The sprint discussion thread

Games Halo 5: Guardians
16746

> 2535442765997359;16703:
>

Nice:

> 2535442765997359;16696:
> I find it very interesting how you casually managed to ignore what I wrote about

-Energy sword defined as sprinting? While not using the mechanic.
-Doom’s “way too high movement speed” and supposidely maps being to small.
-Doom’s “sprint” which is a power up, and Halo’s similar method of “sprint”
-How we’ve easily been able to change our movement speed earlier with no sprint, or what kind of special situational information we need to acquire for sprint which we don’t need for non-sprint, or do not benefit from with non-sprint.
-Question regarding GO’s spread pattern, in relation to 1.6 and the development period for GO. Along with what kind of massive changes CS:GO has seen, compared to those we’ve seen with Halo and its iterations. Thus, is that “sticking to their guns”? And how i343 sticking to their got us Halo 4 and 5.
-The dying style of the older Halos. Interesting to note here is that CS is older than Halo,yet you didn’t adress what kind of massive gameplay changes there have been, but reference it as the greatest FPS e-sport game of all time, also chose to ignore the OG Halos’ e-sport popularity, and their drop off from that.
-What “adaptation” means, and where Doom would be had they completed and released the “Call of Doom” game they had made.
-Answers regarding Doom’s MP.

> 2535442765997359;16703:
> I believe the topic that is being argued is the existence of varia8 movement speed, something that sprint offers. Knife functions the same way as sprint, you lose your ability to shoot for an increase in movement speed.

So, is that a yes on Energy Sword speed boost being sprinting?
Do you lose your offensive capabilities with the knife? Can you not use the knife at all?
Does it reduce your turn rate? Is it in the forward direction only?

> 2535442765997359;16703:
> As someone who plays CSGO regularly, I can assure you I think of this mechanic as a replacement for sprint.

And that’s you.

> 2535442765997359;16703:
> If it makes you happy, ditch the “sprint” animation but keep the variable movement mechanic in the game. I feel you are miffed at the sprint animation and not the mechanic itself, which is telling a lot.

Pray tell, what is it that it tells you?
Because I don’t know what you mean by ditching the sprint animation but keeping the “variable movement mechanic”, as the sprint “mechanic” isn’t dependant on a visual animation. Remove the animation and you’ve still got the exact same thing but no visual representation of what’s happening.
So, do I take the litreal meaning from someone who happily proclaim “players” know little of game design, the literal meaning above, or am I to take a more liberal interpretation where it’s merely a player activated speed boost which lasts for a short duration of time.

> 2535442765997359;16703:
> I believe I was discussing csgo and not 1.6. I criticized 1.6 and called it a “meme of a game”, thereby proving my point that players don’t understand anything about game design.

And I asked a question regarding the development of CS:GO and supposed feedback as well as a reaction to that feedback, which I heard quite some time ago, in relation to how “they stuck with their guns”.

> 2535442765997359;16703:
> I could counter-argue you by saying doom stuck to its old ways and now, we all see what happened to the MP.

As opposed to CS? Which has yet to be elaborated on the massive changes that has happened in terms of mechanics and so forth between each iteration
And no, in terms of Multiplayer, Doom “did not stick to its old ways”.
Customized loadouts, weapon unlocks based on time played, two weapon slots.
Massively powerful demon power-ups, also unlockable by playing more.

> 2535442765997359;16703:
> You seem to be missing the point. I quite like halo 5 and the community is very much active. Your assertion that it is not without any fact doesn’t change it.

If the top most played games on the Xbox App is anything to go by, Halo 5 isn’t on the top 30 list even, I count it to be placed on 43.
An active community is one thing, question is, how big is it?

> 2535442765997359;16698:
> It is perfectly reasonable to use popularity as a factor when discussing mechanics.

How popular is Halo 5? How popular did Halo 4 get?
In the long run?

> 2535442765997359;16696:
> CS:GO unmatched in quality and still going strong with an active and virile community.

So what exactly does “active and virile community” mean? Because CS:GO breaks population records, Halo 5 drops, even in these times when people are home and able to play.
What does “popular” mean then?

> 2535442765997359;16703:
> Moving from a point a to b before you enemy while having control of your movement speed introduces a semblance of mind-games in high rush combat where you need to balance risk and reward delicately. You could run to your cover and noob won’t be able to hit a running target, a competent player would. This introduces a level of sophistication to the otherwise bland gunplay where everyone can hit a shot owing to the constant moving speed.

So that’s a no then, not having sprint means it is not as important to reach B before the opponents.
I’m not really buying that a “noob” wouldn’t be able to hit another player running at constant sprint speed, but suddenly be able to hit that same player if it was constant bms only. Or that forward only sprint speed would make it more difficult for a noob, than against another player fighting back utilising good strafing, changing directions and so forth.

