To 343, from a concerned long time player

Games Other Halo
#1

To start out, I would like to say that I enjoyed thoroughly, your graphical remake of Halo: CE, and I had hoped this decent product would prove to myself and the rest of the Halo Community, that Halo’s future is in good hands, and provide an excellent new trilogy, in the Halo saga.

I have logged dozens of hours since your takeover of Halo Reach, and I have to say, I am very disatisfied with experience you have provided.

With your introduction of the TU gametypes, I was skeptical of how you were planning to change the obviously unbalanced gameplay of Halo Reach, to something more familiar. The point was that YOU were actually going to accept that a large portion of the fans disliked the core playstyle of Reach, and ached for something that felt more akin to past Halos.

What we got instead was even more completely unbalanced.

Here are the CONS of the TU gametypes:
Instead of having the reticule expand as players shot rapidly, due to an uncapped firerate, The new TU gametypes reduce the accuracy lost firing rapidly, and keeps the uncapped firerate, creating even more spam trigger happy shooting.

Bleedthrough effect was broken, where bullets would have bleedthrough, killing the player without notification of their shields being low/empty and the health pack glitch. Instead of addressing this, you removed it completely. (Just like you simply removing betraying in LD, instead of fixing the betrayal glitch for human and zombie same time deaths)

Everything else in the TU gametype, I agree with. I believe that the two cons I mentioned should be adjusted and implemented properly. IE: Lowered firerates for precision weapons, and bleedthrough only when using a melee attack.

Bungie did not want to change the new playstyle they implemented, and I believe that Vanilla Reach should continue to be the core style of playing. The TU gametypes should be treated as a beta. If Halo 4 is going to use the TU formula, so be it, its a different game, you shouldn’t be trying to change the existing formula, but tweak it, so that it remains balanced, IF you decide to add something.

So far as a company, it seems that you have merely caved in to the demands of vocal fans. Please 343, you need to trust your OWN DECISIONS and continue to provide a balanced and reasonable service to both your fans and customers. If that means in Halo 4, matchmaking will have 3 weapons to provide the perfect balance, then so be it. By all means, take suggestions from fans, but ultimately, it is YOU who must make the final decisions. Make YOUR game how you want, not make someone else’s game, how everyone else wants it.

Thankyou.

Does anyone agree/disagree with me? Please comment, I would like to hear everbody else’s thoughts about the changes to MM.

#2

A well reasoned post, even if i disagree with some parts of it. I still think no-bleed melee play is more nuanced. Its refreshing too to read someone who is pro TU but recognises the huge problems certain parts of it introduce, instead of just blindly declaring it the saviour of halo. Whilst simultaneously saying TU reach is still not good…anyway…

Welcome to waypoint.

#3

“Instead of having the reticule expand as players shot rapidly, due to an uncapped firerate, The new TU gametypes reduce the accuracy lost firing rapidly, and keeps the uncapped firerate, creating even more spam trigger happy shooting.”

Welcome to the forums, though we actually proved that 85% (whilst still being bad) promotes pacing more than spamming, heres the research.

http://tiedtheleader.com/2012/01/17/statistical-analysis-of-dmr-behavior/

Apart from that, yeah TU is still bad, but not long till Halo 4 eh.

#4

Study shows TU increases pace wins by only 12% overall, still under 50% total, whilst doubling probability of short range 5 shot spam wins, and doing a number on the sandbox in general (needle rifle) and destroying the tactical difference between dmr pace and spam and increasing spam in general across the board.

Gonna post this every time someone copypastes that link.

