d like such a playlist. It’d be interesting if there could be gametypes where one team is stronger than the other three, and the other three were technically allies but still scored points in separate teams. And gametypes where the individual team is just like the rest, so they spawn in a well-defended location with an extra power weapon or two on their side. And of course, the four-way stuff we’ve got in multi-team already, just a bit bigger.
A 5v5v5 would be really awesome!
> Perhaps…
>
> Sorry, but I just have to bring this up. But it’s called Big Team Battle. These are not big teams.
>
> So would it be possible to call it ‘Multi Team Battle’?
That’s true. If this is going to be in matchmaking it should be called Multi Team Battle.
> A 5v5v5 would be really awesome!
As much as I agree with you there would be too many playlists if 343 tries to put every possible playlist to MM. If I had to choose between 5v5v5 and 4v4v4v4 I would always choose 4v4v4v4.
> Perhaps…
>
> Sorry, but I just have to bring this up. But it’s called Big Team Battle. These are not big teams.
>
> So would it be possible to call it ‘Multi Team Battle’?
could still be a big team battle if it were at least four teams of six right?
> > Perhaps…
> >
> > Sorry, but I just have to bring this up. But it’s called Big Team Battle. These are not big teams.
> >
> > So would it be possible to call it ‘Multi Team Battle’?
>
> could still be a big team battle if it were at least four teams of six right?
4x6 = 24. WAY above Halo’s player limit.
> > Perhaps…
> >
> > Sorry, but I just have to bring this up. But it’s called Big Team Battle. These are not big teams.
> >
> > So would it be possible to call it ‘Multi Team Battle’?
>
> could still be a big team battle if it were at least four teams of six right?
Too bad Halo 4 has 16 player limit. Maybe for Halo 5 or 6.