Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Is Reach the most casual of all Halos?
  • Subject: Is Reach the most casual of all Halos?
Subject: Is Reach the most casual of all Halos?

Harass the harassers.


Posted by: meagsIZbeast Thats the point, you used data plots, and generalizations to make yourself the perfect candidate, rather than using someone of unbiased opinion.Those qualifications are not my standards, they were provided by watching two forums for 7 months and asking the question directly "what makes a casual a casual?" in a thread. My standards for what makes a person a casual a casual are far different, for example I have been playing video games for about 30 years, little less, thats not casual by my standards. But apparently if I play living dead I am a BK, noob casual according to most competitive players that post on forums. I would be disqualified by my standards, I simply allowed others to formulate the criteria. I also would like to add that prior to about 3 days ago, I did zero tabulation on the first 100 games for either, so really had no idea what the outcome for myself would be.

Also bookshelf fit perfectly into the mold, being a casual reach and H3 player, yet faring significantly better in reach.Bookshelf played seemlessly through the transition from Halo 3 to Reach and despite perception, its the same basic game. I would bet his learning curve would have a faily smooth arc in his ability through that transition. This is most important in finding a pure result from the canidate as there will be residual skill transfered from Halo 3 into Reach causing a higher K/D and W/L in general. Perhaps you feel this is an incorrect assumption, but I feel it very important.

There are about 10,000 forum colonels(exaggerated) that are here that can say they are casuals who fare better at reach than H3. Yet you disqualify bookshelf for playing ranked.... Provide examples please. Try and find a canidite that meets most of the qualifications. Lets start there.

  • 01.01.2012 11:46 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Horse Repairman
RC RuNz the internet. Like the superintendent.

Posted by: SouthPoIe
Clone is an internet God.

Posted by: DerpRoids
RC Clone is the anti-thesis of a lurker.


Posted by: Quantam

Posted by: RC Clone
I can play your game too OP.

In Halo 3 my Ranked K/D was 1.16
In Reach my overall is 1.29

Reach is more casual.

There I beat you and there is nothing you can do to disprove my stats because the only stats that can disprove mine are mine.

I win.

Sorry to burst your bubble, but you don't come under the OPs defintion of casual, since you are on a forum.

WTF!?

  • 01.01.2012 11:46 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Honorable Heroic Member

http://www.bungie.net/fanclub/halohaven/Group/GroupHome.aspx

Join Halo Haven! (Group Leader: A 3 Legged Goat)

(To discuss Halo 4.)


Posted by: B Rye

Posted by: Quantam
Reach is a more even match up (switch to Halo 3 where I am getting absolutely nailed or I am winning 1v4 by a landslide).



Seriously? You get more even matches in Reach than what you got in 3? Or do you mean Halo 3 as it currently is? If you're using current Halo 3 matches, it doesn't count.

The truth of my Halo 3 experience for 4 years...

  • 01.01.2012 11:47 PM PDT

Harass the harassers.


Posted by: B Rye

Posted by: Plunderfuq

Posted by: B Rye
Where did you get your operational definition of a "casual", OP?
7 months of observation on two forums and about two weeks of attempting to gather community consensus via asking directly "what makes a casual a casual?". If you feel that there is anything missing or somthing that is wrong about the qualifications, feel free to provide input.


So you operational definition is what you think you gathered indirectly from both forums, and directly from the 343 forums.

Wait, you used the 343 forums to try to get the true "competitive community"'s opinion? You dun goofed.
Which one is wrong?

  • 01.01.2012 11:48 PM PDT

Forget it man, and get with the countdown. Shake this square world and blast off for Kicksville.

Reach host ranking algorithm: (a*quit_percentage + b*isMexican + c*(1/KDR) + d*hasGuest) * 100
where a > b = d > c

Posted by: Quantam
Sorry to burst your bubble, but you don't come under the OPs defintion of casual, since you are on a forum.

Interesting point. That invalidates the OP's one and only data point, since he's on the forum (actually, two forums).

