I edited my last post in response to your video edit. ^ That is an opinion and I'm simply going to disagree with that as we are going in circles.
So surely you can accept that, in its current form, it DOES have these issues? A modified version such as that would indeed help the issue in some senses, but at that stage what's the point? The only point of sprint is to give increased movement speed at the cost of firing. Since the loss of firing capability is what causes this running away issue, negating its main use surely renders it pointless. Why not just increase base movement speed? This is just as useful for pushing and being aggressive, and also still enables a better player to get to cover and hinge their success on strategy, but without causing the problems that giving up the ability to shoot brings.
The only point of sprint is to give increased movement speed at the cost of firing. Since the loss of firing capability is what causes this running away issue, negating its main use surely renders it pointless. I disagree. I use it to catch the enemy off guard all the time, asks anyone who plays customs with me in the lobbies I host on here. Without sprint, it would be much harder to catch the enemy off guard or "close the gap" staying unnoticed. Why not just increase base movement speed? This is just as useful for pushing and being aggressive, and also still enables a better player to get to cover and hinge their success on strategy, but without causing the problems that giving up the ability to shoot brings. Because that would completely change how the game plays. Having sprint allows a risk/reward situation. Use sprint to run around the enemy and assassinate him or he catches you in route and now you have a delay before you can shoot, resulting in death more times than not. I like to close the gap quite often, not just to assassinate but to be closer for BR firefights to increase my accuracy. It gives the enemy better accuracy as well but I plan on shooting first by choosing to "close the gap" as the player has not yet seen me. With me shooting first and a better chance of connecting all shots being close, I stand a better chance of scoring that kill rather than firing from a distance where the player can take cover and now knows my position.
If by "completely change" you mean change it back to how it was for Halo CE-3 (in the sense of one constant speed for all players, at all times). I can see your point on the risk reward thing, though. In that sense, I think your suggestion to basically cut out all the running away friendly elements by removing ability to sprint when being shot or low shields holds a lot of weight. I must admit, that would basically address my concerns whilst still maintaining your aggressive advantages. I'd still personally prefer a standard speed mechanic, since it puts the emphasis on positioning and awareness to define every encounter, rather than even having the opportunity to "close the gap" by a button press, even though there is this risk of being seen and shot first without the ability to immediately retaliate inherent in sprinting, arguably a fair trade. This is more a difference of preference on gameplay principle, and again your suggestion does indeed address the fundamental and most damaging issues with sprint as I see them. That said, to get this back to non hypotheticals, that's not what we have either with Halo 4, or with Reach when it was current. That's what we're discussing, and a hypothetically fixed sprint isn't what anyone in here was criticising, nor what you were originally defending. Talking about what could be done to sprint is all very well, but in its current form these issues are not addressed, so I maintain my judgement on it as it stands.
Fair enough. I love the positives, you hate the negatives. But for now I am happy b/c I get to enjoy sprint for the reasons I believe it was added to the game.
Yeah the BR can kill at long range just like the DMR, but it's nowhere near as easy to kill with at long range. BR BTB Slayer would make BTB more fun in Halo 4 and less annoying. Of course there are still a few more issues but it would be a good start.
While I think that's one of the more offensive ways to put it, sorry for not mentioning Doziz as well. Not sure why I didn't in the first place. Sprint jumps / sprint spring jumps are nice movement skill options, although minor (one requires little skill, the other requires too much to be used often). So I would think sprint is a slight positive in that regard (not talking on balance). I can't say much for Unreal, not watching it often at all, but as for Quake, "insane amounts of health" is not very accurate. One direct shot from the Rocket Launcher off spawn is a kill. One rail off spawn leaves you with 20 health, which is pretty similar to being absolute in Halo, because at that point pretty much anything will kill you. As for running away, not true. You can try, but escape is not as simple as I think you're making it out to be, for several reasons: everyone has the same movement speed (can't get a movement advantage by not shooting and running away at the same time), greater prevalence of explosive weapons (nade around corners to trap people, rockets), flanking movement options (teleporters, rocket jumps), etc. Specifically for teleporters, they're not so easy to run into to escape because Quake teleporters tend to be placed close to each other spatially on the map or allow for rails between the two ends of the teleporter (finish off). There's also the factor of running away not being as enticing because shields don't regenerate when you hide. I'm going to look for a tournament match (since we're talking competitive play after all) with sprint and count times when players use it to run versus not to run. Hopefully I can find a match with the same PoV the whole round, although if I can't find one, I'll just use one with a shifting PoV.
Watch any of the videos on my channel and I promise you it will be used atleast 3 times (3x) more for not running away.
I already said, I'm going for high-level clips (pro gameplay), which means I probably won't be looking at stuff on your channel. Not to say that you're bad (I have no idea), but that I'm looking for tournament-quality matches. Probably will count up something from AGL or such. Tomorrow, though. It's late right now.
Well it wasn't designed or intended to be used at pro level. It was designed for the 99% of the community that is not at pro level. I use it probably every couple seconds to speed up movement and I rarely run away.
