Stretched maps??

Hey guys, I just wanted to make a quick thread before I head off to bed.

When people say that maps are stretched out to accommodate for sprint, I find myself always thinking that this just isn’t as much of an issue as people say it is. Sure, maps are definitely growing larger, there’s no denying that. But every part of the map has to be designed with combat in mind, right? And combat can’t happen at the same time as sprint. So maps can’t be nearly as stretched out as some people claim they are.

I just haven’t seen much evidence at all to prove that maps are being designed too much in favor of sprint. In fact, making sprint usable while shooting (something many have suggested) could actually stretch the maps out even worse because then combat wouldn’t mean only base movement speed. Areas of the map would be designed with sprinting and shooting at the same time. This video and this video are pretty good examples of showing that base movement speed is completely viable even at a competitive level. Sprinting wasn’t required to traverse the map effectively. Cover was within convenient distances and sprint was really only used to make a push when the time was right.

Before people try to shut me down by saying that Truth is perfect proof of how sprint elongates maps, 343 has already said that Truth isn’t a 1:1 remake of Midship, it was merely inspired by it. Anyways, I’m tired. I’m going to lay down and check this thread for a bit before I pass out because I’ve been making a lot of spelling errors lol. You won’t see many here because I always correct them before I post but I can’t even spell “Truth” or “elongate” right now.

Thanks for reading and commenting. Good night.

It isnt that maps have grown larger… Its that small maps ceased to exist. Halo 4 had maps on par with the big maps in other games, same with reach.

Halo 4 lacked the small maps seen in previous halos.

To be fair, ptebious halos were designed around multiplayer on a single box as the norm… But i don’t think it’s coincidence that the first halo to have sprint as a core mechanic lacked the small maps of yore.

I’ve never really felt the evidence of these stretched out maps everyone talks about. But it’s discussed frequently and I don’t have an eye for that kind of thing. I think they play just fine, with or without sprinting. Hells bells, a lot of times I walk crouched to stay off the radar because I suck so much it’s essential for me to get the first shot in lol

> Before people try to shut me down by saying that Truth is perfect proof of how sprint elongates maps, 343 has already said that Truth isn’t a 1:1 remake of Midship, it was merely inspired by it.

It’s Midship but bigger. Claiming that it’s not a remake but rather a successor is just a gigantic cop out on their part. 343I can prove me wrong at any time by making a normal sized Midship and seeing how it functions.

> So maps can’t be nearly as stretched out as some people claim they are.

Yes and no.
You have people claiming that maps are twice as big. No, more like 130% to 150% as big. Not quite as exaggerated but still a significant difference nonetheless.

> 2533274819302824;4:
> > Before people try to shut me down by saying that Truth is perfect proof of how sprint elongates maps, 343 has already said that Truth isn’t a 1:1 remake of Midship, it was merely inspired by it.
>
>
> It’s Midship but bigger. Claiming that it’s not a remake but rather a successor is just a gigantic cop out. 343I can prove me wrong at any time by making a normal sized Midship and seeing how it functions.
>
>
> > So maps can’t be nearly as stretched out as some people claim they are.
>
>
> Yes and no.
>
> You have people claiming that maps are twice as big. No, more like 130% to 150% as big. Not quite as exaggerated but still a significant difference nonetheless.

I would love your insight on the following, Ramir3z77: which do you think has had more influence on map stretching, sprint or the DMR?

> I would love your insight on the following, Ramir3z77: which do you think has had more influence on map stretching, sprint or the DMR?

If you’re going to argue that the DMR caused map stretching I would have to point out that’s probably to give it more reason for existing in a game with multiple precision rifles. If it’s the only rifle in the game then I don’t believe it is the cause of any stretching at all.

Ce Mag and H2 BR are pretty comparable to the DMR, and yet both those games had a good balance of small and medium sized maps.

A small map will still function with the DMR. Being able to shoot across Wizard with perfect accuracy isn’t going to break that map (and you can already do that anyways with other guns). A small map will not function with sprint, the pacing will be too unstructured.

