Forums / Community / Matchmaking Feedback & Discussion

Big Team Battle Refresh Feedback

OP ZaedynFel

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 9
  4. 10
  5. 11
  6. 12
  7. 13
  8. ...
  9. 16
3. Big Team Battle's Matchmaking System

If we are considering a BTB refresh for H5, the matchmaking system for BTB HAS to be talked about because this system is the most insufficient system by far going in to the "aftermath" or "4th year" of Halo 5 where events for this game are finished.
  • Big Team Battle's system is known as the "team balancer" where teams don't match against each other if one of them will win 60+% of the time.
  • This system is put into Big Team Battle to stop players from farming other players (a team exponentially increasing their stats due to the other team's inexperience against them while playing down to the clock) and making games a lot closer in score because it ruins game-play for players who like to enjoy the game. This system was put in due to the complaints in the forums across multiple playlist such as Warzone, Big Team Battle, and other social playlist.
There are tons of reasons why this system is insufficient:
  1. Big Team Battle is a traditional social playlist throughout the Halo franchise where you can go in as a lone wolf or with friends on medium to large scale maps with tons of chaos; therefore, the team balancer ruins the aspect of running with friends by reducing the numbers that a team can run with because of the 60+% chance of winning depending on how large your fireteam is.
  • I am limited to running with 3 and sometimes 1 or 2 on one fireteam. This is extremely unfair to me and the other fireteam members because of the difficulty of facing against other team's that run with at least 6 to 8 players while we have inexperienced players on our team. Yes, I understand that I am very experienced at the game but something you can't deny is that one to four people CAN'T do it all for their team when playing against a team of at least 6 that are experienced because the players that are inexperience on my team get UNDER 10 kills. My history of Big Team Battle is proof of this team balancer system. This also effects other well-talented players that play Big Team Battle. Players would recommend smurfing, getting on a new account, with friends for BTB, but the team balancer system quickly picks up on how well the smurf account play so smurfing doesn't last long.
2. The team balancer ruins running by yourself in Big Team Battle.
  • Depending on the skill of the person that is running lone wolf, their chances of matching against large-scale fireteams are more likely to happen but sometimes regardless of their skill, that player ends up matching against a large-scale team. This makes it unfair because their is a team that can communicate with each other and are playing with some of their FRIENDS. Now some people would say, just communicate with some of the players on your team in game-chat but the thing that is wrong with that is, that we are not back in those Xbox 360 days where game-chat is popular anymore plus Halo 5 in the beginning, didn't have voice-chat to talk to teammates so some players wouldn't really know about it. Some of the people I come across in game-chat don't even know how to use vehicles when I lone wolf BTB.
3. Their's a Quality vs Quantity ratio with this team balancer system.
  • What this means is that players are very skilled are most likely to get match with players who started playing the game or are very inexperienced against a large group of players playing with each other that has one or two inexperienced players. You CAN NOT make teams fair that way. Each player and their contributions matter so this makes it not enjoyable for the people who aren't as talented as the players trying to carry them to a win and makes it extremely frustrating to those who grind to be good at the game.
My solution to this system is:

