Why AA's cannot be balanced

Games Halo 5: Guardians
1

I personally hate AA’s due to the fact that they are cannot balanced, plain and simple. No two can AA’s can be balanced because they are too defined by a style of play. Its not liking to balancing weapons where range, damage, accuracy and such, balance them, for example the assault rifle and the brute shot. The brute shot is a more powerful weapon but its balanced by the fact opponents know they have one from the players stance (informs players unlike AA’s) and the projectiles are slow moving (relative to the assault rifle) so is limited by range since its incredibly hard to hit someone far away and get too close to someone the explosives damages you as well. It also has a limited magazine and most importantly not wildly available.

AA’s cannot be balanced in this sort of way because like i said, they are too defined by a way of playing and some are by default more useful therefore unbalanced. For example Promethean vision and the jetpack. Promethean vision by default is more useful because its more useful in all situations while jetpack is not. Please don’t misunderstand me when i say this. i understand that in some situations the jetpack is better but still it cannot be used in all situations. You could argue that weapons are unbalanced since a battle rifle is useful in more situations than a shotgun. The difference is chance that people have of choosing between Promethean vision and jet pack is equal unlike the chance between the battle rifle and shot gun. Since they both have the same chance of being chosen one being more useful is unbalanced. Also a shotgun makes you play close combat compared to a battle rifle but the main difference there is that weapons are derived from the battlefield through a risk reward system which balances it so your style of play is influenced by strategies you take on the battlefield meaning that everyone is on a level footing when they start/respawn.

In other words, when you are playing, any advantage you gain (e.g with a shotgun, close quarters advantage) is from your interactions with the battlefield not a menu. For example, In halo 3, if i wanted to play close quarters i would have earn that through the battlefield. either from an another player (risk/reward)or go to it’s spawn location (e.g the pit, the shotgun is in an enclosed space with two exits into the open, meaning very easy to flush out with grenades= risk/reward). It’s balanced since not everyone can have it and they are also not completely restricted due to that choice of picking up a shot gun. This is unlike Halo 4 in which for example you pick autosentry, you have an advantage, you’re choosing to playing a defensive role meaning aggressors have an immediate disadvantage. This already upsets the balance of a even playing field. Secondly the player is restricted that by that style till he/she respawns since if he/she changes from defensive play to an aggressive play, he/she would be disadvantaged against other players since autosentry is not meant geared towards dynamic engagements (i.e engagements where the players aren’t static and waiting)

If i take another example, the regen field. I am forced into to play a team based tactics because that is what the AA is for and therefore in situations where i am not playing against another team, all other AA’s dominate mine (in game theory terms)

If AA’s are to continue, i believe that the pick up system is the most balanced way. If you look at halo 3 equipment, the equipment were very overpowered but they were limited to one use which meant two things. Their power did not unbalance the game since they only had one use which meant that there was a risk/reward situation; in game theory terms, use it now for payoff x or use it later for a possible payoff y, in which y>x or y=0. Meaning that the equipment can be used later for greater gain or get killed and receive no use from it. The second thing is that equipment never had to be balanced against each other because they were so limited there was no need to balance the bubble shield with power drain. Halo 4 on the other hand had to but since you have 8 different AA’s you cannot balance them all with each other especially when they are so functionally different and all have the same chance of being chosen

The reason i making this post is because its very easy to say its unbalanced or balanced but much harder to actually articulate why. What i want from this is for people to either build upon my reasoning or have a counter argument. This way we can make people and 343i see what our issues are.

2

I think AA’s should stay in the game, but I think they should be nerfed and only offer you a slight help in hand in certain situations.

I think these should stay in the game

Active camo

I think the current version of Active camo should be scrapped. It should be instead like the original Halo’s. You get complete camo which stays on even if you move, and only dies if you are shot or you shoot your gun, and also if your shield is recharging. But it only stays on for about 5 seconds and therefore encourages tactical movement, rather than camping.

It will give you a small window of time to move out of a situation of danger or passed enemy players to get to somewhere else. It will recharge every 30 seconds.

Jet Pack

I think Jet Pack should give you about 5 seconds to boost up just one level, or the height of a small building, and then be unavailable for another 30 seconds. This gives you a slight help but not the ability to fly everywhere.

Thruster pack

Don’t know what anyone would have against this. It’s a good way to avoid certain things, and takes timing and skill.

Hardlight shield

Available for 5 seconds. Shields you from most bullet types.

I think AA’s should take skill to use, they shouldn’t impact the game significantly. They should be something that if used tactfully, can make you a more deadly unit.

3

I enjoyed reading your post, OP. Thank you.

I like the concept of AA’s, especially as a loadout choices, so I’m always thinking of ways to make them better. My starting assumptions:

(1) We have not yet seen a really good implementation of AA’s yet. Reach’s were fewer with one bad idea; Halo 4’s were more plentiful but buggy.