> 2533274803493024;3:
> I’ve never really felt the evidence of these stretched out maps everyone talks about. But it’s discussed frequently and I don’t have an eye for that kind of thing. I think they play just fine, with or without sprinting. Hells bells, a lot of times I walk crouched to stay off the radar because I suck so much it’s essential for me to get the first shot in lol

Here’s some insight

Link

> 2533274819302824;4:
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> > So maps can’t be nearly as stretched out as some people claim they are.
>
>
> Yes and no.
> You have people claiming that maps are twice as big. No, more like 130% to 150% as big. Not quite as exaggerated but still a significant difference nonetheless.

Tsassi performed some timing tests way back, and I did some math. It was Haven vs Guardian.

If I remember everything properly then:
Haven was 30% longer and wider
I also experimented with GIMP and grey scale overview pictures of both maps, concluding that Haven was at least 60% larger in area, and that was only from an overview map. I suspect that had I taken into account all layers of both maps, Haven could potentially have been at least double the area of Guardian.

Halo CE-3 seemed more focused on small and medium maps, with the larger BTB maps feeling stretched out and playing really slowly. Halo Reach-5 seem more focused on medium and large maps, completely eliminating small maps because they don’t suit the gameplay. I’d rather have a game that only focuses on doing two map sizes really well than a game that tries to do all three sizes and one of them ends up playing poorly because of the mechanics.

Who cares if the map metrics are physically larger than previous Halos if the mechanics offer gameplay at a pace that feels just as compact?

Are maps stretched out or slightly bigger? Yes they are and I don’t think that can really be denied, however playing the halo 5 beta maps was so much fun that I don’t care if the maps are stretched out or not.

> 2533274819302824;4:
> > Before people try to shut me down by saying that Truth is perfect proof of how sprint elongates maps, 343 has already said that Truth isn’t a 1:1 remake of Midship, it was merely inspired by it.
>
>
> It’s Midship but bigger. Claiming that it’s not a remake but rather a successor is just a gigantic cop out on their part. 343I can prove me wrong at any time by making a normal sized Midship and seeing how it functions.
>
>
> >

Yeah. 343 should just stop whatever they’re doing and shift resources to building a map to prove some forum poster wrong. If they don’t do that then said forum poster is right.

You’ve got great expectations.

> 2533274810150284;8:
> Halo CE-3 seemed more focused on small and medium maps, with the larger BTB maps feeling stretched out and playing really slowly. Halo Reach-5 seem more focused on medium and large maps, completely eliminating small maps because they don’t suit the gameplay. I’d rather have a game that only focuses on doing two map sizes really well than a game that tries to do all three sizes and one of them ends up playing poorly because of the mechanics.
>
> Who cares if the map metrics are physically larger than previous Halos if the mechanics offer gameplay at a pace that feels just as compact?

But it’s not compact?

Larger maps, with greater speeds ala’ sprint, tend to have longer sightlines. Meaning close encounters are rarer than before because of the distance, despite moving at the relative right speed.

I never experienced Haven or Skyline as compact despite being the smallest maps in Halo 4, then again that’s me.
I also never got very far on my HtH commendation, then again, that’s just me again.

> Yeah. 343 should just stop whatever they’re doing and shift resources to building a map to prove some forum poster wrong. If they don’t do that then said forum poster is right.

I’m right because the evidence and their own admission points to me being right. Not because they refuse to do something that I never seriously expected them to do in the first place.

If you want to argue that Midship would play perfectly fine with sprint though, be my guest.

> 2533274795123910;11:
> > 2533274810150284;8:
> > Halo CE-3 seemed more focused on small and medium maps, with the larger BTB maps feeling stretched out and playing really slowly. Halo Reach-5 seem more focused on medium and large maps, completely eliminating small maps because they don’t suit the gameplay. I’d rather have a game that only focuses on doing two map sizes really well than a game that tries to do all three sizes and one of them ends up playing poorly because of the mechanics.
> >
> > Who cares if the map metrics are physically larger than previous Halos if the mechanics offer gameplay at a pace that feels just as compact?
>
>
> But it’s not compact?
>
> Larger maps, with greater speeds ala’ sprint, tend to have longer sightlines. Meaning close encounters are rarer than before because of the distance, despite moving at the relative right speed.
>
> I never experienced Haven or Skyline as compact despite being the smallest maps in Halo 4, then again that’s me.
> I also never got very far on my HtH commendation, then again, that’s just me again.