16747

> 2533274795123910;16746:
> > 2535442765997359;16703:
> >
>
> Nice:
>
>
> > 2535442765997359;16696:
> > I find it very interesting how you casually managed to ignore what I wrote about
>
> -Energy sword defined as sprinting? While not using the mechanic.
> -Doom’s “way too high movement speed” and supposidely maps being to small.
> -Doom’s “sprint” which is a power up, and Halo’s similar method of “sprint”
> -How we’ve easily been able to change our movement speed earlier with no sprint, or what kind of special situational information we need to acquire for sprint which we don’t need for non-sprint, or do not benefit from with non-sprint.
> -Question regarding GO’s spread pattern, in relation to 1.6 and the development period for GO. Along with what kind of massive changes CS:GO has seen, compared to those we’ve seen with Halo and its iterations. Thus, is that “sticking to their guns”? And how i343 sticking to their got us Halo 4 and 5.
> -The dying style of the older Halos. Interesting to note here is that CS is older than Halo,yet you didn’t adress what kind of massive gameplay changes there have been, but reference it as the greatest FPS e-sport game of all time, also chose to ignore the OG Halos’ e-sport popularity, and their drop off from that.
> -What “adaptation” means, and where Doom would be had they completed and released the “Call of Doom” game they had made.
> -Answers regarding Doom’s MP.
>
>
> > 2535442765997359;16703:
> > I believe the topic that is being argued is the existence of varia8 movement speed, something that sprint offers. Knife functions the same way as sprint, you lose your ability to shoot for an increase in movement speed.
>
> So, is that a yes on Energy Sword speed boost being sprinting?
> Do you lose your offensive capabilities with the knife? Can you not use the knife at all?
> Does it reduce your turn rate? Is it in the forward direction only?
>
>
> > 2535442765997359;16703:
> > As someone who plays CSGO regularly, I can assure you I think of this mechanic as a replacement for sprint.
>
> And that’s you.
>
>
> > 2535442765997359;16703:
> > If it makes you happy, ditch the “sprint” animation but keep the variable movement mechanic in the game. I feel you are miffed at the sprint animation and not the mechanic itself, which is telling a lot.
>
> Pray tell, what is it that it tells you?
> Because I don’t know what you mean by ditching the sprint animation but keeping the “variable movement mechanic”, as the sprint “mechanic” isn’t dependant on a visual animation. Remove the animation and you’ve still got the exact same thing but no visual representation of what’s happening.
> So, do I take the litreal meaning from someone who happily proclaim “players” know little of game design, the literal meaning above, or am I to take a more liberal interpretation where it’s merely a player activated speed boost which lasts for a short duration of time.
>
>
> > 2535442765997359;16703:
> > I believe I was discussing csgo and not 1.6. I criticized 1.6 and called it a “meme of a game”, thereby proving my point that players don’t understand anything about game design.
>
> And I asked a question regarding the development of CS:GO and supposed feedback as well as a reaction to that feedback, which I heard quite some time ago, in relation to how “they stuck with their guns”.
>
>
> > 2535442765997359;16703:
> > I could counter-argue you by saying doom stuck to its old ways and now, we all see what happened to the MP.
>
> As opposed to CS? Which has yet to be elaborated on the massive changes that has happened in terms of mechanics and so forth between each iteration
> And no, in terms of Multiplayer, Doom “did not stick to its old ways”.
> Customized loadouts, weapon unlocks based on time played, two weapon slots.
> Massively powerful demon power-ups, also unlockable by playing more.
>
>
> > 2535442765997359;16703:
> > You seem to be missing the point. I quite like halo 5 and the community is very much active. Your assertion that it is not without any fact doesn’t change it.
>
> If the top most played games on the Xbox App is anything to go by, Halo 5 isn’t on the top 30 list even, I count it to be placed on 43.
> An active community is one thing, question is, how big is it?
>
>
> > 2535442765997359;16698:
> > It is perfectly reasonable to use popularity as a factor when discussing mechanics.
>
> How popular is Halo 5? How popular did Halo 4 get?
> In the long run?
>
>
> > 2535442765997359;16696:
> > CS:GO unmatched in quality and still going strong with an active and virile community.
>
> So what exactly does “active and virile community” mean? Because CS:GO breaks population records, Halo 5 drops, even in these times when people are home and able to play.
> What does “popular” mean then?
>
>
> > 2535442765997359;16703:
> > Moving from a point a to b before you enemy while having control of your movement speed introduces a semblance of mind-games in high rush combat where you need to balance risk and reward delicately. You could run to your cover and noob won’t be able to hit a running target, a competent player would. This introduces a level of sophistication to the otherwise bland gunplay where everyone can hit a shot owing to the constant moving speed.
>
> So that’s a no then, not having sprint means it is not as important to reach B before the opponents.
> I’m not really buying that a “noob” wouldn’t be able to hit another player running at constant sprint speed, but suddenly be able to hit that same player if it was constant bms only. Or that forward only sprint speed would make it more difficult for a noob, than against another player fighting back utilising good strafing, changing directions and so forth.

I don’t know if you have played cs or not but I can assure you, a noob will have a LOT of difficulty getting a running headshot on a moving target especially if that target is using a knife and moving fast. You need to aim for the head in CS as most weapons are a one hit kill to the head without the helmet. This mechanical skill separates the wheat from the chaff. Your “buying” matters not to me as I have been playing CS for quite some time now. I have seen how CS noobs shoot. CS has a sprint mechanic like it or not. It is called “pulling out the knife” and what it does is increase the movement speed of the character. Also your assertion here

> 2533274795123910;16746:
> not having sprint means it is not as important to reach B before the opponents.

reveals your lack of knowledge regarding game design. It is extremely important in CS to reach a position before your enemy. It offers you superior position, more time to prepare yourselves, hold and angle with an AWP. Infact, an entire series of tactics rely upon getting the “best spawn” possible to reach a certain position before your enemy and hold said angle with an AWP (CSGO’s version of the sniper rifle). People take out the knife and “run” to get to these position ASAP. You walk faster with knife as well so in clutch situations where you can’t allow your enemy to know your location and yet you need to relocate, people pull out the knife and walk.

I have said this before and I will say this again, CS has sprint and it is called “using a knife”. If it makes you feel any better, I will phrase it like this. CS has a mechanic that allows its player to mover faster but they must sacrifice their ability to shoot, something that is functionally same as sprint. I understand that the Halo variation of sprint is lacking in that it offers mobility in a single direction whereas in CS, once you pull out your knife you can perform quite a bit of acrobatics. Knife increases your overall movement speed in all directions and this is very important. I suppose halo could do the same with sprint, tweak it and make it so that certain restrictions are lifted. The end game is, sacrifice the ability to shoot while increasing mobility.

16748

> 2535442765997359;16747:
> I don’t know if you have played cs or not but I can assure you, a noob will have a LOT of difficulty getting a running headshot on a moving target especially if that target is using a knife and moving fast. You need to aim for the head in CS as most weapons are a one hit kill to the head without the helmet. This mechanical skill separates the wheat from the chaff. Your “buying” matters not to me as I have been playing CS for quite some time now. I have seen how CS noobs shoot. CS has a sprint mechanic like it or not. It is called “pulling out the knife” and what it does is increase the movement speed of the character.

You do realise, that apart from ignoring even more stuff, with this you’re saying there’s a movement speed threshold at which noobs can’t hit anything anymore.
It’s not that you can variate your movement speed which throws noobs off, it’s that at a certain value, you’re arguing they can’t hit anything anymore. Because the knife has a certain value for movement speed, and the other weapons have theirs. If the weapon with the lowest movement speed got bumped to knife speed, and all other weapons bumped accordingly, noobs wouldn’t magically be able to hit you any better, they’d start missing you even more, or are you arguing that no matter how high the lowest speed is, noobs will hit you, and as soon as you introduce a way of increasing your speed by a margin, noobs will suddenly be unable to compensate for that marginal speed increase, even though you behave exactly the same in movement as you did with a lower speed, and thus be unable to hit you?

> 2535442765997359;16747:
> Also your assertion here
>
>
> > 2533274795123910;16746:
> > not having sprint means it is not as important to reach B before the opponents.

Nope, that’s not an assertion, that’s an interpretation of the answer you’ve given me.
See, you left out something, let me fetch it for you.

> 2533274795123910;16746:
> So that’s a no then, not having sprint means it is not as important to reach B before the opponents.

Here:

> 2535442765997359;16693:
> Variable movement speed is important for a multiplayer game as it adds an extra layer of skill that people have to master and refine, this separates the unskilled from the skilled. Reaching from point A to B before your enemy is a very valuable asset with the risk that it leaves you vulnerable to enemy fire. It is a fair trade-off and people should use it judiciously. Henceforth, I conclude that Sprint should stay.

This is your original post regarding that particular subject. Note that you’ve yet to elaborate on what kind of information is needed for sprint which we need to acquire that we do not benefit from in a game with no sprint.
Here you’re saying that it is important to reach point B before the enemy, and with that concluding that sprint should stay, as in, sprint makes it important to reach a destination before an opponent.

Now, what did I ask you? Well,

> 2533274795123910;16700:
> And without sprint, it isn’t a “very valuable asset” to reach point B before the enemy?

A simple “yes / no” question.

> 2535442765997359;16747:
> reveals your lack of knowledge regarding game design.

You keep bringing “game design” up but there’s nothing behind it, so far only empty words.
I don’t know what you know about it, or about game development considering the earlier remark regarding the “sprint animation”, which you’ve skipped to give any more insight into. Then again, “game design” is quite a broad term to bring to the table regarding the discussion about a mechanic and its effect on gameplay.