Make a seperate Big Team Battle playlist where there is no team balancer or MMR that require players to run in teams of 4 or 8.
  • To clarify, the current Big Team Battle playlist will be kept for casuals but a new BTB playlist strictly for running with teams with no system will be added to social. Even though this will spread out the population a little, casuals will match casuals and people who like to sweat against teams will be able to sweat against teams WITHOUT getting punished because of players being inexperienced on their team.
Some players went back to MCC not because classic games are better than Halo 5 but because the matchmaking system is fair and actually works for MCC. The team balancer system is very insufficient and can be very frustrating to players that should be rewarded for being good at the game while it doesn't make it enjoyable to those who lack the skill to play against players better than them.
Envore wrote:
3. Big Team Battle's Matchmaking SystemIf we are considering a BTB refresh for H5, the matchmaking system for BTB HAS to be talked about because this system is the most insufficient system by far going in to the "aftermath" or "4th year" of Halo 5 where events for this game are finished.
  • Big Team Battle's system is known as the "team balancer" where teams don't match against each other if one of them will win 60+% of the time.
  • This system is put into Big Team Battle to stop players from farming other players (a team exponentially increasing their stats due to the other team's inexperience against them while playing down to the clock) and making games a lot closer in score because it ruins game-play for players who like to enjoy the game. This system was put in due to the complaints in the forums across multiple playlist such as Warzone, Big Team Battle, and other social playlist.
There are tons of reasons why this system is insufficient:
  1. Big Team Battle is a traditional social playlist throughout the Halo franchise where you can go in as a lone wolf or with friends on medium to large scale maps with tons of chaos; therefore, the team balancer ruins the aspect of running with friends by reducing the numbers that a team can run with because of the 60+% chance of winning depending on how large your fireteam is.
  • I am limited to running with 3 and sometimes 1 or 2 on one fireteam. This is extremely unfair to me and the other fireteam members because of the difficulty of facing against other team's that run with at least 6 to 8 players while we have inexperienced players on our team. Yes, I understand that I am very experienced at the game but something you can't deny is that one to four people CAN'T do it all for their team when playing against a team of at least 6 that are experienced because the players that are inexperience on my team get UNDER 10 kills. My history of Big Team Battle is proof of this team balancer system. This also effects other well-talented players that play Big Team Battle. Players would recommend smurfing, getting on a new account, with friends for BTB, but the team balancer system quickly picks up on how well the smurf account play so smurfing doesn't last long.
2. The team balancer ruins running by yourself in Big Team Battle.
  • Depending on the skill of the person that is running lone wolf, their chances of matching against large-scale fireteams are more likely to happen but sometimes regardless of their skill, that player ends up matching against a large-scale team. This makes it unfair because their is a team that can communicate with each other and are playing with some of their FRIENDS. Now some people would say, just communicate with some of the players on your team in game-chat but the thing that is wrong with that is, that we are not back in those Xbox 360 days where game-chat is popular anymore plus Halo 5 in the beginning, didn't have voice-chat to talk to teammates so some players wouldn't really know about it. Some of the people I come across in game-chat don't even know how to use vehicles when I lone wolf BTB.
3. Their's a Quality vs Quantity ratio with this team balancer system.
  • What this means is that players are very skilled are most likely to get match with players who started playing the game or are very inexperienced against a large group of players playing with each other that has one or two inexperienced players. You CAN NOT make teams fair that way. Each player and their contributions matter so this makes it not enjoyable for the people who aren't as talented as the players trying to carry them to a win and makes it extremely frustrating to those who grind to be good at the game.
My solution to this system is:
Make a seperate Big Team Battle playlist where there is no team balancer or MMR that require players to run in teams of 4 or 8.
  • To clarify, the current Big Team Battle playlist will be kept for casuals but a new BTB playlist strictly for running with teams with no system will be added to social. Even though this will spread out the population a little, casuals will match casuals and people who like to sweat against teams will be able to sweat against teams WITHOUT getting punished because of players being inexperienced on their team.
Some players went back to MCC not because classic games are better than Halo 5 but because the matchmaking system is fair and actually works for MCC. The team balancer system is very insufficient and can be very frustrating to players that should be rewarded for being good at the game while it doesn't make it enjoyable to those who lack the skill to play against players better than them.
Hi Envore, thanks for your feedback!

We run into two problems here that I don't see a good solution to.
  1. We actually already tried that with Warzone. It didn't work. The party-based list died immediately and no one played in it. We leave up Warlords now only because you can't play it in custom games. Meanwhile, you CAN play BTB in customs.
  2. Quit rates skyrocket if you don't team balance. Moving away from 60/40 odds results in several players consistently quitting off the underdog every single match. If your opponents are all quitting out, then you're not really playing the game anyways.
So either way, you won't be able to play with the to8.

We understand that you can't "do it all" with just a few of your friends, but that's the point. We don't want you to be able to do it all. We want you to lose at least half the time despite being good. Having lesser-skilled players on your team makes it more fair for your opponents.