(2) Each AA is so unique that they cannot possibly be balanced when compared to each other. It would be apples:oranges:pears; never apple:apple.

So In my mind I reframe the question: How can we make each AA deliver a very specific but limited benefit and be complimented by a very clear but limited disadvantage? Since you can’t compare them to each other because they do very different things, let’s make sure they are moderate in their benefit and obvious in their disadvantage. Each time you use an AA, you should understand that you’re exposing yourself to some kind of disadvantage. This will prevent abuse and help encourage tactical use.

I’ll use AC, for instance. Not the best in Reach. Definitely horrible in Halo 4; it’s heavily unbalanced so that the advantages outweigh disadvantages. The radar jammer isn’t enough disadvantage at close range (not counting that horrible, horrible crouch bug). It gets abused at long distances, where it provides the user with no disadvantage. That needs to be addressed. So, if AC returned in Halo 5 and we were building off what has already been done, we need some additional disadvantages to make AC less powerful. Perhaps changing the appearance of invisibility would help – make them less transparent by giving them a shadow or more of a ghost/fractured image… this could behave differently over distances; the further you are from them, the more detectable they become.

I probably shouldn’t have taken the most controversial AA as an example. But the point I’m trying to illustrate is that I think they can be modified in a much better way than we’ve seen. AAs should be less extreme in their advantages and more obvious in their disadvantage.

Hologram is an example of it done relatively right. Advantage: hologram acts as decoy; from long distances it can tease out enemy locations (if they take the bait) and at close distances it affords you a second or two advantage over an unwary opponent (or one who doesn’t closely watch his motion tracker). But that’s all… it’s then up to you to engage the enemy and beat them. Minimal benefit, minimal disadvantage. It could probably be improved upon even from there.

Another decent example: Thruster Pack. Advantage: short range motion to gain a positional advantage or throw enemy off their aim. Disadvantage: attracts attention when used, extremely limited range, recharge time is long enough that you normally get one use per engagement.

A bad example: Jet Pack. Advantage: improved 3-dimensional movement, ability to fire accurately when in use, relatively generous recharge rate. Disadvantage: you stick out like a sore thumb. Obviously, not enough disadvantage. So here I’d say decrease the vertical range, increase the recharge time, and make it more difficult to aim. Or make it impossible to fire when in use? That last one could be a great disadvantage; it then becomes a tool for navigating terrain and not an offensive weapon.

There are other restrictions to consider as well. Locking the player into an AA for the duration of a match, for instance. Increasing the recharge time so they don’t get abused. Decreasing the duration/distance so that they don’t become crutches. Giving them a fixed number of uses per match or life.

4

> I personally hate AA’s due to the fact that they are cannot balanced, plain and simple.

Except they can.

> No two can AA’s can be balanced because they are too defined by a style of play. Its not liking to balancing weapons where range, damage, accuracy and such, balance them, for example the assault rifle and the brute shot. The brute shot is a more powerful weapon but its balanced by the fact opponents know they have one from the players stance (informs players unlike AA’s) and the projectiles are slow moving (relative to the assault rifle) so is limited by range since its incredibly hard to hit someone far away and get too close to someone the explosives damages you as well. It also has a limited magazine and most importantly not wildly available.

We can give AAs profile altering cosmetics, that’s what you’re referencing when you say “stance” and the various attributes of the AA can be changed as well.

The range at which PV gives you X-ray vision can be increased or decreased. The luminosity of players can be increased or decreased. How quickly it activates. How quickly the pulse sweeps through the area. How long it lasts. Making them finite consumables instead of rechargable ones. Placing them on the map for pickup rather than spawning players with them.

All of these things are factors that can be changed to bring balance.

> AA’s cannot be balanced in this sort of way because like i said, they are too defined by a way of playing and some are by default more useful therefore unbalanced. For example Promethean vision and the jetpack. Promethean vision by default is more useful because its more useful in all situations while jetpack is not. Please don’t misunderstand me when i say this. i understand that in some situations the jetpack is better but still it cannot be used in all situations.

And while PV can be used in all situations, it doesn’t provide benefit in all situations.

> You could argue that weapons are unbalanced since a battle rifle is useful in more situations than a shotgun. The difference is chance that people have of choosing between Promethean vision and jet pack is equal unlike the chance between the battle rifle and shot gun. Since they both have the same chance of being chosen one being more useful is unbalanced. Also a shotgun makes you play close combat compared to a battle rifle but the main difference there is that weapons are derived from the battlefield through a risk reward system which balances it so your style of play is influenced by strategies you take on the battlefield meaning that everyone is on a level footing when they start/respawn.

So move AAs to map pickups.

