Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: what can be done to improve team games with uneven numbers?
  • Subject: what can be done to improve team games with uneven numbers?
Subject: what can be done to improve team games with uneven numbers?
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Ok, we've all been there.

A team game on Reach. . before you know it.. it's 4v3, or 4v2 or 4v1.

Now, people are going to quit - it's a fact. Banning hasn't stopped people, and it's not going to stop the problem. Moaning about quitters doesn't make any difference either.

The main problem for 4v3, 4v2 or 4v1 - is how unfair it is for the smaller team.

So what can be done by the webmasters to improve it?

Here are my suggestions - what do you think of them, and have you any positive ideas of your own?

1) Idea 1.
Spawn the bigger team with pistols and no grenades.

2) Idea 2.
Spawn a really small team (e.g. 4v1) with a shotgun 2 x stickies, 2 x frag.

3) Idea 3
Spawn the bigger team players in -blam!- positions, and spawn the small team next to power weapons.


In short - I want the multiplayer aspect of ''quitting'' to involve the question 'how can we make it fairer now the team is smaller' - rather than, what bricks can we throw at the guy who just quit??


Me,
I'm also fed up with players having no sportsmanship. If Im on 4v2 or 4v1 - (on the bigger side) I go looking for a PISTOL not a rocket launcher. Hey, that's just me...

  • 02.20.2012 9:56 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Step 1: Get friends

Step 2: Search playlists with them

Step 3: ?????


Step 4: Profit!

  • 02.20.2012 10:00 AM PDT

hi

so now the big team have a disadvantage without even doing anything wrong. punish the quitters, not the other team.

  • 02.20.2012 10:04 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Main | Connection | Youtube Channel


50s: | Slayer | Doubles | Lone Wolves | SWAT | Snipers |

They should have a voting system like in Left 4 Dead. Both teams can vote to end the game after someone quits.

  • 02.20.2012 10:08 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Don't do anything you wouldn't want to have to explain to paramedics. Trust me, I'm a pilot.

I don't really think anything is appropriate. What I would like to see is people be able to join in the middle of a game, so that even if someone quits, another person will promptly replace them. In any case, however, this is the wrong place to bring about changes.

  • 02.20.2012 10:09 AM PDT

Posted by: Tom T
Prolonged exposure to this forum is bad for your health.


Posted by: aBIueBooksheIf
because I like pen­is.

source

Yeah.... punish people for doing good...


Makes perfect sense.

  • 02.20.2012 10:12 AM PDT

@spawn031

"So much of what we do is ephemeral and quickly forgotten, even by ourselves, so it's gratifying to have something you have done linger in people's memories." John Williams

Why not just have an incentive to win so people don't quit?

  • 02.20.2012 10:16 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.

These are literally the worst ideas I've read in at least a couple of months.


Why should the winning side start going easy just because the other side quit? Are they supposed to all of sudden want to lose?

[Edited on 02.20.2012 10:17 AM PST]

  • 02.20.2012 10:17 AM PDT

I am from Mars, that is why I wear red and was issued the MJOLNIR Powered Assault Armor/M variant helmet, was also issued the experimental version of the Camo unit, that is why i have the Recon shoulder. I excel at CQB, hence the CQC shoulder. I have trained extensively with operation of vehicles therefore the armor on my left side is more substantial and the GPS navigator. the ODST chest is because I was embedded with a unit from the 105TH for 7 SpecOP missions, I have a great respect for them

if half the of one team quits, the game should end sooner. either immediately or have a something like a minute.

  • 02.20.2012 10:58 AM PDT

This is actually the stupidest thing ever posted on B.net:

Posted by: the omega man117
Why does everyone hate Halo 2? Maybe its because its the worst game ever next to mario.

How about if half or more players quit out on one team then it becomes an all out FFA match where the winner recieves a super jackpot. OMG I should tell 343 this! Oh wait...that wouldn't encourage boosting at all...

  • 02.20.2012 11:02 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Fabled Legendary Member
  • gamertag: tsujen
  • user homepage:

Inheritor #156 :p

Have the team who is down play smart, stay inside buildings, camp and wait for them to come to you instead of pushing out thinking you can take them on. Just because you're down doesn't mean it's an instant loss or you're at a disadvantage (most of them time though lol)

  • 02.20.2012 11:03 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: UphillMercury
What I would like to see is people be able to join in the middle of a game
No. This is a terrible idea. Joining a game and having no hope because the people who started it got raped is not fun.

