The betrayal system can be a bit of a pain. Especially when there are massive knobs around. I think there are a few ways to define the difference between an arsehole who "I DUN WUNTS TEH SNIPERZ CUS IM S)000000W L33T AND SEXAY!" and a legitimate accident - Betrayal within 5 seconds of entering a vehicle - Some kind of "downvote" system where a user can downvote another user who has been betrayed a lot. Almost have some kind of betrayed leaderboard, so people can see the person who gets an average of 60 times betrayed per game. It would be abused, but tbh quite fun. - Betrayal with a large vehicle. I think that should count half as much, so betrayals would be 4 or 5 with a vehicle. Everything is abusable though. But nothing less abusable than the reach system.
Yeah same, I get booted based on accidents from time to time, and I don't even really use vehicles (the easiest way for an accidental betrayal by far due to Reach's stupid splatter mechanics). But even then, I just tend to take it as an indication that I should either A) be more careful or B) it's just a guy on my team whose sole approach is to hold forward and so constantly gets caught by nades in narrow corridor standoffs, then boots because he doesn't understand that he's the reason we're losing the game. Bitter as that sounds (and totally is) it's rare enough so that I just have to get over it. Betrayal system is still glitchy from time to time, either overly harsh or letting it get to 3 betrayals without a boot, but the majority of the time it works for me. Anything where you can completely predict it (like, say, 2 betrayals then boot as a concrete system) is to easy to abuse and grief with.
I find it when I accidentally betray a teamate in combat while he's taking damage from the enemy gets me booted (like a bad nade throw). But intentional betrayals dont as much Like killing a teamate because hes being a dickhole or camping around corners not helping the team out.
If the team mate has received damage from the enemy within a given (and generous) timeframe, then you killing them won't get you betrayed. The kill is given to the enemy doing damage. Sorry, you're doing it wrong...
Going into MM with the mission to betray as many people as possible without it registering as a betrayal is so damn fun.
Personally, I've always just wondered how the game would go if they simply turned off the ability to hurt your teammates.
Well, in all honesty it's not like there's anything they wont change at this point, for better or worse. And while I understand that's your opinion, and therefore not really debatable, but I can say I've really enjoyed Custom Gametypes where I didn't have to worry about dumbasses running on top of my grenades, or in the way of my gunfire. Not getting run-over by some asshole would be pretty cool too. Though, I suppose Team Killing is used as a balancing method for the Rocket Launcher, and maybe some other ordinance. You have to be careful not to fire it into a mixed group. Other than that, I honestly can't think of any benefits of being able to damage your team-mates. There's a reason why almost all popular games don't allow friendly fire.
That's not a small benefit in a game that is heavily influenced by its ordinance. 'nades and rockets - it would be a very different game if those carried no risk to friendlies. I think they were wise to turn off friendly fire in Firefight, but for competitive play I'm glad it's on. They just need to fix the betrayal boot system; current incarnation sucks.
It's o.k, I'm 15% sure he's kidding. Besides, Halo 4 has new vehicles. And vehicles maps! Don't give up when we're so close TSB.
This. Vehicles, especially the Ghost, Warthog and Relevant would be far too effective as well in the splatter department if friendlies just received a friendly push from a speeding vehicle. As for the boot system, it's actually difficult to think of a version that would serve more effective. As pointed out by myself and Pegasi a bit earlier, a strict 2 betrayal system allows player to determine exactly how much they can get away with and abuse the system. Current system (I believe it is some form of damage quota?) is broken and seems pretty arbitrary. A fixed quota of damage would be far easier to cause accidentally with nades and whatnot in the heat of battle and most likely cause a large amount of innocent boots or a high quota that allowed griefers to inflict massive damage. Damage done only out of combat allows teammates to harass anyone on their team in combat to no end, and just stay out of harm's way them self. It seems like a tricky thing to get right. I see some form of damage quota, with a multiplier on damage done out of combat so that hurting friendlies in combat (same requirement for 'in combat' as the spawn system for invasion, or something similar) causes more strikes towards the boot than damage done in combat, however both should count. The boot would go to the victim of the most damage on their next death once the quota is reached, or if they don't die within a minute, the next most injured, and so on until someone who was hurt by the griefer is dead. Points would be very slowly subtracted from the boot quota as time passes in game. It's not perfect by any means, but if anyone has a better idea, I'd like to hear it. If not, I hope 343 is doing something similar in Halo 4. It can't be so simple that griefers can calculate what they can get away with easily, and it needs to be intuitive and account for mistakes.
i cant wait to get a guy booted from a game for betraying me only for him to join back and land on the other team because of that new awesome system that fills empty spots. that was sarcasm. i think that **** really sucks and i HOPE they have something in place that would stop such dickery.
Again, this. I mean, who not? Someone said that people would be more reckless with grenades then but I'd prefer more grenades over getting betrayed anytime.
What about some form of enemy proximity or LoS thing, like the way spawning works. If an enemy isn't within x metres and/or cannot be seen, no betrayals count for the boot.
Nutduster and Scorch made two very good points as to how that'd hurt the game. It helps balance both ordnance and vehicles to require some care when using them, which I think is important for things so powerful, you must focus their use around teamwork. I personally agree with them. Tbh, even if you think friendly fire should be turned off, I'd say that anyone seeing fit to put the word "just" before that suggestion hasn't fully appreciated its place and significance in games up until now.