<mark>This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not post spam.</mark>
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
keep sprint
> 2535406403538430;13384:
> keep sprint
Expand on your opinion to keep sprint.
> 2535406403538430;13380:
> keep sprint and let halo be halo
- For many people, keeping sprint prevents Halo from being Halo. - Stop spamming threads with multiple single-sentence posts. Consolidate your thoughts into one and if you need to correct any typos, you can edit your existing post rather than making a new one.
> 2535406403538430;13380:
> keep sprint and let halo be halo
contradiction (countable and uncountable, plural contradictions)
Noun
- (uncountable) The act of contradicting. His contradiction of the proposal was very interesting. - (countable) A statement that contradicts itself, i.e., a statement that makes a claim that the same thing is true and that it is false at the same time and in the same senses of the terms. There is a contradiction in Clarence Page’s statement that a woman should have the right to choose and decide for herself whether to have an -Yoink!-, and at the same time she should not have that right.There is a contradiction in what you say - she can’t be both married and single. - (countable) a logical incompatibility among two or more elements or propositions Marx believed that the contradictions of capitalism would lead to socialism. - (logic, countable) A proposition that is false for all values of its variables.
> 2533274801176260;13377:
> Absolutely. There’s a high chance of bias either way. I’m not compltely disregarding your results, hence why I said “suspicious” instead of “false”. Am I wrong? Are you wrong? Are we both wrong? (Are we both right?) All is possible. I just wanted to raise an objection and draw attention to some inconsitencies before everybody in here just blindly accepts and sucks up any numbers, just because they have a decimal point in them. (Which also applies to everything I’m saying.)
And I ultimately appreciate that even if it’s not apparent in my initial defensive reaction. I mean, I try to keep everyone honest, so I should only be thankful when someone tries to keep me honest.
That last point kind of made me question how I represent my data. It might have been better to split it among the individual players because the averaging hides the systematic error that’s present. I think I’m going expand the post a little when I have time.
> 2533274801176260;13377:
> But the kill frequency has basically nothing to do with the pacing of the game. They’re not even correlated, much less in a causal relation.
>
> Take any game mode - Slayer, CTF, Oddball, doesn’t matter - put it on a tiny map (Wizard comes to mind, or Foundation), put enough players on it, remove respawn timers and you will have a fast-paced game, because you’re constantly in combat.
> If you then increase weapon damage and reduce shield strength (or outright remove it like in SWAT), you will have a high kill frequency, but still have the same pace because the players can still come back into action just as fast.
> On the other hand, reduce weapon damage, buff shields to overshield and increase the recharge timer, and you will have a low kill frequency, but once again, the pacing of the game doesn’t change as you’re not less in combat than before.
I guess here we disagree fundamentally what the pace of gameplay means. To you it seems to be the amount of time spent in combat from the total amount of time, but to me it also includes how fast players can actually kill each other. I hadn’t really tought about it deeply because to me it just seemed obvious that this should be included. This isn’t something I can defend by logic because it comes down to definitions. If you gave everyone tenfold shields and put them on a small map, I would still consider (or would have considered) the resulting gameplay slow.
I guess the only proper way to reconcile this is to accept that “pace of gameplay” isn’t really properly represented by a single spectrum from slow to fast, but lives in (at least) a two dimensional space. As nice as it would be to order games from slowest to fastest, I guess it shouldn’t come as a surprise that there’s no single, natural ordering that everyone can instantly agree on.
> 2533274792854607;13379:
> > 2533274801176260;13378:
> > By the way, lore should never dictate gameplay mechanics. By that argument sprint itself already doesn’t make sense because it completely contradicts how Spartans could run and shoot at the same time for about 40 years until they just somehow… forgot. Talk about ridiculous and mockery.