  • 02.20.2012 11:04 AM PDT

I am from Mars, that is why I wear red and was issued the MJOLNIR Powered Assault Armor/M variant helmet, was also issued the experimental version of the Camo unit, that is why i have the Recon shoulder. I excel at CQB, hence the CQC shoulder. I have trained extensively with operation of vehicles therefore the armor on my left side is more substantial and the GPS navigator. the ODST chest is because I was embedded with a unit from the 105TH for 7 SpecOP missions, I have a great respect for them

if this was halo 3, i would agree. but in reach, it almost impossible to take on more then one person at a time, simply because of bloom. unless you have a power weapon, of course.


just have the game end early.


Posted by: tsujen
Have the team who is down play smart, stay inside buildings, camp and wait for them to come to you instead of pushing out thinking you can take them on. Just because you're down doesn't mean it's an instant loss or you're at a disadvantage (most of them time though lol)


[Edited on 02.20.2012 11:08 AM PST]

  • 02.20.2012 11:07 AM PDT

Please...stop getting butthurt when I noscope you from the passenger seat of the vehicle I'm riding in :D


Posted by: last place mac
Ok, we've all been there.

A team game on Reach. . before you know it.. it's 4v3, or 4v2 or 4v1.

Now, people are going to quit - it's a fact. Banning hasn't stopped people, and it's not going to stop the problem. Moaning about quitters doesn't make any difference either.

The main problem for 4v3, 4v2 or 4v1 - is how unfair it is for the smaller team.

So what can be done by the webmasters to improve it?

Here are my suggestions - what do you think of them, and have you any positive ideas of your own?

1) Idea 1.
Spawn the bigger team with pistols and no grenades.

2) Idea 2.
Spawn a really small team (e.g. 4v1) with a shotgun 2 x stickies, 2 x frag.

3) Idea 3
Spawn the bigger team players in -blam!- positions, and spawn the small team next to power weapons.


In short - I want the multiplayer aspect of ''quitting'' to involve the question 'how can we make it fairer now the team is smaller' - rather than, what bricks can we throw at the guy who just quit??


Me,
I'm also fed up with players having no sportsmanship. If Im on 4v2 or 4v1 - (on the bigger side) I go looking for a PISTOL not a rocket launcher. Hey, that's just me...


No. Quit catering to the team who's down people. Yes, it sucks, but it can also happen in your favor. Also, back in the Halo 2 days, the system would PURPOSELY set up 3v4 games with the 3 better players TrueSkill-wise on 1 team and the other 4 people who average those 3 on the other. Even those games were balanced.

The games don't need changed because someone quits. You were getting destroyed as it was, which is why people quit. So do you really think nerfing 1 team or giving advantages to another is going to make a difference anyways?

Also, bricks aren't being thrown at the smaller team because of developers (which is how you worded your statement) but the people that were being played with. And as for me: I'm in 4v1 situations ALOT (I'm on the bigger side) and our team will go tryhard on that 4th guy. Why? Because I want the game to be over. I know he isn't going to quit, so it's better to kill him faster, and either keep spawn-killing him until he quits or 50 kills is reached in Slayer. Objective: we just cap as fast as we can. It's not fun 4v1.

[Edited on 02.20.2012 11:17 AM PST]

  • 02.20.2012 11:14 AM PDT

I am from Mars, that is why I wear red and was issued the MJOLNIR Powered Assault Armor/M variant helmet, was also issued the experimental version of the Camo unit, that is why i have the Recon shoulder. I excel at CQB, hence the CQC shoulder. I have trained extensively with operation of vehicles therefore the armor on my left side is more substantial and the GPS navigator. the ODST chest is because I was embedded with a unit from the 105TH for 7 SpecOP missions, I have a great respect for them


so the game should just end sooner, or immediately. when there are less then half the player on one team.


Posted by: TAxxOUTBR3AKxx

Also, bricks aren't being thrown at the smaller team because of developers (which is how you worded your statement) but the people that were being played with. And as for me: I'm in 4v1 situations ALOT (I'm on the bigger side) and our team will go tryhard on that 4th guy. Why? Because I want the game to be over. I know he isn't going to quit, so it's better to kill him faster, and either keep spawn-killing him until he quits or 50 kills is reached in Slayer. Objective: we just cap as fast as we can. It's not fun 4v1.


[Edited on 02.20.2012 11:21 AM PST]

  • 02.20.2012 11:20 AM PDT