Otherwise, they'll notice pretty quick and just quit (they quit consistently every match in the data).
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please refrain from making non-constructive posts.
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please refrain from making non-constructive posts.
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show
ZaedynFel wrote:
Envore wrote:
3. Big Team Battle's Matchmaking SystemIf we are considering a BTB refresh for H5, the matchmaking system for BTB HAS to be talked about because this system is the most insufficient system by far going in to the "aftermath" or "4th year" of Halo 5 where events for this game are finished.
  • Big Team Battle's system is known as the "team balancer" where teams don't match against each other if one of them will win 60+% of the time.
  • This system is put into Big Team Battle to stop players from farming other players (a team exponentially increasing their stats due to the other team's inexperience against them while playing down to the clock) and making games a lot closer in score because it ruins game-play for players who like to enjoy the game. This system was put in due to the complaints in the forums across multiple playlist such as Warzone, Big Team Battle, and other social playlist.
There are tons of reasons why this system is insufficient:
  1. Big Team Battle is a traditional social playlist throughout the Halo franchise where you can go in as a lone wolf or with friends on medium to large scale maps with tons of chaos; therefore, the team balancer ruins the aspect of running with friends by reducing the numbers that a team can run with because of the 60+% chance of winning depending on how large your fireteam is.
  • I am limited to running with 3 and sometimes 1 or 2 on one fireteam. This is extremely unfair to me and the other fireteam members because of the difficulty of facing against other team's that run with at least 6 to 8 players while we have inexperienced players on our team. Yes, I understand that I am very experienced at the game but something you can't deny is that one to four people CAN'T do it all for their team when playing against a team of at least 6 that are experienced because the players that are inexperience on my team get UNDER 10 kills. My history of Big Team Battle is proof of this team balancer system. This also effects other well-talented players that play Big Team Battle. Players would recommend smurfing, getting on a new account, with friends for BTB, but the team balancer system quickly picks up on how well the smurf account play so smurfing doesn't last long.
2. The team balancer ruins running by yourself in Big Team Battle.
  • Depending on the skill of the person that is running lone wolf, their chances of matching against large-scale fireteams are more likely to happen but sometimes regardless of their skill, that player ends up matching against a large-scale team. This makes it unfair because their is a team that can communicate with each other and are playing with some of their FRIENDS. Now some people would say, just communicate with some of the players on your team in game-chat but the thing that is wrong with that is, that we are not back in those Xbox 360 days where game-chat is popular anymore plus Halo 5 in the beginning, didn't have voice-chat to talk to teammates so some players wouldn't really know about it. Some of the people I come across in game-chat don't even know how to use vehicles when I lone wolf BTB.
3. Their's a Quality vs Quantity ratio with this team balancer system.
  • What this means is that players are very skilled are most likely to get match with players who started playing the game or are very inexperienced against a large group of players playing with each other that has one or two inexperienced players. You CAN NOT make teams fair that way. Each player and their contributions matter so this makes it not enjoyable for the people who aren't as talented as the players trying to carry them to a win and makes it extremely frustrating to those who grind to be good at the game.
My solution to this system is:
Make a seperate Big Team Battle playlist where there is no team balancer or MMR that require players to run in teams of 4 or 8.
  • To clarify, the current Big Team Battle playlist will be kept for casuals but a new BTB playlist strictly for running with teams with no system will be added to social. Even though this will spread out the population a little, casuals will match casuals and people who like to sweat against teams will be able to sweat against teams WITHOUT getting punished because of players being inexperienced on their team.
Some players went back to MCC not because classic games are better than Halo 5 but because the matchmaking system is fair and actually works for MCC. The team balancer system is very insufficient and can be very frustrating to players that should be rewarded for being good at the game while it doesn't make it enjoyable to those who lack the skill to play against players better than them.
Hi Envore, thanks for your feedback!

We run into two problems here that I don't see a good solution to.
  1. We actually already tried that with Warzone. It didn't work. The party-based list died immediately and no one played in it. We leave up Warlords now only because you can't play it in custom games. Meanwhile, you CAN play BTB in customs.
  2. Quit rates skyrocket if you don't team balance. Moving away from 60/40 odds results in several players consistently quitting off the underdog every single match. If your opponents are all quitting out, then you're not really playing the game anyways.
So either way, you won't be able to play with the to8.

We understand that you can't "do it all" with just a few of your friends, but that's the point. We don't want you to be able to do it all. We want you to lose at least half the time despite being good. Having lesser-skilled players on your team makes it more fair for your opponents.

Otherwise, they'll notice pretty quick and just quit (they quit consistently every match in the data).
Posting this at the request of Flamency:

“If you look at Warlords in 2017 vs Warlords now, the reason it was more played in 2017 (besides the fact that the population of competitive/sweaty warzone players was higher) was because it was something that was available for a limited time. It's basic supply and demand. There was a strong demand for supported 12v12 among a group of people and there was little supply, so many people flocked to it. Now that warlords is always available, I'm sure there are days, even weeks without anyone searching in Warlords.

I think it's also safe to assume that a few weeks ago when Warzone Assault was out, it had a higher average population in that one weekend than the last 3 months of Warzone Assault as a permanent playlist. This is due to the fact that it was available for a limited time. This is perhaps a reason why Warzone Turbo is so popular. It's never been released for more than a weekend (to the best of my knowledge), so the average population for that weekend is high. If WZT was to be a permanent playlist, you would definitely see a population drop within the first 1-2 weeks.