> 2535442765997359;16747:
> It is extremely important in CS to reach a position before your enemy. It offers you superior position, more time to prepare yourselves, hold and angle with an AWP. Infact, an entire series of tactics rely upon getting the “best spawn” possible to reach a certain position before your enemy and hold said angle with an AWP (CSGO’s version of the sniper rifle). People take out the knife and “run” to get to these position ASAP. You walk faster with knife as well so in clutch situations where you can’t allow your enemy to know your location and yet you need to relocate, people pull out the knife and walk.

Here you go again, I do not care about CS gameplay or its strategies, tactics and whatnot, otherwise maybe I would have played it more.
Is it, or is it not, more important to reach a position before your enemy, in a game that features sprint, than in a game that lacks sprint?
Is it more important to get to “Pink” on Truth in Halo 5, than it is getting to Pink on Midship in Halo 3? And this is important, is it more important, because Halo 5 features sprint?
Yes or no.

> 2535442765997359;16747:
> I have said this before and I will say this again, CS has sprint and it is called “using a knife”. If it makes you feel any better, I will phrase it like this. CS has a mechanic that allows its player to mover faster but they must sacrifice their ability to shoot, something that is functionally same as sprint. I understand that the Halo variation of sprint is lacking in that it offers mobility in a single direction whereas in CS, once you pull out your knife you can perform quite a bit of acrobatics. Knife increases your overall movement speed in all directions and this is very important. I suppose halo could do the same with sprint, tweak it and make it so that certain restrictions are lifted. The end game is, sacrifice the ability to shoot while increasing mobility.

Okay then, Halo 5 features sprint and sprint.
Sprint mechanic, and Energy Sword sprint.

Great, now, why is it necessary to sacrifice the ability to shoot in order to gain increased mobility?

16749

> 2535442765997359;16747:
> I have said this before and I will say this again, CS has sprint and it is called “using a knife”. If it makes you feel any better, I will phrase it like this. CS has a mechanic that allows its player to mover faster but they must sacrifice their ability to shoot, something that is functionally same as sprint. I understand that the Halo variation of sprint is lacking in that it offers mobility in a single direction whereas in CS, once you pull out your knife you can perform quite a bit of acrobatics. Knife increases your overall movement speed in all directions and this is very important. I suppose halo could do the same with sprint, tweak it and make it so that certain restrictions are lifted. The end game is, sacrifice the ability to shoot while increasing mobility.

Noticed you’ve entirely stopped talking about using DOOM at this point, when it was one of your two primary examples in your original statement.

> 2535442765997359;16693:
> DOOM has a variation of sprint and it is called the Haste powerup.

If you’re willing to accept DOOM, then you’re admitting to a solution that gives you increased mobility without sacrificing your shooting ability (actually increasing it), making your previous statement essentially irrelevant.

And if this solution works, then Halo has had this solution in place since Halo 4.

16750

> 2533274795123910;16748:
> You do realise, that apart from ignoring even more stuff, with this you’re saying there’s a movement speed threshold at which noobs can’t hit anything anymore.
> It’s not that you can variate your movement speed which throws noobs off, it’s that at a certain value, you’re arguing they can’t hit anything anymore. Because the knife has a certain value for movement speed, and the other weapons have theirs. If the weapon with the lowest movement speed got bumped to knife speed, and all other weapons bumped accordingly, noobs wouldn’t magically be able to hit you any better, they’d start missing you even more, or are you arguing that no matter how high the lowest speed is, noobs will hit you, and as soon as you introduce a way of increasing your speed by a margin, noobs will suddenly be unable to compensate for that marginal speed increase, even though you behave exactly the same in movement as you did with a lower speed, and thus be unable to hit you?
>
>
> Nope, that’s not an assertion, that’s an interpretation of the answer you’ve given me.
> See, you left out something, let me fetch it for you.
>
>
> > 2533274795123910;16746:
> > So that’s a no then, not having sprint means it is not as important to reach B before the opponents.
>
> Here:
>
> This is your original post regarding that particular subject. Note that you’ve yet to elaborate on what kind of information is needed for sprint which we need to acquire that we do not benefit from in a game with no sprint.
> Here you’re saying that it is important to reach point B before the enemy, and with that concluding that sprint should stay, as in, sprint makes it important to reach a destination before an opponent.
>
> Now, what did I ask you? Well,
>
>
>
>
> > 2533274795123910;16700:
> > And without sprint, it isn’t a “very valuable asset” to reach point B before the enemy?
>
> A simple “yes / no” question.
>
>
> You keep bringing “game design” up but there’s nothing behind it, so far only empty words.
> I don’t know what you know about it, or about game development considering the earlier remark regarding the “sprint animation”, which you’ve skipped to give any more insight into. Then again, “game design” is quite a broad term to bring to the table regarding the discussion about a mechanic and its effect on gameplay.
>
> Here you go again, I do not care about CS gameplay or its strategies, tactics and whatnot, otherwise maybe I would have played it more.
> Is it, or is it not, more important to reach a position before your enemy, in a game that features sprint, than in a game that lacks sprint?
> Is it more important to get to “Pink” on Truth in Halo 5, than it is getting to Pink on Midship in Halo 3? And this is important, is it more important, because Halo 5 features sprint?
> Yes or no.
>
>
>
>
> > 2535442765997359;16747:
> > I have said this before and I will say this again, CS has sprint and it is called “using a knife”. If it makes you feel any better, I will phrase it like this. CS has a mechanic that allows its player to mover faster but they must sacrifice their ability to shoot, something that is functionally same as sprint. I understand that the Halo variation of sprint is lacking in that it offers mobility in a single direction whereas in CS, once you pull out your knife you can perform quite a bit of acrobatics. Knife increases your overall movement speed in all directions and this is very important. I suppose halo could do the same with sprint, tweak it and make it so that certain restrictions are lifted. The end game is, sacrifice the ability to shoot while increasing mobility.
>
> Okay then, Halo 5 features sprint and sprint.
> Sprint mechanic, and Energy Sword sprint.
>
> Great, now, why is it necessary to sacrifice the ability to shoot in order to gain increased mobility?

balance? because running around like a rabbit on steroid while retaining the ability to snipe people is not balanced? It is broken and encourages mindless shooting or taking potshots. A tradeoff is necessary to balance this mechanic. If you want you can have sprint with the ability to shoot, go ahead and do that and no one will like it. It will ruin the balance and no one will walk/ use the normal speed. Everyone will sprint. It will defeat the whole purpose of introducing sprint. This goes against the game design and strategic aspects of gunfight that I am trying to present.

I did give you examples of game design and you dismissed it as “hurr durr I don’t care about strategy”. I am done providing more examples.

How else are you supposed to go from point A to point B quickly? Sprinting. I suppose you could teleport but they are restrictive by design and encourage camping. A sprint/variable movement mechanic is not restrictive.

It is not as if “noobs magically wont be able to hit you”. It is a fact that it is difficult to hit a faster target as opposed to slower one even if they are sharing a linear trajectory. It is basic human biology and physics. Noobs are noobs because it is difficult for them to shoot properly. It is especially true for CS as you need to go for the head which makes it a very fast moving, small target if the target is using a knife.

