The return of classic movement mechanics?

Games Halo Infinite
2882

With sprint and the supporting movement mechanics the weight of the decision is less important because it is far harder to punish, corner, shut out or pressure players. I feel the main criticism of the pro-343 crowd is that old halo lacks movement options / mobility. The classic crowd feel the more methodical freeform sandbox game has suffered with the introduction of random (ordnance) uncertain (loadouts) or defensive/evasive (abilities) mechanics.

Halo has a two-weapon limit, moderate health, basic starts, controlled pacing, weapons/items/power on map and compact map design - i would argue those 6 more than anything else are the blueprint to Halo MP and despite the rather basic premise, something ost other shooters don’t share. It’s rather obvious since Reach that there has been a chase to capture the drop-in/drop-out style gameplay other shooter games offer. In the process everything but the 2-weapon limit has been affected majorly since Reach.

In Reach the loadouts made the pacing far more erratic, the engagements in the game were defined by sprint. If you had run out of sprint then you waited before making a risky play as it offered a safety net. Unless you were playing stupid, sprint abused the higher kill time, the bloom mechanic and the quick time between cover for an easy quite guaranteed escape. Jetpack and freezing the game by being stationary were really the only 2 answers.

In 4 loadouts replaced power on map, pacing was determined both by what you spawned with and what you received in a random ordnance. A larger chunk of the weapon sandbox had 1sk or quick-kill potential, the randomness and uneven power-spikes were yet again the only thing that kept sprint in check, otherwise sprint would dictate how players engaged and disengaged in fights. The only way to fight the randomness and escapes was to play very static and to play closer to teammates.

In 5 sprint was nerfed, but with the introduction of clamber, thrusters, GP, slide and hover the chainable evasion made it hard to collapse on players yet again forcing the game into 2 modes chaotic or stationary and defensive. Engagements are less definite and risky due to the power off spawn, to the point that playing safe and defensive is more rewarding as it’s the only way the movement options don’t dictate the pacing and engagements. The greater options and mobility…at least in how they are implemented leads to a less mobile and limited game high level and a chaotic and disorganised one at low level, what i assume is the opposite of what people wanted with more options and mobility.

I have said it over a hundred times but i’ll reinforce it here, creating more options and mobility through map design and pick-ups will still cater to the pro-343 crowd who believe old Halo is too simplistic while retaining what the pro-classic crowd feels we have lost. We shouldn’t have to remove equal starts like in 4 or have a mechanic(s) off spawn dictate the game in order to accommodate varied mobility.

Also as for the other recent comment about the requirement of sprint / advanced movement to be relevant, since about 2012 we have been in the modern era of gaming where a lot of popularity and retention is decided by good marketing, social media influencers, a healthy streaming base and content creation, it’s an opinion but i feel 4, MCC and 5 tanked inherently because they had poor controversial launches, social media personalities that gave negative or indifferent opinions of the game (dropping it immediately) and the more hardcore streaming and content creating community that usually keeps interest high, abandoned or were sour about the direction of the game.

There is negativity in R6, LoL, Dota 2 etc but not enough to drive away content creators, streamers or general interest, the direction of the game influences that. Halo didn’t take a hit because it didn’t chase trends but because it chased trends, formed an identity crisis, discarded / watered down or failed to accomplish things that were Halos strengths / feathers in its cap such as

  • solid campaign
  • smart AI
  • well designed combat
  • vehicular balance and implementation
    +hundreds other minute details etc etc and left the community at large fractured.
    It doesn’t need to be fractured, take the base of the old games by having limited equal starts and offer greater variety in the playspace, since they would be limited controllable commodoties on the map 343 could be far more experiemental and far less conscious about balance than they currently need to be.
2883

> 2533274825830455;2872:
> I just don’t think “this mechanic causes problems on a map that hasn’t been properly designed for it” is a very strong argument against the mechanic. Whether the map design we end up with is desirable, or whether we’d be better off removing the mechanic to preserve map design is of course a different story, but that is an entirely different argument.