The maps themselves aren’t as compact, but the combat encounters that occur on them are. Skyline doesn’t have long sightlines at all, and I think Haven’s longest sightlines are on the red and blue curved sections, depending on your angle (maybe from the Mohawk to the top-middle area?).

I melee just as often in Halo 4 as I do in other Halos, which means that I have to consistently be having close-proximity encounters. The maps are larger, but they are designed for combat to take place in compact areas.

> 2533274795123910;11:
> > 2533274810150284;8:
> > Halo CE-3 seemed more focused on small and medium maps, with the larger BTB maps feeling stretched out and playing really slowly. Halo Reach-5 seem more focused on medium and large maps, completely eliminating small maps because they don’t suit the gameplay. I’d rather have a game that only focuses on doing two map sizes really well than a game that tries to do all three sizes and one of them ends up playing poorly because of the mechanics.
> >
> > Who cares if the map metrics are physically larger than previous Halos if the mechanics offer gameplay at a pace that feels just as compact?
>
>
> But it’s not compact?
>
> Larger maps, with greater speeds ala’ sprint, tend to have longer sightlines. Meaning close encounters are rarer than before because of the distance, despite moving at the relative right speed.
>
> I never experienced Haven or Skyline as compact despite being the smallest maps in Halo 4, then again that’s me.
> I also never got very far on my HtH commendation, then again, that’s just me again.

What he’s saying is, if the scale being used to determine how big maps should be is player speed then map size between sprintless halo and halo w/sprint is relatively the same.

> 2533274819302824;12:
> > Yeah. 343 should just stop whatever they’re doing and shift resources to building a map to prove some forum poster wrong. If they don’t do that then said forum poster is right.
>
>
> I’m right because the evidence and their own admission points to me being right. Not because they refuse to do something that I never seriously expected them to do in the first place.
>
> If you want to argue that Midship would play perfectly fine with sprint though, be my guest.

I wouldn’t argue that because I don’t believe that. I was just calling attention to the fact that expecting them to make a map to prove you wrong is absurd. Now you’re saying you never expected that. Ok, I believe you, but in the previous post you sounded sincere to me.

Of course maps have to scale up to accommodate sprint. Why wouldn’t they? Doesn’t mean we no longer have small maps. It’s all relative.

> 2533274810150284;13:
> > 2533274795123910;11:
> > > 2533274810150284;8:
> > > Halo CE-3 seemed more focused on small and medium maps, with the larger BTB maps feeling stretched out and playing really slowly. Halo Reach-5 seem more focused on medium and large maps, completely eliminating small maps because they don’t suit the gameplay. I’d rather have a game that only focuses on doing two map sizes really well than a game that tries to do all three sizes and one of them ends up playing poorly because of the mechanics.
> > >
> > > Who cares if the map metrics are physically larger than previous Halos if the mechanics offer gameplay at a pace that feels just as compact?
> >
> >
> > But it’s not compact?
> >
> > Larger maps, with greater speeds ala’ sprint, tend to have longer sightlines. Meaning close encounters are rarer than before because of the distance, despite moving at the relative right speed.
> >
> > I never experienced Haven or Skyline as compact despite being the smallest maps in Halo 4, then again that’s me.
> > I also never got very far on my HtH commendation, then again, that’s just me again.
>
>
> The maps themselves aren’t as compact, but the combat encounters that occur on them are. Skyline doesn’t have long sightlines at all, and I think Haven’s longest sightlines are on the red and blue curved sections, depending on your angle (maybe from the Mohawk to the top-middle area?).
>
> I melee just as often in Halo 4 as I do in other Halos, which means that I have to consistently be having close-proximity encounters. The maps are larger, but they are designed for combat to take place in compact areas.

How is it compact if the general combat distance is increased?
The distance still plays a role when combat happens at the same speed, or close to same speed atleast, in two games, one with sprint and the other without, despite the map being designed for the travel speed.

Let me elaborate.