[Edited on 01.01.2012 11:51 PM PST]

  • 01.01.2012 11:50 PM PDT

"The truth is the key, and with it, I will unlock the doors of darkness and find justice."
-Me

"Why is it that lately, all I want to do is cry?"
-Phoenix Wright


Posted by: meagsIZbeast

Posted by: Akamia179

Posted by: meagsIZbeast
There are about 10,000 forum colonels(exaggerated) that are here that can say they are casuals who fare better at reach than H3.

I'm an inverted case. Look at my Ranked stats in Halo 3 and my stats in Halo Reach... I say I do better in 3.

Of course, I'm just a measly 1 compared to the thousands.


actually your ranked k/d in H3 is a .71, while your arena k/d(the only ranked playlist) is a .72.

Meanwhile your social in H3 is a .54, where as your social in reach is a .62.

Even you are not an exception.

I still am, actually.

I stopped playing Arena ages ago.

I still play Ranked Halo 3 whenever I play it (which was a while before I got my new Xbox). I never touch Social anymore.

As for the rest of Reach (which I still play), I still get stomped on.

  • 01.01.2012 11:51 PM PDT

Harass the harassers.


Posted by: Sentox6
Posted by: Plunderfuq
How so the K/D ratio is almost identical.

As I have pointed out, regardless of the K/D ratio being virtually the same, you were able to trade kills more often and win significantly more often in Reach.

I feel bad even dignifying this farce, though. You cannot draw any conclusions from one data point. You just simply cannot.
Provide me a single point of data to counter my findings.

  • 01.01.2012 11:52 PM PDT

Harass the harassers.


Posted by: Sentox6
Posted by: Quantam
Sorry to burst your bubble, but you don't come under the OPs defintion of casual, since you are on a forum.

Interesting point. That invalidates the OP's one and only data point, since he's on the forum (actually, two forums).
At the time of both sets of games I had never even heard of forums for Halo. (im old)

  • 01.01.2012 11:53 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Horse Repairman
RC RuNz the internet. Like the superintendent.

Posted by: SouthPoIe
Clone is an internet God.

Posted by: DerpRoids
RC Clone is the anti-thesis of a lurker.


Posted by: RC Clone
I can play your game too OP.

In Halo 3 my Ranked K/D was 1.16
In Reach my overall is 1.29

Reach is more casual.

There I beat you and there is nothing you can do to disprove my stats because the only stats that can disprove mine are mine.

I win.

  • 01.01.2012 11:54 PM PDT

Forget it man, and get with the countdown. Shake this square world and blast off for Kicksville.

Reach host ranking algorithm: (a*quit_percentage + b*isMexican + c*(1/KDR) + d*hasGuest) * 100
where a > b = d > c

Posted by: Plunderfuq
Provide me a single point of data to counter my findings.

LOL no. You started this thread. You provide me with a robust sample that proves your findings (well, proves what you want to find: you have no findings at present). Your one and only data point supports the idea that Reach is more casual-friendly.

[Edited on 01.01.2012 11:56 PM PST]

  • 01.01.2012 11:54 PM PDT
  • gamertag: Meagss
  • user homepage:

I play games for gameplay, not silly gimmicks

H3 MM warrior

Reach S7, 8 and 9 arena warrior.

H4 MM legend


Posted by: Plunderfuq

Posted by: meagsIZbeast Thats the point, you used data plots, and generalizations to make yourself the perfect candidate, rather than using someone of unbiased opinion.Those qualifications are not my standards, they were provided by watching two forums for 7 months and asking the question directly "what makes a casual a casual?" in a thread. My standards for what makes a person a casual a casual are far different, for example I have been playing video games for about 30 years, little less, thats not casual by my standards. But apparently if I play living dead I am a BK, noob casual according to most competitive players that post on forums. I would be disqualified by my standards, I simply allowed others to formulate the criteria. I also would like to add that prior to about 3 days ago, I did zero tabulation on the first 100 games for either, so really had no idea what the outcome for myself would be.

