Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Poll [37 votes]: MM would be better without a score limit (only time limit present)
  • Poll [37 votes]: MM would be better without a score limit (only time limit present)
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: MM would be better without a score limit (only time limit present)

Poll: MM would be better without a score limit (only time limit present)  [closed]
Agree:  16%
(6 Votes)
Disagree:  81%
(30 Votes)
Other (explained below):  3%
(1 Votes)
Total Votes: 37

There should only be a time limit in MM. It'd be just like many other games like football or soccer or basket ball etc. A good benefit is that you'd know exactly how long a game would be. Another good benefit is that you could end up with amazing scorelines like 200 - 50 against really bad teams. MM would be more consistent and hence would improve in quality.

  • 03.02.2012 4:16 AM PDT

Sorry, but I really have to disagree. What if I get up against a bunch of vehicle whorers? Instead of dying 100 times in 5 minutes, I'll die 300 times in 15 minutes.

  • 03.02.2012 4:39 AM PDT

What is your point?

If you can't enjoy the game when you're losing, why even bother playing?

[Edited on 03.02.2012 5:00 AM PST]

  • 03.02.2012 4:59 AM PDT

Here's the problem: let's suppose you really hated losing and really enjoyed winning. That means that instead of getting 300 kills, you'd only get 100. Your argument works both ways.

  • 03.02.2012 5:06 AM PDT

Immortality: A toy which people cry for, And on their knees apply for, Dispute, contend and lie for, And if allowed Would be right proud Eternally to die for.

I strongly disagree. You would be screwed if you get matched against full parties.

  • 03.02.2012 5:14 AM PDT

100% Australian.

My Connection
My House
My Pet


Posted by: TerroristMan151
Sorry, but I really have to disagree. What if I get up against a bunch of vehicle whorers? Instead of dying 100 times in 5 minutes, I'll die 300 times in 15 minutes.



Both those figures are physically impossible, and most games against 'vehicle whorers' already DO go for 15 minutes due to the fact that they deliberately vote for Objective so they do not have to contend with limitations such as AL and a kill-cap.

Also, you're blatantly implying you're a bad player if you admit that you are pretty much dying the entire game against 'vehicle whorer' parties. The majority of them are just garbage players looking to stat on unorganized randoms.

OT: Nah, half the time randoms stay in games is because they know there is a definitive end to their pain. (i.e. "Assuming we get owned, we're only going to die 12-13 times each.") One-sided games barely go for more than 5 minutes in a 4v4.

What you're going to be seeing are randoms quitting en-masse, not prepared to take the extra 20 or so deaths when it's pretty clear the other team have already asserted their superiority.

[Edited on 03.02.2012 5:21 AM PST]

  • 03.02.2012 5:15 AM PDT

Posted by: ICanHasRofl

Posted by: TerroristMan151
Sorry, but I really have to disagree. What if I get up against a bunch of vehicle whorers? Instead of dying 100 times in 5 minutes, I'll die 300 times in 15 minutes.



Both those figures are physically impossible, and most games against 'vehicle whorers' already DO go for 15 minutes due to the fact that they deliberately vote for Objective so they do not have to contend with limitations such as AL and a kill-cap.

Also, you're blatantly implying you're a bad player if you admit that you are pretty much dying the entire game against 'vehicle whorer' parties. The majority of them are just garbage players looking to stat on unorganized randoms.

OT: Nah, half the time randoms stay in games is because they know there is a definitive end to their pain. (i.e. "Assuming we get owned, we're only going to die 12-13 times each.") One-sided games barely go for more than 5 minutes in a 4v4.

What you're going to be seeing are randoms quitting en-masse, not prepared to take the extra 20 or so deaths when it's pretty clear the other team have already asserted their superiority.

People don't quit just because they think they'll lose. They quit because they aren't having fun. Changing how long the game lasts doesn't change anything fundamental about the game.

The probability a player quits is proportional to the length of the game. Of course with really long games, quitting would be a problem but I don't want to increase game length time.

I would argue that players are less likely to quit with no score limit because they always have a decent chance to come back. If there score is 99 - 89 in a fast game, there's no way for the team with 89 to come back if it's 100 kills to win. With no score limit, either team could win, making it more competitive and more interesting.

  • 03.02.2012 5:36 AM PDT

I'm interested in hearing people tell me why no score limit is good for football/soccer/basketball but bad for Halo. I can't see how you can think it's good for those games but bad for Halo.

The fact is the only reason people are voting disagree is because it's different and people can't stand change.

