Jump to content

gollum385

Trusted Members
  • Content Count

    143
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

5 Liked

About gollum385

  • Rank
    Prophet of Regret

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  1. I dont think the credit system should come into it. For a start i agree in credits, but not as a ranking system, so that is irrelevant at this point. Of course it wouldnt be like normal forge mode, with all weapons being the same price. More powerful things would cost much more, so if you want a good weapon you have to save for it. Maybe also ideas for updrading a players starting weapon etc could be cool. As for weapons on map, if they are able to purchase standard weapons cheaply, i dont think this is necessary. Yes spawning weapons/ammo etc would be a 1 time placement, aswell as objects. Not sure about a limit, as if you want all 4 people to have the best stuff, you need to save up 4 times, probably won't happen often. As for weapon, was just a small idea. Would definately need to be a sentinel beam. As for having one at all times, i think if you destroy their monitor, you should be rewarded with a wait before it respawns. THerefore i feel like it should work like the vip system. You are going to play more than one game in it, so if you aren't the monitor in one game, or are another, it won't matter too much. It's the sort of gametype that would escalate quickly aswell, so wouldnt take too long Also like the idea of doing it for larger groups (like 8v8, 12v12) In that case the effect of one big weapon etc wouldnt have as big an effect, and as you have more people accumulating points and more people to spread it between it becomes more tactical. In order for that to have monitors who change the way a map plays, or change the outcome of a battle though, maybe a second monitor would be required to help with the larger amount of players.
  2. SilentCo1, i can understand where you argument comes from. But at what point is multiplayer cannon? At what point to spartans fight eachother!? in halo 3, both spartans and elites fought eachother! Again seeing as flood are similar in size to spartan 2s, elites and brutes (because thats what they are made from). They too could be awesome playable characters, and in terms of custom armour be so customiseable! I've heard alot of things about there being no covenant no brutes elites etc in halo 4. Whilst i can understand why people think this, i cant imagine a halo without those people, but more importantly the weapons, espeically in multiplayer! If forerunners are in it, they too could be in multiplayer, but seeing as this is a place for awesome gameplay, i really hope they get multiplayer right and include previous weapons. THeres no reason other characters could be in it aswell. And all of the above (so 5 different equal sized characters, plus a 6th if you include heretics) could be possible. All would be equal sized, and have a huge number of custom options available armour wise. That would be so awesome, as the number of combinations for games would be so varied. Also it would take a huge amount of time to collect them all. I also like the idea of other playable characters, but not for general matchmaking, as their size etc would be different. As for balancing. I still don't know whether balanced, but different stats would be good or not. I'm thinking no for normal gameplay. Keep it like halo 3. But the option to limit a team to one race, or change the stats for an individual race would be awesome. It would be aweomse for things like multiteam when every team is a different race or something.
  3. Yea definately sabers and the space level in reach was the main reason that myself and many other people have thought of an idea like this. But there is also the possibility of so many more vehicles. Pelicans, phantoms, spirits, long and shortswords, seraphs. Possibly even hawks or covered hornets. I'm sure other things could also be made too. This variety would make it a great series of games being possible. Maybe there could just be a space slayer game mode, with sabres vs banshees or whatever. The other benefit of this is these vehicles could be used in normal maps aswell (maybe 1 or 2 exceptions). People have been craving for driveable pelicans for so long!
  4. Thanks for the comments guys. I defiantely agree the opportunity to tactically spam is sometihng which should be possible, even if it sacrifices later shots (like my methods). This sorts of method, plus the harsher way the bloom works, promotes skilled players who can act based on the situation, deciding when and when not to time their shots/spam.