This solution is definitely viable, but must be done correctly. I propose that once a month or every two months, you release a playlist called "Big Team Battlelords" or something like that where for a limited time (Friday-Monday), you can search in a 4-man or 8-man fireteam ONLY. To make this more competitive, perhaps make it ranked, just like BTB was in 2015. Not only that, advertise it in a way that makes people wanna actually form a team and test their skills. Here's an example:

‘Introducing Big Team Battlelords! Search in teams of 4 or 8 against other teams! Test your team's skill against the other teams see if you are the best team!’”
Volize wrote:
Posting this at the request of Flamency:

“If you look at Warlords in 2017 vs Warlords now, the reason it was more played in 2017 (besides the fact that the population of competitive/sweaty warzone players was higher) was because it was something that was available for a limited time. It's basic supply and demand. There was a strong demand for supported 12v12 among a group of people and there was little supply, so many people flocked to it. Now that warlords is always available, I'm sure there are days, even weeks without anyone searching in Warlords.

I think it's also safe to assume that a few weeks ago when Warzone Assault was out, it had a higher average population in that one weekend than the last 3 months of Warzone Assault as a permanent playlist. This is due to the fact that it was available for a limited time. This is perhaps a reason why Warzone Turbo is so popular. It's never been released for more than a weekend (to the best of my knowledge), so the average population for that weekend is high. If WZT was to be a permanent playlist, you would definitely see a population drop within the first 1-2 weeks.
This solution is definitely viable, but must be done correctly. I propose that once a month or every two months, you release a playlist called "Big Team Battlelords" or something like that where for a limited time (Friday-Monday), you can search in a 4-man or 8-man fireteam ONLY. To make this more competitive, perhaps make it ranked, just like BTB was in 2015. Not only that, advertise it in a way that makes people wanna actually form a team and test their skills. Here's an example:

‘Introducing Big Team Battlelords! Search in teams of 4 or 8 against other teams! Test your team's skill against the other teams see if you are the best team!’”
That's a good call out. Though, to be honest, I was talking about 2017 as well. The numbers were pretty bad the first weekend, and cut in half each additional despite it being only limited time runs.

Though we do like the idea of making BTB ranked. In my personal unoffical opinion, if parallels nicely with BTSF. You have BTSF in Social, which is clearly a Social playstyle with lots of non-tryhards in there, and then you have BTB in Ranked which, in H5, has always been a more competitive playlist.

You may ask, "Why is BTB so competitive in H5 when it was so casual in H4?" That's a tricky question. Probably a combination of Warzone, H5 Arena being more competitive-focused to begin with, and most of the non-tryhards being in Super Fiesta even before we had BTSF. It just won't feel Social if the casuals are all in other lists. BTB was the one of the most casual lists in previous games, but now that's clearly Super Fiesta (again, even before BTSF).

The other bonus with having Ranked BTB is that your CSR (Ranking) will be high even if you can't win 80% of your matches.

So pros like Envore might not win 80% of the time, but they would be #1 on the BTB Leaderboard.

I think that's a better solution than trying to spread the existing pop even thinner.
Volize wrote:
This solution is definitely viable, but must be done correctly. I propose that once a month or every two months, you release a playlist called "Big Team Battlelords" or something like that where for a limited time (Friday-Monday), you can search in a 4-man or 8-man fireteam ONLY.
TBH, this is more of a solution for making regular BTB rotational. If it was rotational, more people would play it which would solve the issue of parties not being able to play with each other since there would be more people to match. The other issue is if regular BTB goes rotational, then we're gonna have to trade off between regular BTB and Battlelords because I highly doubt they're gonna have three BTB playlists up at the same time. This means that regular BTB will show up once or every couple months and it's possible that only parties will be able to play it if it's the Battlelords version. To me, that's worse because I don't think parties make up the majority of the player base and everyone not in a party has to wait even longer than one or two months just to play the normal version. Now if regular BTB wins over Fiesta, then disregard.

ZaedynFel wrote:
Though we do like the idea of making BTB ranked. In my personal unoffical opinion, if parallels nicely with BTSF. You have BTSF in Social, which is clearly a Social playstyle with lots of non-tryhards in there, and then you have BTB in Ranked which, in H5, has always been a more competitive playlist.

The other bonus with having Ranked BTB is that your CSR (Ranking) will be high even if you can't win 80% of your matches.
A couple questions. If BTB Fiesta does end up winning, will it have objective modes or just stay Slayer? I think it needs objective modes since they make up the core of BTB and I think it is possible because just look at Holiday Fiesta.

