Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Health Packs?
  • Subject: Health Packs?
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: Health Packs?

.:. îXî - $ìgñ øf thé GøÐz .:.


My Profile - iXi Gaming


Î ũňķñ{ǾẄŃ} ū

Slow regeneration along with health packs would be the best option for OUR debate, the best middle ground per se, but I don't think it would be the best option overall. Hmmmm... unless maybe they make it slow regeneration if you're more than half health? Like green/yellow health, then when you cross into orange/red health you can't regenerate automatically. I wouldn't mind that actually.


I don't like the example you gave about waiting to find an ample opportunity to execute a flawless kill because let's face it, the way most maps are designed give people enough opportunities to run around a corner or behind cover to regenerate their shields unless it's a very open map like Valhalla or something. Take even The Pit for example, how many people just run out into the open to allow you to get a nice clean kill 100% of the time? A competitive or even just a smart player won't do that more than a couple times if they've seen how you work and how it's failed them. Not to mention that I think that kind of gameplay of "waiting to shoot till you're SURE you can finish the kill" is both slow and campy. Might as well have a prone position in Halo to make it better for you lol.



That being said, I found a contradiction in some of your ideas. You say that if you control a power weapon and powerups or even Rockets/Banshee as you've stated before, that it's pretty cheap. However, you throw the health system into effect and it becomes much more fair to fight against someone who has dominating map control.

Take Standoff for example. If you control the Spartan Laser and Warthog, you're golden as long as you're aware of your surroundings (no one driving across the side of the map in a Mongoose lol). In these scenarios, this map is just UNPLAYABLE in competitive games because say you're shooting someone, all they have to do is duck behind a rock for a few seconds and bam, back to map control and no inherit danger. However, say you had a health pack system, then that person would either take the risk of continuing to hold his spot without leaving it to get a health pack, which could lead to his death quicker OR he could leave his spot and risk losing map control. You see what I'm saying?


There are just many scenarios where a health pack system would benefit overall gameplay and I just don't see it causing the radical shift in gameplay as you're suggesting. In fact, it would be even better if that new single shot BR were real (which I believe/hope it is) because it could lean more towards Halo 1 precision in your shooting since it would most likely be that weapon of choice again.

[Edited on 11.18.2009 1:39 PM PST]

  • 11.18.2009 1:36 PM PDT
  • gamertag: BJRSCJ
  • user homepage:

Posted by: UNKNOWN iXi
Take Standoff for example. If you control the Spartan Laser and Warthog, you're golden as long as you're aware of your surroundings (no one driving across the side of the map in a Mongoose lol). In these scenarios, this map is just UNPLAYABLE in competitive games because say you're shooting someone, all they have to do is duck behind a rock for a few seconds and bam, back to map control and no inherit danger. However, say you had a health pack system, then that person would either take the risk of continuing to hold his spot without leaving it to get a health pack, which could lead to his death quicker OR he could leave his spot and risk losing map control.
You forgot option number 3, which is to fall back and base camp. My fear is that losing health will cause people to fall back as opposed to stay up and risk losing weapons. If you fall back with a laser and a banshee, it's not too hard to get back to map control. And if you don't move back up, you're still a pain to get while you're camping, and I assume if you've been controlling, you have the leisure to camp because you have the lead.

Also, let's not forget that we've suggested health be up front in neutral, heavily traversed areas. That means the controlling team is going to control the health...Talk about domination. Now the controlling team is the only team that has access to this lifeline. Well, move it back to the base then...OK, now gameplay is SLOWED down because people are running from the middle back to their bases to get health all the time. I just don't see that as being too fun or good for gameplay or fluidity.

Here are my summary thoughts:

1. As per the idea that fast regens make the game slower, I could see that. It's not as frantic. That might not be such a bad thing.