> If i take another example, the regen field. I am forced into to play a team based tactics because that is what the AA is for and therefore in situations where i am not playing against another team, all other AA’s dominate mine (in game theory terms)

If you think Regen Field is just for team based modes only…

> The second thing is that equipment never had to be balanced against each other because they were so limited there was no need to balance the bubble shield with power drain. Halo 4 on the other hand had to but since you have 8 different AA’s you cannot balance them all with each other especially when they are so functionally different and all have the same chance of being chosen

What?

Equipment did have to be balanced. And it was balanced, more or less; individual stances on what was and wasn’t balanced will of course vary. There was also just as much Equipment, originally, as AAs and all were just as varied as AAs. Saying that Equipment could be balanced and yet AAs can not just because AAs are picked at spawn/respawn is silly.

If that’s the case, moving AAs back to map pickups fixes the issue and makes them balanced.

All in all your entire stance that AAs can not be balanced is weak. AAs can be balanced. AAs can be fixed to work better.

The most difficult part about balancing AAs would be animating some gadjet or gizmo to stick out of the player model to be the tell as to what they have equipped and tapping the various AAs up or down in terms of power.

We as players can already force players to spawn without AAs and can place them around the maps ourselves. I can not imagine that causing any trouble at all for 343 to make that change baseline for HXB1.

5

> There are other restrictions to consider as well. Locking the player into an AA for the duration of a match, for instance. Increasing the recharge time so they don’t get abused. Decreasing the duration/distance so that they don’t become crutches. Giving them a fixed number of uses per match or life.

I have my doubts about this approach however. Whenever faced with a contentious issue (AA’s, loadouts, certain “broken” weapons") the first thought seems often to pull back on the reigns to bring the game back on track. After all if the implementation was bad that surely means that somewhere between the old format and where we are now there’s a better solution, right?

Well not necessarily. AA’s as they are now can be frustrating but I’m going to attribute that to a clear lack of design behind them. You simply have a suite of abilities with the only common theme being a recharge meter. Each has a different effect, as with any ability feature, but without any clear themes underlying them. Thruster packs, jet packs, holos, camo, each is their own separate entity to the effect each has on gameplay is various and, quite likely, non-complimentary. It’s as though you have a suite of separate games operating within the confines of a familiar Halo, as each AA could have been very adequately added as a default ability to some various shooter or adventure game (but as it is they’re all calamitously shoe-horned into this one.)

Thus I don’t think the main issue is with clearly defined imbalances between pros and cons. More so it’s that we don’t have any real idea of just what an AA should be. Between where we are now and where we used to be there isn’t a solution to our current problems, as we started down a wrong path to begin with. An RPG, for example, might have clearly defined offensive, defensive, and control abilities while a more tactical shooter (ex. Section 8) might have stealth, explosive, and healing equipment. We just have a lot of stuff, a cobbled together collection of content that can’t be put to logical order.

That is what 343 must first address in the next game. They need to decide on what AA’s should do for the game in specific terms and build a new set of focused abilities to work strictly on those lines. Part of that will naturally be some rebalancing and I do like the general principle that an AA should be less decisive in combat (ie. less generally advantageous, more dangerous to use, so that the choice to jet pack or spawn a repair field is more a tactical choice than an automatic one.) However that isn’t to say that we can’t have strong AA’s, only that whatever their effect they should have proportional drawbacks (which isn’t that hard of a thing to balance. Weighing cost and benefit in ambiguous circumstances is a very human thing to be able to do.)

6

Integrate AAs into map design, and keep them off loadouts. Buff and modify them accordingly (such as Camo becoming equipment again, or having a single use without the radar jam or movement nerf). Make sure they have not only a recharge bar, but a total usage bar, and can be collected off a player’s corpse.

Bam, balanced, why? The same way Powerups are balanced as map spawns, or power weapons.

In customs, on the other hand, it would still be nice to include them in Gametype Specific Loadouts and the ability to give them infinite total usage or infinite recharge as separate options, so we can still have fun variations of our customs. But in standard play and non-specific gametypes in MM that use custom loadouts, don’t make them an option.

Heck in the case of Camo keep both variations, so we can use Reach/4 Camo in those custom games. Just name the version that plays like Reach/Halo 4’s differently, like the UNSC variant that SPI armour had in Ghosts of Onyx, can’t remember what it was called but it seemed more similar to the way Camo worked in those games.

7

> No two can AA’s can be balanced because they are too defined by a style of play. Its not liking to balancing weapons where range, damage, accuracy and such, balance them, for example the assault rifle and the brute shot. The brute shot is a more powerful weapon but its balanced by the fact opponents know they have one from the players stance (informs players unlike AA’s) and the projectiles are slow moving (relative to the assault rifle) so is limited by range since its incredibly hard to hit someone far away and get too close to someone the explosives damages you as well. It also has a limited magazine and most importantly not wildly available.

We can give AAs profile altering cosmetics, that’s what you’re referencing when you say “stance” and the various attributes of the AA can be changed as well.