There is an assumption you’re making which is that maps can be designed to fully negate the effects of sprint. The example of matching cross map traverse speeds between the original and the replica doesn’t mean the maps play the same. Leaving aside how advanced movement may or may not break a map through pathways available, the example above is obviously not equal because while sprinting you can’t engage in combat (bar spartan charge). This means for every section of the map and for the map as a whole you need to account for both sprint speed but also the default combat speed.

You can create a map which is ideal for one speed or the other, not both. If you make maps to small, then sprint is too strong, if you make the maps to large, gameplay becomes far slower. Do you know what happens when games are slower? Reactionary plays become more frequent. And do you know what reactionary play props up the most? Sprinting out of a bad position to get into the ideal one.

> 2533274960674724;2870:
> Well just take a look at where the franchise is today. Do you think a slower and lore strategic game will attract more people than one that feels faster pases with more mechanics to master?

The game is actually faster without sprint. Sprint is an illusion which appears to make the game appear faster but has the opposite effect. I’ve said before and I’ll say it again, your reasoning is basically the same as 343i when they made H4 and H5. Instead of sticking to the roots of Halo they, and I want to emphasise here, unnecessarily copied competitors, and we all paid the price.

This isn’t about catering to the OG’s. This is about making Halo great again.

2884

GodLike ProDG to add to that i found that without sprint off spawn that the pacing was far more dynamic.

Take
chillout in CE
Sanctuary in 2
The Pit in 3
Countdown in Reach
as an example, since i found these maps to be the most general in each game

without sprint or abilities the pacing was purely determined by how aggressive the player wanted to be or what a player had on them.
I find with sprint and abilities the game either plays at the pacing set by these abilities or stationary. Power weapons have far less impact on the pacing, routing and flow of the game as sprint is the optimal movement due to the 2-tiered system and far easier to dodge power thrown at you.

Reach is the best example since we had vanilla settings and ZBNS for direct comparison, take competitive countdown settings which had a rocket and sniper on map, without sprint you had to respect rockets as it was far more likely you would be hit by them, the sniper became fearful as it taken more time to go between cover. The power weapons and decision making had more direct impact on the pacing of the game. Before ZBNS sprint did not have to respect 1sk weapons anywhere near as much and so the game became more about freezing movement options and shutting down sprint OR running around like headless chickens and getting sloppy picks and trades, less chance for variety in play imo.

I think what we had in Reach with jetpack and evade pick-ups felt like a good mix of what was desired in giving it off spawn and what we wanted out of Halo. There was more variety yet it could be controlled and played around and didn’t take priority over other aspects of the game like positioning or map rotation. As long as we start simple we could easily lean more to what we see in Mobas, Destiny or Overwatch in terms of the variety of options / abilities but it needs to adhere to the constraints of Halo, rather than disregard or supercede the aspects prominent in prior games like what 4 and 5 both did.

2885

> 2533274836395701;2884:
> without sprint or abilities the pacing was purely determined by how aggressive the player wanted to be or what a player had on them.
> I find with sprint and abilities the game either plays at the pacing set by these abilities or stationary. Power weapons have far less impact on the pacing, routing and flow of the game as sprint is the optimal movement due to the 2-tiered system and far easier to dodge power thrown at you.

I strongly agree with this and would also add it highlights a similar issue I was mentioning before surrounding spawn traps.

In the instance of spawn trapping, the utility the spawn trapper earns from sprint compared to the trapped vastly favours the trapped. Not being able to shoot, scope, scan the area or throw grenades while sprinting places a huge limitation on the attackers ability to secure a kill, as they can’t move and deal damage at the same time. On the other hand, this penalty matters little to the defending team which is escaping the trap, as their primary objective is to escape their current location and doing so quite often only requires sprint. In this way, sprint makes spawn killing less feasible, therefore reducing the skill ceiling in both setting up and breaking a spawn trap. The effect sprint has in spawn traps varies between maps, spawn locations, players alive, etc., but it in high pace matches between two similarly skilled teams, it is a significant factor that changes the way the game is played.

