Off Topic: The Flood
This topic has moved here: Subject: Why doesn't Halo 4 have Armor Lock?
  • Subject: Why doesn't Halo 4 have Armor Lock?
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • of 4
Subject: Why doesn't Halo 4 have Armor Lock?

Because no one with brain cells wanted it back.

Not putting armor lock in Halo 4 was the only smart decision 343 did.

  • 12.04.2012 8:02 PM PDT

If we disagree, it's nothing personal, opinions are opinions.
Antagonizing me to build a false sense of worth is so damn cute.

Brighten your day with science.

Possibly the worst AA.

  • 12.04.2012 8:02 PM PDT

Posted by: Murcielago00
Posted by: MongotheRed
Posted by: Murcielago00
Posted by: MongotheRed
Because Armor Lock was a terrible idea and slowed the game down by a considerable amount.

Oh the humanity of having a game last a few minutes longer, if that.


It's not about how long the game takes. In fact, I would prefer if 343 extended the time limit and point limit in Halo 4 matchmaking. No, it's not about that. It's about the pace of the game.


Pace of the game was still the same.
Someone AL, use the time to reload or check your peripherals, same as if they went into a room you knew they had teammates in. Slow your roll for a bit, then go ahead.
Having to awkwardly check your peripherals as you keep your eye on the guy who is bowing his head in prayer that someone will come along and save his ass because he chose a weak armor abillity does slow the pace of the game down. I'm truly sorry if you cannot see this.

  • 12.04.2012 8:03 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Senior Mythic Member

The Flood's resident metalhead.


Posted by: Murcielago00

Posted by: MongotheRed
It's not about how long the game takes. In fact, I would prefer if 343 extended the time limit and point limit in Halo 4 matchmaking. No, it's not about that. It's about the pace of the game.


Pace of the game was still the same.
Someone AL, use the time to reload or check your peripherals, same as if they went into a room you knew they had teammates in. Slow your roll for a bit, then go ahead.

Posted by: Murcielago00
Posted by: RustedEdge

You're telling me that you never got angry when a player armor locked when you stuck him? Or when you were about to put the last shot of your DMR into him to kill him? Or when you shot your rocket?


No.
I used the time to reload, or I'd wait it out and time it, so right before they popped out of it, I'd throw grenades at their feet.

And if I shot my rocket and they AL'd, I just looked at it as the same if I shot someone without AL and I missed. I never saw the big deal and I never will.


Except you didn't miss, and you effectively wasted a rocket. Even then, waiting for noobs to get out of armor lock isn't the fun kind of Halo I like to play, it makes the game very irritating and dull. That rush of running around the map looking for multikills was gone.

  • 12.04.2012 8:06 PM PDT

Posted by: Recon Number 54
Use your head. The one on your shoulders. No really, just try. Please?

˙sɹǝʇndɯoɔ ɥʇıʍ pooƃ os ʇou ɯ,ı 'ǝɹǝɥ ʇǝƃ sıɥʇ pıp ʍoɥ 'lol

Hardlight shield is a better blend of damage resistance and mobility than armor lock ever was. Armor lock was a pause button after every time someone's shields dropped. I'm much happier to wait for someone who has popped hardlight as their shields went down than I was for someone using armorlock. This is in part because they can still be killed, or they are somehow relying on kiting me into some sort of CQB fight before they get shot in the head. They don't get that sliver of shield regen which was enough to win a melee battle since LOL no shield bleed through.

Plus hardlight shield can be used to help your teammates.

  • 12.04.2012 8:06 PM PDT

Reach got glassed and the Armor Lock technology was lost.

  • 12.04.2012 8:08 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: MongotheRed

Which was slowing the game. And it might have felt like it was the same, because Armor lock was always in the game.


That may be your own perceptions. There is nothing concrete online about average game lengths for H3 and Reach.

This old H3 thread says that average game lengths tend to be around 6-10 minutes.

I couldn't find anything similar for Reach, but looking at my recent games for Reach (where I suspect AL was in play) the lengths were all around 10 minutes.

It might just be your perception that the game lasts longer. The game lengths between H3 and Reach seem to be around the same, so I'm not seeing how AL slowed down the pace, when the games ended up lasting about the same.

  • 12.04.2012 8:10 PM PDT

I am the God Emprah of Mankind.

Deal with it.

I just miss the bubble shield.

  • 12.04.2012 8:11 PM PDT

-I was here

because people couldn't adapt.

  • 12.04.2012 8:12 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: JMAN07

Except you didn't miss, and you effectively wasted a rocket. Even then, waiting for noobs to get out of armor lock isn't the fun kind of Halo I like to play, it makes the game very irritating and dull. That rush of running around the map looking for multikills was gone.


