Some very talented people are working on maximizing the fun of Conquest while minimizing the boredom. I'm currently working on compiling statistics from the test games. This will be very detailed. Stay tuned.
I understand your level of worry...because you have to take into account of maps that very... Furious if you need me to do some math or something let me know
Furious Duncan when your done holding Conquest V2 you could off load it on one of the FH dummy. I don't think they have anything in there fileshare.
100% Damage on Faction: Link to the Carnage Report 75% Damage on Faction: Link to the Carnage Report The following table shows total kills, kills by team, the kill breakdown by weapon, melee, and grenade (W/M/G), the number of double kills and their percentage of the total kills, the % of kills that were melees, and the % of kills that were assisted. Kills Assists W/M/G Double Kills Blue926758/20/14 100% Red985866/22/9 Total 190125124/42/23 16 double kills for 8% 22% melees, [br] 66% assists Kills Assists W/M/G Double Kills Blue999461/30/8 75% Red737339/26/7 Total 172167100/56/15 7 double kills for 4% 37% melees, [br] 97% assists Here are the conclusions that I draw from this data. The most striking realization was the fact that 97% of kills were assisted in the 75% damage game. That can mean two things. Either players relied more on teamwork than the other game, or more likely, when they fought someone and died, a teammate showed up and finished off the enemy. As predicted, the total number of kills was higher in the game with 100% damage. Also as predicted, the total number of melees was higher in the game with 75% damage. Looking at the tool of destruction, 7/10 people had the AR as their ToD in the 100% damage game. And 6/9 people had the melee as their ToD in the 75% damage game. This evidence clearly supports the fact that in small maps like Conquest, players will end up punching each other much more often when they have reduced weapon damage. Headshots made up 11% of the kills in the 100% damage game, and 10% of the kills in the 75% damage game. But if we ignore Cosmic Rick's headshots (3 in 100%, 11 in 75%), the headshot percentage changes to 10% in the 100% damage game, but only 4% in the 75% damage game. Those numbers tell me that people used the BR and the sniper rifles much less often when they played the 75% damage game. It also tells me that Cosmic Rick loved the BR in the 75% damage game. (Why, Rick? You really messed up my stats in that game!) So basically 75% damage means that players melee much more often and rely on skill-based weapons such as BRs and snipers less often. Because of the nature of the maps, any team with fewer players is at a severe disadvantage. And if skill-based weapons are less effective, it takes away any chance that the smaller team has to win based on skill. Final Thoughts: I guess it comes down to personal preference. The Conquest game with 75% damage means that it's easier for less skilled players, and the fights often come down to melees. Also, the reduced damage can confuse players who are familiar with the default game mechanics of Halo, but aren't familiar with Conquest's settings. The Conquest V2 game with 100% damage means that there are more opportunities for skilled players to make an impact on the game. Also, there is a wider variety of weapons used. To me, the preference is obvious, but I can see how some players might get attached to the 75% damage version. Please post your opinions. And if you have opinions on the custom powerup settings, please post those.
Ahahaha... I love screwing up statistics. I always fill out surveys improperly, too. That being said, there was no reason why I made so much BR love during the 75% game. I just picked it up and hung around the doorway to the other team's 3rd point backing out when my shield got low. It worked, and I had ammo, so I kept doing it. I wouldn't have been able to do it if the teams had been even. Frankly, I don't like messing with the default traits in halo customs because people feel out of place playing with them on (especially gravity and speed), so I'm in favor of setting it back to 100% damage. Again, I love the idea of a good custom powerup. 110%/125% damage and 25% shield vamp.?
Yes, I'm for setting it back to default. And of course some shield vampirism for the custom powerup is a freakin awesome idea. Who came up with that? That's great. He should be guilder or something. By the way, I'm designing a Conquest map right now, it might change a lot of things about conquest... hope you guys don't hate it. One thing though, do all conquest maps have to be so small? Can I make a bigger one without completely changing what it is?
I know squid had a map on standoff that was significantly more open (in the center at least). The conquest purists would probably disagree, but I think it works in wider spaces as well as in smaller spaces.
I totally forgot. Lower damage means that it's even less effective to shoot people through fence walls. And we're starting to make that an important part of Conquest. As for the CPU traits, I'm gonna go fiddle with the settings, but I'm thinking about a small increase to damage, a small amount of shield vampirism, and a small reduction of gravity. I know one or two of you guys don't like the gravity thing, but I think it'll at least provide a cool option for map designers if they choose to implement it. All traits will be for 10 seconds, which is coincidently the length of time that it takes to capture a territory. If you look in the FH Standard Gametypes thread in the Premium section, you'll see a gametype called Campaign which is supposedly like Conquest but for larger maps. As far as I know, no one has made a map for it, and no one has played it to test it. You could try to make a map for that. But I'd also like to see a Conquest map that was less linear. As long as it works with the gametype and is balanced, you can make the map any way you choose, or any size you want.
Seems like the damage should be changed back to the default. Nice job on compiling the test results, Furious. It'll be nice to have the BR back as a relevant weapon to add into Conquest. I was actually planning on ditching the whole thing until I thought of the activated launching pad as a central area. As Faction so awesomely showed, the central meet-up doesn't have to be a tight hallway. I had hoped it would add a little more tactics (like flanking) than previous versions had. I think I fixed the teleporter camping situation for that map; I now have three receiver nodes in the air for each team in that central area and an televator back to each base that spawns in the last minute of the round. I like the Custom Powerup settings. This will surely add another design level to everything. You know, that Territories map that Turbo Gerbil made would probably benefit from that.
So far to my knowledge this Campaign game type has not made it to Forge Hub or a B.net fileshare to that matter. I have a Conquest/Campaign Map in Limbo because of this problem.
Iron is it the one on the Narrows. Because I suggested you make it a Campaign gametype not actually knowing if a Campaign map was actually ever made. I will try to work up a test map made on Rat's Nest using the long closed in section for it tonight. Do not expect anything extravagant since it is only to test the gametype. If anyone wants to help me I will be on most of the night.
yes it is the Narrows map, but I want to get 12 people to test than the 8 last time. It might work better with Conquest V2. Where did you find the Campaign game type Ghost?
I want to test one or two more things, and that will most likely happen tomorrow night (Tuesday). I'll host Conquest V2 on my file share for a while. I'll make a post here when it's up.