> Reach is the best example since we had vanilla settings and ZBNS for direct comparison, take competitive countdown settings which had a rocket and sniper on map, without sprint you had to respect rockets as it was far more likely you would be hit by them, the sniper became fearful as it taken more time to go between cover.

From recollection, the rockets in Reach did more damage and had a larger radius than its H3 counterpart. Similarly, the sniper had a larger hitbox as well I think. It was clear to me at the time that these changes were made to account for sprint - faster moving targets needed to be easier to kill. Yet, these principles only worked on sprinting targets. Once your target stopped sprinting, both power weapons became easier to use (and were in fact too easy). This was abundantly clear when ZBNS came around. This is yet another example of the way in which sprint complicates balancing the game (and in fact makes it impossible to balance).

2886

> 2533274805175435;2885:
> In this way, sprint makes spawn killing less feasible, therefore reducing the skill ceiling in both setting up and breaking a spawn trap.

In what world is spawn killing a show of skill, and spawn trapping a sign of balance? Out of all the issues the abilities introduce, making it less likely for snowballing to occur is definitely not one of them.

2887

[deleted]

2888

> 2533274930855538;2880:
> You know, I feel there’s a simple solution to all this that would satisfy most, if not all parties: Simply increase the base movement speedThis would allow for the fast mobility people perfer from the newer games, while catering to those who simply want to play halo how it used to be. clamber is fine as long as it can only be performed on places you can actually get to, but other than that, get rid of the Halo 5 spartan abilities, as they have been nothing but detrimental both to map design and the core Halo gameplay.

While I agreee with having a slightly faster base speed (and increased FOV), it’s all an illusion really. At the end of the day, the developers can make a map as large or small, closed or open as they like. At that point, the only thing that’s really changing is the size of the Spartans on the map. Movement speed is almost irrelevant when you look at gameplay overall.

2889

> 2535415876049274;2888:
> > 2533274930855538;2880:
> > You know, I feel there’s a simple solution to all this that would satisfy most, if not all parties: Simply increase the base movement speedThis would allow for the fast mobility people perfer from the newer games, while catering to those who simply want to play halo how it used to be. clamber is fine as long as it can only be performed on places you can actually get to, but other than that, get rid of the Halo 5 spartan abilities, as they have been nothing but detrimental both to map design and the core Halo gameplay.
>
> While I agreee with having a slightly faster base speed (and increased FOV), it’s all an illusion really. At the end of the day, the developers can make a map as large or small, closed or open as they like. At that point, the only thing that’s really changing is the size of the Spartans on the map. Movement speed is almost irrelevant when you look at gameplay overall.

yeah, but being unable to shoot while moving at top speed is definitely a major issue for some. coming off of the original games, it feels like a downgrade when you’re unable to do so.

2890

> 2533274794648158;2886:
> > 2533274805175435;2885:
> > In this way, sprint makes spawn killing less feasible, therefore reducing the skill ceiling in both setting up and breaking a spawn trap.
>
> In what world is spawn killing a show of skill, and spawn trapping a sign of balance? Out of all the issues the abilities introduce, making it less likely for snowballing to occur is definitely not one of them.

Spawn trapping isn’t a skill on maps with easily abusable spawn zones, though when it’s difficult to achieve or at even skill levels, being able to gate off or shut down spawners can be skillful. Quake is a good example of spawn trapping done right, the skill involved to maintain spawn pressure is hard. Halo has always had that problem where some of the more simplistic maps like narrows have easy spawn traps, though more claustrophobic maps like midhship or onslaught, or complex like construct or countdown are harder to maintain.

Coming from the Oceanic scene, GodLike’s moreso talking about high level arranged play than anything else. I could see how that could look bad in casual matches though. Kill securing and lack of penalty outside of that example is still an issue however. Outside of high level play, mismatched games and poor map design are far more at fault for spawn trapping in casual play than a mechanic, the example given is purely about another dimension of skill at top level.