If BTB becomes ranked, what will happen if the population is low? Will it have expanded skill parameters like FFA or will people not be able to match if no one is near their skill level? Mainly for parties since their overall MMR would probably be high.
Envore wrote:
...
Now some people would say, just communicate with some of the players on your team in game-chat but the thing that is wrong with that is, that we are not back in those Xbox 360 days where game-chat is popular anymore...
I go into game chat and often times communicate information to whomever may be listening on my team, but admittedly I don’t always do this. I do think the ranked environment should automatically force anyone who may be in party chat into game chat. That way people who do what I often do are at least assured that the team can hear them; plus, it may encourage more people to pop their mics on to communicate. Of course, there are those who’ll simply mute the lobby which would prevent them from hearing you. But, forced game chat still should increase the odds of team communication.

If we don’t receive a ranked Squad Battle playlist I wouldn’t mind seeing that forced game chat implemented for the social BTB playlist too.

Josh, how feasible would something like forced game chat be?
ZaedynFel wrote:
Volize wrote:
Posting this at the request of Flamency:

“If you look at Warlords in 2017 vs Warlords now, the reason it was more played in 2017 (besides the fact that the population of competitive/sweaty warzone players was higher) was because it was something that was available for a limited time. It's basic supply and demand. There was a strong demand for supported 12v12 among a group of people and there was little supply, so many people flocked to it. Now that warlords is always available, I'm sure there are days, even weeks without anyone searching in Warlords.

I think it's also safe to assume that a few weeks ago when Warzone Assault was out, it had a higher average population in that one weekend than the last 3 months of Warzone Assault as a permanent playlist. This is due to the fact that it was available for a limited time. This is perhaps a reason why Warzone Turbo is so popular. It's never been released for more than a weekend (to the best of my knowledge), so the average population for that weekend is high. If WZT was to be a permanent playlist, you would definitely see a population drop within the first 1-2 weeks.
This solution is definitely viable, but must be done correctly. I propose that once a month or every two months, you release a playlist called "Big Team Battlelords" or something like that where for a limited time (Friday-Monday), you can search in a 4-man or 8-man fireteam ONLY. To make this more competitive, perhaps make it ranked, just like BTB was in 2015. Not only that, advertise it in a way that makes people wanna actually form a team and test their skills. Here's an example:

‘Introducing Big Team Battlelords! Search in teams of 4 or 8 against other teams! Test your team's skill against the other teams see if you are the best team!’”
That's a good call out. Though, to be honest, I was talking about 2017 as well. The numbers were pretty bad the first weekend, and cut in half each additional despite it being only limited time runs.

Though we do like the idea of making BTB ranked. In my personal unoffical opinion, if parallels nicely with BTSF. You have BTSF in Social, which is clearly a Social playstyle with lots of non-tryhards in there, and then you have BTB in Ranked which, in H5, has always been a more competitive playlist.

You may ask, "Why is BTB so competitive in H5 when it was so casual in H4?" That's a tricky question. Probably a combination of Warzone, H5 Arena being more competitive-focused to begin with, and most of the non-tryhards being in Super Fiesta even before we had BTSF. It just won't feel Social if the casuals are all in other lists. BTB was the one of the most casual lists in previous games, but now that's clearly Super Fiesta (again, even before BTSF).

The other bonus with having Ranked BTB is that your CSR (Ranking) will be high even if you can't win 80% of your matches.

So pros like Envore might not win 80% of the time, but they would be #1 on the BTB Leaderboard.

I think that's a better solution than trying to spread the existing pop even thinner.
Flamency:

"You say the numbers were bad, but relative to what? If relative to the regular warzone playlist, well that's a very obvious because not everyone that plays regular warzone, can/wants to play in 12-man teams. While the populations may have gotten smaller and smaller with 2017, it did not feel that way for me. The population felt very stable all 3 weekends for me, despite the long search times in regular warzone at the same time.

Since it parallels with BTSF, why not just remove BTSF for one weekend, promote BT Battlelords, and then bring back BTSF"
LUKEPOWA wrote:
Volize wrote:
This solution is definitely viable, but must be done correctly. I propose that once a month or every two months, you release a playlist called "Big Team Battlelords" or something like that where for a limited time (Friday-Monday), you can search in a 4-man or 8-man fireteam ONLY.
TBH, this is more of a solution for making regular BTB rotational. If it was rotational, more people would play it which would solve the issue of parties not being able to play with each other since there would be more people to match. The other issue is if regular BTB goes rotational, then we're gonna have to trade off between regular BTB and Battlelords because I highly doubt they're gonna have three BTB playlists up at the same time. This means that regular BTB will show up once or every couple months and it's possible that only parties will be able to play it if it's the Battlelords version. To me, that's worse because I don't think parties make up the majority of the player base and everyone not in a party has to wait even longer than one or two months just to play the normal version. Now if regular BTB wins over Fiesta, then disregard.