As for your “pink” example, I will try to address it the best I can. It is funny you choose “pink” as your example but I will try to expand on it. If there to be a location that houses a power weapon, then yes, it will be important to get their asap. Now,in halo 3 this is dependent on your spawn and if you get their first, good for you, if not, your enemy gets the weapon first and kills you. In 5, if you don’t get the weapon and you can see that you won’t be able to make it in time, you can simply sprint in the opposite direction and run away to increase you chances of survival. This strategic element that applies to power-ups and weapons is what I am referring to. Of course, there are certain gamemodes in 5 where you can simply “will your weapons into existence” so this doesn’t apply in those game-modes. I am talking from a competitive perspective and the “fair-starts” halo formula where you have to scavenge the map to find power weapons and dominate the map. Sprinting will also save lives in situations where you can simply run away from a grenade if you are on low health. Of course, if you make sprint universal and allow people to shoot while sprinting, without any drawback then no one will use it. We will regress back to a Doom style gameplay with no tactics and everyone running around all over the map trying to shoot each other in the face.

16751

> 2533274833081329;16749:
> > 2535442765997359;16747:
> > I have said this before and I will say this again, CS has sprint and it is called “using a knife”. If it makes you feel any better, I will phrase it like this. CS has a mechanic that allows its player to mover faster but they must sacrifice their ability to shoot, something that is functionally same as sprint. I understand that the Halo variation of sprint is lacking in that it offers mobility in a single direction whereas in CS, once you pull out your knife you can perform quite a bit of acrobatics. Knife increases your overall movement speed in all directions and this is very important. I suppose halo could do the same with sprint, tweak it and make it so that certain restrictions are lifted. The end game is, sacrifice the ability to shoot while increasing mobility.
>
> Noticed you’ve entirely stopped talking about using DOOM at this point, when it was one of your two primary examples in your original statement.
>
>
>
>
> > 2535442765997359;16693:
> > DOOM has a variation of sprint and it is called the Haste powerup.
>
> If you’re willing to accept DOOM, then you’re admitting to a solution that gives you increased mobility without sacrificing your shooting ability (actually increasing it), making your previous statement essentially irrelevant.
>
> And if this solution works, then Halo has had this solution in place since Halo 4.

I expanded upon my “sprint” philosophies. I took doom out because doom is not as tactical as Halo or CS. It is run and gun. Halo requires co-ordination and teamwork. This is wherein the whole “mindgames” element of gunplay, compounded with the existence of sprint comes in. A risk and reward system.

16752

Okay honestly…
Halo Reach styled sprint. Have it regen so you don’t run around the map at mach 10 like in H5 and slow the sprint speed down to Reach’s so people don’t race across the map.
Where sprint should and should not be used…
Sprint: Campaign/casual playlists such as btb/grifball/etc
No Sprint: Comp playlists

Easy enough sprint should be allowed for casual things and modes with bigger maps to get around a bit quicker and even in campaign for the same reasons. Though it should be limited so it’s not over used and not ruining the sandbox. In competitive play it has no place ie Halo CE-Reach had no sprint in comp playlists and it seems to be better that way.

So I think sprint should stay but be modified to not completely ruin the sandbox like Halo 5 where people had infinite sprint and could run around the map like lunatics but if 343 plays their cards right and makes the sprint just something to get around a bit quicker like Halo Reach in campaign and casual bigger map based games I think it will be fine and accepted as long as the btb maps are nothing like Halo 5’s and they make bigger, more open btb maps like how they are in classic Halo games I don’t think there would be much of an issue there.

As a side edit I saw someone mention not losing the ability to shoot while sprinting. Dumb idea there needs to be a consequence to moving around the map faster and if you use sprint in the wrong place at the wrong time you shouldn’t be rewarded for making bad decisions. I think it’s a bad idea for the Halo sandbox with that being said.

16753

> 2535442765997359;16751:
> > 2533274833081329;16749:
> > > 2535442765997359;16747:
> > > I have said this before and I will say this again, CS has sprint and it is called “using a knife”. If it makes you feel any better, I will phrase it like this. CS has a mechanic that allows its player to mover faster but they must sacrifice their ability to shoot, something that is functionally same as sprint. I understand that the Halo variation of sprint is lacking in that it offers mobility in a single direction whereas in CS, once you pull out your knife you can perform quite a bit of acrobatics. Knife increases your overall movement speed in all directions and this is very important. I suppose halo could do the same with sprint, tweak it and make it so that certain restrictions are lifted. The end game is, sacrifice the ability to shoot while increasing mobility.
> >
> > Noticed you’ve entirely stopped talking about using DOOM at this point, when it was one of your two primary examples in your original statement.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > 2535442765997359;16693:
> > > DOOM has a variation of sprint and it is called the Haste powerup.
> >
> > If you’re willing to accept DOOM, then you’re admitting to a solution that gives you increased mobility without sacrificing your shooting ability (actually increasing it), making your previous statement essentially irrelevant.
> >
> > And if this solution works, then Halo has had this solution in place since Halo 4.
>
> I expanded upon my “sprint” philosophies. I took doom out because doom is not as tactical as Halo or CS. It is run and gun. Halo requires co-ordination and teamwork. This is wherein the whole “mindgames” element of gunplay, compounded with the existence of sprint comes in. A risk and reward system.

The existence or style of Sprint does not prevent a game from being tactical. Halo especially since you’re constantly moving for a map/weapon advantage and you aren’t meant to stop moving once you’re shot. It’s one step below being as run and gun as DOOM or traditional arena shooters. In this case “tactical” just means “more buttons to press for the same result”, but doesn’t necessarily mean “better.”

“coordination and teamwork” also doesn’t directly rely on this one mechanic because I could just bring up Halo CE and how it maintains a competitive community to this day, to the point where teamwork controls the very spawns of the player.

Why does this style provided by DOOM only now not work but the one provided by CS does work? Because now it’s no longer “game needs to have Sprint”, it’s “game needs to have this variation of Sprint,” especially since now you’re saying that DOOM’s way is bad and a regression, as if Sprint was linear progress.

Halo 5 is going with not one, but three variations of Sprint, and some people here are only advocating to remove one of them - and arguably this variation has the weakest amount of “risk/reward” going for it.

16754

> 2535442765997359;16750:
> balance? because running around like a rabbit on steroid while retaining the ability to snipe people is not balanced? It is broken and encourages mindless shooting or taking potshots.

And that “balance” argument comes from, where?
For example, Josh Holmes’ post on teambeyond which is quoted here, only mentions balancing sprint, regarding the escepability of it. Never about anything being “broken” or that it “encourages mindless shooting” before sprint was introduced.

> 2535442765997359;16750:
> A tradeoff is necessary to balance this mechanic. If you want you can have sprint with the ability to shoot, go ahead and do that and no one will like it. It will ruin the balance and no one will walk/ use the normal speed. Everyone will sprint. It will defeat the whole purpose of introducing sprint. This goes against the game design and strategic aspects of gunfight that I am trying to present.