The range at which PV gives you X-ray vision can be increased or decreased. The luminosity of players can be increased or decreased. How quickly it activates. How quickly the pulse sweeps through the area. How long it lasts. Making them finite consumables instead of rechargable ones. Placing them on the map for pickup rather than spawning players with them.

All of these things are factors that can be changed to bring balance.

And while PV can be used in all situations, it doesn’t provide benefit in all situations.

> You could argue that weapons are unbalanced since a battle rifle is useful in more situations than a shotgun. The difference is chance that people have of choosing between Promethean vision and jet pack is equal unlike the chance between the battle rifle and shot gun. Since they both have the same chance of being chosen one being more useful is unbalanced. Also a shotgun makes you play close combat compared to a battle rifle but the main difference there is that weapons are derived from the battlefield through a risk reward system which balances it so your style of play is influenced by strategies you take on the battlefield meaning that everyone is on a level footing when they start/respawn.

So move AAs to map pickups.

> If i take another example, the regen field. I am forced into to play a team based tactics because that is what the AA is for and therefore in situations where i am not playing against another team, all other AA’s dominate mine (in game theory terms)

If you think Regen Field is just for team based modes only…

> The second thing is that equipment never had to be balanced against each other because they were so limited there was no need to balance the bubble shield with power drain. Halo 4 on the other hand had to but since you have 8 different AA’s you cannot balance them all with each other especially when they are so functionally different and all have the same chance of being chosen

What?

Equipment did have to be balanced. And it was balanced, more or less; individual stances on what was and wasn’t balanced will of course vary. There was also just as much Equipment, originally, as AAs and all were just as varied as AAs. Saying that Equipment could be balanced and yet AAs can not just because AAs are picked at spawn/respawn is silly.

If that’s the case, moving AAs back to map pickups fixes the issue and makes them balanced.

All in all your entire stance that AAs can not be balanced is weak. AAs can be balanced. AAs can be fixed to work better.

The most difficult part about balancing AAs would be animating some gadjet or gizmo to stick out of the player model to be the tell as to what they have equipped and tapping the various AAs up or down in terms of power.

We as players can already force players to spawn without AAs and can place them around the maps ourselves. I can not imagine that causing any trouble at all for 343 to make that change baseline for HXB1.
[/quote]
The basis of you conclusion is make them equipment. This means they’re not AA’s so you kind of defeated your own argument about saying they can be balanced. Your arguments are so flawed by the simple lack of understanding of function of a weapon and an AA and not providing arguments disprove your own theory. But nevertheless I’ll counter most of your statements.
The main issue of your counter argument about AA balancing through adjusting aspects of them is not the same as balancing a weapon. A weapon has one goal. To kill your opponent. Changing aspects of rate of fire or damage is seen through result. AA’s goal is much broader. It supplements the chances of you winning an engagement. They cannot be balanced against one another because they are functionally so different. PV is supposed you give spatial awareness while hard light shield is giving you defensive capabilities. This is comparing a sprinter with a long distance runner. Yes you can reduce the range and length of usage but then you run the risk of it being weakly dominated (game theory terms) by other AA’s which therefore means it unbalanced. You need to understand that balanced means that given a combination of different situations players would be indifferent from X and Y since the perceived disadvantages are equal to their advantages in a different situation. Weapons allow this because they have one goal. Take the example the pit. It’s a medium ranged engagement. A battle rifle would give me a payoff of 1 (a kill) while the shotgun would give me -1 (death). I would win that battle every time because the weapons were balanced (shotgun short range, battle rifle medium) Now with AA’s you never know if you’re going to win. Same situation but both have battle rifles. One has Hard light shield another jetpack. The one who wins is not clear. How can it be balanced if the reason you lost is not defined and obvious.
Next you say that PV can be used in all situations but doesn’t provide benefit. Please tell me one situation where having extra information granted by PV not a benefit.
After, you try countering my arguments against restricted play styles that AA’s bring, pointing out that regen field is team based only. Well if I take another example, if I chose hard light shield I am forgoing the advantages of enemy positions (PV) or stealth advantages (Camo) or vertical advantages (jet pack). I am forced to play defensively (since I cannot use it to aid my offense since) otherwise my AA benefit < other AA’s benefit
I understand that equipment has to be balanced but it was easier and not to the degree AA’s have to. You have obviously didn’t understand. Not everyone had equipment but they had a chance to obtain them even if it was small. In halo 4 everyone has AA’s. Why this is important? Well, if you everyone starts with AA’s you have to make them all equal otherwise they are unbalanced, that is a simple fact and you don’t need to know game theory to understand that. If one is more useful than the others which is unfair if anyone went with a different AA. Equipment on the other hand were very powerful which gave big advantages to the player but they were severely limited due to only have on use. The fact not everyone had them meant that they didn’t have to be designed to counter each other. Regen field, bubble shield, power drain or grav lift didn’t need to counter each other because not everyone had them and the advantages of having them were through the battlefield.

