An honorable playstyle is just another way of saying, reward what's skillful. It's the same basis that every arena shooter and early Halo game was balanced by for years. It's the same thing every person with a brain knows makes a good shooter. If it's difficult, it should be rewarding. If it's easy, it shouldn't be rewarding. That's all I mean by honorable playstyle. What I think is good is the same thing that every competent forger with a brain has stood by for years. Something that's interesting, has depth, and is balanced. But considering you've been 180'ing on everything including the validity of the AR is only more indicative that you're just being a contrarian for the sake of it right now which is why I'm not really interesting in entertaining this conversation with any longer. The announcements, articles, rules, decisions are all being made before I have ever personally had much input. I also said nothing of the rubric before it was published, so yes. This could be ran much better.
I just thought about how much better H5 would be if the walk animation for your Spartan going backwards was the moonwalk. Just thought I'd share.
I feel very uncomfortable agreeing with @Spranklz on anything --- Double Post Merged, Sep 12, 2017 --- I'm not? If you want an automatic weapon on your map and you already have a Sentineal Beam on it, use the Assault Rifle. As far as numbers go, it's less powerful and less versatile than all of the other automatics. Are you just going to assume I'm trolling and lump me in with everyone else "without a brain" because you disagree with that statement? You yourself have said you don't dislike what the AR does, so your comment sounds unnecessarily passive aggressive.
This could compete with the first time i discovered goldeneyes bighead mode. Like truly life changing next level ****.
I don't think that this is always the best thing. Rocket launchers, for example, are not skillful in Halo 5, when compared to other weapons. I would enjoy Halo less without rocket launchers. I think it's okay to have the opinion that more skillful gameplay should always be what's rewarded, but I don't want to see maps judged poorly simply because they don't always reward skillful gameplay. Different opinions are great, but judging maps based on what your opinion is of how Halo should be played is a form of bias. Like Goat said, though, bias is inevitable--and that's why there's a panel.
No I'm assuming it because of a handful of posts/comments you've made the past 2 weeks as well as your general demeanor. In addition to the fact that you've gone through similar cycles before with other people. I've already approached you in private about whatever it is your problem is and this isn't even a conversation I want to have here - for your sake. Okay, again. What your argument is boiling down to is "That's your opinion". "I think it's okay to have the opinion that more skillful gameplay should always be what's rewarded, but I don't want to see maps judged poorly simply because they don't always reward skillful gameplay." That statement sums up what I'm trying to point out. It's a contradiction as best and a complete paradox at worst. Skill based shooters should always reward the more skillful playstyle (I've used the word honorable in the past but it seems that it's being misinterpreted so I'll drop it). That is not only the basis of good game design but level design as well. A good map, at it's most fundamental level, is; Interesting in design, balanced, and at the most primitive basic level allows the player to succeed. Take away any of those and you start to stray from what most level designers have established to be "good design" The sentence "I don't want to see maps judged poorly simply because they don't always reward skillful gameplay." completely contradicts that prior precedent. If we can't judge a map on not filling out that criteria then what the **** are we judging. That criteria is what determines whether or not a map is good. If it is not good, it is bad. You're telling me we shouldn't be calling bad maps bad. If you disagree with that criteria that's an entirely different story. But for the record, I find that completely ignorant and you loop back into the argument of subjectivity where there is no such thing as something that is bad. There's no place for that anywhere, let alone judging. That conversation was exhausted with xzamples here in the WAYWO like 2 months ago so if you want to argue with someone about the basis of "good" level design please do so in your head and reread the thread.
No, my point is that I don't want you to confuse preference with fact. Like Goat said, "What you think is good is very different from what other people think is good; bias is inherently unavoidable, which is why there is a judging panel." The reason there is a discussion here is because I indicated that I would prefer that weapon sets not be changed by judges on maps submitted to the 1v1 competition. I don't agree with this at all.
@no god anywhere its all cool brah. Hakuna Matata. Ya I was that guy but I couldn't do it because I value helping more than getting easy wins. So told anyone to reach out to me @MultiLockOn I do agree that the contest was announced a little earlie. I was under the impression that the judging rubric was agreed apon by all judges in the Contest amd thats how it was going to be judge. Which ment we where being judge on are full skill set as a forger. I am okay with all judges wanting to judge it differently. Your the judges. I just want it the be formly known and fair for everyone. Thats all ----------------------------------------------------------- I am fairly competitive. So with how the judging guidelines was looking I was feeling extremely confidant. I mean i will feel confident in any forge contest. Hahahaha. Chuck is allowed to say what ever he wants to say about me ahahah. He knows me fairly well and how much i like helping others. Thats why I told the others that summited to reach out to me for feedback I just like forging for a reason. Forging for myself is boring. It could be Contest, Matchmaking, Tournaments, Helping Others or Educational.
Don't talk down on me please. My comments about Forge or Halo over "the past 2 weeks" have nothing to do with the bullshit going on in my personal life. I mean everything I say when I say it.