ZaedynFel wrote:
Though we do like the idea of making BTB ranked. In my personal unoffical opinion, if parallels nicely with BTSF. You have BTSF in Social, which is clearly a Social playstyle with lots of non-tryhards in there, and then you have BTB in Ranked which, in H5, has always been a more competitive playlist.

The other bonus with having Ranked BTB is that your CSR (Ranking) will be high even if you can't win 80% of your matches.
A couple questions. If BTB Fiesta does end up winning, will it have objective modes or just stay Slayer? I think it needs objective modes since they make up the core of BTB and I think it is possible because just look at Holiday Fiesta.

If BTB becomes ranked, what will happen if the population is low? Will it have expanded skill parameters like FFA or will people not be able to match if no one is near their skill level? Mainly for parties since their overall MMR would probably be high.
I think it would depend on 1) CSR requirements and 2) # of dedicated champs. Would there still be only 200 players in the champ category?
ZaedynFel wrote:
  • Vehicle gameplay: How do you feel about the Warthog right now?
Concerning the Standard Chain Warthog: The iconic vehicle of Halo, unfortunately suffers from 2 main problems.
  1. The Gunner: The bullet magnetism against the gunner is incredibly strong. Players do not want to take this vehicle typically due to the known frustration of getting into this gunner position and being shot out incredibly fast. A moving target should be more difficult to hit, but the gunner is a guided target. This was made slightly better when the BR change hit, but it was not enough by any means. This just gets worse with Mag starts, it turns into more perfects, any form of starting weapons chosen will not fix this glaring issue. If you are concerned about our iconic Warthog, the bullet magnetism/aim assist must be an absolute priority above all else going into this refresh or we will continue to see empty warthogs sitting around on maps. The other hogs are fine, the rocket hog is harder to hit the player due to a larger object around them and the gauss is literally a cannon.
  2. The Variant: The Standard Chain Warthog suffers from lack of armor, power weapons aside, this vehicle gets shot up very fast. The Corp variant should be considered across the playlist or the next up (the tundra/urban/etc.), even these variants are driving around on fire at times, but no where near as much as the standard. I understand having a Magnum start instead of a BR would mean less damage to the vehicle, however please refer to problem 1. The standard hog, could absolutely be used on smaller maps with mag starts if issue 1 was addressed.
I understand that this isn't as easy as flipping a switch, however doing this and making it known that this will happen with the refresh will put players back behind the wheel and more importantly add an actual gunner to it. A lot of maps are great Warthog maps, but the Warthog isn't balanced enough, even after the weapon tuning.

Quote:
Are there enough larger maps to really enjoy vehicles in general?
There are some great maps out there for vehicles already despite the refresh. However, I think some vehicles are not represented properly or enough. Mostly, the two tanks Halo 5 provides, the Scorpion Tank and the Wraith.