8

you know how AAs worked in halo? They WERE in Halo 3 pick ups that not everyone re-spawned with and required using map control to get them. Everything in Halo 4 was handed to you.

9

I’m with the OP. I don’t like AAs. I mostly stick to playing Reach now, and the only AA i pick is sprint, because besides affecting player speed, it really does nothing else. Its simple, non-harmful, and not nearly as annoying as others; Exhibit A) Jetpack.

10

Agreed. AA’s take away so much away from what halo made halo. It significantly diminishes the importance or map control and skill in the game due to unbalanced play. This is just from AA’s alone. All the other additions the 343i added simply moved it into Call of Duty: Halo edition. I can guarantee that no one could argue against that.

11

> The basis of you conclusion is make them equipment. This means they’re not AA’s so you kind of defeated your own argument about saying they can be balanced.

Moving AAs to map pickups doesn’t make them Equipment. Equipment was a one shot deal that affected the environment. AAs have infinite uses and primarily affect the player. Moving AAs to map pickups and even making them have finite uses doesn’t make them Equipment.

And you’re getting hung up on a name.

It doesn’t matter what name they use, it’s just a name, a handle, a way to easily identify a concept that people are talking about. Certainly if you change something so much it starts becoming silly to continue to call it by it’s former name. It would be silly to call an automatic handgun such if we modified it so much that it resembled a SMG.

> The main issue of your counter argument about AA balancing through adjusting aspects of them is not the same as balancing a weapon. A weapon has one goal. To kill your opponent. Changing aspects of rate of fire or damage is seen through result. AA’s goal is much broader. It supplements the chances of you winning an engagement.

Weapons do that too.

Rockets supplement your chances of winning most encounters greatly. Does does a Shotgun. Sniper too. Even non-Power Weapons like the BR and AR supplement your chances of winning an encounter. Well, BR does, AR should in theory.

> They cannot be balanced against one another because they are functionally so different. PV is supposed you give spatial awareness while hard light shield is giving you defensive capabilities. This is comparing a sprinter with a long distance runner. Yes you can reduce the range and length of usage but then you run the risk of it being weakly dominated (game theory terms) by other AA’s which therefore means it unbalanced.

And the same thing happens when they balance MP weapons. DMR and Boltshot at the start of H4 were the go to weapons to use. Not only are they not comparable to each other in your sprinter/distance runner analogy but non-typical traits were changed about them (Boltshot’s 1SK range reduced) and other weapons were brought up to par (BR/Carbine/LR buffed, automatics given a buff and auto aim decrease.)

> You need to understand that balanced means that given a combination of different situations players would be indifferent from X and Y since the perceived disadvantages are equal to their advantages in a different situation. Weapons allow this because they have one goal.

What?

> Take the example the pit. It’s a medium ranged engagement. A battle rifle would give me a payoff of 1 (a kill) while the shotgun would give me -1 (death). I would win that battle every time because the weapons were balanced (shotgun short range, battle rifle medium)

The Pit also has a Sword and two Shotgun spawns on it. It has open space and avenues to allow mid range combat but also enclosed areas to allow for closer combat. You’re dumb, you’ll try using the Shotgun on the open sections and get domed for your trouble. Who wins an encounter depends on a number of factors, namely who spawned with what, who got what Power Weapon, and how they are using it.

> Now with AA’s you never know if you’re going to win. Same situation but both have battle rifles. One has Hard light shield another jetpack. The one who wins is not clear. How can it be balanced if the reason you lost is not defined and obvious.

Except the reason you lost will be clear and obvious. In this particular case neither AA actually serves the player in an open engagement with BRs. Jetpack would serve the other player far better than HLS would assuming that Jetpack is the better shot, forces the player to cover, and uses Jetpack to invalidate the cover and get that last shot in.

> Next you say that PV can be used in all situations but doesn’t provide benefit. Please tell me one situation where having extra information granted by PV not a benefit.

Using it when no one is around.
You see someone coming up on your MT.

> After, you try countering my arguments against restricted play styles that AA’s bring, pointing out that regen field is team based only.

Regen Field isn’t team based only.

You start an engagement, you both get damaged, you disengage, drop it to start shield recharge and by the time it’s finished you have a leg up on your opponent since he’s still waiting for his recharge to start.

> Well if I take another example, if I chose hard light shield I am forgoing the advantages of enemy positions (PV) or stealth advantages (Camo) or vertical advantages (jet pack). I am forced to play defensively (since I cannot use it to aid my offense since) otherwise my AA benefit < other AA’s benefit

You can use it, in theory, offensively. You can take bigger risks than other players can because you can use HLS, again in theory, to block bigger dangers that other players might have and might throw against you.

> I understand that equipment has to be balanced but it was easier and not to the degree AA’s have to.

Why?

Because they were map pickups?