#5

I cant believe you still dont get it. That whole thread, everyone agreed and accepted that, apart from you. Only 12%? Thats 12% better than 0%

Why does doubling matter if PACING WINS IMPROVE OVER SPAM. Let’s say on 100%…

80% Pacing win
1% Full spam wins

Then suddenly on 85%

90% pacing wins
2% spam

Yes, spam has doubled, but pacing wins have improved too. The card deck analogy? Here it is again…

To help clarify this, here’s an analogy. Picture the 25 paced kill times as a deck of 25 cards, and the 25 spam kill times as a deck of 25 cards. Now you take the spam deck, and I’ll take the pace deck. Then you shuffle your deck, and I’ll shuffle my deck. Next we draw one card from each of our decks. Now we can compare the card we each drew and see who won the battle based on the time written on the card. So what’s really going on is that out of the 25 cards in the spam deck, 9 of them are 5 shot kills. You have a 9/25 chance of pulling a 5 shot spam kill out of your deck. But you also have a 7/25 chance of pulling a 7 or more shot kill out of the deck.

Here is the thread discussing it, and seeing Fatal in all his glory… http://halo.xbox.com/Forums/yaf_postst54756_Observations-on-the-TTL-dmr-study.aspx

WTF is tactical difference in dmr pace and spam? Just because you pace quicker doesnt make it less skillful, unless not pressing the trigger finger is a skill now. Needle rifle? Most people used the DMR before and after the TU so thats wrong too.

#6

Thanks for digging out the thread, i couldnt actually find it. Most useful.

"80% Pacing win
1% Full spam wins

Then suddenly on 85%

90% pacing wins
2% spam"

You just made that up, its nothing of the sort.

The numbers went from 28% to 40% and broke a lot of stuff on the way. And spam still wins 60% of the time, even taking into account the negligible timing difference.

Bur im not too bothered anymore, i can deal with it. I just dont like people posting that study as if it was conclusive.

#7

343 will never be able to fully satisfying those that are displeased with Reach and any change Reach now will only result in new dis-satisfied customers. Those new dis-satisfied customers would be ones that were formally happy ones.

This has played out perfectly with the TU and should be a cautionary tale for 343, you cant please everyone all the time.

#8

> Thanks for digging out the thread, i couldnt actually find it. Most useful.
>
> “80% Pacing win
> 1% Full spam wins
>
> Then suddenly on 85%
>
> 90% pacing wins
> 2% spam”
>
> You just made that up, its nothing of the sort.
>
> The numbers went from 28% to 40% and broke a lot of stuff on the way. And spam still wins 60% of the time, even taking into account the negligible timing difference.
>
> Bur im not too bothered anymore, i can deal with it. I just dont like people posting that study as if it was conclusive.

Yes well done, I made those up, AS I SAID. I said hypothetically, that even if spam doubled, pacing still improved, as those pretend numbers showed is possible. That was just an example.

Yes spam wins 60% of the time, why? Because Bungie implemented a horrible half -Yoinked!- bloom mechanic. TU or non TU, that is a fact. Nobody said the test was conclusive, but you have taken the results shown and literally flipped them and said 100% is better.

Agreed Plunder, its impossible to satisfy everyone. Sometimes you have to put your balls on the table and do what you think is right. If 343 think bleedthrough is not for this game (I can understand why, it was not designed for it) then implement it across the board, show whos boss.

#9

While I don’t fully agree with OP, I think he’s going in the right direction. What 343 needs to do is figure exactly how they want the game to play, and then just stick to that. Stop changing it around. Either completely implement the TU, and then fix any of it’s bugs, or just straight up remove it, and fix the problems in vanilla some other way.

#10

The TU was a step in the right direction, but it needed better player traits to take full advantage of it with as much consistency as possible. The bleedthrough system alone would be better if 110% damage resistance and 75% melee were implemented instead. Personally, I prefer the ZBNS gameplay from MLG and GoldPro, but that’s me.

Even though I am against the removal of bleedthrough, that won’t stop me from playing the game. But remember that without 343 even implementing the TU, the competitive gameplay in ZBNS would not have come to light. Since the TU is gametype-based and not put into the entire game code, much like an update in StarCraft II, players can still play custom matches with the TU settings before they will be changed.