2. To the idea that it is more fair, however, I stand by what I said. Adding health randomizes things. You do make a good point how the laser/warthog/banshee combo is unbeatable (and very similar to the banshee/rocket combo of H2), but that is NOT a problem with regenerating health, that's a problem with the laser, vehicle balance, etc. Changing out weapons is supposed to give you an edge (like H1's weapons), not cause you to dominate (like the laser on some maps, banshee, etc). I realize that health would be great for those times people have the perfect, cheap strategy, but I don't think we should look to outside sources to balance something that should be done so internally.

So if you're talking about changing the pace or feel of a game, health may be good. But when talking about balance, I don't think health should promote that. You're essentially admitting that you aren't good enough to take someone out 1v1 or as a team, so you need health to help you. In a good balanced game, fights should be fair other than the minor advantages of map control and weapons you've earned.

3. Again, you've convinced me that health may be a good thing for pace and some strategy, but I'll repeat that I'm concerned about mixing this with the current Halo. Maybe it would be great, but HR may be a lot different than CE. In my opinion, bringing back a larger skill gap (decreased autoaim, decreased or no melee lunge, precision bullets, multifaceted weapons with more accuracy while bursting, etc) is what is really needed for HR. Health worries me as I feel it brings randomness, but perhaps it could be fun.

  • 11.18.2009 3:01 PM PDT

.:. îXî - $ìgñ øf thé GøÐz .:.


My Profile - iXi Gaming


Î ũňķñ{ǾẄŃ} ū

Posted by: fifthderelicte
You forgot option number 3, which is to fall back and base camp. My fear is that losing health will cause people to fall back as opposed to stay up and risk losing weapons. If you fall back with a laser and a banshee, it's not too hard to get back to map control. And if you don't move back up, you're still a pain to get while you're camping, and I assume if you've been controlling, you have the leisure to camp because you have the lead.


There is no Banshee on Standoff for competitive play. You only see them for BTB Heavy on Standoff in which you have millions of other things too. Also, if people fall back because they have low health and base camp and they LOSE the important weapons because of it, then they deserve it. Halo is a team game so if that person were to lose health, they could switch the role from them getting the Laser to someone else picking it up when it spawns since the other person's health would be higher. It's all about quick thinking, teamwork and adjusting to the dynamic gameplay that is Halo.

Also, let's not forget that we've suggested health be up front in neutral, heavily traversed areas. That means the controlling team is going to control the health...Talk about domination. Now the controlling team is the only team that has access to this lifeline. Well, move it back to the base then...OK, now gameplay is SLOWED down because people are running from the middle back to their bases to get health all the time. I just don't see that as being too fun or good for gameplay or fluidity.

I said it all depends on map layout, such as fitting them in properly with weapons and the such. Clearly it would be a bad choice to put a health pack in the middle of Standoff right next to the Laser lol...

Ok again you're only looking at the extremes lol. So, what? The health packs can only be far back in bases or wide open in the middle of the maps? No... Why can't a health pack be by the Plasma Grenades of each Camo? Why can't a health pack be ANYWHERE between either the base and the middle of the map? It's all about balance which again seems like Bungie wouldn't be able to do.



1. As per the idea that fast regens make the game slower, I could see that. It's not as frantic. That might not be such a bad thing.

I guess this is where we disagree. I strongly believe that Halo should not be as slow and especially get any slower than it already is. I think they need to increase the speed up the overall gameplay than what we see in Halo 3 because right now it just feels way too sluggish sometimes, especially if you think fast and work fast with your fingers... going against skill based gameplay over casual gameplay (which might I add you said you'd rather have skill over casual).

Sluggish and slow gameplay = Casual
Faster than Halo 3 and fluid gameplay = Much more skill based.

2. To the idea that it is more fair, however, I stand by what I said. Adding health randomizes things. You do make a good point how the laser/warthog/banshee combo is unbeatable (and very similar to the banshee/rocket combo of H2), but that is NOT a problem with regenerating health, that's a problem with the laser, vehicle balance, etc.