Also bookshelf fit perfectly into the mold, being a casual reach and H3 player, yet faring significantly better in reach.Bookshelf played seemlessly through the transition from Halo 3 to Reach and despite perception, its the same basic game. I would bet his learning curve would have a faily smooth arc in his ability through that transition. This is most important in finding a pure result from the canidate as there will be residual skill transfered from Halo 3 into Reach causing a higher K/D and W/L in general. Perhaps you feel this is an incorrect assumption, but I feel it very important.

There are about 10,000 forum colonels(exaggerated) that are here that can say they are casuals who fare better at reach than H3. Yet you disqualify bookshelf for playing ranked.... Provide examples please. Try and find a canidite that meets most of the qualifications. Lets start there.


so your saying someone isnt allowed to have a degree of natural talent? That makes no sense....

RC clone, bookshelf, avernus, skyfighta65, sanuel jackson(was a casual up until he played reach for a while), III klutch III, one 4sakenangel, HJ Suicune, lFishy, cycle22, chrishans, Tactical Bazza, WIIZZZAARD.....

I can get more if you want. All of them are casual players, some enjoy playing more than others, and all of them are better at reach than H3, and for a reason. It is easier, the average player skill is reduced.

  • 01.01.2012 11:56 PM PDT

Harass the harassers.


Posted by: Sentox6
Posted by: Plunderfuq
Provide me a single point of data to counter my findings.

LOL no. You started this thread. You provide me with a robust sample that proves your findings (well, proves what you want to find: you have no findings at present). Your one and only data point supports the idea that Reach is more casual-friendly.
So all you are willing to provide is opinion?

  • 01.01.2012 11:56 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Honorable Heroic Member

http://www.bungie.net/fanclub/halohaven/Group/GroupHome.aspx

Join Halo Haven! (Group Leader: A 3 Legged Goat)

(To discuss Halo 4.)

OP, I agree partly, but you are on this forum, that invalidates your own definition.

  • 01.01.2012 11:57 PM PDT
  • gamertag: Meagss
  • user homepage:

I play games for gameplay, not silly gimmicks

H3 MM warrior

Reach S7, 8 and 9 arena warrior.

H4 MM legend


Posted by: Akamia179

Posted by: meagsIZbeast

Posted by: Akamia179

Posted by: meagsIZbeast
There are about 10,000 forum colonels(exaggerated) that are here that can say they are casuals who fare better at reach than H3.

I'm an inverted case. Look at my Ranked stats in Halo 3 and my stats in Halo Reach... I say I do better in 3.

Of course, I'm just a measly 1 compared to the thousands.


actually your ranked k/d in H3 is a .71, while your arena k/d(the only ranked playlist) is a .72.

Meanwhile your social in H3 is a .54, where as your social in reach is a .62.

Even you are not an exception.

I still am, actually.

I stopped playing Arena ages ago.

I still play Ranked Halo 3 whenever I play it (which was a while before I got my new Xbox). I never touch Social anymore.

As for the rest of Reach (which I still play), I still get stomped on.


the fact you dont play arena anymore doesnt invalidate the fact that it was the only ranked playlist, where you had a higher k/d than you did in ranked H3.

As for the rest of reach, it has no skill barriers, it is social. Fact is you have a higher k/d in reachs social than H3s. And you played more social in reach, which should mean your k/d should be lower.

  • 01.01.2012 11:58 PM PDT

Harass the harassers.


Posted by: meagsIZbeast

Posted by: Plunderfuq

Posted by: meagsIZbeast Thats the point, you used data plots, and generalizations to make yourself the perfect candidate, rather than using someone of unbiased opinion.Those qualifications are not my standards, they were provided by watching two forums for 7 months and asking the question directly "what makes a casual a casual?" in a thread. My standards for what makes a person a casual a casual are far different, for example I have been playing video games for about 30 years, little less, thats not casual by my standards. But apparently if I play living dead I am a BK, noob casual according to most competitive players that post on forums. I would be disqualified by my standards, I simply allowed others to formulate the criteria. I also would like to add that prior to about 3 days ago, I did zero tabulation on the first 100 games for either, so really had no idea what the outcome for myself would be.