I know I didn't miss, but I didn't look at it like it was such a huge deal. Oh well, wasted a rocket, keep it moving. Why get frustrated?

It is your opinion that AL made the game dull and irritating and it is your opinion that the fun in Halo was trying to get multikills. On that we'll have to agree to disagree since we won't be changing the other's opinion on the matter.

  • 12.04.2012 8:13 PM PDT

You look around.You fire your weapon before you realize.
Its just me. I fall and you walk up. You cry why.
When i pop up. You look at me in wonder. I say,"ASSUMING DIRECT CONTROL."
You bend to my will and go to a cliff, walk off, and fall.
The last thing you hear is me stating as fact,"All will fail the battle of life, you just went early"


Posted by: Murcielago00

Posted by: MongotheRed

Which was slowing the game. And it might have felt like it was the same, because Armor lock was always in the game.


That may be your own perceptions. There is nothing concrete online about average game lengths for H3 and Reach.

This old H3 thread says that average game lengths tend to be around 6-10 minutes.

I couldn't find anything similar for Reach, but looking at my recent games for Reach (where I suspect AL was in play) the lengths were all around 10 minutes.

It might just be your perception that the game lasts longer. The game lengths between H3 and Reach seem to be around the same, so I'm not seeing how AL slowed down the pace, when the games ended up lasting about the same.


Is there a reason why you aren't understanding this? I'm not talking about actual game lengths, I am talking about game pace, which is completely different. A game could last 10 minutes and play at a slow or a fast pace. Longer games are not the same as slow-paced games.

  • 12.04.2012 8:14 PM PDT

Posted by: goatman327
because people didn't accept mediocrity and didn't assume everything in the game was perfect.
This.

  • 12.04.2012 8:14 PM PDT

Remember those times when we all had something better to be doing, but didn't do it? Those were good times. Gooood times

too many complaints.

  • 12.04.2012 8:14 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Senior Mythic Member

The Flood's resident metalhead.


Posted by: Murcielago00

Posted by: MongotheRed

Which was slowing the game. And it might have felt like it was the same, because Armor lock was always in the game.


That may be your own perceptions. There is nothing concrete online about average game lengths for H3 and Reach.

This old H3 thread says that average game lengths tend to be around 6-10 minutes.

I couldn't find anything similar for Reach, but looking at my recent games for Reach (where I suspect AL was in play) the lengths were all around 10 minutes.

It might just be your perception that the game lasts longer. The game lengths between H3 and Reach seem to be around the same, so I'm not seeing how AL slowed down the pace, when the games ended up lasting about the same.


Are you for real? Pace =/= game length

Pace refers to movement around the map in relation to fighting and getting kills. AL stalls movement around the map and stalls the time it takes to get kills.

  • 12.04.2012 8:15 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: JMAN07

Posted by: Murcielago00

Posted by: MongotheRed

Which was slowing the game. And it might have felt like it was the same, because Armor lock was always in the game.


That may be your own perceptions. There is nothing concrete online about average game lengths for H3 and Reach.

This old H3 thread says that average game lengths tend to be around 6-10 minutes.

I couldn't find anything similar for Reach, but looking at my recent games for Reach (where I suspect AL was in play) the lengths were all around 10 minutes.

It might just be your perception that the game lasts longer. The game lengths between H3 and Reach seem to be around the same, so I'm not seeing how AL slowed down the pace, when the games ended up lasting about the same.


Are you for real? Pace =/= game length

Pace refers to movement around the map in relation to fighting and getting kills. AL stalls movement around the map and stalls the time it takes to get kills.


If AL stalls the times to get kills, which is how some gametypes ended -Slayer, then how do the game lengths end up averaging to around the same?

If the overall pace of the game is slowed, and it's slow to get kills because of AL, then how does that not correlate to game length?

  • 12.04.2012 8:18 PM PDT

Guys, it's usesless trying to talk to kids who have no idea about proper game design.

It was absolute garbage, and served no purpose other than a pause button, and to sap the fun out of Halo.

Evidence:

1) Eventual nerf from the Title Update
2) Removed entirely from competitive playlists (the few that existed, anyways)
3) Complete absence in Halo 4
4) Massive vocal backlash

  • 12.04.2012 8:20 PM PDT

Posted by: Murcielago00
If the overall pace of the game is slowed, and it's slow to get kills because of AL, then how does that not correlate to game length?
It doesn't correlate because:
A) You don't have the data to prove that there's a correlation.
B) There are too many confounding factors other than Armor Lock that mess with your abillity to make a definite conclusion that "Armor Lock didn't / did make the average game slower."

Learn how the scientific method works.