I disagree. We've spoken before about balance issues and you've agree with me on what you just said about the Warthog being balanced or the Banshee, etc. From my personal experience, it almost always seems as though when I get the drop on someone on maps like Standoff, they just hide behind a rock for a few seconds and maintain map control with full health. I don't know... Maybe we've just been experiencing different things I guess.

That being said, maybe it's just because Halo 3 overall has poor map layout and game mechanics which sway our views one way or the other. I don't know about you, but I find Halo 3 way too sluggish a lot of the time.

So if you're talking about changing the pace or feel of a game, health may be good. But when talking about balance, I don't think health should promote that. You're essentially admitting that you aren't good enough to take someone out 1v1 or as a team, so you need health to help you. In a good balanced game, fights should be fair other than the minor advantages of map control and weapons you've earned.

I disagree again. The way it works now, as I've stated many many times before, is that even if you can get the upperhand on someone they can still find a SIMPLE way to turn that situation around, be it because of the random BR spread or just hiding behind a tiny piece of cover for a few seconds. It has nothing to do with skill... lol

3. Again, you've convinced me that health may be a good thing for pace and some strategy, but I'll repeat that I'm concerned about mixing this with the current Halo. Maybe it would be great, but HR may be a lot different than CE. In my opinion, bringing back a larger skill gap (decreased autoaim, decreased or no melee lunge, precision bullets, multifaceted weapons with more accuracy while bursting, etc) is what is really needed for HR. Health worries me as I feel it brings randomness, but perhaps it could be fun.

So ok mixing it in with the CURRENT Halo as in Halo 3 correct? Well to be honest, I seriously hope Halo Reach is a little faster and has a better pace to the game because Halo 3 was very slow many times. So if Halo Reach were to remain exactly like Halo 3 as in pacing and that sluggish feeling and WITHOUT weapons that take precision aiming (like the Halo 1 Pistol / one shot weapons), then sure, health packs might not be the best thing.

I guess I'm just having good faith in Bungie to step up their game a little bit because they can't possibly get more casual than what Halo already is without losing many consistent players. So worst case scenario, EVERYTHING will be exactly the same which isn't tooooooooo bad, but in my opinion Halo can only get better from this point.

  • 11.18.2009 3:40 PM PDT

~Wile~

No VISR, that is limited strictly to ODST personel only. I love the health system in ODST as well as the first Halo. Awesome idea. Carry able would be tight, or maybe just biofoam that you could carry to help along the way, much like pills in L4D.

  • 11.18.2009 3:43 PM PDT
  • gamertag: BJRSCJ
  • user homepage:

Posted by: UNKNOWN iXi
...if people fall back because they have low health and base camp and they LOSE the important weapons because of it, then they deserve it.
My point was that health may encourage base camping for a winning team, once their health is low out mid. My fear isn't that they'll lose their weapons in this scenario, it's that the new playstyle will be to fall back to base with the power weapons (if health is located on each team's half as opposed to in the middle).

Posted by: UNKNOWN iXi
I said it all depends on map layout, such as fitting them in properly with weapons and the such. Clearly it would be a bad choice to put a health pack in the middle of Standoff right next to the Laser lol...
Actually, putting health in the middle wouldn't be so bad, since it's a death trap to go there. I'd say put it out on the wings in the middle of the bubble shield launch silos. Nobody goes out there, it's neutral, and it would actually open up the middle more instead of clogging it.

Posted by: UNKNOWN iXi
Ok again you're only looking at the extremes lol. So, what? The health packs can only be far back in bases or wide open in the middle of the maps?
Yes. What are the other options? If you have two on a map, you probably either have them in the middle on opposite sides (maybe one in the exact middle) or... on a team's side. There is no "nobody's side." It's either closer to red, closer to blue, or in the middle. That means if it's middle, and you're the team controlling middle, you have a huge advantage and can clean house. If it's back on either side, that means you have to fall back and slow down gameplay when you want health.