Also bookshelf fit perfectly into the mold, being a casual reach and H3 player, yet faring significantly better in reach.Bookshelf played seemlessly through the transition from Halo 3 to Reach and despite perception, its the same basic game. I would bet his learning curve would have a faily smooth arc in his ability through that transition. This is most important in finding a pure result from the canidate as there will be residual skill transfered from Halo 3 into Reach causing a higher K/D and W/L in general. Perhaps you feel this is an incorrect assumption, but I feel it very important.

There are about 10,000 forum colonels(exaggerated) that are here that can say they are casuals who fare better at reach than H3. Yet you disqualify bookshelf for playing ranked.... Provide examples please. Try and find a canidite that meets most of the qualifications. Lets start there.


so your saying someone isnt allowed to have a degree of natural talent? That makes no sense....

RC clone, bookshelf, avernus, skyfighta65, sanuel jackson(was a casual up until he played reach for a while), III klutch III, one 4sakenangel, HJ Suicune, lFishy, cycle22, chrishans, Tactical Bazza, WIIZZZAARD.....

I can get more if you want. All of them are casual players, some enjoy playing more than others, and all of them are better at reach than H3, and for a reason. It is easier, the average player skill is reduced.
So if I pick out a couple of those and start going thruogh stats and asking questions you believe thse guys are going to meet most of the criteria set forth?

  • 01.01.2012 11:59 PM PDT
  • gamertag: Meagss
  • user homepage:

I play games for gameplay, not silly gimmicks

H3 MM warrior

Reach S7, 8 and 9 arena warrior.

H4 MM legend

They meet the only criteria that matters.....

They are casual players.

  • 01.02.2012 12:00 AM PDT

Harass the harassers.


Posted by: Quantam
OP, I agree partly, but you are on this forum, that invalidates your own definition.
At the time I played those games I did not even know these forums exsisted, you can check the join dates for both Bnet and Waypoint.

  • 01.02.2012 12:00 AM PDT

"The truth is the key, and with it, I will unlock the doors of darkness and find justice."
-Me

"Why is it that lately, all I want to do is cry?"
-Phoenix Wright


Posted by: meagsIZbeast

Posted by: Akamia179

Posted by: meagsIZbeast

Posted by: Akamia179

Posted by: meagsIZbeast
There are about 10,000 forum colonels(exaggerated) that are here that can say they are casuals who fare better at reach than H3.

I'm an inverted case. Look at my Ranked stats in Halo 3 and my stats in Halo Reach... I say I do better in 3.

Of course, I'm just a measly 1 compared to the thousands.


actually your ranked k/d in H3 is a .71, while your arena k/d(the only ranked playlist) is a .72.

Meanwhile your social in H3 is a .54, where as your social in reach is a .62.

Even you are not an exception.

I still am, actually.

I stopped playing Arena ages ago.

I still play Ranked Halo 3 whenever I play it (which was a while before I got my new Xbox). I never touch Social anymore.

As for the rest of Reach (which I still play), I still get stomped on.


the fact you dont play arena anymore doesnt invalidate the fact that it was the only ranked playlist, where you had a higher k/d than you did in ranked H3.

As for the rest of reach, it has no skill barriers, it is social. Fact is you have a higher k/d in reachs social than H3s. And you played more social in reach, which should mean your k/d should be lower.

Hmm... I suppose you have a point...

Makes me appreciate that I use Reach as training grounds for Halo 3 even more.

  • 01.02.2012 12:01 AM PDT

Forget it man, and get with the countdown. Shake this square world and blast off for Kicksville.

