Modern Warfare 3's voting system would be good...

Don’t crucify me for saying this, you pathetic lumps o’ poo.

1st -In Halo Reach, if you the top option has the same amount of votes as the one below it, the top one will always be picked. That’s biased, and isn’t very fair. Instead, there should be a stalemate and a random map and gamemode are selected.

2nd -Also in Reach, if you hold ‘up’ and spam A, you get a spamming and random vote where every option is picked in a second. No real voting, just mucking around.

But on Modern Warfare 3, you vote once, then have 1 second before you can vote again. Then 2, then 3 and so on.

I think Halo would greatly benefit from something like this, just the stop the biased voting (1st reason) and bleach-sniffers (2nd reason) from taking the piss and ruining the game before it even starts.

InB4 ‘G3t Ca11 0f D00Dy 0u7 0f mah H4l0!!!’

Yay, I’m poo! I don’t think stereotyping everyone is a very good idea.

Seems like an ok system, the first part should be tweaked a bit tho.

No. It would benefit with the same thing, just without the option to change votes. It worked fine in Halo 3, and nobody cares if the top option is “biased”. I’d rather play a map that half the people like than risk getting a terrible random map.

> Don’t crucify me for saying this, you pathetic lumps o’ poo.
>
> 1st -In Halo Reach, if you the top option has the same amount of votes as the one below it, the top one will always be picked. That’s biased, and isn’t very fair. Instead, there should be a stalemate and a random map and gamemode are selected.
>
> 2nd -Also in Reach, if you hold ‘up’ and spam A, you get a spamming and random vote where every option is picked in a second. No real voting, just mucking around.
>
> But on Modern Warfare 3, you vote once, then have 1 second before you can vote again. Then 2, then 3 and so on.
>
> I think Halo would greatly benefit from something like this, just the stop the biased voting (1st reason) and bleach-sniffers (2nd reason) from taking the piss and ruining the game before it even starts.

I dislike #1 for a number of reasons. Firstly, surely it’s better that one of two preferred choices is chosen (the choice, incidentally, is random as the order of the maps/gametypes on the list is random) than a completely random, unasked for map/gametype combo? This is presuming ‘random’ does mean truly random and not a (pseudo-)random choice out of the two most-voted options.

But still, I’ve gotta Thank your post, purely for that lulzy opener.

Could work.
inb4 “343 copied CoD enough already. This voting system will ruin the series.”

> No. It would benefit with the same thing, just without the option to change votes. It worked fine in Halo 3, and nobody cares if the top option is “biased”. I’d rather play a map that half the people like than risk getting a terrible random map.

Better choose my map and mode rather than jumping onto a random match that i won´t like.

> Could work.
> inb4 “343 copied CoD enough already. This voting system will ruin the series.”

Lucky you got that in before ‘they’ arrived. Nice name, by the way.

its obvious that the game should just randomly pick between the 2 that have the same votes, not risking getting a crappy map and gametype that nobody wants, but not being biased either. seriously this seems so obvious…

> its obvious that the game should just randomly pick between the 2 that have the same votes, not risking getting a crappy map and gametype that nobody wants, but not being biased either. seriously this seems so obvious…

I like this idea.

> > its obvious that the game should just randomly pick between the 2 that have the same votes, not risking getting a crappy map and gametype that nobody wants, but not being biased either. seriously this seems so obvious…
>
> I like this idea.

Yeah, not bad.

Reach’s play lists and voting selections are TOO DIVERSE and convuluted.

A new system is definitely in order and hopefully we will know what it is soon…