At which point is “a tradeoff necessary”? At what speed levels does it become “unbalanced” to be able to shoot and move at top speed at the same time?
That’s quite the claim, “no one will like it”.
The new sprint while retaining all capabilities would be the normal speed, and yes, everyone would sprint.
So, you wouldn’t have to introduce sprint.

Not to mention, if Halo CE-3’s speeds aren’t acceptable to use while being able to shoot, how is Halo 5 with a higher BMS acceptable?

> 2535442765997359;16750:
> I did give you examples of game design and you dismissed it as “hurr durr I don’t care about strategy”. I am done providing more examples.

Sure, pulling one of the broadest terms you possible can in terms of game development and telling anyone who you can’t highly can’t answer properly, that they don’t know anything about that subject, is a sure way of getting your own point across, isn’t it? Especially when you’ve very clearly made it seem like you don’t know the difference between an “animation”, and the “mechanic”.

Moving on, “hurr durr I don’t care about strategy”, you’re fairly close to a pattern in leaving out essential parts of what you choose to quote, to, what you choose to quote.
See, what I asked, was a simple “yes no” question, but all you’ve actually given me are “strategy lectures”.
Let me yet again point out that I do not care for CS:GO’s gameplay or strategies, if it would’ve, I’m certain I would have played it more. Not to mention, the original question, if it is more important to reach a specific location in a game with sprint than in a game without sprint, does not include a specific game, at all. Either you don’t understand the question, or you do understand it but you do not want to answer it at all, properly.

Your examples of “game design”, are tactical and strategical tips 'n tricks which I really doubt made it into any larger overarching document during the development of CS:GO. I’d also narrow that part down to the more specific map design, and weapon balance.
Or do you think Blizzard already had all the Starcraft / Warcraft tactics and strategies planned somewhere?

> 2535442765997359;16750:
> How else are you supposed to go from point A to point B quickly? Sprinting. I suppose you could teleport but they are restrictive by design and encourage camping. A sprint/variable movement mechanic is not restrictive.

Sprint is not restrictive, said directly after, in the same post no less, mentioning that a restrictive mechanic should be in place, something like removing the ability of long range combat.

How? You move at the highest speed provided to you by the game, the time it takes you to get there is decided by the map designer, the only thing you’ve managed to do by implementing sprint is removing your combat efficiency, compared to a sprintless game.
Now, I like how you mention “game design” so much, that you use teleporters as the only example and label them as “restrictive” by design.
Not only can teleporters be redesigned in a wide manner of ways, but they are far from the only map utility assets which can be used for fast traversal, and as they’re designed now fall well within the “risk / reward” framework which even you yourself have used for sprint, and variable movement.

If we for instance start with teleporters, is simply replace the whole concept with “Portals” from Portal, and with these you can do a lot. If I’m not mistaken, the first Unreal Tournament had every door be a portal, and they were then connected. There’s a map called Fractal, where if you fall through the trap door at the bottom you come down from the roof.
Then we’ve got man cannons, a few earlier games had conveyor belts, we’ve had elevators and grav lift equipment.
If that’s not enough it’s entirely possible to introduce “robotic arms” which can take a player along a specific route with twists and turns.

16755

> 2535442765997359;16750:
> It is not as if “noobs magically wont be able to hit you”. It is a fact that it is difficult to hit a faster target as opposed to slower one even if they are sharing a linear trajectory. It is basic human biology and physics. Noobs are noobs because it is difficult for them to shoot properly.

That’s exactly what I said.
The way you’ve been arguing has been that it’s the variable speed which makes it difficult, not the velocities themselves.

> 2535442765997359;16750:
> As for your “pink” example, I will try to address it the best I can. It is funny you choose “pink” as your example but I will try to expand on it.

I recall saying it’s a simple “yes / no” question.

> 2535442765997359;16750:
> If there to be a location that houses a power weapon, then yes, it will be important to get their asap.

Oh, I’m sorry, I thought it was implied from the start, starting with your post, that the desired location is a point of interest to both parties.
Now, that “yes” wasn’t so hard, now was it?

> 2535442765997359;16750:
> Now,in halo 3 this is dependent on your spawn and if you get their first, good for you, if not, your enemy gets the weapon first and kills you. In 5, if you don’t get the weapon and you can see that you won’t be able to make it in time, you can simply sprint in the opposite direction and run away to increase you chances of survival.

Now with the unnecessary “expansion”:

So getting somewhere is not dependant on your spawn point in Halo 5?
And for some reason, in Halo 3 if you’re not able to get there in time, the opponents will get it and kill you immediately?
But in Halo 5 you’re somehow relayed more information through what means exactly? That you’re not going to get there in time, and can make a decision to get out.

Halo 5 spawn points does not matter for map traversal times and you’ll always know when an enemy will get somewhere at all times.
As opposed to Halo 3 where spawn points matter for map traversal times and you have no clue ever, when someone will get somewhere, and if they do you die.
Got it.

> 2535442765997359;16750:
> Sprinting will also save lives in situations where you can simply run away from a grenade if you are on low health. Of course, if you make sprint universal and allow people to shoot while sprinting, without any drawback then no one will use it. We will regress back to a Doom style gameplay with no tactics and everyone running around all over the map trying to shoot each other in the face.

Sure, that would be ignoring any weapons balanced around sprinting speeds so that potential blast radiuses would be increased.
But ok, a skillfully well placed grenade with thought and precision behind it can easily be evaded by noobs with the press of a button, now that’s great game design.

Great move there, doing lengths of “tactical” stuff for CS:GO, citing “game design”, but dismissing Doom, and with that, its cousins UT, Tribes, Quake and other games where you can run at full speed while shooting as games with no tactics and players running around trying to shoot each other in the face.
Pretty sure Halo CE-3 all required strategies and tactics, but what do I know, perhaps all that came with Halo Reach, or possibly Halo 4.

16756

> 2533274795123910;16755:
> That’s exactly what I said.
> The way you’ve been arguing has been that it’s the variable speed which makes it difficult, not the velocities themselves.

Variable velocity adds an element of unpredictability that makes things diffcut and fun. The reason we strafe to avoid shots, crouch, crouch jump, all of it is to add unpredictability.

> 2533274795123910;16755:
> Oh, I’m sorry, I thought it was implied from the start, starting with your post, that the desired location is a point of interest to both parties.
> Now, that “yes” wasn’t so hard, now was it?

If a desired location houses an item of interest then yes, the location and by extension, the item is desirable. Then there is case of “vantage points” on certain maps.

> 2533274795123910;16755:
> So getting somewhere is not dependant on your spawn point in Halo 5?
> And for some reason, in Halo 3 if you’re not able to get there in time, the opponents will get it and kill you immediately?
> But in Halo 5 you’re somehow relayed more information through what means exactly? That you’re not going to get there in time, and can make a decision to get out.

I don’t know if you are trolling or you really seem incapable of understanding. If an enemy has a power weapon, yes, they can instantly kill you. Having the ability to sprint can be the difference between getting one shot by a sniper or a rocket launcher. I don’t see how that is difficult to grasp.

> 2533274795123910;16755:
> Halo 5 spawn points does not matter for map traversal times and you’ll always know when an enemy will get somewhere at all times.
> As opposed to Halo 3 where spawn points matter for map traversal times and you have no clue ever, when someone will get somewhere, and if they do you die.
> Got it.

