Dont know if there's already a thread about this but idc. Basically if you have a symmetrical 4v4 map and the key gametype to play is infinity slayer what is the best type of spawning to have? is it best to have simply spawn points all around the map but have initial spawns on each respective red and blue side? Or is it best to put spawn zones down so that reds always spawn on red side and blues spawn on blues visa versa. Also with the latter to have weak spawns on the outskirts so that if an enemy is in your base then you spawn to the side of it if that makes sense? The only problem i see with that is that sanctuary on halo reach was filth when it came to spawning. all it was was spawn trapping, spawn killing, spawn killing and spawn trapping etc etc etc no skill involved at all just bs. SO I really want to avoid that at ALL COSTS because it's very boring to play a game like that. say a map has this layout red spawn at the top of the page base and blue spawn at the bottom, should they be random spawns where you spawn depending on where the enemy is not, or should they be more set out? cheers.
I guess it depends on how you want the map to play -- with teams anchored to their respective bases or simply starting off in them. It depends on the advantages offered by the base relative to the rest of the map. Allow me to share my musings. After a cursory pondering of the matter, I don't really see what the purpose for having team specific spawns in a regular slayer gametype would be. It makes sense on BTB maps since bases offer vehicles, but the above doesn't look like it supports vehicle play. Also, if a base offers certain advantages, making it so that it is not anchored to a certain team opens the map up for more dynamic play, allowing for different strategies to be employed, such as the other team attempting to steal control of the base from your team, which would otherwise be spawn trapping if you used team specific spawns attached to the base. Teams will have to actually defend their control of advantageous positions, since they won't have the benefit of inherent spawn rights. For example, one team may push the other out of their base and thus control both bases and reap the according benefits (unique weapon spawns, vehicles, vantage points, etc.). The other team could respond by counterattacking or attacking the other team's original base. Sort of like Dominion, sans the scoring system and heavy emphasis on base control. However, if the benefits offered by bases aren't great enough, players may simply roam the map, not worrying about base control. But in the end, I think I like the idea of dynamic spawning better. The end result is arguably the same -- a good team will contain and spawn-trap a severely inferior team when using team specific spawns, while with dynamic spawning, the good team will dominate the map and consistently force the inferior team to spawn in less advantageous positions. The important distinction I see between these two examples is that in the former, the flow is very static (boring), and the game extremely frustrating for the spawn-trapped team, while in the latter, the flow is more dynamic, and the inferior team has more options out of spawn (since they can't be as easily predicted by the other team as with static spawns), a better chance at recovering, and thus a less frustrating experience. So to sum it up, static spawns seem to offer a more "hardcore" experience, while dynamic offers a more balanced one. With static, mistakes are severely punished, and once your team gets spawn trapped, chances are slim that you'll recover and bounce back, making the early game much more critical than the late game. With dynamic, players respawn on more equal footing (relative to static), making the entire duration of the game more uniformly important, and thus the overall team performance -- not just the opening salvos -- the deciding factor in determining the victor. I just wrote this as it came to me, so I probably contradicted myself multiple times and just altogether confused the hell out of you. This is all theoretical, I'm sure some of the more senior forgers here have actual experience they can impart.
Yeah spawning on Sanc was terrible in my opinion. But don't forget, many players WANT that type of spawning and gameplay. Some say it takes teamwork to be able to control a map and should be rewarded with a spawn trap. Others (including myself) feel that it's just exploiting a broken spawn system. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think there's a single map in MM with static spawning (except for CTF). Everything is dynamic to be able to support Infinity Slayer since instant respawn and sprint REALLY strain a maps' spawning system. If you plan on having dynamic spawns then there's not MUCH of a reason to even include zones in the first place. Respawn zones were created to "define" where a player(s) spawns and if you do not want to do that then there's no reason for a respawn zone. Having one weak zone for red side and one for blue side should work out okay though. Best thing to do is to just test it out. Have multiple variants of your map; one with two sets of weak zones and one with no zones. Make sure to keep it simple though, don't use too many zones. EDIT - Here's a perspective. In Slayer, there is no objective other than to slay the other team. SO, why then should a player be restricted/influenced to spawn in a certain portion of the map? If a player dies, he should spawn in the SAFEST location on the map wherever that may be.
