Forums / Games / Halo Infinite

Should Halo Infinite MP Have Map Voting?

OP FloppyFish05583

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. ...
  5. 3
So after playing MCC for a while, I started noticing that some of the cool maps were never used (Highground, for example). What if Infinite had 3 or 5 maps that the players could vote for if they stayed in the matchmaking lobby, or 343 allowed us to vote for a map after the lobby filled, but before the match started? I think this would be a pretty good idea, since it would give some other, less used maps some play time. I would love to play highground in MCC MP, but it never happens. Please give us map voting!!
(Or a revised and fair veto button/more map rotation)
I prefer some sort of playlist thing like mcc has. mostly for selecting game modes but it'd be cool if infinite had the option to select what maps you liked so you still get a choice in what you want to play but you can remove a map or mode if the game keeps selecting it, because I like being able to choose or vote what I play but you have to admit that the voting system often leads to repetitive selections because the community latches onto a few favorites and just votes for those.
So I can play the same 2-3 maps...no thanks. I'd rather map voting never return in any future Halo games. If people wanted the same few maps over, over then they should stick to custom games browser for their specific maps/game-types. Veto/voting should never return and there is nothing good about them, like said in other threads good riddance to them because they were the worst part of Halo matchmaking.
Definitely a no to voting.

Maybe some sort of veto system in a pinch... but I'm not sure that has worked in the past. And I definitely remember some unpleasant pre-game lobbies.

Could they have an individual rating system... where you privately rank the maps on offer... and matchmaking gives a slight push towards your own personal favourites?
hell no, one of the things that pissed me off about reach was the constant same 2-3 maps being played over and over again. give us map veto instead like h3 did, it gives you an option, don't like it? veto it and the game will give you another random map and you'll be forced to play that one instead. but if you DO veto you might get a map that you don't like AT ALL so it keeps the maps fresh and forces people to think. what we have with mcc is random maps and that sucks -Yoink- because I cant tell you how many times I play h2 btb and I only get either coagulation, Zanzibar or burial mounds. and its EXTREMELY mind numbing.
No. But it should have veto like H3 did.
Alright so a lot of nos to the voting system. I have two more ideas right now on how Infinite could could keep the map rotation fresh.

1. Is bringing back a modified veto button... so there are 8 players in a lobby, and the game shows them the next map to be played. Each player can say no, and the game needs 5/8 votes to change to a different map, but after one map is vetoed the players are forced to play on the next map. (Not sure if this is how H3 worked... I couldn't pay for gold then)

2. Equalize the chances of each map in MP. Sure some maps are kind of bad, so maybe some kind of poll of everyone's 2 or 3 least favorite maps would lower chances of getting those maps. But at least having the majority of maps be equal in chance would make more people happy.
Darwi wrote:
Definitely a no to voting.

Maybe some sort of veto system in a pinch... but I'm not sure that has worked in the past. And I definitely remember some unpleasant pre-game lobbies.

Could they have an individual rating system... where you privately rank the maps on offer... and matchmaking gives a slight push towards your own personal favourites?
I agree, this way if there’s a bunch of people who want to play a specific map, the matchmaker can just put them together. And if you ever get tired of a map you can easily move it down your preference list. Only downside is that I can see is this list getting overly complicated and potentially overwhelming if there’s a ton of maps.
veto yes. map voting like reach no. halo 3 veto was decent, it should just have a less random option. maps should be cycled through in played least to played most order if that makes sense. if the population stays high enough you could theoretically get matched in maps with people who havent played that specific map yet or in a certain ammount of time. like i get tired of playing the 3 dev invasion maps constantly when there are a bunch of forge world invasion maps (refinery being my favorite). or playing breakneck every btb match etc etc.
Cody15x wrote:
Darwi wrote:
Definitely a no to voting.

Maybe some sort of veto system in a pinch... but I'm not sure that has worked in the past. And I definitely remember some unpleasant pre-game lobbies.

Could they have an individual rating system... where you privately rank the maps on offer... and matchmaking gives a slight push towards your own personal favourites?
I agree, this way if there’s a bunch of people who want to play a specific map, the matchmaker can just put them together. And if you ever get tired of a map you can easily move it down your preference list. Only downside is that I can see is this list getting overly complicated and potentially overwhelming if there’s a ton of maps.
Nah Rainbow six Siege had this system, it barely did anything from memory.
Veto was definitely the best system. In Halo 3 you weren't just vetoing the map either, it was the gametype. So even if you got ARs on Guardian, you'd have to choose whether to play a good map, or get BRs on trash. It basically ensured that every map was played in the rotation.
Fos Kuvol wrote:
Veto was definitely the best system. In Halo 3 you weren't just vetoing the map either, it was the gametype. So even if you got ARs on Guardian, you'd have to choose whether to play a good map, or get BRs on trash. It basically ensured that every map was played in the rotation.
Ehm...H3 turned into BRs on The Pit most of the time if you weren't playing BTB. Definately proof enough for me to say no to a veto/vote system. The way it works in H5 is fine.
Halo Master Chief Collection feels casual than competitive so I can let voting slide there. It wouldn't be an entirely good idea to have voting because it would cause some maps to be neglected and potentially forgotten. Plus it can also cause for people to have an edge over knowing certain maps over later players which would throw away the even-playing-field that 343 is trying to emphasize on with area multiplayer.
DonVinzone wrote:
Fos Kuvol wrote:
Veto was definitely the best system. In Halo 3 you weren't just vetoing the map either, it was the gametype. So even if you got ARs on Guardian, you'd have to choose whether to play a good map, or get BRs on trash. It basically ensured that every map was played in the rotation.
Ehm...H3 turned into BRs on The Pit most of the time if you weren't playing BTB. Definately proof enough for me to say no to a veto/vote system. The way it works in H5 is fine.
Haha totally not for me - played so often on the most different asymetrical maps :D
To point things out, I just take the System from Halo 3, Reach and 5.

