I know exactly what you mean by this and I agree entirely. Games with simple goals but deep strategic opportunities tend to be more successful and widely received. In fact, I think in some regards it is the simplicity of the mechanics and the fact that each one operates differently (no two weapons that overlap in basic function, for example) that creates such a deep strategic potential. Games that are too complicated become chaotic too quickly and negate strategic potential. Even an RTS game needs to have a simple goal and relatively simple mechanics to create possible strategy potential. Units may vary and should vary, but if the game operates on a simple and relatively predictable set of principles the strategies produced become the flair and create a different game each time. It's sort of ironic, in a way. The simplicity creates the variety. In regards to Halo 4, this is part of my complaint against the perks and AAs: they have a tenancy to over-complicate what would otherwise be a simple fight, making it a lot more random and based on ability counters (oh, he had X ability and I had Y, and X beats Y in Z situation so he won) than actual strategy. The abilities need to be distinct, straightforward and predictable. It should be the players that create the differences in gameplay by aid of abilities. This next part evolved into bit of an essay, so I'll spoiler it. If you don't want to bother (and frankly I don't blame you) skip on ahead. Opinion: How can abilities add to strategy, and how can they it take away? Spoiler From my experience with perks and classes, this rarely happens. The abilities directly change gameplay and force people who use different ones into a certain playstyle with limited variation to how they approach a fight. For instance, evade in firefights made players far more likely to evade-punch or just evade away, as evade was really good at doing either but offered little room for other tactics in battles (evade strafe was meh, neither player hits and the battle resumes when evade ends), making players either neglect the ability or use in in the same ways over and over (other examples are sprint-punch, sprint-sword, AL counter-meleeing, jetpacking up high in a 1v1, camoing up to someone and getting first hit, etc.). Players almost always did the same thing with each ability, and that's because of the way the ability is designed in the game. It is designed to do specific roles, and I think that's the wrong way to go about an ability competitively, especially in Halo. Less so for class-based shooters where the abilities should change how can play. But that doesn't mean they can't work in other environments Look at Starcraft for example. I'm somewhat familiar with it's ability set so I can use it to relate. I understand that it is a totally different game, but they managed to create abilities that sort of mirror what I would like to see from all abilities in a competitive setting. Two abilities I find myself using a lot are good examples of abilities that create interesting gameplay: Force Field and Blink. Force Field is a simple mechanic. You use it, nobody walks in that area you selected for 15 seconds. However, FF isn't designed to do one thing, like Jet-Pack is for height advantage in combat or mobility, or Sprint is for pure mobility. FF has a wide range of uses that it fits into perfectly. It creates strategic options by giving the player a large range of circumstances and functions for the ability ranging from offensive with choke points and trapping enemies to defensive/mobility by escaping with FFs behind you or protecting a ranged army from melee attackers. It is simple but versatile and thus creates a range of strategies that can make use of it. Blink is another simple mechanic. A short range teleport. It can catch up to a fleeing foe, help you flee, teleport to high ground, or blink behind another Stalker (unit with this ability) and let them take the next few hits, then have them blink off and put Stalker 1 in. Once again, simple with a wide range of uses and different strategic potential. Neither of these abilities are limited to very specific circumstances. Camo and Holo suffered most from this in Reach. AL was considered over-powered because it was versatile, simple but offered too many options and advantages in the scope of Halo without much thought required to make full use of it. I think Halo could use abilities well if each was designed not to fill a certain role, but instead to give the player some new ways to toy around with existing mechanics in a wide range of ways. If these abilities were not too overbearing but still useful in many ways, I feel that AAs could work a lot better. Thruster looks to be doing that, to an extent. It offers strafing options, movement options and maybe combat options (heard you can blind people if you thruster near them?) without making a huge impact on the game. H4 needs more Thrusters and less Holograms. As it is, I think 343 could only be making it worse with their quoted approach of making specific abilities counter each other. That only enforces the 'certain situations' thinking of AAs more. I realize now that abilities could work in Halo, if they offered strategic options, weren't designed with set situations in mind and did not completely change gameplay when activated. Once again, this is opinion. Thank you for reading this all. (Apologies for any typos. I was getting this all down as fast as I could, I was short on time.)
