I like the gametype. Except for instant respawn and not being able to have power ups. Why no initial ordnance? I wasn't gonna place plasma pistols or Magnums on ordinance. I just wanted to be able to have power ups.
After some deliberation we've decided to bite the bullet and update our game type, and cross our fingers that nobody gets incredibly angry or continues to use the older version. The non-instant respawn is just too good to pass up. Lookout for a short mini-announcement about the update in the next few hours. The updated game type will, of course, be hosted on staff file shares following the announcement.
Looking forward to it. I'm glad the change was made. you should edit the original post with a link to the announcement as well, just in case anyone doesn't notice.
Thank god. I have a couple other relatively minor issues with the gametype, but at least this makes it a viable option competitively.
Not to stir things up, but if we want to submit non-Impact/Ravine/Erosion maps, could we do so provided we are willing to forfeit any potential prizes for that map? I have a 2v2 variant of Adrift that I really like, and would like to contribute it to the tourney. It's on my FS (called 40 Miles, here are pics) if anybody wants to take a look. I understand the different design principles that are implied in producing a completely original map, but natural terrain and pre-existing geometry use isn't prohibited is it? I mean, I could submit a map that uses that weird silo building on Impact, right? Other than that, contest looks sweet - I'm glad radar and instant respawn are being avoided. As for team waypoints - I think it's a good idea, because it means call-outs aren't as crucial. Call-outs on forged maps can be a bit shady.
Yes yes and yes. I feel like 2v2 really suffers from instant respawn. Leave everything else like it is but this is the right decision.
IDK if it's been adressed but Im wondering... If you submit a map can you also participate? Cause I would like to meet some of the other FH members on the online battlefield but I also want my name into the mix of maps but IDK if I can.
While it may be illegal to have a team consisting of one person and his guest, we have no way of telling if two separate gamertags are playing on the same box. In the same light though, we understand that split screen frame rate is terribly hard to avoid in this game. So, while I would HIGHLY discourage same-box-teams we can't disqualify them. In the end we will probably meet somewhere in the middle though as far as judging frame rate. If we're too stringent on it then I'm sure next to every entry would be canned. Moral of the story: Let's just say that that a lack of split screen frame rate will help your chances but the presence of it won't necessarily hurt them, especially if it plays awesomely in single screen. Lol
I think it'd be fair enough to pretty much ignore split screen framerate to be honest. As you said, you can make same xbox play against the rules for this reason. Whilst you can't enforce it, no one loses out but the people who do it. Worst case scenario: Awesome map is approved, despite bad split screen framerate, because it's awesome. Team play on same xbox despite rules disallowing it, complain that result is unfair because of bad framerate. Staff come back with: that's why the rules said no split screen play. You broke them, and suffered as a result. I appreciate how the staff here try to be accommodating even to people who don't go by the letter of the law in tourneys, but in this sense I don't think there's anything to be lost by simply ignoring split screen considerations personally. If it's concluded that making split screen play explicitly against the rules is too draconian then yes, it should definitely be a balance in judging terms. But if you're planning on putting it in the rules anyway then I don't see why you guys should have to sacrifice judge's opinions based on accommodating something that has been banned. Simplifies the judging process, and improves potential map quality imo.
^ Agreed with all of that. I realize there are reasons why they can't, but I've actually begun to wish 343i would just stop supporting splitscreen play for Halo, unless the next XBox does a better job with their taxing engine than the 360 did in Reach and Halo 4. Splitscreen is just brutal - often on default maps; certainly on MOST forged maps. The game just isn't really made for it anymore. I've stopped forging with splitscreen in mind, there are rumors that 343 won't be paying attention to it when looking at forged maps for matchmaking, and I think we (Forge Hub) should stop worrying about it as well. Just state that the maps won't be judged on it, and playing on split is against contest rules; if you choose to do, the resulting frame drops should be punishment enough for making a bad decision.
I think split-screen is part of what makes a game great - ability to have friends over and play. The only issue is that 343 needs to actually give us the capability to make proper split-screen capable maps without framerate or such nonsense, and make maps that are at least 2pl compatible themselves. The fact that Complex has some split lag (and I've heard Vortex does, too) in SINGLE SCREEN MODE is ridiculous. As for what to do with this game, yeah, scrap the split screen. Not much can be done about it, especially when three blocks put together cause unbearable lag. Rail has pretty bad framerate on splitscreen. RAIL. It's a tiny little 2v2 map...
What's the chances of including 2v2 CTF into this? Like the first round be 2v2 TS, next round be CTF, and back and forth. It would be all the same gametype settings but just CTF. 2v2 CTF can be a lot of fun and requires even more solid team work.
Slim chances this late in the game bro. Thank God too cuz I hate 2v2 flag. My opinion set aside, I don't see that happening now. Maps have been made already that may need changing to work well with flag.
We had several 2v2 objective variants of the gametype ready to go. CTF functioned pretty well but we couldn't get any decent maps that worked well with it. In the end, the objective games were scrapped in favor of the more conventional Slayer type. We realized that it takes a lot of effort to make a balanced and exciting 2v2 map that supported so many gametypes. I think by the next tourney we'll have a solid round of objective based games working along side the slayer variants. Although, 2v2 Dust-Up CTF on Adrift is some of the most intense CTF I've ever played lol.
Well it's pretty impossible to make a map that supports so many gametypes but 2v2 CTF is old school roots in classic competitive play. Most maps are design for only one or two gametypes but can play "decent" with some others. Most 2v2 Team Slayer games really comes down to just getting ahead in points and then camping the most advantageous spot on the map to almost "bag" the win. This is impossible to do with higher number players (unless you have a very coordinated team) because it so much more complex with so many players coming from so many angles but 2v2 it is very possible to do this and I hate such a cowards' way to play. 2v2 CTF avoids this as it is possible to score one point then camp your own flag but good designed 2v2 CTF maps will make bases very vulnerable to "push" the team out of its' base. You don't have to state the obvious but it never hurts to ask if they;ve thought about it.