2891

> 2533274825830455;2863:
> > 2533274819446242;2860:
> > Like I said in my original post, choosing not to participate in fundamental game mechanics is not what I would consider a skill.
>
> But choosing when to use that game mechanic is, right? I mean, the alternative is that it’s completely irrelevant when you start reloading, or when you start/stop sprinting, or when you turn right. The position that knowing when to use any of the game’s fundamental mechanics is not a skill seems untenable to me.
>
> And I’m not talking about a conscious choice here where you have a five second internal monologue before every button press. I’m talking about the fact that at a given time you perform a particular action when there are numerous actions you could’ve performed. These choices are mostly unconscious, but they are still fundamentally based on processing information about the game, and therefore require a degree of skill.

No more than “choosing when to aim” would be. You can aim poorly or course, but that isn’t what I wouldn’t call it a “choice” to do so. Once again going back to my original post, simply having a risk associated with a mechanic doesn’t make using it or not a real choice. No one is known for their excellent reloading habits. I don’t think it is reasonable to claim a unique skill from unconscious choice. At that point it is not a “choice” to use it is just muscle memory and reaction time. Naturally that is a component of skill but utilizing necessities of map navigation like sprint does not create a greater skill gap. At best it is horizontal change.

> > 2533274819446242;2860:
> > If I were to diagnose a particular problem with the sprint debate as a whole I would consider it would be the inability for anyone to simply state their preference in a way without trying to ascribe any higher meaning to their choice.
>
> I assume this is not just the pot calling the kettle black, and you are acknowledging that we’re all just as guilty of the same.
>
> For what it’s worth, I think the alternative would be really boring, because there would be no discussion at all. Sure, it often just seems like an endless circle where the same things get said over and over again. But every now and then, somebody says something interesting. Maybe I’m just crazy and alone in this, but these threads are often a source of introspection to me, which is the main reason I hang around. My views have become more nuanced over the years, and I’ve learned a lot about other people’s views.
>
> You can view this thread cynically as people trying to make their personal views seem more universal and altruistic than they are. Who knows, maybe most of it is. Certainly, I don’t think much of anything that includes “majority of Halo fans” or “most people”. But you can also see it as people struggling to understand why they have a particular preference and give it some meaning. That way it’s not just fluff, but a glimpse into how someone who’s not you views the game.

I’m not suggesting all attempts at reasoned discussion, only wishing we could cut some of the song an dance a bit shorter because I do find it interesting when we can cut to the heart of the matter or reexamine how we view certain subjects. Its one reason I changed my tune regarding dual wielding from being something I never wanted to see return to being more open to provided it got a serious overhaul but I digress. I just found this particular bit “it seems like every single change sprint effects in the game has to be bad” to somewhat unfair given the context of how this recent line of discussion started.

2892

> 2533274836395701;2890:
> > 2533274794648158;2886:
> > > 2533274805175435;2885:
> > > In this way, sprint makes spawn killing less feasible, therefore reducing the skill ceiling in both setting up and breaking a spawn trap.
> >
> > In what world is spawn killing a show of skill, and spawn trapping a sign of balance? Out of all the issues the abilities introduce, making it less likely for snowballing to occur is definitely not one of them.
>
> Spawn trapping isn’t a skill on maps with easily abusable spawn zones, though when it’s difficult to achieve or at even skill levels, being able to gate off or shut down spawners can be skillful. Quake is a good example of spawn trapping done right, the skill involved to maintain spawn pressure is hard. Halo has always had that problem where some of the more simplistic maps like narrows have easy spawn traps, though more claustrophobic maps like midhship or onslaught, or complex like construct or countdown are harder to maintain.

I would actually argue that onslaught was one of the worst maps for spawn killing. Although the absolute period you could hold a spawn trap was lower, because it was 5 flag and not 3, the relative time you could spend being stuck in spawn could be quite long. It was also the easiest map to set up a spawn trap (literally just sit on boxes). I would say Onslaught and Narrows would be the worst maps for spawn killing and Narrows TS is probably the only gametype in the MLG rotation that has genuine snowball capability due to the significant advantage the team holding top mid has.

> GodLike’s moreso talking about high level arranged play than anything else

Yes but any high level (lvl50+ MLG) random mm game is also usually full of players who understand spawn traps and how to break them.