Posted by: UNKNOWN iXi
No... Why can't a health pack be by the Plasma Grenades of each Camo? Why can't a health pack be ANYWHERE between either the base and the middle of the map? It's all about balance which again seems like Bungie wouldn't be able to do.
Plasma spawn would be horrible because it's essentially just like spawning at your base. If we're using Standoff, I'd use the launchpads mentioned above, but I'd consider that middle.

Now, I can see your point on larger maps. If you're controlling Valhalla, putting health at caves on either side (water side is more passages as opposed to caves), that would make you vulnerable enough out of base, but far enough away from middle that I'd consider that workable. Big maps would work. But when it comes to small maps, healthpack gameplay would become very random, IMO. Teams die and switch spawns all the time and I can just see someone running around Guardian randomly picking up a newly spawned healthpack by luck and winning a duel. Luck happens so as it is, but this would be bad on small maps. With the switching sides spawning all the time, I could easily foresee one team just constantly unluckily missing the health spawns and getting beat not because of tactics, but luck. Luck happens, but I'd rather control it as much as possible.

Posted by: UNKNOWN iXi
I guess this is where we disagree. I strongly believe that Halo should not be as slow and especially get any slower than it already is.
I agree as well, I would just rather see that gameplay come by putting that potential to kill into weapons with large skill gaps as opposed to spawning magic boxes.

Posted by: UNKNOWN iXi
I think they need to increase the speed up the overall gameplay than what we see in Halo 3 because right now it just feels way too sluggish sometimes, especially if you think fast and work fast with your fingers... going against skill based gameplay over casual gameplay (which might I add you said you'd rather have skill over casual).
Agreed. But if you play MLG or higher level slayer, you can't tell me those games aren't pretty fast paced for the most part.

Posted by: UNKNOWN iXi
Sluggish and slow gameplay = Casual
Faster than Halo 3 and fluid gameplay = Much more skill based.
I don't necessarily agree. I remember playing GOW when it first came out and some of those games were long. It was all about coordinating movement and finding positioning. Yes, whoever out-thought the other person faster won, but relative to other games, it was slow.

Posted by: UNKNOWN iXi
I disagree. We've spoken before about balance issues and you've agree with me on what you just said about the Warthog being balanced or the Banshee, etc. From my personal experience, it almost always seems as though when I get the drop on someone on maps like Standoff, they just hide behind a rock for a few seconds and maintain map control with full health. I don't know... Maybe we've just been experiencing different things I guess.
I think a lot of this is more map specific, and some of it happens more in large vs. small maps. I definitely think the laser and the banshee are unbalanced, among several other things in the game.

Standoff is definitely a map where you may not finish kills...if you just try to shoot down the middle. I use camo or mongooses to my advantage quite frequently, flanking the enemy. I also use the BS conveniently positioned around the outside. When you get to the side of their rocks or behind their base, you either push them out of cover, finish off kills, or distract them for your team to clean up. If you're just standing there shooting 1v1 and not working with positions, you'll get unfinished kills all day long. I think that's what I like. Instead of just playing pop out, pop in, pop out, pop in - this gameplay forces you to do something if you want to get it done. You can't just wear them away, you have to out think them.

Posted by: UNKNOWN iXi
That being said, maybe it's just because Halo 3 overall has poor map layout and game mechanics which sway our views one way or the other. I don't know about you, but I find Halo 3 way too sluggish a lot of the time.
Agreed

Posted by: UNKNOWN iXi
I disagree again. The way it works now, as I've stated many many times before, is that even if you can get the upperhand on someone they can still find a SIMPLE way to turn that situation around, be it because of the random BR spread or just hiding behind a tiny piece of cover for a few seconds. It has nothing to do with skill... lol
I agree that there are random factors in there that help to change this situation - which should be eliminated - but I can't tell you how many times I've gotten kills while shieldless. Go to my fileshare and look up numbers 1, 4, 17, and especially 19, as just a few of the many examples of how enemies missed their opportunities and my skill allowed me to come back. I'm sorry, but if you get the jump on someone, most of the time you should beat them unless they find cover. But shields keep you in the game against lesser skilled opponents. Just because a few random factors exist that shouldn't does not mean you can make a blanket statement about this.