Reach host ranking algorithm: (a*quit_percentage + b*isMexican + c*(1/KDR) + d*hasGuest) * 100
where a > b = d > c

Posted by: Plunderfuq
So all you are willing to provide is opinion?

The Plunderfuq motif:

1. Make an utterly illogical claim.
2. Write a long-winded, overly verbose, grammatically terrible diatribe to try and disguise the fact you have no evidence or convincing reasoning to support your claim.
3. When challenged over your claim, make insupportable demands of others to avoid the issue.

If you really are older than 13, you should be ashamed of yourself.

  • 01.02.2012 12:01 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Horse Repairman
RC RuNz the internet. Like the superintendent.

Posted by: SouthPoIe
Clone is an internet God.

Posted by: DerpRoids
RC Clone is the anti-thesis of a lurker.


Posted by: Plunderfuq
So if I pick out a couple of those and start going thruogh stats and asking questions you believe thse guys are going to meet most of the criteria set forth?

No. Because your criteria is ridiculous. The only definition of casual is play for fun. All the people listed play because they enjoy the game. Your list is just a filter to keep anyone who would respond to this thread from using their own stats to counter you using your stats.

  • 01.02.2012 12:02 AM PDT
  • gamertag: Meagss
  • user homepage:

I play games for gameplay, not silly gimmicks

H3 MM warrior

Reach S7, 8 and 9 arena warrior.

H4 MM legend


Posted by: RC Clone

Posted by: Plunderfuq
So if I pick out a couple of those and start going thruogh stats and asking questions you believe thse guys are going to meet most of the criteria set forth?

No. Because your criteria is ridiculous. The only definition of casual is play for fun. All the people listed play because they enjoy the game. Your list is just a filter to keep anyone who would respond to this thread from using their own stats to counter you using your stats.



Posted by: meagsIZbeast
They meet the only criteria that matters.....

They are casual players.

  • 01.02.2012 12:03 AM PDT

Stop arguing over imaginary -blam!-. May as well argue over Santa Claus. There will never be proof that there is/was a god - and before people start saying "HERP DERP PROVE THERE WASN'T ONE ROFLOLOL" well, you are the people who made it up in the first place so we know there isn't one
What created the big bang then? A coalition of genetically modified TR-909s with extra distortion?


Posted by: Plunderfuq


SurficialZeus43 Tabulation for K/D and W/L for first 100 games= 712 kills, 717 deaths giving a K/D of .99. Total wins 41 with game losses at 59.

Plunderfull Tabulation for K/D and W/L for first 100 games= 854 kills, 846 deaths giving a K/D of 1.01. Total wins 56 with game losses 44.
What in the world does this prove? This is just one example... and a terrible logical fallacy at that.

The belief that Reach is a "casual" freindly game appears to be false and if it isnt show me a single example using the qualification provides that suggests otherwise.Such as?

  • 01.02.2012 12:03 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Veteran Legendary Member

The 343 forums suck. They're full of retarded kids and mods who got butthurt in the B.net forums for being told that they're bad.

Why does OP neglect the fact that even his own datum goes against his hypothesis?

  • 01.02.2012 12:03 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Horse Repairman
RC RuNz the internet. Like the superintendent.

Posted by: SouthPoIe
Clone is an internet God.

Posted by: DerpRoids
RC Clone is the anti-thesis of a lurker.


Posted by: B Rye
Why does OP neglect the fact that even his own datum goes against his hypothesis?

Becuase, shut up.

  • 01.02.2012 12:05 AM PDT

Harass the harassers.


Posted by: meagsIZbeast
They meet the only criteria that matters.....

They are casual players.
Im going to take it they play alot of living dead, have not played through the transition from Halo 3 to Reach, have no idea what callouts are and weapon spawn times are, have no care for mechanics arguments...........Wait a minute, I am familiar with some of those guys and can say it is my belief that would be completely wrong, and I didnt need to start checking, please dont waste my time with unvetted submissions.

  • 01.02.2012 12:05 AM PDT