You admit there is a problem with sprint at pro level of play? You have to balance a game for the 99%(everyone else) and 1% (pros) Imo game mechanics should be designed to be as perfectly balanced at pro level of play then made sure there isn't any overwhelming problems for the 99% (like a over powered weapon for 99% players but it's balanced at a pro level because they can counter it, that is a problem) If pros use sprint to to run a lot then it probably means that's a good tactic that you should use a lot to. If you rarely run away with it your making suboptimal plays and can't judge a mechanic's balance based off intentional suboptimal plays. Your one shot losing a fight without sprint you walk away while they walk after you at same speed(using grenades shooting at them trying to escape etc) but with sprint you turn with 10 sensitivity 180* and sprint away around a corner, The guy killing you has only one choice to sprint after you till you both run out of sprint then it ends up exactly like how it would without sprint(a walking chase, till sprint comes back). Which may not seem like much but that's X seconds of time to contribute to shields replenishing and for the guy trying to escape to dictate the path which is generally towards his own team. In that situation sprint essentially means "No fighting for X seconds while shields recharge"(Assuming no outside force interrupts and specially bad with the shield recharge perk in Halo 4) and "No fighting till losing player is closer to team or Better spot to defend" (No deaths till team gets closer? sounds like a complaint for armorlock...Except shields don't recharge in armorlock...) And if your chasing choosing to stop and shoot in that situation(like there is a corridor where you might be able to headshot him or something) since there is a delay after sprinting before you can shoot you automatically add distance between you and the guy who's trying to get away from you then add even more distance depending on aim and amount of shots. Which strait away puts you at a distance at that moment. Plus it also puts even MORE distance between you in the future because of this choice.(if the chase lasts long enough) Sprinting walking then sprinting is slower then Sprinting till its run out. Because there is a delay before it recharges and if you stop and shoot then sprint again means when you sprint again you have to wait the full recharge duration before it recharges which means to get two full sprint durations you have to wait "Full Recharge duration+whatever time you spent shooting/aiming/forced delay when you stop sprinting", While guy who didn't stop only has to wait the recharge duration)
They don't test it at a pro level, therefore it wasn't designed for pro level. Why design a game focused around that 1% of people, when 99% is where the money is at? Pro and standard gameplay are different and would play different. They should just have a seperate playlist for that 1%.
You don't have to test to design for. It's recommended but not required. Design=A plan to show the look and function or workings of a object before it is built or made. -If the game isn't balanced for the pros then the better you get the closer you become to the pro's level of play and start using similar tactics etc and becomes more unbalanced and uncompetitive. (And you can lose because someone used the broken mechanic) -If the game is balanced for 1% of pros then the better you get the closer you become to the pro's level of play and start using similar tactics etc and the game becomes more balanced and competitive. (And you can win by using more advanced tactics/skill/strategies, aka your where better then them so you won) To me the 2nd option sounds better. Which is why my stance is "Balance for the pros but don't ignore the 99%" making sure its still pretty much balanced for 99%. (ideally balanced for both but pro level is more important) Because 99% wont know if it's balanced or not, Which sounds condescending but The worse you are the more you "Don't know any better" to take advantage of unbalanced tactics. New players wont know anything or how to take advantage of any broken tactics in there level of play(once they do they become better and leave that level of play) Continuing on for every level of play with more skilled players been able to "Know better" till you get to the pros who know everything. If you perfectly balance a game for average players, Then its not technically balanced because the only reason there average players "don't know any better" If they knew better (meaning knowing the OP tactic that the pros use since its not balanced at pro level) they would use that OP tactic and be playing at a pro level(if there skilled enough) Which is why my stance is "Balance for the pros but make sure its still pretty much balanced for 99% because even if its a little unbalance for the 99% they wont know any better."
I don't agree with at all here, but "pro level" is still something new to the gaming community. This didn't even start until after the first halo came out and even then it was rarely heard of. Before that it was just playing video games and to say you were a "pro" would of just got a laugh from whoever. Game companies headsmen don't make decisions and plan for what pros will think of the game and don't take that in effect when planning anything. They want it to play well and there not going to "strip down" their game just to make that 1% happy. A LOT of players suck and there are a lot more sucky players out there than "pros." They probably care more about the sucky players than the pros because of all the elements in the game that work away from competitive gameplay (auto-aim, radar, excessive power weapons). All I'm saying is, the more you make a shift to one side (pro level), the more you lose interest from the other side (sucky level). The way halo is now sits pretty much in the center.
I would say there's no distinction between balanced for pros and balanced for non-pros (the 99%, as you describe most of us). Mechanics don't change for pros - the only difference between pros playing and us playing is that pros use every last overpowered trick that we overlook or don't use. So having the game play well at the pro level means it'll play well everywhere else, but the converse is not necessarily true - a game can play well because the testers playing it don't understand the full consequences of the mechanic. EDIT: ohai, new post three minutes ago. Same comment. If it plays well for pros, it doesn't necessarily play poorly for "sucky people."
Ever play League of legends? (According the Riot, People make the game)Champions on the game are balanced for the pros primarily and then balanced for the 99% and have the same stance as I do. And they run the most popular game in world at the moment and they admit there is a difference between pro level gameplay and the 99%, At low levels champion "Master Yi" is over powered you can 1vthere team and win the game solely on your own (Not because you know how to play they don't, Because if you happen to choose Yi by random its unbalanced at that level so Yi is OP) But Yi is useless at Pro level. Some champions are really good (and balanced) at a pro level of gameplay and weak for the 99% because there hard to use(and need a good team to coordinate) Halo doesn't use champions, but the things you have to balance in halo are more of a nuance so the same concepts apply just less obvious. Like a power weapons can be OP at low levels of play but people can't map control or rush or know how to use it to take advantage of it, When players get better they can counter it so its not OP anymore (meaning more balanced for the better players) I'm not talking about MLG and "stripping down" the game, I'm talking about pro level gameplay whatever the gametype(even pro level gameplay of the default gametype, Good thing about Halo is pros can choose there gametypes/maps). You don't balance for the pro's for the pros(well you kinda do but its not the main goal), You balance for the pros for the 99% (so the better the 99% the more balanced the game gets)