Cover can be blown with grenades or teammates quite easily, not to mention preparation and ensuring you time your shots right so your victim can't escape.

Posted by: UNKNOWN iXi
I guess I'm just having good faith in Bungie to step up their game a little bit because they can't possibly get more casual than what Halo already is without losing many consistent players. So worst case scenario, EVERYTHING will be exactly the same which isn't tooooooooo bad, but in my opinion Halo can only get better from this point.
I agree, as they've had a long time to work on Reach. I also agree about the pace, but just differ in my opinion on how to do that (although I think you agree with me on that too, you just go one step farther with health).

Final statements here, I again want to say that I think health could be very interesting if done properly. I think smaller maps may not do so well with it, and I think the placement would have to be very good. I honestly don't think health would add or detract all that much from the game. My hope would be that it adds good pace and tactics, but my fear would be that it actually detracts from both of those things.

[FOOD FOR THOUGHT: Other ideas] I don't know if you'll like any of these, and frankly I haven't thought through them, but rather skimmed them off the top of my mind.

1. Instead of having health placed around the maps (particularly on small maps which already have crowded items and weapons, not to mention would probably have the problems I mentioned earlier in the post, randomizing things), what if you had a portable health pack. This healthpack would be filled up after you deal X amount of damage to the enemy, and then used like equipment is now.

2. Have very slow regenerating health, but still have healthpacks. (I think you already responded to this one)

3. Have healthpacks at middle locations (like caves of valhalla or launch pads of Standoff) on medium/larger maps, with 90 second respawn times. That makes them controllable and not too random, plus it locates the healthpacks away from the key holding places, not highly easy to be dominated by either those holding middle or the defenders. I just can't see how they could place these on smaller maps = perhaps Guardian Forest and launch.

4. Have everyone start with a healthpack they can use at any time. This way you choose when to use yours, and if you use it, you're out. Also have one healthpack, centrally located, spawning every 60 seconds, like equipment.


I'd go with number 3, as it's the most normal and halolike, and some of the others may just be weird. Just trying to throw some ideas out there and facilitate some other thoughts.

[Edited on 11.18.2009 5:02 PM PST]

  • 11.18.2009 4:59 PM PDT

Posted by: Hellzwolfz666
Posted by: fifthderelicte
.


One of the things I love in Halo is how when your finished with a battle you can jump right back in there with full sheilds. None of that, go back I need a Health pack stuff.

  • 11.18.2009 5:03 PM PDT

Run for the hills! Run for your lives!

Really, it depends for me. For example, what I am thinking of is if this is Master Chief, is it young (15 years) Chief? Or older, up to the point where he polices the Covenant or Heretic technology, like the shield from the Jackals were used in the production of creating the MJOLNIR armor?

p.s. (I read the book, Halo: The Fall of Reach).

  • 11.18.2009 5:06 PM PDT

.:. îXî - $ìgñ øf thé GøÐz .:.


My Profile - iXi Gaming


Î ũňķñ{ǾẄŃ} ū

Posted by: fifthderelicte

Anything before this point is something we're just going to have to agree to disagree because there are good and bad things about everything, but personally I have faith in Bungie to balance the game if they were to incorporate health packs.

I don't necessarily agree. I remember playing GOW when it first came out and some of those games were long. It was all about coordinating movement and finding positioning. Yes, whoever out-thought the other person faster won, but relative to other games, it was slow.

You misunderstood what I said lol. Sluggish and slow = Literally sluggish and slow (slow movements/actions... not long games).

Standoff is definitely a map where you may not finish kills...if you just try to shoot down the middle. I use camo or mongooses to my advantage quite frequently, flanking the enemy. I also use the BS conveniently positioned around the outside. When you get to the side of their rocks or behind their base, you either push them out of cover, finish off kills, or distract them for your team to clean up. If you're just standing there shooting 1v1 and not working with positions, you'll get unfinished kills all day long. I think that's what I like. Instead of just playing pop out, pop in, pop out, pop in - this gameplay forces you to do something if you want to get it done. You can't just wear them away, you have to out think them.