If we take the same exact map, but enlarge it to accommodate sprint speed, and put it in a game with sprint, then that map is physically larger, yes?
Then we take the base speed and make it identical in both maps.

So, 10 metres would become 20, 20 metres 40 and so on and so on. If we use that as an example.

You’re moving and fighting around a map without sprint at the speed the map was designed for. You are engaging in combat and can move about at the same rate you would on the sprint map, without sprint, meaning corridors are relatively shorter while in combat than while in combat on the sprint map.

On the sprint map, you slow down in order to engage in combat, you’re not moving at the relative speed of the non-sprint map. Unless you managed to close distance while sprinting, the combat will most likely happen at an extended range.

More over, as an effect of that, the target will look like it moves less because the longer the distance is, the smaller the angle will be that you have to adjust your aim.

That’s not to say close encounters won’t happen.

So I’d say the compact mapyness we’re discussing would apply if you doubled base speed and doubled map size, but in this case, combat speed is not the same as top speed.

> 2533274825044752;14:
> > 2533274795123910;11:
> > > 2533274810150284;8:
> > > Halo CE-3 seemed more focused on small and medium maps, with the larger BTB maps feeling stretched out and playing really slowly. Halo Reach-5 seem more focused on medium and large maps, completely eliminating small maps because they don’t suit the gameplay. I’d rather have a game that only focuses on doing two map sizes really well than a game that tries to do all three sizes and one of them ends up playing poorly because of the mechanics.
> > >
> > > Who cares if the map metrics are physically larger than previous Halos if the mechanics offer gameplay at a pace that feels just as compact?
> >
> >
> > But it’s not compact?
> >
> > Larger maps, with greater speeds ala’ sprint, tend to have longer sightlines. Meaning close encounters are rarer than before because of the distance, despite moving at the relative right speed.
> >
> > I never experienced Haven or Skyline as compact despite being the smallest maps in Halo 4, then again that’s me.
> > I also never got very far on my HtH commendation, then again, that’s just me again.
>
>
> What he’s saying is, if the scale being used to determine how big maps should be is player speed then map size between sprintless halo and halo w/sprint is relatively the same.

But as I said, wouldn’t that only apply if you were to increase base speed and increased map size by the same rate.

Extreme example:

Say we take Battle Creek and have normal base speed
Then we take Blood Gulch and increase base speed by 300%

I could agree that in this case, combat could be regarded as compact.

But if we take Blood Gulch again, and have sprint on it with a speed of 300%, then I wouldn’t agree because combat happens at a reduced speed than what we can move about on the map.

And yet, cqb happens at the same frequency as Halo2/3.