> You have obviously didn’t understand. Not everyone had equipment but they had a chance to obtain them even if it was small. In halo 4 everyone has AA’s. Why this is important? Well, if you everyone starts with AA’s you have to make them all equal otherwise they are unbalanced, that is a simple fact and you don’t need to know game theory to understand that.

You don’t have to make them equal. And further more, making them equal is an impossible task. They are all different. They can’t be equal since they are different. The same thing is true of weapons. The BR is going to be better than the AR at midrange combat. They aren’t equal.

> If one is more useful than the others which is unfair if anyone went with a different AA.

Yes it is.

That’s why we have post game launch support and why games are internally tested, calibrated, tested again, recalibrated, and so on. Even then, stuff slips through.

Case in point: H4 launched and DMR/Boltshot became the go to weapon of choice.

> Equipment on the other hand were very powerful which gave big advantages to the player but they were severely limited due to only have on use. The fact not everyone had them meant that they didn’t have to be designed to counter each other.

Why do AAs have to be designed to counter each other? There’s no automatic weapon which counters midrange precision weapons. Counters should come from player tactics of available resources. Player drops a Regen Field? Grenade. Or TP in to finish the job before his shields finish recharging. Or Camo in and shank him while he’s trying to stay in cover to finish recharging. Or disengage and lure him into an ambush.

> Regen field, bubble shield, power drain or grav lift didn’t need to counter each other because not everyone had them and the advantages of having them were through the battlefield.

So move AAs, or the majority of them, to map pickups.

Problem solved.

12

AA’s in their current form need to cease to exist.

Anything that remains needs to be an on map pickup that is fought for. No random drops, and no starting with them in loadouts. One of the biggest problem with Halo 4 is that players are handed game unbalancing attributes and items off the spawn. They add randomness, and deemphasize map control.

Camo, Sprint/Speed Boost, Overshield need to return as colored on map power up orbs. 30 seconds of use. Overshield obviously dropped faster if taking damage. They should be placed just like a power weapon in a neutral position that is highly contestable.

Regenerator should be a one time use pickup. Power drain should return as it was in Halo 3. Bubble Shield should replace hardlight shield. There should never be a way to halt taking damage and move in the open in an arena shooter.

Auto Sentry is useless and needs to go.

I personally despise Promethean Vision, and jet pack. They have no place in competitive play. If they are to remain they should be on map power ups and treated as such. They must have a finite use and once it’s gone it’s done. They should be placed like a power weapon so they must be fought for.

Thrust pack is similar to jet pack. Not as powerful but I also feel like it is just another unnecessary gameplay gimmick.

13

> Agreed. AA’s take away so much away from what halo made halo. It significantly diminishes the importance or map control and skill in the game due to unbalanced play. This is just from AA’s alone. All the other additions that 343i added simply moved it into Call of Duty: Halo edition. I can guarantee that no one could argue against that.

It was actually an improvement since Reach, as they were heavily tweaked in 4. The problem is, they still ruin balance. Jetpack is an example of the improvements made, but the fact that the relevant user still has a height advantage is bothersome, and should not exist. Promethean Vision is terrible, no one should be able to see through walls. It is welcome in Campaign, but defs not in MP, Hardlight Shield is the one i used to use in Halo 4, but eventually got annoying, it should be removed. Over-shield is already enough IMO. Armour Lock was removed (thank god for that), but then they added extra perks and specialisations that are even worse. And some are completely unnecessary, like Explosives. What on earth was the point in that? I wouldn’t say its a COD rip off, but i wouldn’t say its a part of Halo either.

14

Honestly OP, what I’m hearing boils down to- “AA’s are inherently unbalanced because some of them are unbalanced in current Halo games.”

15

Most load out features are pretty dodgy but I don’t mind some Armour Abilities… or Equipment. They should stay but rather hold a more passive role, in the generic sandbox shooter we all love… perhaps only team-based or support AA; rather than Armour Lock, Hardlight Shield etc. which rewards players with death… when attempting to take out said player with these overpowered obstacles. I believe the old orb system, which carries as a power up for the lone wolf types, should be brought back. Although speaking for the Machinnima and Custom Gamers the more lone wolf based AA should be allowed in certain game types but not competitive ranked, otherwise balancing issues occurs. These are all the Armour Abilities or Equipment, seen in previous games, after I’ll come up with a combination of a few different ones…

Armour Abilities/Equipment in Previous Games

Halo CE
- Flashlight
- Active Camouflage
- Overshield

Halo 2
- Flashlight
- Active Camouflage
- Overshield

Halo 3
- Bubble Shield
- Deployable Cover
- Flare
- Portable Grav-Lift
- Power Drain
- Radar Jammer
- Regeneration
- Trip Mine
- Auto Turret
- Cloaking
- Invincibility
- Overshield
- Active Camouflage
- Custom Power Up

Halo: Reach
- Active Camouflage
- Armour Lock
- Drop Shield
- Evade
- Hologram
- Jet Pack
- Sprint