It's extremely easy to control the enemy team's Camo when you're in control of the Warthog/Laser. I'm also not only talking about 1v1 situations as you're assuming and in my experience, Halo 1 took a lot more strategy and outsmarting your opponent than any of the Halo games... In Halo 3 all you need to do is work in pairs and you're golden. One pair gives cover and distraction fire while the other pair works toward the objective like capturing the flag. Essentially, only one person in each pair has to actually THINK or play decent while the other can just be a brute force of killing. In Halo 1 however, each and every single person on the team has to be great at both thinking in tough situations and be able to perform excellently.

Basically what the end of that paragraph boils down to is that in Halo 3, there are way more opportunities for MUCH less slacking in actual skill and out-thinking opponents than Halo 1.

I agree that there are random factors in there that help to change this situation - which should be eliminated - but I can't tell you how many times I've gotten kills while shieldless. Go to my fileshare and look up numbers 1, 4, 17, and especially 19, as just a few of the many examples of how enemies missed their opportunities and my skill allowed me to come back. I'm sorry, but if you get the jump on someone, most of the time you should beat them unless they find cover. But shields keep you in the game against lesser skilled opponents. Just because a few random factors exist that shouldn't does not mean you can make a blanket statement about this.

Disagreed. Far too many times have I've seen videos and experienced myself that I land headshots with the BR bullets for them to not count or have little to no effect. Just differences in experiences then.


[FOOD FOR THOUGHT: Other ideas] I don't know if you'll like any of these, and frankly I haven't thought through them, but rather skimmed them off the top of my mind.

1. Instead of having health placed around the maps (particularly on small maps which already have crowded items and weapons, not to mention would probably have the problems I mentioned earlier in the post, randomizing things), what if you had a portable health pack. This healthpack would be filled up after you deal X amount of damage to the enemy, and then used like equipment is now.


That sounds pretty cool haha, would you have this from the beginning of the match or would it be an actual piece of equipment you pick up and hold onto? Also, assuming the whole thing about reusable equipment (which I hope is true) is true (based on the leaks), would it be like that?

2. Have very slow regenerating health, but still have healthpacks. (I think you already responded to this one)

I like this as long as there's a point where it wouldn't automatically regenerate and you would NEED a health pack, such as low health in the red.

3. Have healthpacks at middle locations (like caves of valhalla or launch pads of Standoff) on medium/larger maps, with 90 second respawn times. That makes them controllable and not too random, plus it locates the healthpacks away from the key holding places, not highly easy to be dominated by either those holding middle or the defenders. I just can't see how they could place these on smaller maps = perhaps Guardian Forest and launch.

Quick question: By randomness this whole time were you talking about random respawn times as in how the weapons work now, you pick up a Laser and the respawn timer starts from when you pick it up? Or do you mean you want it like Halo 1 were every 2 mins the Rocket would spawn regardless if you picked it up or not?

Placements I don't think would be too hard on smaller maps. Guardian could be by the lift leading to Sniper and another under the orange lift. I'm sure we can find balanced placements for health packs on the smaller maps.

4. Have everyone start with a healthpack they can use at any time. This way you choose when to use yours, and if you use it, you're out. Also have one healthpack, centrally located, spawning every 60 seconds, like equipment.

lol Reminds me of Left 4 Dead. I don't think this would be too good because sometimes when I play BTB or objective games, I respawn with the intentions of going STRAIGHT into the base with a Bomb or to throw their flag off the Valhalla lift, etc., but allowing me to heal myself once at any time would make that cheap.

;p


  • 11.18.2009 5:47 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

wth no thats so annoying.
If they do put them make them carryable.
I hope they dont it will RUIn the multiplayer.
SIngle player wont be as fun... you'll have to reastart parts b/c you wont have enough Health to get through them.
i can promise you MAjority of people dont want health packs disrigarding the forums.
Since like 95% of peopel who play halo dont go on the forums.
It can kill the game a risk not worth taking.