> Outside of high level play, mismatched games and poor map design are far more at fault for spawn trapping in casual play than a mechanic, the example given is purely about another dimension of skill at top level.

Exactly. Again, with the exception of maybe a couple gametypes (mentioned above), a match between two evenly skilled teams should rarely result in a prolonged spawn trap at just about any level of play. When it comes to poor map design, I think standoffs were a much bigger issue (i.e. The Pit TS, Guardian TS when it was in rotation). Teams would just get a lead and set up on their half of the map and you would have actual 15 minute TS games that wouldn’t even reach 50 kills.

Personally though, I thought the maps in general were fairly well designed when it came to escaping a spawn trap. If you were even in skill the other team, you rarely found yourself in one for long.

2893

> 2533274805175435;2883:
> There is an assumption you’re making which is that maps can be designed to fully negate the effects of sprint.

No, only the effects of the maximum speed increase brought by sprint, which yes, can be completely negated by simply making a larger map. I’m well aware that the lack of combat abilities at maximum speed is indepdent of map design, but that wasn’t relevant to your original argument.

> 2533274819446242;2891:
> No more than “choosing when to aim” would be. You can aim poorly or course, but that isn’t what I wouldn’t call it a “choice” to do so. Once again going back to my original post, simply having a risk associated with a mechanic doesn’t make using it or not a real choice. No one is known for their excellent reloading habits. I don’t think it is reasonable to claim a unique skill from unconscious choice. At that point it is not a “choice” to use it is just muscle memory and reaction time. Naturally that is a component of skill but utilizing necessities of map navigation like sprint does not create a greater skill gap. At best it is horizontal change.

If there is a range of possible actions, and you need to perform one of them, what is that called? You’re making this about semantics. But if you don’t want me to use the word “choice”, I can reiterate: at any moment in the game there is a range of possible actions the player might execute. Executing an action that is optimal to the player’s goals requires them to gather and process information about the past and present state of the game. Only actions that are irrelevant to the player’s goals don’t require any such information. The players who are the best at gathering and processing information regarding a particular goal are the most likely to execute the optimal actions to achieve that goal. Some actions are of course more frequent or require a greater ability to process information, and are more impactful. Such actions are often valued by players and recognized individually. Other actions are often given less attention to, but require players to gather and process information nonetheless.

> 2533274819446242;2891:
> I just found this particular bit “it seems like every single change sprint effects in the game has to be bad” to somewhat unfair given the context of how this recent line of discussion started.

It’s something I’ve genuinely thought about and wanted to put out there. I think a lot of people are unconsciously afraid of ascribing any positive or neutral qualities to sprint, and there’s a lot of motivated reasoning going on in these anti-sprint arguments. Obviously, the same is going on on the other side of the fence, but that’s getting enough attention as is. I’m not even trying to wash my hands off this; I might be as quilty of it as anyone else. It’s just something to be aware of.

2894

> 2533274825830455;2893:
> > 2533274805175435;2883:
> > No, only the effects of the maximum speed increase brought by sprint, which yes, can be completely negated by simply making a larger map. I’m well aware that the lack of combat abilities at maximum speed is indepdent of map design, but that wasn’t relevant to your original argument.

Yes in retrospect the argument stems largely from the difference in sprint speed and combat speed. As above, this inherently lowers the skill ceiling and negatively impacts map design.

2895

> 2533274794648158;2886:
> > 2533274805175435;2885:
> > In this way, sprint makes spawn killing less feasible, therefore reducing the skill ceiling in both setting up and breaking a spawn trap.
>
> In what world is spawn killing a show of skill, and spawn trapping a sign of balance? Out of all the issues the abilities introduce, making it less likely for snowballing to occur is definitely not one of them.

Thank you. I used to hate how early map control could dominate games.