  • 03.02.2012 5:39 AM PDT

Immortality: A toy which people cry for, And on their knees apply for, Dispute, contend and lie for, And if allowed Would be right proud Eternally to die for.


Posted by: KaRiK
Posted by: ICanHasRofl

Posted by: TerroristMan151
Sorry, but I really have to disagree. What if I get up against a bunch of vehicle whorers? Instead of dying 100 times in 5 minutes, I'll die 300 times in 15 minutes.



Both those figures are physically impossible, and most games against 'vehicle whorers' already DO go for 15 minutes due to the fact that they deliberately vote for Objective so they do not have to contend with limitations such as AL and a kill-cap.

Also, you're blatantly implying you're a bad player if you admit that you are pretty much dying the entire game against 'vehicle whorer' parties. The majority of them are just garbage players looking to stat on unorganized randoms.

OT: Nah, half the time randoms stay in games is because they know there is a definitive end to their pain. (i.e. "Assuming we get owned, we're only going to die 12-13 times each.") One-sided games barely go for more than 5 minutes in a 4v4.

What you're going to be seeing are randoms quitting en-masse, not prepared to take the extra 20 or so deaths when it's pretty clear the other team have already asserted their superiority.

People don't quit just because they think they'll lose. They quit because they aren't having fun. Changing how long the game lasts doesn't change anything fundamental about the game.

The probability a player quits is proportional to the length of the game. Of course with really long games, quitting would be a problem but I don't want to increase game length time.

I would argue that players are less likely to quit with no score limit because they always have a decent chance to come back. If there score is 99 - 89 in a fast game, there's no way for the team with 89 to come back if it's 100 kills to win. With no score limit, either team could win, making it more competitive and more interesting.
No just no.

  • 03.02.2012 5:41 AM PDT

Posted by: xDelta7x
No just no.

Yes we already know that you're unable to construct any argument, there's no need to keep demonstrating your inability to say anything of any value.


[Edited on 03.02.2012 5:44 AM PST]

  • 03.02.2012 5:44 AM PDT

Immortality: A toy which people cry for, And on their knees apply for, Dispute, contend and lie for, And if allowed Would be right proud Eternally to die for.


Posted by: KaRiK
I'm interested in hearing people tell me why no score limit is good for football/soccer/basketball but bad for Halo. I can't see how you can think it's good for those games but bad for Halo.

The fact is the only reason people are voting disagree is because it's different and people can't stand change.
I don't mind change, I just don't like people like you trying to make the game worse. It's a very incompetent idea.

[Edited on 03.02.2012 5:53 AM PST]

  • 03.02.2012 5:45 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

No thanks.

Looking at my recent games, I always search in a party so most of the time people quit. It's not enjoyable to be looking for 1 or 2 people in a 12 minute game. It's just a waste of everyone's time. Ah, here is an example.

And another and another. It's not fun to search for a couple people the whole game. Just pointless.

A proper way to demonstrate this from your analogy is this. Say there is a basketball game going on. It's 5v5 right? Now one team gets ahead by 20 points. 2 people quit on the losing team. Then another person quits because there isn't enough man power.

You now have a 5v2 in basketball. How would that be interesting to watch?

:/

[Edited on 03.02.2012 6:11 AM PST]

  • 03.02.2012 5:59 AM PDT

100% Australian.

My Connection
My House
My Pet


Posted by: KaRiK


lol you are clueless

Anyone losing 50-3 doesn't want to spend an extra 10 minutes in a respawn screen when it's pretty clear the other team is superior. Nor should a 10 kill lead be trivialised in an 8v8 by having no kill cap. The current kill caps (25 for 2v2, 50 for 4v4 and 100 for 8v8) just work.

Also, I don't get where your whole 'people don't quit when they're losing' crap comes from. Someone is much less likely to quit if they know there is a definitive and reasonable end to their pain.

  • 03.02.2012 6:03 AM PDT

100% Australian.

My Connection
My House
My Pet


Posted by: KaRiK
Posted by: xDelta7x
No just no.

Yes we already know that you're unable to construct any argument, there's no need to keep demonstrating your inability to say anything of any value.


Implying that in that small-minded head of yours you believe you are saying something of value ITT.

  • 03.02.2012 6:04 AM PDT

Immortality: A toy which people cry for, And on their knees apply for, Dispute, contend and lie for, And if allowed Would be right proud Eternally to die for.


Posted by: ICanHasRofl

Posted by: KaRiK
Posted by: xDelta7x
No just no.

Yes we already know that you're unable to construct any argument, there's no need to keep demonstrating your inability to say anything of any value.