>
> They could have kept sprinting and shooting, just made it much less accurate than even hip fire, something like suppression fire. But then again, they needed reasons to make Armor Upgrades important…
>
> And personally, I believe that gameplay mechanics not being dictated by lore is not the choice of the creators, it’s a necessary flaw in the game itself. Like dead spartans floating, spartans appearing weightless, or pulling a grenade out of your “Hammer Space”.
Adding weapon readiness would help but your solution just worsens it. Halo is popular for hip fire, you’re idea just makes it less viable
they never needed to add armor abilities and the like a thing to begin with. Notice how they change every single game? 343 aren’t confident enough to keep them in due to back lash so they try to do another set, now I wonder what new abilities h6 will have since 343 is to stubborn to just drop it.
gameplay is always decided by the creators, lore or no lore. Bungie had no issue with it, halo only started mixing the two when 343 took over and now you have a very mixed and declining fanbase. 343 supports sprint, and there are records of bungie (old bungie, not reach-destiny bungie)saying sprint is a crutch and they saw no need for it.
the only way (if possible) for sprint to stay is if 343 made some sort of reinvention of it that is able to mesh with halo perfectly. Which I don’t see happening as there’s now been 3 games with sprint all differing in how they function. Because of that, it shows 343 aren’t set on a foundation since they’re always changing it up so much.
Right now it’s only unique in the sense that it’s the first time I’ve seen sprint punish people (shields don’t regen when sprinting and if you don’t reach top speed you get knocked out if it). Other than that it ruins weapon readiness, elongates maps, makes weapons carry obnoxious bullet magnetism, etc etc.
just to add: I don’t mind games using lore, but it needs to be done correctly where lore won’t dictate what is and isn’t in the game, how x functions where x takes place. Halo isn’t doing it correctly, I honestly think it’s more detrimental since it’s using lore to validate mechanics that people oppose.
Keep sprint, I’m ok with sprint really I am, but please, pretty pretty pretty please take Spartan Charge, knock it out, tie it up, put it in an old derelict house and then set fire to that house. Once the blaze has gone out plant some C4 and blow up the lot where the house used to be. Then, from orbit, Nuke the general zip code/postal area in which the house resided.
At that point I might actually have it in me to forgive the ‘genius’ designer that thought SC was a good idea. Note - might.
I honestly think H6 wont have sprint. Im calling it now. 3 games 3 different variations of sprint implemented into the game and still problem after problem. Nows the time 343.
> 2533274921982810;13391:
> I honestly think H6 wont have sprint. Im calling it now. 3 games 3 different variations of sprint implemented into the game and still problem after problem. Nows the time 343.
I’d honestly be surprised if they did that.
> 2533274921982810;13391:
> I honestly think H6 wont have sprint. Im calling it now. 3 games 3 different variations of sprint implemented into the game and still problem after problem. Nows the time 343.
Considering they didn’t even bother to take sprint out for a classic playlist a few months ago, I wouldn’t get your hopes up…
we can dream can’t we
> 2533274801176260;13377:
> But the kill frequency has basically nothing to do with the pacing of the game. They’re not even correlated, much less in a causal relation.
> Take any game mode - Slayer, CTF, Oddball, doesn’t matter - put it on a tiny map (Wizard comes to mind, or Foundation), put enough players on it, remove respawn timers and you will have a fast-paced game, because you’re constantly in combat.
> If you then increase weapon damage and reduce shield strength (or outright remove it like in SWAT), you will have a high kill frequency, but still have the same pace because the players can still come back into action just as fast.
> On the other hand, reduce weapon damage, buff shields to overshield and increase the recharge timer, and you will have a low kill frequency, but once again, the pacing of the game doesn’t change as you’re not less in combat than before.
> Of course those are two extremes, but the logic is the same for “normal” gameplay. The game pace is not defined by the number of kills in a game, because you could still frag multiple people at a time with a rocket or tank, yet have a boring, slow–Yoink- game while dragging yourself from encounter to encounter for extended periods of time. It is mostly (perhaps solely) defined by the downtime, the periods where a player has no meaningful engagement with either another player or at least the environment. (Camping, cat-and-mouse-chases, etc.) Taking out what I call “pileup”, namely double-counting kills that were actually made in the same gunfight somewhat alleviates this issue, but it’s still nothing more than a value that’s “nice to have”. That’s why this result is misleading, because adducing it in a discussion about game pacing implies a connection where there is none.