You see I agree with that and what tony was saying, to me in slayer it makes sense. In ctf its obvious that static spawns are required but yeah. The only reason I bring it up is because I tested the map above out in a lobby and PA1NTS gave me the feedback that there needed to be static spawning. But I completely disagree. However I am fairly new to forging, I can make great looking mas that flow well but when it comes to balancing them out I have a fair bit to learn still so I'm a bit on the fence about it. Maps such as haven and solace in matchmaking seem to have dynamic spawns and thats the sort of gameplay I am trying to replicate so I might leave with dynamic spawns. Simply because I will never get enough testing done on the map because I can never join many lobbies. There are a few BTB maps that have static spawns such as Ragnarok, but this is nowhere near a BTB map. Also on this map neither teams side gains any specific advantage as there is a sniper that spawns on each side but on the ground floor so both are easily accessible from both sides. Obviously each team is slightly close to their own sniper however. Thanks so much for the insight tho
I could have sworn that Ragnarok was dynamic. I've spawned in both bases several times. I've even spawned in the middle of the map many times.... Dumb... Anyway don't forget that static spawns CAN BE GOOD for a map. It can pick up the pace of a match and can also keep a map from playing too "circular" in a sense. With dynamic spawns it can turn into a ring-around-the-rosie (lol) type thing where as static will create more of a clash along the middle. It really depends on the map. Also, don't be TOO afraid of spawn traps. Spawn killing is what you need to be weary of. Spawn traps only mean that one team has gained map control and is manipulating (knowingly or unknowingly) where the other team spawns. There is nothing wrong with this. Spawn killing (which Sanc and The Pit were notorious for) is where the line should be drawn. Paints may be right but ultimately it really depends on how you want your map to play.
yeah youl find you spawn in the middle and in the opposing teams base when the opposing team has captured the majority of control of your base. But other times youl find you always spawn in or around your own base. I see what you're saying, the only problem is I can't test the map out enough in order to suss this out. Static spawns make sense for a symmetrical map however what I find is with static spawns there is a degree of camping and there are two power positions on my map, the two main towers where I want to avoid people camping and spawning on. They are the highest points on the map and there are the places where people gravitate to especially if they pick up the sniper. So If I dont want them to spawn there then they will spawn in only two locations, left and right of the above picture, the areas resting above the water. and they are so below the rest of the map that if you spawn there and the enemy knows then you dont have much chance at all to recover. irrelevant but do you know of any frequent map testing lobbies?
Static spawns can work well on large maps like Ragnarok and Hemorrhage; I would argue that's in part because they have such large buffer zones between them. Big, roughly rectangular maps with large buffer zones in between two bases that spawn vehicles, combined with static spawns, equals a frontline struggle sort of game like Noooooch said. Dynamic spawns here could disrupt that, since players could spawn-flank their enemies, which would make having a permanent friendly presence in the bases important for preventing that. I don't know, it would be interesting to see. This in mind, I'll have to renege a bit on my earlier stance. Absolutes are usually bad, since there's almost always exceptions. The map layout and desired flow should be the first factor in deciding on a spawn system. So dynamic isn't always the best, a bit contrary to what I was expressing earlier. You said you want to replicate the flow of Haven, then I'd lean towards dynamic spawning. Remember Pinnacle from Reach? Remember how much people complained about it? Part of the problem was its static spawns.
I'm not familiar with your map, but if there aren't that many safe areas to spawn in then dynamic only somewhat alleviates that issue, it doesn't cure it. Safe spawning needs to be taken into account early in the design phase otherwise you'll end up with a map with nowhere to spawn. You can always make some changes to your map to accommodate safer spawning if you need to. You generally don't want players to spawn in power positions but it happens every now and then. It practically happens half the time during CTF on Simplex. Sounds like you need to make a judgment call.