I don’t think you understand. It has nothing to do with the relaying of information. I am trying to point out that a variable velocity mechanic,which can be used at will, will provide you with more options to react to an unforeseen scenario, for example, being ambushed by an enemy. I don’t even know how how came to the aforementioned conclusion.

> 2535442765997359;16750:
> Sprinting will also save lives in situations where you can simply run away from a grenade if you are on low health. Of course, if you make sprint universal and allow people to shoot while sprinting, without any drawback then no one will use it. We will regress back to a Doom style gameplay with no tactics and everyone running around all over the map trying to shoot each other in the face.

> 2533274795123910;16755:
> Sure, that would be ignoring any weapons balanced around sprinting speeds so that potential blast radiuses would be increased.
> But ok, a skillfully well placed grenade with thought and precision behind it can easily be evaded by noobs with the press of a button, now that’s great game design.

Need I remind you that grenade spam is and has always been a thing in Halo? There is nothing tactical about logging a room full with 20 nades with your buddies. CE was especially horrible with its ability to being able to carry upto 8 nades. There is nothing “skillful” about spamming nades in a room. Other games balance this out by limiting the number of grenades so that players have to think twice before using them. CSGO, for example, allows you to carry only 1 HE grenade. Yes, adding sprint will allow the mitigation of grenade cheese in cases where battle literally becomes a grenade-spam fiesta between 2 teams. It is not fun and it is by no means, balanced.

> 2533274795123910;16755:
> Great move there, doing lengths of “tactical” stuff for CS:GO, citing “game design”, but dismissing Doom, and with that, its cousins UT, Tribes, Quake and other games where you can run at full speed while shooting as games with no tactics and players running around trying to shoot each other in the face.
> Pretty sure Halo CE-3 all required strategies and tactics, but what do I know, perhaps all that came with Halo Reach, or possibly Halo 4.

I don’t know where you come from but Quake and Doom are arena shooters. They are designed to be twitch shooters where you don’t have to think a lot and shoot everybody in the face . I am sorry to have to break you to this but Quake and Doom aren’t regarded as “tactical” games.

16757

> 2533274795123910;16754:
> And that “balance” argument comes from, where?
> For example, Josh Holmes’ post on teambeyond which is quoted here, only mentions balancing sprint, regarding the escepability of it. Never about anything being “broken” or that it “encourages mindless shooting” before sprint was introduced.

The balance argument comes from the observation of player patterns and their tendency to exploit a system. Something that is sure to happen.

> 2533274795123910;16754:
> At which point is “a tradeoff necessary”? At what speed levels does it become “unbalanced” to be able to shoot and move at top speed at the same time?
> That’s quite the claim, “no one will like it”.
> The new sprint while retaining all capabilities would be the normal speed, and yes, everyone would sprint.
> So, you wouldn’t have to introduce sprint.
>
> Not to mention, if Halo CE-3’s speeds aren’t acceptable to use while being able to shoot, how is Halo 5 with a higher BMS acceptable?

If you don’t use sprint, it simply becomes Halo with a Doom speed which brings us to the initial point of the discussion. Mindless shooting and a “dumbing” down of the strategies involved.

> 2533274795123910;16754:
> Sure, pulling one of the broadest terms you possible can in terms of game development and telling anyone who you can’t highly can’t answer properly, that they don’t know anything about that subject, is a sure way of getting your own point across, isn’t it? Especially when you’ve very clearly made it seem like you don’t know the difference between an “animation”, and the “mechanic”.
>
> Moving on, “hurr durr I don’t care about strategy”, you’re fairly close to a pattern in leaving out essential parts of what you choose to quote, to, what you choose to quote.
> See, what I asked, was a simple “yes no” question, but all you’ve actually given me are “strategy lectures”.
> Let me yet again point out that I do not care for CS:GO’s gameplay or strategies, if it would’ve, I’m certain I would have played it more. Not to mention, the original question, if it is more important to reach a specific location in a game with sprint than in a game without sprint, does not include a specific game, at all. Either you don’t understand the question, or you do understand it but you do not want to answer it at all, properly.
>
> Your examples of “game design”, are tactical and strategical tips 'n tricks which I really doubt made it into any larger overarching document during the development of CS:GO. I’d also narrow that part down to the more specific map design, and weapon balance.
> Or do you think Blizzard already had all the Starcraft / Warcraft tactics and strategies planned somewhere?

I provided you with a literal scenario, in great detail explaining the weapons used and how they interact with the sandbox. You dismissed it as nothing. My explanation was not a “broad term”. Your refusal to understand something won’t change the reality of the situation. I use CSGO a an example because guess what, it is the king of FPS shooters. It has been so for the past 20 years so I’m sure they must be doing something right to be able to retain that crown. Maybe halo could pick up a few things about balance from it. Something like, I dunno, doing something about the grenade spam meme. Grenade spam becomes even more of an issue in small maps like Zealot. I can’t say about Blizzard but in case of CS, yes, the developers are very aware of the strategies used by the players and tweak their game in accordance with those strategies. Strategies and tactics are of the utmost important when evaluating the life-cycle and fun factor of a game because let us be honest, no one wants to play a broken game.
For the thousandth time, I don’t care about the animation. I care about the mechanic. Hell, it you want to make your spartan “waltz” to a location while sprinting, do it I don’t care. What I care about is that there should be a mechanic that should give considerable boost to the player speed while restricting his combat abilities. Mainly to be used to retreat or reposition. Also, there should be very little delay between the switching of the walk and sprint stances. People should not have to waste a second to start sprinting (looking at you reach) and similarly they shouldn’t have to waste time to switch to walk from sprint(once again, looking at you reach). CS does this by making the “switch to knife” time very low.

> 2533274795123910;16754:
> Sprint is not restrictive, said directly after, in the same post no less, mentioning that a restrictive mechanic should be in place, something like removing the ability of long range combat.
>
> How? You move at the highest speed provided to you by the game, the time it takes you to get there is decided by the map designer, the only thing you’ve managed to do by implementing sprint is removing your combat efficiency, compared to a sprintless game.
> Now, I like how you mention “game design” so much, that you use teleporters as the only example and label them as “restrictive” by design.
> Not only can teleporters be redesigned in a wide manner of ways, but they are far from the only map utility assets which can be used for fast traversal, and as they’re designed now fall well within the “risk / reward” framework which even you yourself have used for sprint, and variable movement.
>
> If we for instance start with teleporters, is simply replace the whole concept with “Portals” from Portal, and with these you can do a lot. If I’m not mistaken, the first Unreal Tournament had every door be a portal, and they were then connected. There’s a map called Fractal, where if you fall through the trap door at the bottom you come down from the roof.
> Then we’ve got man cannons, a few earlier games had conveyor belts, we’ve had elevators and grav lift equipment.
> If that’s not enough it’s entirely possible to introduce “robotic arms” which can take a player along a specific route with twists and turns.

are you really that incapable of understanding the value of unpredictability in a game? The map-designer argument works against players because once a player has mastered the map, there is nothing else to be mastered. This increases the gap between people who are knowledgeable about the map and who are not. With sprint, even a new player has that advantage of “unpredictability” given their “erratic movement”. This unpredictability caused by sprint will persist across all tiers of game and will be something that will have to be factored in with pro-level play.
Teleporters are something I am against because they are very skewed in the risk reward section. Teleporters encourage camping. Once you get out of a teleporter, you can’t do much to fight the guy who has camped outside of it. You fight a losing battle. With sprint, you may not be able to shoot but you can evade. Also, teleporters will make the games restrictive as every team will vie for teleporter control. The rest of the map will be relatively unattended. Team who gains teleported control will have the advantage. Sprint is not unbalanced so no matter wherever a team may be, they will have a chance for a fair fight. It won’t be a one sided slaughter for the rest of the game just because a team manged to get control of a teleporter (in case of teleporters) owing to their better spawn for the rest of the game.