  1. The Scorpion Tank: The default timers in Forge for this vehicle was and is 120 seconds, however it is 3 minutes for MM. You will never have an additional Tank spawn in until 3 minutes after the first one is destroyed. A lot can happen in 3 minutes. This vehicle is slow, easily boarded and cannot escape a Spartan Laser, (needs two shots if at full health). Early on, the Sentinel Beam did not exist as a counter to this vehicle, but it shreds vehicles, especially if they move slow. My suggested solution: The Scorpion Tank would be better represented at a 120 second respawn being its only change. Of course more Scorpion maps are ideal, but after loads of testing, this would be an excellent change to represent the Scorpion Tank.
  2. The Wraith: The default timer in Forge for this vehicle was and is 60 seconds, and again is 3 minutes for MM. Death/Deletion settings again keep this vehicle out of the action for 3 minutes after being destroyed. The Wraith is more present in the playlist, however I do not feel it is represented properly. The Wraith has less armor than the Scorpion and can be destroyed from a single Spartan Laser hit. The Wrath is still relatively easy to board and destroy, however the Wraith is also destroyed rather quickly from team shooting. Even a very skilled player is subject to a fairly quick demise due to a lack of armor the Wraith has. My suggested solution: Use the Sword Wraith variant at 120 second respawn across the playlist. This would only give the Wraith a 15% increase in health and keep it in line with the Scorpion timer. This change would also allow the Wraith to take 2 Spartan Laser shots to kill from full health giving the player a little (on fire) more time with the vehicle. The Wraith would be better represented across the playlist and this has been tested in the lobbies that I host for awhile now.
The Scorpion and Wraith are excellent at pushing objectives, especially CTF and Assault. Having them more present on the maps they are on would undoubtedly impact the way stalemates work out on all objective based BTB maps. Reducing the timers of these vehicles 1 minute and changing the Wraith to the Sword variant brings these Big Team vehicles back into the picture on the maps that represent them. I have been running lobbies in Halo 5 since its release and testing many, many BTB maps in Halo 5 starting shortly after the release. Thanks for reading.
ZaedynFel wrote:
Envore wrote:
3. Big Team Battle's Matchmaking SystemIf we are considering a BTB refresh for H5, the matchmaking system for BTB HAS to be talked about because this system is the most insufficient system by far going in to the "aftermath" or "4th year" of Halo 5 where events for this game are finished.
  • Big Team Battle's system is known as the "team balancer" where teams don't match against each other if one of them will win 60+% of the time.
  • This system is put into Big Team Battle to stop players from farming other players (a team exponentially increasing their stats due to the other team's inexperience against them while playing down to the clock) and making games a lot closer in score because it ruins game-play for players who like to enjoy the game. This system was put in due to the complaints in the forums across multiple playlist such as Warzone, Big Team Battle, and other social playlist.
There are tons of reasons why this system is insufficient:
  1. Big Team Battle is a traditional social playlist throughout the Halo franchise where you can go in as a lone wolf or with friends on medium to large scale maps with tons of chaos; therefore, the team balancer ruins the aspect of running with friends by reducing the numbers that a team can run with because of the 60+% chance of winning depending on how large your fireteam is.
  • I am limited to running with 3 and sometimes 1 or 2 on one fireteam. This is extremely unfair to me and the other fireteam members because of the difficulty of facing against other team's that run with at least 6 to 8 players while we have inexperienced players on our team. Yes, I understand that I am very experienced at the game but something you can't deny is that one to four people CAN'T do it all for their team when playing against a team of at least 6 that are experienced because the players that are inexperience on my team get UNDER 10 kills. My history of Big Team Battle is proof of this team balancer system. This also effects other well-talented players that play Big Team Battle. Players would recommend smurfing, getting on a new account, with friends for BTB, but the team balancer system quickly picks up on how well the smurf account play so smurfing doesn't last long.
2. The team balancer ruins running by yourself in Big Team Battle.
  • Depending on the skill of the person that is running lone wolf, their chances of matching against large-scale fireteams are more likely to happen but sometimes regardless of their skill, that player ends up matching against a large-scale team. This makes it unfair because their is a team that can communicate with each other and are playing with some of their FRIENDS. Now some people would say, just communicate with some of the players on your team in game-chat but the thing that is wrong with that is, that we are not back in those Xbox 360 days where game-chat is popular anymore plus Halo 5 in the beginning, didn't have voice-chat to talk to teammates so some players wouldn't really know about it. Some of the people I come across in game-chat don't even know how to use vehicles when I lone wolf BTB.
3. Their's a Quality vs Quantity ratio with this team balancer system.
  • What this means is that players are very skilled are most likely to get match with players who started playing the game or are very inexperienced against a large group of players playing with each other that has one or two inexperienced players. You CAN NOT make teams fair that way. Each player and their contributions matter so this makes it not enjoyable for the people who aren't as talented as the players trying to carry them to a win and makes it extremely frustrating to those who grind to be good at the game.
My solution to this system is:
Make a seperate Big Team Battle playlist where there is no team balancer or MMR that require players to run in teams of 4 or 8.
  • To clarify, the current Big Team Battle playlist will be kept for casuals but a new BTB playlist strictly for running with teams with no system will be added to social. Even though this will spread out the population a little, casuals will match casuals and people who like to sweat against teams will be able to sweat against teams WITHOUT getting punished because of players being inexperienced on their team.
Some players went back to MCC not because classic games are better than Halo 5 but because the matchmaking system is fair and actually works for MCC. The team balancer system is very insufficient and can be very frustrating to players that should be rewarded for being good at the game while it doesn't make it enjoyable to those who lack the skill to play against players better than them.
Hi Envore, thanks for your feedback!