Halo 4
- Promethean Vision
- Auto Sentry
- Regeneration Field
- Hardlight Shield
- Thruster Pack
- Jet Pack
- Hologram
- Active Camouflage

Halo: Spartan Assault
- Regeneration Field
- Auto Sentry
- Sprint
- Active Camouflage
- Hologram
- Stun
- Shield
- Overshield
- Seeker Drone

Okay so these are the Armour Abilities/Equipment types that we have seen are:

Armour Ability/Equipment Classes

  • Invisibility-based (Active Camouflage, Cloaking) [Lone-Wolf]
  • Turret-based (Auto Turret, Auto Sentry, Seeker Drone) [Team]
  • Deflection-based (Armour Lock, Hardlight Shield, Shield) [Lone-Wolf]
  • Shield-based (Overshield, Bubble Shield, Deployable Cover, Drop Shield, Hardlight Shield, Shield) [All Rounder]
  • Regeneration-based (Regeneration, Drop Shield, Regeneration Field) [Team]
  • Tank-based (Overshield, Invincibility) [Lone-Wolf]
  • Dodging-based (Evade, Thruster Pack) [Lone-Wolf]
  • Movement-based (Sprint, Jet Pack, Evade, Thruster Pack) [Lone-Wolf]
  • Distraction-based (Hologram) [Team]
  • Blind-based (Flare, Radar Jammer, Active Camouflage) [Team]
  • Obstacle-based (Deployable Cover, Portable Grav-Lift, Trip Mine) [Team]
  • Energy-based (Power Drain, Stun) [Team]
  • Detection-based (Promethean Vision) [Lone-Wolf]

Okay I think that is all of the classes… roughly. Anyway the following team-based classes that should be Armour Abilities/Equipment, which do subtle changes to gameplay… but nothing more, are:

My Changes To Armour Abilities/Equipment

  • Confusion-based Team Armour Ability… Hologram and Radar Jammar. These team-based armour ability would be good for confusing players; which is great for setting up ambushes, defending objectives, and offensive counter attacks. (Nothing to add)

  • Obstacle-based Team Armour Ability… Deployable Cover, Trip Mine and Portable Grav-Lift. These team-based armour abilities would be good for map control; which is great for acquiring or disabling vehicles, minimizing entrances to objectives, thus better defense, and setting traps, like ambushes or baits. (Perhaps a few more variants, but nothing major to add)

  • Energy-based Team Armour Ability… Stun, with Power Drain components. This team-based armour ability would be great for re-balancing the playing field; which is good for having a fighting chance, against on-slaughts of enemies, reestablishing map control and team-work, and disabling vehicles. (Something to add)

The additional feature: Stun should act out like it does in Halo: Spartan Assault, where it stuns near by units, friend or foe. But Stun should also slows or even disables vehicles, I’d rather slow to give drivers a fight chance… as this would be a armour ability, and it would become the new Plasma Pistol, if it was disable vehicles. It could also drain a quarter of players shielding… unknown whether this would work?

  • Regeneration-based Team Armour Ability… Regeneration Field. This team-based armour ability is great for getting a slight advantage in an even firefight; which is great for holding the line, pressing the attack and when players are backed up against a wall. (Nothing to add)

  • Shield-based Team Armour Ability… Bubble Shield. This team-based armour ability is good for defending team mates, against in-coming fire, whether it be vehicular or infantry; which is great for survival longetivity, baiting ambushes and defending key map positions. (Nothing to add)

  • Turret-based Team Armour Ability… Auto Sentry. This team-based armour ability is good for assistance gun fire and minor detection; which is great for finding camping foes, defending your home base, and helping with the general damage onto an enemy. (Nothing to add)

The Lone-Wolf Armour Abilities/Equipment should return to being a pick up orb or other such item… pickup AA, until death? The orbs/pickups items could be:

Lone-Wolf Items

  • Active Camouflage (Orb)
  • Promethean Vision (Pick Up)
  • Overshield (Orb)
  • Jetpack (Pick Up)
  • Thruster Pack/Evade (Pick Up)

I will say this if 343 Industries do make Lone-Wolf Armour Abilities please limited them to Free For All playlists… Custom Games, Forge it is fine to have pick and choose which one is available to spawning etc.

Also apologies for the ambiguity. The ones I proposed in the above list is:

Proposed Balanced Armour Abilities/Equipment

  • Radar Jammer (Armour Ability)
  • Hologram (Armour Ability)
  • Deployable Cover (Equipment)
  • Trip Mine (Equipment)
  • Portable Grav-Lift (Equipment)
  • Stun (Equipment/Armour Ability)
  • Regeneration Field (Armour Ability)
  • Bubble Shield (Equipment)
  • Auto Sentry (Armour Ability)

Each isn’t necessarily an armour ability, they could be equipment pickups.