16758

I sense a trending theme of a game without sprint, but with a slightly boosted movement speed. And that sounds good to me. Try that.

16759

This thread is still going? Nice! Amazed there is still any real debate to be had.

If you enjoy being unable to shoot while moving at max speed like you could in the past, just so you can feel ‘immersed’ in the illusion of speed then good for you! So what if map design and sandbox balance suffers… it’s in the books!.. and more importantly it’s in other games… Halo had to evolve by dropping it’s uniqueness to be more like everything else right???

16760

> 2533275001522797;16738:
> > 2533274833081329;16732:
> > > 2533275001522797;16731:
> > > > 2533274795123910;16730:
> > > > > 2533274887581216;16729:
> > > > > but I’ve already made videos that contradict the whole “sprint isn’t faster paced” logic that people seem to make up. Yes, Sprint is indeed way faster paced, the reason why Sprint doesn’t work on the older maps is because the older maps weren’t built with Spartan abilities in mind (at least with Halo 5).
> >
> > It was? That answer is easy.
> >
> > Halo 5 is the fastest movement in the series because the walk speed is 2.59 units per second and Halo CE-3 is 2.25 units per second. Sprint speed is even faster than that. Assuming all distances are equal, Halo 5 will always be the fastest without even needing Sprint involved - didn’t need game comparison videos to do that much.
> >
> > The consistent problem that I have with Sprint is that I just proved Sprint isn’t the only way to be faster (because Halo 5 is still faster without Sprint), and 95% of the attempts to justify it falls flat on its face once you apply it to other parts of the same game.
> >
> > Like the whole “in the books Chief sprints!” thing. I care less than 0% about what the lore says about what is primarily a game mechanic - and I know most people here feels the same, after all the books never mention Chief having to slide jump to move faster. If we’re allowed to take liberties with lore purely due to gameplay, why is Sprint not given the same treatment?
> >
> > EDIT:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > 2533275001522797;16731:
> > > In classic Halo, you cannot move at a slower speed.
> >
> > Of course you can. It’s “not pushing the stick all the way” The only problem is PC keyboards and how they’re binary (but some games have a “walk” key).
>
> My bad, I didn’t know you didn’t care about lore because most fans do. I knew you would say “not pushing the stick all the way” but it still isn’t walking. It was a misspeak on my part, I mean to say walk not move. Everyone knows about the tip toe and crouching.
>
>
> > 2533274795123910;16733:
> > > 2533275001522797;16731:
> > > He’s actually right. I did a test. Yes, the Halo 2 BMS is faster than Halo 5’s walk speed but Halo 5’s sprint speed is actually faster. In any video you will see, the Halo 2 example will reach a certain location first. How would a game with a slower speed reach a location faster than a game that has a faster speed? The maps in Halo 5 are way bigger than Halo 2 so, it takes longer. If you play on one of the maps in Halo 5 that have been forged to be the same size as the original in Halo 2(Heretic, Sanctuary) you will see that Halo 5 does have the fastest speed.
> >
> > Halo 2 BMS is faster than Halo 5 BMS because you get to locations in a shorter time, however play on a Forged 1:1 Halo 2 map in Halo 5 and Halo 5 is the fastest.
> > What?
> >
> > Okay, you did a test.
> > What did you do?
> > What was the distance you ran?
> > What time did you do it in?
> >
> > When you give a distance, and time, velocity can be calculated.
> > 63 world units, or 83 metres are distances.
> > Midship base to base, for example, is not a distance which can be used in an equation.
> >
> > Nighterlev’s videos only provided travel times on maps between different games. There’s no amount of distance provided, there’s no velocity anywhere.
> > Any of those maps could have been shorter or longer, with movement speeds altered between the games, which would net the times which were measured in the videos.
> >
> > You don’t proclaim a car which maxes at 50 km/h to be faster than a car maxing at 100 km/h, when the 50 car completes a 40 km track while the 100 car must complete a 100 km track.
> > That is the video scenario, taken to its extreme.
> >
> > Before I post a video regarding this velocity subject, and some pictures to go along with it, I want to see your numbers, and how you got them.
> > Because all you got now is what I described in extreme with the car example.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > 2533275001522797;16731:
> > > Sprint seems more accurate to lore. When you read the books you will see sentences like “He began to sprint towards the sound of gunfire” obviously he was moving at a slower speed. In classic Halo, you cannot move at a slower speed.
> >
> > Lore again.
> > i343 can write whatever they want in the lore.
> > So, if the next book suddenly does away with “weapons down” sprint, you say it’s okay to move top speed and fire weapons with full accuracy, like Halo CE - 3.
> > And yes, you could move att slower speeds in Halo CE - 3.
> > You just didn’t tilt the stick to its max, and you could also crouch which lowered your speed.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > 2533275001522797;16731:
> > > You move at the same peed at all times which isn’t accurate to lore or reality.
> > > Do you run the same speed everywhere? To the bathroom, kitchen, etc… It makes more since to have two different speeds but at the same time one speed is easier. Not to mention that everything doesn’t have to be accurate to lore or the plasma pistol would be a one shot weapon when overcharged.
> >
> > What I’m getting from this is.
> > Halo should be as realistic as possible, but only for things you think, some things doesn’t have to.
> > But that’s okay, they can write the lore as they want and you’ll change stances on what should and shouldn’t be possible to do in the game. How about that prone?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > 2533275001522797;16731:
> > > 2nd EDIT: I just read what I quoted. What Nightlev has shared is not besides the point at all. His post was about sprint and this thread is about sprint, check. One of the arguments that Vegetable and I were discussing were whether classic Halo or modern Halo with sprint is faster, check. Also, he quoted us directly, check. Seems completely relevant and on topic to me. You may want to read what we were discussing earlier before making false assumptions.
> >
> > So you don’t even read what you quote?
> >
> > Perhaps you should read what I quoted.
> > My post is under the assumption that I recall correctly, that Nighterlev made a video some time ago demonstrating sprint speed being in terms of raw speed, in velocity, faster than BMS. Henche the very first part of my own text: “As far as I recall, if it was indeed you who made a “sprint video”, you missed the point entirely.”
> > Which I clarified really hasn’t been something a lot of people argue would be the case, only seen a handful of cases, but rather, sprint doesn’t really make a difference between titles featuring sprint, and titles without
>
> If you can’t look at two maps and be able to tell they are more parallel compared to Heretic and Truth, idk what to tell you. Sure, it probably isn’t completely accurate but, it is more accurate than Halo 5’s Truth map. At least I tried something, what are you doing? Don’t answer, it isn’t even relevant. If you want numbers, get them yourself don’t make me do your work for you. I’m just saying some things make sense to be more realistic than others. I read a post by someone else and thought I quoted it, people makes mistakes you know. Not everyone is immortal like you are. Is it not true? All the people arguing against sprint haven’t even reached D3 in any playlist in Halo 5. Though like some people said earlier, knowledge about sprint is irrelevant because everyone supposedly knows how it works. If I could see one person who has at least hit Onyx arguing against sprint here, I’ll shut up because I am not convinced sprint is really bad when lower ranked players are the only ones arguing against it. I have checked the service records.