I disagree. I don’t think it’s that simple. While you’re correct in that player downtime (which is created by respawn duration, map structure, and distance) contributes to the pacing, that is just one aspect. Other important factors include TTK, spawns, map size, player speed, weapons on map, choice of gametype, etc. If you’re constantly engaging the enemy but can’t land a kill, the pacing will clearly suffer. Let’s not ignore that Halo has objectives, whether it be getting 50 kills or controlling a certain area of a map for a certain amount of time, and ideally you want to be moving towards these goals at a reasonable pace… otherwise it’ll just be long drawn out matches where nothing is being accomplished.
Yes, Halo’s pace decreased significantly after CE. That’s why I mentioned in my original post that it’s been that way since Halo 2 and it hasn’t really gotten any better 13 years later. TTK in Halo has never been “instant CoD style”, not even in CE. Sure, someone could potentially drop you in 0.6 seconds with the magnum, but it demanded a lot of skill to do so. This is why CE’s perfect TTK and average TTK were quite far apart – it provided a high shooting skill gap.
First want to address this skill gap, this still exists today in halo 5. Body shots in halo 5 do less damage than head shots.
This made it so that if you flanked two competent enemies, you could potentially drop them both given you don’t choke your shots. You’d be rewarded for a smart play. If you consider the same scenario for H2 (or any other Halo for that matter), you’d maybe drop one enemy before you die. You out-played them, but because two BR’s are always better than one, you have to settle for a 1-for-1 trade off. It didn’t matter how skillful your shot was in that scenario.
So let’s clear this up: teamwork existed in CE. There are no elements to H2 that are missing in CE, there is simply less of a gross reliance on team shooting and more opportunity for individual prowess.
I totally disagree with this statement, if i can kill an enemy faster that makes it easier for individuals to go on killing sprees. This is where in H2 and H3 the TTK was slowed and became more prominent this is very similar to H5. Im not saying that H CE didnt have team shooting but H2 to H5 have more.
Power items can increase the pace of the game but it is not an overriding factor a greater factor is map size and speed of movement.
Everything plays a part. Lockout TS was known for being stagnant and “standoff-ish”, but if you put rockets top mid, OS top blue, and made them spawn every 2 minutes, you’d see a lot more map movement and slaying going on. On the flip side, take camo out of Warlock and it wouldn’t really make a difference.
So you mean the engagments have increased not the pace of the gamplay to me the pace of gameplay is the overall time it takes to finish a game. If we look at the average game time of halo classics and compare them to halo 5 they are similar.
Agreed power weapons and weapon placement can change the pace of a game but as ive said its not the biggest factor map size and player speed
The average length of matches from H2-H5 probably are similar. I never said otherwise. As tsassi went over in his post, the differences seem to be marginal between those games, with CE being the obvious outlier.
And lastly you havent tied TTK to anything like sprint which is what this thread is for.
The reason Sprint was irrelevant in Halo CE is because you already moved faster, basically a constant sprint, there was no need for it back then. Now, jogging is significantly slower from past games and sprinting is only a tad bit faster. I have no problem with sprint… the only issue with sprint is the rule that follows it… no shield regen while sprinting. Spartan Charging is highly abused, so is the Ground Pound… two features added most likely to attract COD players.
And sprint/shooting could work just fine in just about any game(works in Far Cry/Battlefield) lol, it’s just not as effective in a game where everyone has an energy shield that needs to be broken down before you actually damage them. But it could be used as suppressing fire to keep people from a weapon, vehicle, doorway, or a team mate while you try to close the gap between you and the enemy/objective.