It had static spawns? I remember spawning everywhere on that map... wait come to think of it, I only ever didn't spawn in my own base if it was overrun by the enemy... then id spawn on that stupid pier looking thing and get spawn killed. I think for asymmetrical maps, static spawns don't work well at all... gah its so complicated. I think ill stick with dynamic. However when I played 4v4 on asylum (reach version) it seemed to be fairly balanced... but thats probably more to do with the layout allowing for that spawning type to work
Probably. Asylum was symmetrical, rectangular, and had clear bases for red and blue team, whereas Pinnacle was circular and had uneven bases. BTW, looking at your screenshot, I find it your sig. ironic. I think the map looks very smooth and natural -- quite aesthetically pleasing!
that being said... the map above is rectangular, or rather is square... so i might somehow try to test if static spawns work effectively on it. Thanks for the info
Ragnarok does use dynamic spawning. There are no maps that I know of in Halo 4 that use static spawning for any game type other than CTF and Dominion. I have heard people say that dynamic spawning should be used for Slayer, and that a really good player would be able to spawn trap even in a dynamic spawning environment. Static spawning simply makes spawn traps and spawn killing more easily accomplished (less skill). For this reason I would advocate never using static spawning except for objective games for which each team's defended objective is at their end of the map (flag, bomb). Assuming you have respawn points all along the outer edges of the map... If you do not use any zones, then just by looking at the map you should be able to avoid spawn traps. If you use zones covering each half of the map, then it would be trivial to setup a spawn trap. I do not believe anyone should make spawn traps a trivial exercise. For more information, see this article...
The reason static spawning is recommend by some competitive players for certain (not all) maps is that dynamic spawning can come uncomfortably close to rewarding people for dying. Line-of-sight and proximity spawn influencers being what they are, if you die between your own base and mid-map at a time that the enemy has just crossed and taken control of mid, then your most likely next spawn will be right behind them, toward the base they just left. This does indeed require more skill to counteract, but it also leads to a situation where pushing to control neutral territory is punished, and it's actually easier and less dangerous to just stay in and hold your own base. Arguably, the best strategy on a lot of maps with dynamic spawning is not to control neutral territory, but to hold your own base and then rely on your infrequent deaths to create flanking situations for you as you push back to where you died. Opinions vary greatly though. Personally I am in favor of dynamic spawning for slayer on most small and mid-sized maps, which tend to be square or circular and not so base-oriented; it's only as maps get larger and longer that I tend to prefer static spawning. It would be very annoying to push up and control the hill on Ragnarok, only to get sniped in the back of the head or lose your mantis to the guy who was lucky enough to spawn behind you, in your base. And a map of that size and length should have plenty of territory to spawn in such that spawn traps are harder to maintain (of course, I can't vouch for the actual spawning on that particular map, and will withhold comment on how the DMR affects things as well... just muddies the waters). If I understand right, in actuality Ragnarok has weighted dynamic spawning which works reasonably well; it's static-ish unless you completely take over the other base, in which case you did it to yourself. Also, instant respawn +sprint is worse for dynamic spawning than static thanks to the shoot-you-in-the-back factor. It's hard enough to counter a player spawning 1 second after you kill him when he knows where you are, but you don't know where he is exactly; if he also is able to spawn behind you and sprint immediately to within shooting distance, that's not a larger skill gap, it's just a huge irritation that makes the game worse.
These are all key points to keep in mind. Taking Ragnarok as an example, if blue moves up to mid and are looking toward red base, the only reason someone might spawn more likely on red side than blue side is because there is a red player on the red side already. However, when there are no blue players on the blue third of the map, it is nearly as likely that a red player can spawn at the blue end. The only static-ish behavior is due to allies being at one end of the map, and that is it. I think the IS+Sprint is a key element of what is troubling for spawning on Halo 4. It does want to make you lay down lots of respawn zones to ensure they spawn in front of you. Yet, none of the publisher maps do this for slayer. This is a real issue. Thanks for reiterating this. I needed to be reminded of it once again.
me? I find dynamic spawns to work best for slayer with anti and respawn zones in certain spots and set for any else that isnt ffa.. IDK if this helps but if it does then great. But this is how ive done all my spawns...