Halo 3 had a Veto-System:
  • You got one map and one gametype
  • when the majority of the lobby used a veto, like 9/16, 5/8 or 3/4, the veto was successfull
  • [mostly] a new map and a new gametype was presented - if you hate the new map and/or gametyp, you were forced to play
  • if you liked the map, lucky you, if you left - well you loosed an EP point
Halo Reach had a "Choose your map/gametype" System:
  • You got 3 maps and 3 [not always] different gametypes, also one new poll vote which leads to three new maps and gametypes
  • the majority wins, even if only one person voted
  • Of course, if you hate the map and or the gametype you were able to leave the lobby but maybe you got banned for some minutes
Halo 5 had a "forced" System
  • You got one map and one gametype
  • if you like the map and the gametype you were lucky, if not - well had to play on the map or leave - maybe got a temporary ban when you left too many lobbies
In my opinion, the Halo 5 system is for many reason the worse one.
On the one side, you can't do anything to change the map or the gametype you MUST play the map.
On the other side, the developers just get feedback in the forum, when people are upset with something and write it down here. The silent majority never used the forum.

Halo 3 was a very well balanced one.
It was like you can play on that map or that gametype or you can use your veto - if the majority shared your opinion you were able to get a new map and a new gametype - maybe it was the same bad thing on another map or with another gametype, a better thing or even worse a thing. Sorrynotsorry but it's there your "fault" if you used a veto or not. Developers were able to see on what kind of maps the people wanted to play the most and less.

Halo Reach was in my opinion the best one.
You got three [not always] different maps and gametypes and one new poll vote. Majority wins always.
The good thing was, that if all three maps were bad, the majority was able to simple vote for the new poll.
Three new maps and [mostly not] three different gametypes were able.
When 343i take over Halo, maps like "The Cage" got new deadzones which ruins many infection spots, which were really loved by many players. You saw there easily, how many people voted for anything but not for "The Cage".
Like in Halo but better, the developers could see it more easily what players wanted to play and what not.

In this conclusion, I'm for the Reach system.
Halo Reach was in my opinion the best one.
You got three [not always] different maps and gametypes and one new poll vote. Majority wins always.
The good thing was, that if all three maps were bad, the majority was able to simple vote for the new poll.
Three new maps and [mostly not] three different gametypes were able.
When 343i take over Halo, maps like "The Cage" got new deadzones which ruins many infection spots, which were really loved by many players. You saw there easily, how many people voted for anything but not for "The Cage".
Like in Halo but better, the developers could see it more easily what players wanted to play and what not.

In this conclusion, I'm for the Reach system.
I completely agree. They need to give the control back to the players. The reach system by far had the best system to implement this and I would be ecstatic to make it see a comeback in infinite.
YES
Especially when map/game settings have a lot of bad settings/map weapons/starting weapons. like the H1 mag for swat .Old classic BALANCED maps should also be allowed back into map rotations. really hoping the BR is made primary again because i have no clue why that in Halo 5 our primary is a secondary..
If we were going to return to any older system I would prefer the Veto option with options to veto map and gametype separately.

Map voting is great in theory, but in practice I would like to play something other than Blood Gulch and slayer when I play something like BTB. Ideally there shouldn't be any maps or gametypes in MM that would be bad enough for me to want to avoid like the plague. If there are any Snowbound or Foundation class bad maps then they should be fixed rather than just left to flounder, same with gametypes.

For the folks who really adore just one map I think that's what a custom game browser should be for. Otherwise I don't want to see MM devolve into playing the same handful of fan favorite maps while other good maps are never given a chance.
I personally did not like map rotation, I would prefer it to not return, but then also have the map rotation a little bit better, I would not be completely opposed to map voting if it was done right like have a playlist selection system similar to mcc, but then vote between 4 different maps with whatever game mode you have selected.
Alright so a lot of nos to the voting system. I have two more ideas right now on how Infinite could could keep the map rotation fresh.

1. Is bringing back a modified veto button... so there are 8 players in a lobby, and the game shows them the next map to be played. Each player can say no, and the game needs 5/8 votes to change to a different map, but after one map is vetoed the players are forced to play on the next map. (Not sure if this is how H3 worked... I couldn't pay for gold then)

2. Equalize the chances of each map in MP. Sure some maps are kind of bad, so maybe some kind of poll of everyone's 2 or 3 least favorite maps would lower chances of getting those maps. But at least having the majority of maps be equal in chance would make more people happy.
You couldn’t see what map would come next if you vetoed in h3
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. ...
  5. 3