  • 11.18.2009 5:58 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Your friendly and eccentric Sangheili forum-poster. :)

Carryable health bars sounds like a good idea. That way if we're in an impossible situation with low health we can just use a health pack and get back into the fight. It would please both sides of the argument on whether to have health packs or not, because while players would still need health packs, they would be able to carry them around for their convenience.

  • 11.18.2009 6:00 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Your friendly and eccentric Sangheili forum-poster. :)

Posted by: DrFuzzyBallz
wth no thats so annoying.
If they do put them make them carryable.
I hope they dont it will RUIn the multiplayer.
SIngle player wont be as fun... you'll have to reastart parts b/c you wont have enough Health to get through them.
i can promise you MAjority of people dont want health packs disrigarding the forums.
Since like 95% of peopel who play halo dont go on the forums.
It can kill the game a risk not worth taking.

Most people who have played Halo have an account on these forums, not counting second accounters. So if the majority of people in this poll want healthpacks in Halo Reach, then the majority of Halo players want healthpacks in Reach. Halo CE was fun, both singleplayer and multiplayer and that had healthpacks. So did ODST. I'm still in the favour of carryable healthpacks though.

  • 11.18.2009 6:10 PM PDT
  • gamertag: BJRSCJ
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Honourable Elite
Most people who have played Halo have an account on these forums, not counting second accounters. So if the majority of people in this poll want healthpacks in Halo Reach, then the majority of Halo players want healthpacks in Reach.
I disagree with you. There are lots of multiple accounts on here, not to mention that there are a ton of people who've played Halo or still play that don't get accounts. Furthermore, polls can show different results depending on who responds to them, as this thread shows.

Posted by: UNKNOWN iXi
Anything before this point is something we're just going to have to agree to disagree because there are good and bad things about everything.
Quite true.

Posted by: UNKNOWN iXi
You misunderstood what I said lol. Sluggish and slow = Literally sluggish and slow (slow movements/actions... not long games).
Look sensitivity helps with look movement, but I completely agree with running speed. In fact, that's one thing I argue for to increase the skill gap. Even/especially with health, it would help to promote movement and it would require more skill for aiming at a moving target, along with creating faster gameplay.

Posted by: UNKNOWN iXi
I'm also not only talking about 1v1 situations as you're assuming and in my experience, Halo 1 took a lot more strategy and outsmarting your opponent than any of the Halo games... In Halo 3 all you need to do is work in pairs and you're golden. One pair gives cover and distraction fire while the other pair works toward the objective like capturing the flag. Essentially, only one person in each pair has to actually THINK or play decent while the other can just be a brute force of killing. In Halo 1 however, each and every single person on the team has to be great at both thinking in tough situations and be able to perform excellently.
I completely agree. I think we need a larger skill gap to require more individual skill differentiation. But again, I think that was largely due to other factors, not health. That was due to a potentially 3 shot kill, quicker movement, less autoaim, etc. You had to be on the top of your game. Health may have added a little, but IMO, most of that was due to other factors.

Posted by: UNKNOWN iXi
Disagreed. Far too many times have I've seen videos and experienced myself that I land headshots with the BR bullets for them to not count or have little to no effect. Just differences in experiences then.
I still understand that this happens, and too frequently at that. But I don't see how you can't agree with me that turning a bad situation around is quite often times skill. I gave you just a few examples in my fileshare. If you're good and the other person is off a beat, equal footing allows the better player to differentiate from the weaker.

You also have to remember that H1 didn't experience many of these difficulties because most MP games were played via PC, and some via XBC. As far as I know, they both use different systems than H2-H3 xbox host system. Not to mention, H3's shot registration and coding are funky.