Sprint combats spawn killing by;

  1. Adding some unpredictability to your initial movement.
  2. Increasing the size of the maps - which allows for more spawning points to be built in.
  3. Making the battle rifle (or DMR) less like mini-sniping rifles (you are further away and it’s harder to get all the shots in).
2896

> 2585548714655118;2895:
> Sprint combats spawn killing by;
> 1. Adding some unpredictability to your initial movement.
> 2. Increasing the size of the maps - which allows for more spawning points to be built in.
> 3. Making the battle rifle (or DMR) less like mini-sniping rifles (you are further away and it’s harder to get all the shots in).

These are all results of a higher maximum movement speed, i.e., not unique to sprint. The same results could be accomplished by simply having a higher base movement speed. Secondly, the ease of spawn killing is affected by numerous factors from how the spawn system prioritizes spawns to how much protection the map allows for spawning players. Raising movement speed is hardly a necessary solution to an issue that for the most part stems from map design.

> 2585548714655118;2895:
> 3. Making the battle rifle (or DMR) less like mini-sniping rifles (you are further away and it’s harder to get all the shots in).

On this in particular, you do realize that making maps larger makes precision weapons more effective relative to other weapons, not less?

2897

> 2585548714655118;2895:
> > 2533274794648158;2886:
> > > 2533274805175435;2885:
> > > In this way, sprint makes spawn killing less feasible, therefore reducing the skill ceiling in both setting up and breaking a spawn trap.
> >
> > In what world is spawn killing a show of skill, and spawn trapping a sign of balance? Out of all the issues the abilities introduce, making it less likely for snowballing to occur is definitely not one of them.
>
> Thank you. I used to hate how early map control could dominate games.
>
> Sprint combats spawn killing by;
> 1. Adding some unpredictability to your initial movement.
> 2. Increasing the size of the maps - which allows for more spawning points to be built in.
> 3. Making the battle rifle (or DMR) less like mini-sniping rifles (you are further away and it’s harder to get all the shots in).

1: Not exclusive to sprint. But at the cost of being able to efficiently fight back and move at optimal speeds.
2: At the cost of small intense maps, also, a poor spawning system isn’t fixed by adding sprint.
3: That’s weapon balance, but I’d be surprised if movement mechanics weren’t taken into account when balancing weapons, and as such, I wouldn’t be surprised if the Halo 5 sandbox was buffed in some ways to accommodate some aspects of the movement mechanics as to not make it too difficult to land shots.

2898

Exiting a spawn point when you are outgunned requires unpredictable movement. I’m not sure simply increasing the BMR would help that much. The answer is spawning in a safe spot (which needs a bigger map with more options) or having some movement mechanics to aid an escape.

Small intense maps lend themselves to limited spawn points and one side dominating through ‘map control’. No thanks.

And the mid-long range weapons become over powered when they easily reach from one side of the map to the other. Obviously a lot of other map factors come into play, particularly open areas / sight lines etc. I just feel that the balance is better when you have bigger / more varied maps that you move faster on. But that’s an issue that is easily rectified by not having those types of weapons on the small to mid sized maps anyway.

2899

to be honest i love the movement in Halo 5, i hope will be in halo 6 too, just wish for a 30M radar, not the 18M!

2900

This is my idea,

  • Keep sprint, but for only 10-15 seconds, while the cooldown is 20 seconds
  • Have armor abilities
  • Make the maps in a way that you won’t always need sprint
  • No thruster packs

I think this is a fair compromise for both new and old players. What do you think?

2901

One aspect to think about is “strafing” . I feel that in H5 there is no true stafing in 1v1 gunfights, most encounters are determined by who has the quicker 5 shot and people use tactics like crouch shooting and thrusting. Older Halos 1v1s had more flow and since the Battle Rifle is a multishot weapon it allows you to stafe through each shot. The base movement speed is a bit too slow in H5 relatively to allow proper strafing engagements. Theres something too about a single circle reticule on the old B.R. thats allows you to move with more flow versus the preciseness of the H5 BR, or H5 magnum.
On a separate note I personally like sprint in the gameplay as well as thrusters and stabilize. I theorize that if Base Movement Speed is increased a bit and sprint nerfed it promotes more of a classic movement feel while still being modern.
Halo is a huge Universe and I think Sprint has to be in the game on some level.