But fellow fans, unfortunately we are stuck with Armour Abilities/Equipment, otherwise contradictory halo canon, will occur…

It would be like; Oh all of a sudden the GEN2 Spartan Armour can’t used armour abilities? When it was in GEN1 prototype Mark V Armour used by Spartan-IIIs and Spartan-IVs with GEN2 on Requiem. Seems legit?*
So rather than say get rid of Armour Abilities, lets make better proposals for artistic and balanced armour pick ups.
So what did you think?

16

Equal Starts in Halo Xbox One?

> Equal does not always mean the same.

I used to be such a proponent of this philosophy… but I’ve begun to doubt the credibility of this claim. Here’s a question: What two things are different but equal in every scenario?

I couldn’t come up with an answer, due to this…
Equal- adj. as great as; the same as; alike in quantity, value, or degree.
Different- adj. not alike in character or quality; not identical; various.

17

Two quick thoughts to balanced AAs: 1. shorter ranges, 2. longer cool downs

and who here really fears the Hardlight shield or the turret when compared to the horror that was Armor Lock

18

Made into equipment would be alright but as I see it. You shouldn’t be able to use AA’s that hurt other players ie promethean vision. I think it should only be able to affect you. Like with the bubble shield. It didn’t really hurt the other player. It still gave him a chance to kill you and he could use it to his advantage if used poorly. Promethean vision affects other players because see through walls would be considered a hack in literally almost any other game. But its encouraged here. huh… I think equipment is the way to go though, for sure.

Also this was said earlier. I really couldn’t care less about the canon if its just going to ruin the game. I’d rather pretend it didn’t happen then have to move onto a different game.

19

> Anything that remains needs to be an on map pickup that is fought for. No random drops, and no starting with them in loadouts. One of the biggest problem with Halo 4 is that players are handed game unbalancing attributes and items off the spawn. They add randomness, and deemphasize map control.

And one of the biggest problems with Halo is that small fights for territory are translated into crushing superiority in firepower.

If we want to make Halo a better video game then the effect of each fight should be taken as an independent trial in the test of ability. IE. if you win skirmish 1 the outcome of skirmish 2 should NOT be contingent upon it, because if for some reason fight 1 went to factors outside of skill and ability the outcome of the game can easily be said to be non-representative, unfair, or in some other respect NON-VALID.

To put it more simply, the effect of on-map items is to create a few strategic focal points throughout the course of the match that can be leveraged in order to affect subsequent events. This is ultimately why you fight for them, but also why they are inherently disruptive influences on Halo. They allow random factors to have a much greater impact on the game by reducing the number of meaningful “experimental trials” in a given match. Sample size goes to pot and all for “map control”, which is simply another way of saying “it’s good to fight for them” but only with respect to YOU, in order to win, not the game as a functional entity.

AA’s can certainly be criticized, especially for their lack of a clear design behind them, but what one cannot reasonably say is that by making them loadout items you make the game worse. No, by making them a part of the loadouts one ensures an even playing field throughout the course of the match, thereby making Halo less random. This might conflict with some pretty basic principles of “Halo”, but such should be challenged because our game is most certainly NOT a holy entity wrought form the loins of the gods and bestowed to us mortals through the divine inspiration of Bungie. That is to say, it’s not perfect (or even conceptually adequate.) Making Halo in certain key respects not Halo is easily in its best interests.

20

> And one of the biggest problems with Halo is that small fights for territory are translated into crushing superiority in firepower.

This is not what happens. A player with a power weapon can be taken down if outplayed and outsmarted by another player with a simple BR.

> To put it more simply, the effect of on-map items is to create a few strategic focal points throughout the course of the match that can be leveraged in order to affect subsequent events. This is ultimately why you fight for them, but also why they are inherently disruptive influences on Halo. They allow random factors to have a much greater impact on the game by reducing the number of meaningful “experimental trials” in a given match. Sample size goes to pot and all for “map control”, which is simply another way of saying “it’s good to fight for them” but only with respect to YOU, in order to win, not the game as a functional entity.

I don’t think it’s disruptive. I enjoy the metagame. I see on-map pickups as a “secondary objective” that makes accomplishing the primary objective a little easier. You are wanting to make Halo more like Section 8, but because Section 8 doesn’t have anything except the two control points to control, there is no metagame. Winning and losing is only based on the sum of one team’s skill vs. the sum of the other team’s skill. The game lacks depth and becomes repetitive after only a few games.

I would compare Halo’s on-map pickup metagame to Payday 2’s stealth objectives. Going through a heist stealthily in Payday 2 requires a lot more time, teamwork, strategy, skill, and high-level upgrades, but they are much more rewarding, both in terms of money gained for in-game upgrades and a sense of accomplishment. Going back to blasting hundreds of guards until the escape van arrives becomes too simple and repetitive.

You are more than welcome to not like Halo for this reason, but that doesn’t mean it’s disruptive and must change. Your taste is just different.