I've listed many of the uses of AAs before, so you might want to skip those paragraphs. So you're saying that AAs would be more balanced if they had more uses? The fact that you couldn't shoot in the split second that an evade took does not mean that it can not be considered an effective strafing option. With movement acceleration slowing down normal movement (not saying I like it or don't in this post), evade allowed you to cover horizontally more ground than you otherwise could, forcing the opponent to adjust his/her aim moreso than he otherwise would. You would have to adjust your aim as well, but because you decide when to use it and know that it's coming (as opposed to the opponent), you can easily react to it; therefore it's a net advantage for you. The split second that the evade takes is still enough time for an opponent to recognize it and be ready to adjust his aim in time, but if you're one shot, it's still likely to be useful, especially if a teeammate is dealing damage (2 shots) while you burn those two evades and the opponent can't shoot you for just over a second. Allowing you to shoot and allowing the enemy to shoot you during the speed boost wouldn't change gameplay much considering how quick (durationwise and speedwise) the boost is, but it is not what is necessary to make it useful as a strafe option. It can also allow you to close distances for CQC weapons (the only thing that prevents the shotgun from being a crouching around corners weapon), escape to cover in combat, traverse long open distances without covering fire, and cut down travel time whether under fire or not, in addition to the strafe/pause abilities. It is a weak version of the abilities of armor lock (pause while teammates shoot when one-shot) and sprint (but a more effective way of escaping/ lunging), plus strafe. Seems like a versatile ability to me. I think it would be more balanced with one evade and a 3/4 recharge time to prevent easy fleeing in any situation/ massive sword lunge, but possibly provide two evades over sprint-distances. AC is useful for Sniping/long range DMRing (let them stray from cover and then crouch/scope shoot them), always getting the first shot/grenade on enemies if you have a slower reaction time, eliminating aim assist when not moving at full speed for a full second, letting forward teammates stay at the edge of your radar jammer on small maps (they won't expect a player in front, and the front player still has an effective forward radar while sticking in pairs is advantageous for other reasons), or having your entire team (possibly used to playing no AA/radar MLG?) use it on small maps. Versatile. AL: Any time you don't want to die (happens frequently) but want to distract one or more enemies with chance of surviving, or for use with teammates (most effective), use with grenades to get the damage output without the damage received during nade travel time, protection from vehicle splattering/ power vehicle stalling by surviving powerful projectiles with a slow rate of fire. Jetpack: Get to highest ground quickly (usually advantageous position for more than one reason), places that you otherwise couldn't reach at all, allowing players to use many more paths, a way to vertically strafe (obviously this doesn't work well at long-medium ranges, but aiming vertically is slower and not what most are used to, so the fact the jetpacker knows what's going to happen is significant when considering that he has to adjust his aim too) while shifting headshot difficulty in your favor, a way of popping out of cover at an unexpected height/ staying above the blast radius of grenades (and not just for the Paradiso opening Banshee rush), getting away from CQC weapons on non-ceiling maps, avoiding explosives from power vehicles, possible skyjacking, avoiding getting splattered, making it much easier to use rockets. You can sensibly criticize AAs for being too "overbearing", but you can't sensibly say that they were designed or used for one role, nor can you sensibly make both arguments. I don't think that they are necessarily contradictory arguments, though. One sole easy (for the user), frustrating (for the opponent) use of an ability can be worse than many situational, surmountable advantages. AL's roles could be described in fewer ways than JP's roles, yet AL could actually be used more often (anytime you are about to die), with less thought, and to greater frustration of opponents than JP's uses. Evade has more uses than Sprint, but with one roll and 3/4 recharge time, it becomes no longer undoubtedly better overall than Sprint. AL's nerf, which could have been a shorter duration to prevent wasted grenades, was not just the modification of a number but a significant logical limit to the situations in which AL could be useful, even though its role was largely unchanged. You said that AAs need to be simple and predictable before you said that they need to have multiple uses. You also managed to insert the idea that AAs simply counter each other. I have found no coherence in your post. Allowing Promethean Vision to see Active Camo users is the type of rock-paper-scissors gameplay that you're talking about, and I agree that that's not strategy, and that the more completely one ability negates the other, and that the more solely (or exclusively) an ability can be used as a counter to one thing, the less dynamic gameplay is.
AA's abilities, guns, etc. do not create dynamic gameplay, maps do. I watched some video with neighbor playing and holy **** that map was atrocious. I just don't get the mindset of designers introducing hallways. I thought we went through this many times. Cluttered and compact spaces do not make for enjoyable gameplay.