You don't agree that skill based games should reward skillful players. You are actually a walking contradiction. "No, my point is that I don't want you to confuse preference with fact. Like Goat said, "What you think is good is very different from what other people think is good; bias is inherently unavoidable, which is why there is a judging panel."" Yes. I have preferences. My point is that I'm always willing to look past them to see what a map objectively is. Does it work, is it broken, is it balanced, is it fun. End of discussion.
I stand by this, although you're misquoting me and omitting the word "always." I even gave an example earlier. Hope so. But I don't believe changing a map's weapon set is objective judging. You've indicated that you disagree. That's okay.
It was literally just a suggestion I thought the one object stairs were tacky. Yes it's forge, what do you want me to say. It stuck out to me. I know we have no control over object limits. Not liking clamber is one thing. Saying key maps are boring is just stupid, sorry. There is no comparable map experience in H5 that makes you think as much as you have to as playing a key map. If using your head is boring I don't know what to tell you other than maybe you haven't even played a proper match on it. This will come off as self defensive however, I don't really care. The BPR rapes at close/mid range but everything is context, so. The LR is half the problem the BPR will ever be If you have personal issues then don't take them out by being edgy and contrarian here, I've been nothing but kind to you so if you have issues just tell me instead of subtweeting me here.
Mine is Sagittarius--I think that means we are supposed to be lovers or something. Goat actually literally said, "I'm not knocking on the concept or vision." I'm really giving you a hard time today--I just really don't like seeing people's original words/intentions being misrepresented for the sake of having an argument over them.
- Yea I know it was a suggestion. I'm just letting you know any "issues" have nothing to do with that because everything else on that list coincidentally happened afterwards. -I agree the simple blocks are tacky. They were also placeholder because I wanted to have them beveled and was testing different things. Literally all of the stone techniques in this game were pioneered by me, so bet your ass I want beveled stairs. Every other step on the map was beveled, but I just don't think those ones are worth 20 extra detailed blocks considering that is one of the main sources of framedrop on the map. -Your map is the only key map in the game and I think it's boring because clambering all over the place to chase the key is not fun. Fun to me is a clean pistol duel and that happens maybe once a game on Arcanum. It has nothing to do with using your brain and I'm tired of you assuming anyone who disagrees with you is retarded. It's like we didn't have weeks of discussions about secondary map mechanics, and I didn't state several times that I think it's more interesting than power weapons. -Nothing I've said on ForgeHub in the last 2 weeks is "edgy". You haven't mentioned anything particular and offered a counter, so it just looks like a deflection at this point.
No matter how bullshit a weapon is, obviously the better player will utilize it more. This remains true pretty much no matter what, and it has little to do with the balance of the weapon and much, much more to do with the fact that any decision based game that doesn't have some sort of pay-to-win is almost entirely a meritocracy. Using Goat's example... a pro will utilize a scarab gun better than a n00b. This isn't a sound argument for the balance of a weapon because it provides no distinction. It's just always true. As far as lowering ammo count... I'll just repeat what I already said. Limiting somethings use is stupid because a bullshit weapon is a bullshit weapon. Not only is this a poor balancing tool, but the high ammo count isn't even what makes the BPR so obnoxious to fight. The weapon has a ridiculously fast kill time when paired with a melee or a switch, and the weapon's projectiles travel extremely quickly, and the bullets will bend around the moon and back to hit their target. I mean, when you get killed with a BPR, are you really thinking "man, if only that guy didn't have so many shots!!!" No. It's more realistically along the lines of "Wow, I had no chance to fight back because he killed me before I could even blink." It only gets more frustrating when you use the weapon and realize how easy it is to dominate with it.
The only weapon in this game that doesn't feel cheap to die by is the Sentinel Beam. Hitscan and Bullet Magnetism can suck a ****. edit: nevermind. The Sentinel Beam is ****ing ugly. That alone makes me feel disgusted by dying to it. This is a Sentineal Beam This is 343's shitty bionicle forerunner
Other than the initial "rush out the door" week and a half (which I thought could've waited a bit before posting, so I'll take the fall for that) there has been plenty of time for discussion and changes to this contest. This doesn't take into account the judges private messages, but other than that there is very little discussion that I can personally see about all of these issues. I suppose I could have messaged each judge and got a consensus that way, but ultimately it was up to the judges to make the rules and regulations. I mean for goodness sakes this is being argued about in waywo, and not the thread that was set aside for just this occasion. Where was this fire weeks ago when it would have been as easy as a snap of the fingers to change? Was it unclear that the judges held responsibility for this contest and how it was run? I mean I saw this as a great opportunity for everyone to run this thing how they wanted, squashing stigmas and established norms every step of the way to give birth to the alpha and omega of running contests.
Oh look the typical fallback of I just think everyone else is retarded. Didn't see that coming. --- Double Post Merged, Sep 12, 2017 --- If the judges were in charge of the contest I wasn't aware, would've been nice to know. I would've taken a little initiative in creating the announcement and rules, all that.