> 2533274795123910;16:
> > 2533274810150284;13:
> > > 2533274795123910;11:
> > > > 2533274810150284;8:
> > > > Halo CE-3 seemed more focused on small and medium maps, with the larger BTB maps feeling stretched out and playing really slowly. Halo Reach-5 seem more focused on medium and large maps, completely eliminating small maps because they don’t suit the gameplay. I’d rather have a game that only focuses on doing two map sizes really well than a game that tries to do all three sizes and one of them ends up playing poorly because of the mechanics.
> > > >
> > > > Who cares if the map metrics are physically larger than previous Halos if the mechanics offer gameplay at a pace that feels just as compact?
> > >
> > >
> > > But it’s not compact?
> > >
> > > Larger maps, with greater speeds ala’ sprint, tend to have longer sightlines. Meaning close encounters are rarer than before because of the distance, despite moving at the relative right speed.
> > >
> > > I never experienced Haven or Skyline as compact despite being the smallest maps in Halo 4, then again that’s me.
> > > I also never got very far on my HtH commendation, then again, that’s just me again.
> >
> >
> > The maps themselves aren’t as compact, but the combat encounters that occur on them are. Skyline doesn’t have long sightlines at all, and I think Haven’s longest sightlines are on the red and blue curved sections, depending on your angle (maybe from the Mohawk to the top-middle area?).
> >
> > I melee just as often in Halo 4 as I do in other Halos, which means that I have to consistently be having close-proximity encounters. The maps are larger, but they are designed for combat to take place in compact areas.
>
>
> How is it compact if the general combat distance is increased?
> The distance still plays a role when combat happens at the same speed, or close to same speed atleast, in two games, one with sprint and the other without, despite the map being designed for the travel speed.
>
> Let me elaborate.
>
> If we take the same exact map, but enlarge it to accommodate sprint speed, and put it in a game with sprint, then that map is physically larger, yes?
> Then we take the base speed and make it identical in both maps.
>
> So, 10 metres would become 20, 20 metres 40 and so on and so on. If we use that as an example.
>
> You’re moving and fighting around a map without sprint at the speed the map was designed for. You are engaging in combat and can move about at the same rate you would on the sprint map, without sprint, meaning corridors are relatively shorter while in combat than while in combat on the sprint map.
>
> On the sprint map, you slow down in order to engage in combat, you’re not moving at the relative speed of the non-sprint map. Unless you managed to close distance while sprinting, the combat will most likely happen at an extended range.
>
> More over, as an effect of that, the target will look like it moves less because the longer the distance is, the smaller the angle will be that you have to adjust your aim.
>
> That’s not to say close encounters won’t happen.
>
> So I’d say the compact mapyness we’re discussing would apply if you doubled base speed and doubled map size, but in this case, combat speed is not the same as top speed.
>
>
>
>
> > 2533274825044752;14:
> > > 2533274795123910;11:
> > > > 2533274810150284;8:
> > > > Halo CE-3 seemed more focused on small and medium maps, with the larger BTB maps feeling stretched out and playing really slowly. Halo Reach-5 seem more focused on medium and large maps, completely eliminating small maps because they don’t suit the gameplay. I’d rather have a game that only focuses on doing two map sizes really well than a game that tries to do all three sizes and one of them ends up playing poorly because of the mechanics.
> > > >
> > > > Who cares if the map metrics are physically larger than previous Halos if the mechanics offer gameplay at a pace that feels just as compact?
> > >
> > >
> > > But it’s not compact?
> > >
> > > Larger maps, with greater speeds ala’ sprint, tend to have longer sightlines. Meaning close encounters are rarer than before because of the distance, despite moving at the relative right speed.
> > >
> > > I never experienced Haven or Skyline as compact despite being the smallest maps in Halo 4, then again that’s me.
> > > I also never got very far on my HtH commendation, then again, that’s just me again.
> >
> >
> > What he’s saying is, if the scale being used to determine how big maps should be is player speed then map size between sprintless halo and halo w/sprint is relatively the same.
>
>
> But as I said, wouldn’t that only apply if you were to increase base speed and increased map size by the same rate.
>
> Extreme example:
>
> Say we take Battle Creek and have normal base speed
> Then we take Blood Gulch and increase base speed by 300%
>
> I could agree that in this case, combat could be regarded as compact.
>
> But if we take Blood Gulch again, and have sprint on it with a speed of 300%, then I wouldn’t agree because combat happens at a reduced speed than what we can move about on the map.

How does taking a map, adding increased speed, then allowing players to speed up faster with sprint means that combat happens at a reduced speed? Is it because 300% is technically slower than sprinting?

Does that really matter because combat will always be played out at that 300% speed anyways?

At what point does arguing theory over the internet become useless?

> 2533274819302824;12:
> > Yeah. 343 should just stop whatever they’re doing and shift resources to building a map to prove some forum poster wrong. If they don’t do that then said forum poster is right.
>
>
> I’m right because the evidence and their own admission points to me being right. Not because they refuse to do something that I never seriously expected them to do in the first place.
>
> If you want to argue that Midship would play perfectly fine with sprint though, be my guest.

It would play horribly, of course.

> 2533274833600810;19:
> > 2533274819302824;12:
> > > Yeah. 343 should just stop whatever they’re doing and shift resources to building a map to prove some forum poster wrong. If they don’t do that then said forum poster is right.
> >
> >
> > I’m right because the evidence and their own admission points to me being right. Not because they refuse to do something that I never seriously expected them to do in the first place.
> >
> > If you want to argue that Midship would play perfectly fine with sprint though, be my guest.
>
>
> It would play horribly, of course.

I dunno. I thought the Midship remake on halo 5 was pretty good. Even the Pit in Halo 4 was decent with Sprint.