  • 12.04.2012 8:23 PM PDT

1.) "Crack In Time" - Louder Production Music
2.) "Agressive Sucks" - Moss Landing
3.) Custom Version of "Meet Oscar" - Louder Productions Music
4.) "Behind You Rise" - Distortion Music
5.) "Aurora" - Mark Petrie
6.) "Surge Down - Audio Machine

I still don't get why Active Camo is again useless and only works if you're still or really slow.

It was fine in Halo 1,2, and 3.

  • 12.04.2012 8:25 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Senior Mythic Member

The Flood's resident metalhead.


Posted by: Murcielago00

Posted by: JMAN07

Are you for real? Pace =/= game length

Pace refers to movement around the map in relation to fighting and getting kills. AL stalls movement around the map and stalls the time it takes to get kills.


If AL stalls the times to get kills, which is how some gametypes ended -Slayer, then how do the game lengths end up averaging to around the same?

If the overall pace of the game is slowed, and it's slow to get kills because of AL, then how does that not correlate to game length?


On average, only one person (sometimes a few people) might use armor lock in a 4v4. And AL only lasts for a few seconds, so fights don't really take that much longer... but a few seconds is a long time in an online shooter.

Now a whole team of armor lockers... was rare, but horrifying all the same. Just unbelievably infuriating, getting kills at that point is near impossible. Team Doubles is a whole other story...

  • 12.04.2012 8:26 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: Hylebos
Posted by: Murcielago00
If the overall pace of the game is slowed, and it's slow to get kills because of AL, then how does that not correlate to game length?
It doesn't correlate because:
A) You don't have the data to prove that there's a correlation.
B) There are too many confounding factors other than Armor Lock that mess with your abillity to make a definite conclusion that "Armor Lock didn't / did make the average game slower."

Learn how the scientific method works.


Posted by: Hylebos

B) There are too many confounding factors other than Armor Lock that mess with your ability to make a definite conclusion that "Armor Lock didn't / did make the average game slower."

Posted by: Hylebos

to make a definite conclusion that "Armor Lock didn't / did make the average game slower."


And this can be applied to everyone I was discussing who were arguing that AL did, indeed, slow the pace of the game.

  • 12.04.2012 8:26 PM PDT

You look around.You fire your weapon before you realize.
Its just me. I fall and you walk up. You cry why.
When i pop up. You look at me in wonder. I say,"ASSUMING DIRECT CONTROL."
You bend to my will and go to a cliff, walk off, and fall.
The last thing you hear is me stating as fact,"All will fail the battle of life, you just went early"


Posted by: ROFL Wolf1254
I still don't get why Active Camo is again useless and only works if you're still or really slow.

It was fine in Halo 1,2, and 3.


It's supposed to force you to be stealthy, rather than just running around the map being mostly invisible. And I like it like that, but that radar thing is stupid. They should at least make the extra dots red.

  • 12.04.2012 8:28 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Odyssey Genesis

Because too many ghey homos spammed hard with it

  • 12.04.2012 8:29 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

Without The Flood, I wouldn't know what an opinion is.


Posted by: MongotheRed
Because Armor Lock was a terrible idea and slowed the game down by a considerable amount.

  • 12.04.2012 8:30 PM PDT

You look around.You fire your weapon before you realize.
Its just me. I fall and you walk up. You cry why.
When i pop up. You look at me in wonder. I say,"ASSUMING DIRECT CONTROL."
You bend to my will and go to a cliff, walk off, and fall.
The last thing you hear is me stating as fact,"All will fail the battle of life, you just went early"


Posted by: Murcielago00
And this can be applied to everyone I was discussing who were arguing that AL did, indeed, slow the pace of the game.


And that is where you are wrong. The FACTS are that the AL last for about 10 seconds and the person using it is completely invincible. As opposed to the person being vulnerable at all times, this does actually slow down the game.

  • 12.04.2012 8:31 PM PDT

Posted by: Murcielago00
And this can be applied to everyone I was discussing who were arguing that AL did, indeed, slow the pace of the game.
That's a little different.

I can compare Reach to Reach without Armor Lock and agree that Reach without Armor Lock has a faster pace because players do not have the abillity to waste three seconds of our time on a five second cool down. You'll notice that the only variable that changes is the presence of Armor Lock, which allows us to easily compare the two scenarios.

You were comparing Reach to Halo 3, which introduces too many confounding variables. The game feels slower, but is that because player speed is slower than in Halo 3? Is that because the weapons are balanced differently? Is it because players sprint away from combat too much?

Do you see the difference?

[Edited on 12.04.2012 8:32 PM PST]

  • 12.04.2012 8:31 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • of 4