> First want to address this skill gap, this still exists today in halo 5. Body shots in halo 5 do less damage than head shots.
I mentioned skill gap to emphasize that a fast perfect TTK works fine in Halo given your utility weapon is difficult to use. Besides, a fast TTK isn’t really meant to increase the skill gap - it’s meant to increase the coherency of the game’s pacing. If you want to get right down to it, a 17-shot weapon is more skillful because it’s a more accurate approximation of a player’s ability to stay on target, but can you imagine what the surrounding game experience would look like? Not good.
> I totally disagree with this statement, if i can kill an enemy faster that makes it easier for individuals to go on killing sprees.
I have absolutely no idea why you think this is a bad thing.
> Agreed power weapons and weapon placement can change the pace of a game but as ive said its not the biggest factor map size and player speed
Alright. Like I said, everything plays a part.
> And lastly you havent tied TTK to anything like sprint which is what this thread is for.
I personally believe that sprint and thrust just serve to prolong engagements because by their very nature they are defensive options. Your gun is down when you use them. Just speaking from my own experience from Reach-H5.
> 2533274792854607;13397:
> The reason Sprint was irrelevant in Halo CE is because you already moved faster, basically a constant sprint, there was no need for it back then. Now, jogging is significantly slower from past games and sprinting is only a tad bit faster.
This is not true. Halo CE (and every game in the original trilogy for that matter) had a base movement speed of 2.25 units per second, while Halo 5 has a base movement speed of 2.60 units per second. Halo 5 has a significantly faster base movement speed. The only reason it might feel slower is that the maps are significantly larger than they used to be, as the size has been designed for sprint speed.
But there is no “need” for sprint here anywhere. Halo 5 doesn’t have sprint because the maps are large. The maps are large because Halo 5 has sprint. Sprint is the cause of everything here, not the effect. Sprint was not a design decision to “fix” anything. It was a design decision made solely because the developers wanted sprint, and everything has since then just been adjusted for that.
> 2533274794648158;13398:
> > And lastly you havent tied TTK to anything like sprint which is what this thread is for.
>
> I personally believe that sprint and thrust just serve to prolong engagements because by their very nature they are defensive options. Your gun is down when you use them. Just speaking from my own experience from Reach-H5.
I wouldn’t say sprint as much prolongs encounters as it just makes more encounters not result in someone’s death. I don’t think the time to raise your gun when coming out of sprint contributes to the length of encounters in any meaningful way.
> 2533274792854607;13397:
> The reason Sprint was irrelevant in Halo CE is because you already moved faster, basically a constant sprint, there was no need for it back then. Now, jogging is significantly slower from past games and sprinting is only a tad bit faster. I have no problem with sprint… the only issue with sprint is the rule that follows it… no shield regen while sprinting. Spartan Charging is highly abused, so is the Ground Pound… two features added most likely to attract COD players.
>
> And sprint/shooting could work just fine in just about any game(works in Far Cry/Battlefield) lol, it’s just not as effective in a game where everyone has an energy shield that needs to be broken down before you actually damage them. But it could be used as suppressing fire to keep people from a weapon, vehicle, doorway, or a team mate while you try to close the gap between you and the enemy/objective.
Base movement speed is actually faster in Halo 5.
Every Spartan Ability, including regular melee’s, account for <10% of all kills for the average player. As player skill increases this goes down even more, as does use of autos.
Spartan Charging isn’t highly abused, neither is Ground Pounding.
Your post is filled with false info.
> 2533274825830455;13399:
> > 2533274792854607;13397:
> > The reason Sprint was irrelevant in Halo CE is because you already moved faster, basically a constant sprint, there was no need for it back then. Now, jogging is significantly slower from past games and sprinting is only a tad bit faster.
>
> This is not true. Halo CE (and every game in the original trilogy for that matter) had a base movement speed of 2.25 units per second, while Halo 5 has a base movement speed of 2.60 units per second. Halo 5 has a significantly faster base movement speed. The only reason it might feel slower is that the maps are significantly larger than they used to be, as the size has been designed for sprint speed.
