Conquest Dead In Reach?

That is because conquest was eh in halo 3, but it had potential. In halo Reach AZN FTW decided to steer it even further away from its potential, and turn it to crap. His idea was that you should take out all of the fun, and turn it into walls of meat walking slowly down a hallway and dying.

So pretty much, the only "Conquest" game type that is passed around completely blows, so that's why nobody plays it very often.

 

Exactly. The only real conquest maps that are even slightly good are classic maps such as LD'a Eden. No one really wants to make a map revolving around a bad gametype, why bother when the map won't be played if the gametype is hated? That's why it's dead.

 

I actually kind of enjoyed it in h3. I haven't played any reach "versions" of it but is it really that bad. I had a lot of fun on lots of conquest maps way back when. It's kind of sad to see it go really. However, reach seems to be more based on "TEST TEST TEST" instead of custom games all the time.

/nostalgic rant

 

The problem with conquest in reach is the gametype doesn't work the way it did in 3.

Territories no longer gives you one point per owned territory unless they become locked on capture.
If you leave them open for the other team to recapture then the scoring works on a very complicated version of king of the hill.

basically means if you own three of the territories long enough you'll get so far ahead that no matter how many spots the other team captures they won't beat you.

 

Pretty much this.

I loved the gametype back in H3, but the reach version is just walk forward, shoot, die repeat. New round. walk forward, shoot, die repeat. New round. ect

and with the strict rule to the gametype and him thinking he is gods gift to forge if you want to have a sniper or concussion rifle on the map you're a heretic and you map is bad and you should feel bad.

I'd love to see a rework of the gametype and elements added back from the H3 maps.

 

There is so much truth in this. He was a cocky (insert favorite expletive). If you didn't have the exact right weapon set you were useless and your map was disregarded. No one knew how to do it right but him and it was frustrating just to watch. It's unfortunate the gametype doesn't work the same way in reach because, despite the creator, it was brilliant back in the day. However, with all the new tools available, I'm sure we'll come up with new and better gametypes then it ever was. Circle of life...

 

Let's not make this a flame thread on AZN, please.

Conquest in general was pretty bad, but at least was competitive. Even if you lost the middle and buffer territories, you still had a good shot of a comeback. In Reach, pretty much every game devolves into an **** of grenades and bullets in the center because of the shortcomings of the new and 'improved' Territories settings.

 

We should make our "own" version and we should name it Hubquest and it will be our Hubquest and we should make a ton of maps for it and together we will reach perfection

I always loved Conquest, somehow, but I have to agree that the Reach version could be a lot better. I still hope that AZN decides to put a lot of work into it, but it seems like the "old" conquest is dead ..