It was a stream of consciousnesses post, that's probably why it lacked coherency. I apologize for that; I was rushed for time. Simple and predictable is not necessarily opposite of having multiple uses. For my example of Blink, you know what it can do and you know your opponent has it. For Armor abilities, unless they have jetpack, you have no idea what they have until they use it, making it unpredictable. If all AAs had distinctive aesthetic differences, it would be easier to develop strategy to combat each scenario while keeping them different each time. If you know what they have and what it can do, both of you have to consider how the ability can be used in the current situation and attempt to react with that knowledge. In Reach, you're going in blind until the jetpacker soars up and snipes you, or another player breaks into a full out sprint mid-way through a fight or you pull out a sword only to get stopped by Armor Lock. That is what I'm trying to avoid. If I turned the corner and saw a visible indication of an oppoonent with thruster, the battle would be more controlled, less random and still allow for diversity in combat options. As for AAs countering AAs, I didn't say they did in Reach. I said them in reference to an interview with 343 in which they said some AAs would be designed to counter others. I don't have the link on hand, as it was an old video, so I can understand if you doubt that credibility. However, it seems that statement is supported by ProVision v Camo currently. No. I put that comment under abilities affecting strategy, not balance. I actually never used the word balance in my little essay; I was trying to talk about strategic options and simple core gameplay mechanics. The only time I come close to mentioning balance is calling AL over-powered, because it has so many helpful uses but a very small skill ceiling. Armor lock is useful in baiting a trap, winning a melee fight against any weapon, using latency to escape over a short distance (frosting effect), surviving explosives and regaining a small portion of shields to continue a fight, or Al and try to catch your opponent reloading. That is the only time I touch balance in my post. The rest related to strategic potential of abilities done by giving them versatility with simple mechanics. Easier said than done, of course. Evade was a poor choice of AAs to defend this, especially considering Thruster is what I am promoting. Evade does have the versitility but the fact that it all but completely out-classed the most used ability (Sprint) in every way made it hard to balance in competitive play. In truth, Evade does demonstrate simple versatility well and I was wrong to use it as a counter-example. You are correct. It just didn't work well in Reach because it only lost to Sprint in straight distance or quick Sprint-jumps as far as I am aware. AC is a decent idea for a versatile mechanic, but it has the effect of slowing gameplay down too much to work well in the sandbox in its current state, especially because it obviously can't have a visible indication when a person is using it or has it. It encourages crouching around corners and avoiding areas because there could be a player in the area with AC, and no one wants to stumble into their trap. This is one of those abilities I mentioned as falling into the categories I listed of not working well in the sandbox. Perhaps if it were made a short, 5 second or so 'good camo' duration it would work more fluidly, as it could allow for all of the uses you mentioned without players having to play so cautiously and slowly. Jetpack is also useful mechanic, but it allows for players to contest map control too easily. You also mentioned avoiding CQB weapons, explosives and gaining vertical height it a battle. All three of those are done simultaneously and very easily, thus making it another ability with a skill ceiling that is too small for its effectiveness. It could be a good ability, as it has a decent set of uses, but it is too easy to execute and has a serious impact on gameplay via map control, hence it violates my statement that the abilities should be useful but not overbearing. (Just a side note, I don't want to get into another 'Jet-pack and map control' debate again please.) I understand those are strict criteria, but they can be met, have been met in the past, and some of them (Thruster) already fall in that category. I hope that better clarified my position. I want to see neat abilities with a non-distinctive purpose like Thruster or modified Camo that can be identified easily and used in ways that do not severely impact gameplay.
Me too, but I'll accept less versatile abilities over random, insurmountable, or just unfun to play against versatile abilities
An interesting read. They confirmed that we will essentially be able to "turn off" the load outs for customs so we can make maps with weapons you have to pick up instead of(hopefully)being called in.
A few things that interested me from the QnA: That almost definitely means you will be able to toss the flag like the oddball. So, flag juggling is back and even better? Also, "just a tease" makes it sound as though you can do more than just tossing. Hmmm.... Does that mean there are more AAs we have yet to see? I feel like they would've wanted to test all the AAs at E3/ComicCon etc to make sure they're all fairly balanced and work well with each other. There's no way they can throw a new AA at us come November and expect it to play well if they haven't done any public testing. I'm hoping that just means they have yet to show us the recent updates they've made to the AAs.
I think what they mean by just a tease is that each gametype will have more accessibility, not that CTF and Oddball will have more options. I just don't know what they'd do for KoTH... And I'm pretty certain it means that there will be more AAs, I don't see a problem with this. The public doesnt need to playtest every aspect of Halo 4 before it comes out.
Public demos are less about testing than they are about publicity. I mean obviously there's lots of useful data to collect there, but internal testing lets them test multiple iterations of something so they can get a feel for how changes affect it. Besides - Promethian Vision dominated. I doubt any unmentioned AAs are going to challenge it for the position of the most useful AA. Realistically, I don't think anybody would have used anything else regardless. Here's hoping the other AAs aren't available in Infinity Slayer though - I'm so sick of jetpacks..
Noooo.. I'm disappointed, jetpack completely changed the Halo experience for me. I was ecstatic to know, or at least think I knew, that jetpacks wouldn't be back in Halo 4. Seems as though I was wrong.