I have been a Champion in almost every playlist in Halo 5, and I can tell you that I am more against sprint now than before Halo 5.

16761

Who cares? Just enjoy the new game! Odds are things that 343 implemented will most likely stay…I would be very surprised to see sprint removed.

Instead of arguing about this we should be discussing the topic of battle royals and possibility of halo implementing one into infinite. I pray to god this does not happen

16762

> 2624419068589170;16761:
> Who cares? Just enjoy the new game! Odds are things that 343 implemented will most likely stay…I would be very surprised to see sprint removed.
>
> Instead of arguing about this we should be discussing the topic of battle royals and possibility of halo implementing one into infinite. I pray to god this does not happen

i agree with you.
there are things that will stay for ever in the halo series and become more a basic thing in the series.

there is a big chance there never gone remove sprint from the halo series that sprint will chance in each new game is somthing else but removing is something there not gone do at some point.

its the same with Warzone that type playlist is something that there never gone remove more since in halo 3 ODST it was the first time there have add a second game playlist on the menu and since then its becoming more a basic thing that you more get Campaing,Matchmaking,Forge and the second playlist like FireFight,Warzone and spec opps.
the only thing there have done since Halo 3 ODST with it is change it and not remove it.

the big discusion is now we most have is about a battle royal in the halo series.
is that something halo needs or not needs.

in the 4 years off this thread has notting been chance it only has show that the communety from halo has been split about sprint.
if there add sprint option in the next halo game halo infinite then its the developers choose to do it same if there not wane add it its there choose not us to make.
the only thing we can show is that we disagree with it or agree with it but the final decision about adding sprint or not has been make all but there not gone tell us and for that we have to wait when the game is out.

16763

> 2533274823394867;16762:
> the only thing we can show is that we disagree with it or agree with it

Therefore this thread has reason to exist. It’s a discussion thread, not “make 343 do X” thread.

You and X SniPEd YoU X going “who cares? We need to talk about this other subjective thing instead!” is not only off topic, it’s telling people that their discussion, and therefore opinion does not matter because it’s not battle royale.

To which I say: “go make a ‘Battle Royale discussion’ thread”

16764

> 2533274833081329;16763:
> > 2533274823394867;16762:
> > the only thing we can show is that we disagree with it or agree with it
>
> Therefore this thread has reason to exist. It’s a discussion thread, not “make 343 do X” thread.
>
> You and X SniPEd YoU X going “who cares? We need to talk about this other subjective thing instead!” is not only off topic, it’s telling people that their discussion, and therefore opinion does not matter because it’s not battle royale.
>
> To which I say: “go make a ‘Battle Royale discussion’ thread”

Haha I guess your right.

16765

I had an idea recently for how you might be able to implement sprint while still addressing the concerns that no-sprint folks (such as myself) have about map design and the combat loop with its inclusion. Forgive me if someone else presented this idea or some variation earlier in the thread, but with nearly 850 pages to go through I don’t exactly have the time to ensure I’m being original here.

The basis of the idea is that rather than have sprint as an instant activation by a player pressing a button, you have it as a passive activation from a player’s forward movement. So let’s say you have CE-3 base movement speed, with the ability to shoot, melee, throw grenades, all that good stuff. After ~7 seconds or so of forward movement on the player’s part, they would begin to sprint at however much of an increase to movement speed, unable to shoot/throw grenades/melee without dropping out of sprint, which they would then have to build up the momentum again in order to sprint once more. This would allow a map like Midship or Warlock to exist without enlarging the map (and thus lengthening the sight-lines) by accounting for sprint, because odds are in a 4v4 Slayer match you’re going to get into a fight before you’ve sprinted across the regular length of those maps, and will have to regain that speed again once you have. It also allows sprint to remain as a decent traversal tool for larger BTB maps in the event you are unable to acquire a vehicle, or campaign levels in general where balancing against other players is moot.

I went with 7 seconds here for the obvious reference, but also because I think it’s a good number when considering the criticism that sprint makes escape too easy. Having to commit to the sprint for seven seconds would hypothetically force the escaping player to be more aware of their surroundings to keep cover so they are not killed while trying to run away. And if the following player is unable to kill the runner within those seven seconds, he likely would not have been able to if the game had no sprint in the first place. Not being a game designer myself, I could see this number either going up or down depending on actual playtesting, and almost certainly with the time to sprint in the campaign being lowered to again reinforce its use for traversal (and have the value be fully adjustable in custom games besides). I believe playtesting would also show whether it would be necessary to have the TTS countdown be reset when a player is shot, have it add additional time per shot/amount of damage taken while building momentum, or if the length of the TTS would be sufficient on its own. I might air on the side of only the time commitment as the deciding factor, but that could change depending on how the testing played out (though I personally think the TTS for multiplayer should be no less than five seconds at absolute best, and no less than three seconds for campaign). Odds are you would want a player getting shot to knock them out of sprint as well, but I admittedly haven’t given that aspect much thought as yet.

I also wanted to talk specifically about how this sprint system would work with the Energy Sword, since the inclusion of sprint has made the sword a much more offensive tool than it was in the original three games. Since any attack forces the player out of sprint as is, the inclusion of the TTS would make it harder for a player with the sword to sprint around cutting down the enemy team, since they would have to once again build up to a sprint after every kill, thus making escape after a kill and running to the next one more difficult. This puts the sword back into a more defensive weapon, which I personally think is for the better. I also considered the possibility that switching weapons during a sprint would cause you to drop out of it as well, so that a player could not sprint around the map with a BR as a fakeout and then swap to the sword just before getting in lunge range and keep their speed. This would make sword sprinting a full commitment on the player’s part, and thus making them a more obvious target for the enemy team when doing so. This possibility would also make it harder to sprint in with the shotgun, gravity hammer, and other such power weapons without being noticed by the opposing team. I’m not sure how weapon switching forcing the player out of sprint balances out with the regular weapons, however, so I believe this possibility would definitely need some testing, perhaps resulting in it being a power weapon exclusive factor, but I’m not sure.

And on a final note, removing the need for sprint to be tied to a button press has the added benefit of freeing up that button for other uses on the controller, whether that be some all new mechanic, or just putting crouch back onto left stick on the default controls (where I believe it should be) and help de-clutter the somewhat cramped controls that I felt Halo 5 suffered from at times.

There are likely other factors I have not accounted for in my reasoning, but that is part of why I am posting it here, to see what everyone else thinks and what they believe would improve the concept. So please, let me know what you think.