Implying that in that small-minded head of yours you believe you are saying something of value ITT.
He's gotta be new here. B.net - 1 Karik - 0

  • 03.02.2012 6:07 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Waypoint isn't pro-anything so much as they're just anti-intelligence.

Can't tell if serious.....


OT: FFA yes, anything else no.

  • 03.02.2012 6:12 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

Ranks? I'm a Mythic. Get on my level.


Posted by: KaRiK
I'm interested in hearing people tell me why no score limit is good for football/soccer/basketball but bad for Halo. I can't see how you can think it's good for those games but bad for Halo.

The fact is the only reason people are voting disagree is because it's different and people can't stand change.

Reach isn't competitive, that's why. And I disagree because it's a silly idea(for Halo), but I do applaud you for taking the time to think about how to Reach make better.

  • 03.02.2012 6:23 AM PDT

~ Videogames are my favorite videogames ~

It would be interesting, but I can imagine it causing a lot of headaches for people facing stacked teams.

  • 03.02.2012 6:41 AM PDT

I like how Rofl thinks he's cool by attempting to embarrassing on a community forum, because he gets embarrassed irl. Let me clear up something from your retarded first post. When I say "I",I don't necessarily mean me, I mean the player opposing the team of 8. Judging by about 95% of Reach's population, this anonymous' person team would have quit because of the other team, the 4% who get bullied IRL and trash talk in the lobby to feel good about themselves.. So because I die 8v1 a few times, I immediately suck balls at Reach? Sorry, Rofl, but if you're trying to embarrass me again, you kind of failed, like the time you tried to kill me :L. Please plan a formed-out post before you come and post in here again.

[Edited on 03.02.2012 7:31 AM PST]

  • 03.02.2012 7:25 AM PDT

Immortality: A toy which people cry for, And on their knees apply for, Dispute, contend and lie for, And if allowed Would be right proud Eternally to die for.


Posted by: TerroristMan151
I like how Rofl thinks he's cool by attempting to embarrassing on a community forum, because he gets embarrassed irl. Let me clear up something from your retarded first post. When I say "I",I don't necessarily mean me, I mean the player opposing the team of 8. Judging by about 95% of Reach's population, this anonymous' person team would have quit because of the other team, the 4% who get bullied IRL and trash talk in the lobby to feel good about themselves.. So because I die 8v1 a few times, I immediately suck balls at Reach? Sorry, Rofl, but if you're trying to embarrass me again, you kind of failed, like the time you tried to kill me :L. Please plan a formed-out post before you come and post in here again.
From what I've read it doesn't seem like he's trying to embarrass you. Could be wrong though.

  • 03.02.2012 7:33 AM PDT


Posted by: xDelta7x
Rofl is still butthurt from the time I made him rage in team slayer, when there we no vehicles. Since then he has ridiculed my every post in an attempt to make me rage back. Never works, though.

  • 03.02.2012 7:36 AM PDT

100% Australian.

My Connection
My House
My Pet


Posted by: TerroristMan151
I like how Rofl thinks he's cool by attempting to embarrassing on a community forum, because he gets embarrassed irl.


lol

If you think shooting me in the back once upon a time in Team Slayer makes you good, feel free to accept my game invite and 1v1 me lol.

EDIT: Please show me how you've 'embarrassed' me in any way, shape or form. Feel free to pick any of those game links.

[Edited on 03.02.2012 7:49 AM PST]

  • 03.02.2012 7:42 AM PDT


Posted by: ICanHasRofl

Posted by: TerroristMan151
I like how Rofl thinks he's cool by attempting to embarrassing on a community forum, because he gets embarrassed irl.


lol

If you think shooting me in the back once upon a time in Team Slayer makes you good, feel free to accept my game invite and 1v1 me lol.


Proves my EXACT point. You think Reach is life. Sorry, bozo, got a social life, so I'll be signing off now. Atleast I know I'm better than you in every way possible. Have a nice life.

  • 03.02.2012 7:46 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

No... if you really wanna play that way, Custom Map... no need to implement every dumb idea someone post on forums in MM... if the gametype is popular then maybe theyll put it on MM... thats how Grifball was made, thanks to Rooster Teeth of course

  • 03.02.2012 7:48 AM PDT

100% Australian.

My Connection
My House
My Pet


Posted by: TerroristMan151
Proves my EXACT point. You think Reach is life. Sorry, bozo, got a social life, so I'll be signing off now. Atleast I know I'm better than you in every way possible. Have a nice life.


You talk about how good you are at Reach then as soon as I ask you to show me I am apparently the one with no life...? When you're trying to make someone angry you should use at least some sense in your posts..

  • 03.02.2012 7:51 AM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2