Posted by: UNKNOWN iXi
1. Instead of having health placed around the maps (particularly on small maps which already have crowded items and weapons, not to mention would probably have the problems I mentioned earlier in the post, randomizing things), what if you had a portable health pack. This healthpack would be filled up after you deal X amount of damage to the enemy, and then used like equipment is now.

That sounds pretty cool haha, would you have this from the beginning of the match or would it be an actual piece of equipment you pick up and hold onto? Also, assuming the whole thing about reusable equipment (which I hope is true) is true (based on the leaks), would it be like that?
Beginning of the match or each spawn. The reason it refills after x amount of damage is because if you deal that much damage, it means you're probably moving around and getting kills. Also, assume a k/d ratio should average 1, if you refill the packs after say 3 kills worth of damage, this player has already caused 3 other people to spawn with the advantage of healthpacks, why shouldn't they be on equal footing.

Unfortunately, if weapons were imbalanced, I could see this being heavily flawed by entrenching someone in a banshee who deals out damage like crazy, or who knows what else. But, health only fills up the health bars, so it wouldn't really give you all that much of an extra boost.

Posted by: UNKNOWN iXi
3. Have healthpacks at middle locations (like caves of valhalla or launch pads of Standoff) on medium/larger maps, with 90 second respawn times. That makes them controllable and not too random, plus it locates the healthpacks away from the key holding places, not highly easy to be dominated by either those holding middle or the defenders. I just can't see how they could place these on smaller maps = perhaps Guardian Forest and launch.

Quick question: By randomness this whole time were you talking about random respawn times as in how the weapons work now, you pick up a Laser and the respawn timer starts from when you pick it up? Or do you mean you want it like Halo 1 were every 2 mins the Rocket would spawn regardless if you picked it up or not?

Placements I don't think would be too hard on smaller maps. Guardian could be by the lift leading to Sniper and another under the orange lift. I'm sure we can find balanced placements for health packs on the smaller maps.
When I say health brings randomness, I mean more of it just adding in a quick fix for someone to throw the game off. Rather than just being as you are, you quickly boost your health and end up winning. That's why I have a huge problem with bubbles and regens to the extent they are placed on the maps, and how quickly they respawn. I feel like health would be like that - like powerups put on the maps. And I assume they'd respawn quickly, which would make them harder to control. But I addressed how to control them above, by placement and timers.

Posted by: UNKNOWN iXi
4. Have everyone start with a healthpack they can use at any time. This way you choose when to use yours, and if you use it, you're out. Also have one healthpack, centrally located, spawning every 60 seconds, like equipment.

lol Reminds me of Left 4 Dead. I don't think this would be too good because sometimes when I play BTB or objective games, I respawn with the intentions of going STRAIGHT into the base with a Bomb or to throw their flag off the Valhalla lift, etc., but allowing me to heal myself once at any time would make that cheap.
1) If you get that far, they've already done something wrong 2) flag games are already cheap because it takes way too long to return the flag 3) health only adds a little to your life, whereas shields compose the most of your overall life. You'd still be headshot capable with a BR type weapon (so it would really only take one extra shot), able to be meleed, or a few AR bullets away from death.

  • 11.19.2009 3:20 PM PDT

to solve these problems i suggest that everybodies shield shall funciont independetn of life not like in ODST where when u get a med kit ur stamina goes max again no matter how it was when u picked the kit up.and instead of everybody having a med kit how about we have bio injection(like the on they gave romeo at the cutscene in the phantom) that add 10 percent health.
there shall be an equipment piece with three bio foam injectors(sprey lke things) with each adding 25 percent of health or an equipment piece with a med kit that adds 90 percent of health.now there is the catch;if u use all the bio foam on one guy to patch him up u run the risk of him dying and losing them all.orif u use them to different people they wont have a great boost of health.the medkit will really help one soldier but that meaans no cookie for the rest.each one shall have a bio injection at th start just to be helped a bit.the only way to carry more than one is to have the equipment pieces in which case u ll be kinda a medic:):)

  • 11.19.2009 4:08 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2