>
> But there is no “need” for sprint here anywhere. Halo 5 doesn’t have sprint because the maps are large. The maps are large because Halo 5 has sprint. Sprint is the cause of everything here, not the effect. Sprint was not a design decision to “fix” anything. It was a design decision made solely because the developers wanted sprint, and everything has since then just been adjusted for that.
>
>
>
>
> > 2533274794648158;13398:
> > > And lastly you havent tied TTK to anything like sprint which is what this thread is for.
> >
> > I personally believe that sprint and thrust just serve to prolong engagements because by their very nature they are defensive options. Your gun is down when you use them. Just speaking from my own experience from Reach-H5.
>
> I wouldn’t say sprint as much prolongs encounters as it just makes more encounters not result in someone’s death. I don’t think the time to raise your gun when coming out of sprint contributes to the length of encounters in any meaningful way.
Do you have a source for the movement speed of HaloCE-3 and Halo 5? I’ve always heard it said that Halo 5 is slower, but never actually seen a source for the claim.
> 2600292642016732;13401:
> > 2533274825830455;13399:
> > > 2533274792854607;13397:
> > > The reason Sprint was irrelevant in Halo CE is because you already moved faster, basically a constant sprint, there was no need for it back then. Now, jogging is significantly slower from past games and sprinting is only a tad bit faster.
> >
> > This is not true. Halo CE (and every game in the original trilogy for that matter) had a base movement speed of 2.25 units per second, while Halo 5 has a base movement speed of 2.60 units per second. Halo 5 has a significantly faster base movement speed. The only reason it might feel slower is that the maps are significantly larger than they used to be, as the size has been designed for sprint speed.
> >
> > But there is no “need” for sprint here anywhere. Halo 5 doesn’t have sprint because the maps are large. The maps are large because Halo 5 has sprint. Sprint is the cause of everything here, not the effect. Sprint was not a design decision to “fix” anything. It was a design decision made solely because the developers wanted sprint, and everything has since then just been adjusted for that.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > 2533274794648158;13398:
> > > > And lastly you havent tied TTK to anything like sprint which is what this thread is for.
> > >
> > > I personally believe that sprint and thrust just serve to prolong engagements because by their very nature they are defensive options. Your gun is down when you use them. Just speaking from my own experience from Reach-H5.
> >
> > I wouldn’t say sprint as much prolongs encounters as it just makes more encounters not result in someone’s death. I don’t think the time to raise your gun when coming out of sprint contributes to the length of encounters in any meaningful way.
>
> Do you have a source for the movement speed of HaloCE-3 and Halo 5? I’ve always heard it said that Halo 5 is slower, but never actually seen a source for the claim.
For Halo CE to 3, and the precise speeds are well known from the game files. For Halo 5 I ran my own test some months ago, similar as in the video, a 100 unit run (really 1,000 in the Halo 5 units because one unit in the original trilogy is ten units in Halo 5) and averaged over five runs. This is just part of a larger project I did to study the movement mechanics of Halo 5.
> 2600292642016732;13400:
>
Ok, I was wrong about the speed but whenever I play the Master Chief Collection: Halo CE, it feels like that fast DOOM type movement versus the more modern fluent movement of the other Halos.
And there are TONS of people that think Spartan Charging is annoying and abused. I typed “Spartan Charging Halo 5” in google to give you some references from forums and I’m not even wasting my time posting a link lol it took almost two pages to find something positive about it. Besides, any kind of Charging was already hated on in Destiny. And Ground Pounds have too much splash damage with no cooldown, so players can spam them over and over to keep other players out of an area… Plus, it was taken straight from COD:Advanced Warfare/Destiny/Titanfall. Halo 5 borrowed most of it’s “new” features from all the popular multiplayer games of 2014.