We run into two problems here that I don't see a good solution to.
  1. We actually already tried that with Warzone. It didn't work. The party-based list died immediately and no one played in it. We leave up Warlords now only because you can't play it in custom games. Meanwhile, you CAN play BTB in customs.
  2. Quit rates skyrocket if you don't team balance. Moving away from 60/40 odds results in several players consistently quitting off the underdog every single match. If your opponents are all quitting out, then you're not really playing the game anyways.
So either way, you won't be able to play with the to8.

We understand that you can't "do it all" with just a few of your friends, but that's the point. We don't want you to be able to do it all. We want you to lose at least half the time despite being good. Having lesser-skilled players on your team makes it more fair for your opponents.

Otherwise, they'll notice pretty quick and just quit (they quit consistently every match in the data).
I can totally see a party-based BTB playlist dying super quickly. People tend to party with other people of similar skill and with the somewhat small community BTB has there is a pretty obvious skill differential between the current regular teams. I can see teams going up against each other multiple times in a row resulting in the same outcome each time, then one team stops searching out of frustration and the victor doesn't find any more games.
ZaedynFel wrote:
Though we do like the idea of making BTB ranked. In my personal unoffical opinion, if parallels nicely with BTSF. You have BTSF in Social, which is clearly a Social playstyle with lots of non-tryhards in there, and then you have BTB in Ranked which, in H5, has always been a more competitive playlist.
I think making BTB so competitive was a mistake and the biggest reason why it never performed very well in Halo 5. But that's in the past so I won't belabor the point. Now that we're in this situation, you seem to be saying that the core audience of casual BTB lovers can be satisfied with Big Team Super Fiesta, while the people who like it competitive can continue to have a competitive BTB in ranked.

What I want to ask you is, in your personal unofficial opinion, do you think it's not worth refreshing BTB in such a way as to appeal to the casual non-tryhards? I understand that you don't want to split their population up between a casual-focused BTB and BTB Super Fiesta, but do you think there's a chance that adding an option for casual BTB but without random weapon spawns (for example BTB Heavies) would have a positive effect on Halo 5's population?
Add some way bigger things in it and maybe a bigger team for a bigger map
ZaedynFel wrote:
but do you think there's a chance that adding an option for casual BTB but without random weapon spawns (for example BTB Heavies) would have a positive effect on Halo 5's population?
I agree with adding BTB Heavies as a game type. Astute
Strongholds in general is not a good team game if you not in a fireteam. Everyone just does what they want. I wonder how only 2 bases would work and you need both to score?j
DbnpoiZN wrote:
Strongholds in general is not a good team game if you not in a fireteam. Everyone just does what they want. I wonder how only 2 bases would work and you need both to score?j
I agree to an extent, but I think you could say that about any gametype with a solo team. In my experiences, you will get teammates that just decide to slay instead of going for the objective, but I've also had countless games where they play the objective and try to win. It really just depends on who you get on your team and what their motivations are.
LUKEPOWA wrote:
DbnpoiZN wrote:
Strongholds in general is not a good team game if you not in a fireteam. Everyone just does what they want. I wonder how only 2 bases would work and you need both to score?j
I agree to an extent, but I think you could say that about any gametype with a solo team. In my experiences, you will get teammates that just decide to slay instead of going for the objective, but I've also had countless games where they play the objective and try to win. It really just depends on who you get on your team and what their motivations are.
Yes but at least when you got 2 bases they must defend both. Most peope just capture bases. With 2 it becomes natural to defend both
DbnpoiZN wrote:
LUKEPOWA wrote:
DbnpoiZN wrote:
Strongholds in general is not a good team game if you not in a fireteam. Everyone just does what they want. I wonder how only 2 bases would work and you need both to score?j
I agree to an extent, but I think you could say that about any gametype with a solo team. In my experiences, you will get teammates that just decide to slay instead of going for the objective, but I've also had countless games where they play the objective and try to win. It really just depends on who you get on your team and what their motivations are.
Yes but at least when you got 2 bases they must defend both. Most peope just capture bases. With 2 it becomes natural to defend both
I find strongholds probably the easiest objective gametype to play solo since it's closer to Team Slayer than to a 3 to win gametype like CTF. I find when solo queuing that people tend to "Over Rotate" - which is pretty easy to exploit as a solo player.

Having 2 bases would make spawning a nightmare, and make it very camping friendly. You could technically just keep 8 back at your base and slay/farm to your hearts content knowing that the enemy would need to push out as a team of 8 to take your base
Make BTB ranked again. Remove the Team Balance. Remove BTB Fiesta.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 9
  4. 10
  5. 11
  6. 12
  7. 13
  8. ...
  9. 16