  5. The fact that the shield covers you entire body doesn't mean you therefore have to make it so hitting anywhere does the same damage. You could argue that the power supply for the shield being further away means that more shield power is needed to absorb headshots or it's distance means it's intensity is less, or any number of reasons. Take the example of my idea for weapon ballancing http://www.343industries.org/forum/index.php?/topic/369-weapon-damage-and-range-balancing/. Just because the idea might not make sense in some ways, if it makes the gameplay better, then who cares? It's not like this stuff is set in history, it's a fictional universe! As for armour, i disagree it would make sense for halo. I like the idea of tool kits instead of health packs if it was though. Therefore rechargeable health, but not rechargeable armour. If you take shots to the arm, that will be weaker, so if you shot there again it could do more damage to the arm, or maybe even go straight through it to the health? I dont really want it, but just thinking of a few ideas for it if it was. Not sure what the grenade debate is, but btoh frags and plasmas are too strong in reach. However in halo 3 i felt they were awesome. Obviously add some of the cool features that were included in reach, such as damage for hitting someone with a grenade, and a decreasing damage range (maybe means range can be a bit bigger than halo 3, like reach, but damage would be less)
  6. I'd like to clarify that I think this system would be very good for gameplay, allowing for skill, but preventing any weapon for operating well outside it's designed range limits. I think that although this wouldnt be accurate in terms of what real bullets do, this system would balance gameplay, and i'm all for that over what is possible. You could even say the increase in damage is due to the increase in speed of the bullet, up until it's operating range, as it accelerates from the gun, then afterwards it's decrease in speed, and therefore damage due to decelleration from air resistance etc.
  7. I think the other thing we must remember us that this is the future, with super soldiers using weapons. I think whatever the outcome, it should focus on how it makes gameplay feel, rather than what is realistic to real life.
  8. I didn't know that much about gears 3's horde mode. I've got to admit i'm excited to play it.
  9. Great to see most people don't think i'm crazy and agree!
  10. Does anyone else have ideas for improvements on the system i proposed, or a system of their own they think would work better?
  11. But the elites and spartan 3's in reach aren't balanced. That is why you only play as both of them in certain gametypes, such as invasion. I would be happy to have them for some gametypes etc, but for general matchmaking it should be like halo 3. Equal (or balanced) characters with equal size and hitbox ie brutes elites and spartans.
  12. Yea things like this are always annoying when matchmaking. especially in social when you are just playing for fun, and it is spoiled. It is far too common an occurence, and unlike other games the other players suffer. Obviously this wouldnt apply to ranked, but in that environment the punishment for quitting is more severe, therefore less people are encouraged to quit.
  13. Thanks for your contributions. interesting to see sandtrap is one of your favourites machinga. anyone agree? I'd always be up for new maps, but if they are like the ones in reach i would much rather have virtually all of the old ones.
  14. Where did you hear news they are using dedicated servers. i doubt this would be the case, as it is expensive to maintain.
  15. I still don't think armour would be very good, although if 2 people think it is a good idea then i'd be interested to see if other people agree? How would this system work? Obviously shields would recharge, but would armour, or health? The problem with armour is that it would mess up the gameplay, and make it confusing. In halo, once shields have popped, you're one shot. How many shots are you if you have armour? You recharge your health with a medpack in reach/ce, or just naturally in other halo's (better), but how do you recharge armour? I agree i very much disliked the spartan health model in reach. I much preffered the elite model with health which grows back completely. That is why i think a model like halo 3, but with slower recharging and visible health would be better than reach or halo 3. Interesting about your views of the spike grenade okage. I actually have thought about a delayed detonation, controlled by holding the left trigger, kind of like an alternate firing method like the grenade launcher. By holding the trigger, you are stopping yourself throwing new grenades, meaning it wouldnt be overly powerful. Once released, it explodes, maybe after a short time delay, so it cant just be used by campers hiding round a corner too effectively. Maybe the explosion could be slightly weaker than normal too. The way i think the spiker benefits is that it can stick to walls floor roof. How to make it so it also can compete against the plasma is by making it more powerful on vehicle damage, and the benefit above of a delayed explosion and it's ability to be stuck to any surface. Machinga, i completely disagree with your idea to lethalize frags. they are already way to overpowered.
×
×
  • Create New...