Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

[Locked] Regular Warzone 6-man Limit????? NOPE. NO THANKS.

OP I Who is that I

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. ...
  8. 122
It not that hard of a concept to wrap your head around so I struggle with why 343 can't understand. The issue is solo/small groups vs team/full parties. Limiting the fireteam size doesn't change the fact teams/full parties are going to go into Warzone and wreck solo/casual groups, it just means the severity for each individual game may be lowered slightly, but you're going to have more games going because there are more parties increasing your chances of having one of these blowout games.

Splitting playlists as worked before and it only makes sense. It also lets people know what they are walking into when they chose to select a playlist.
Fishztikz wrote:
Well, you can blame the 12-man farmers who ruined it for all of the 12-man quick corers. Then that can go back to Achilles. All this for a semi-ugly armor. gg guys

Plus, its only test, so if anything goes bonkers it can be reverted
Ok but how long will it last? And you say it can be reverted but what happens if most of the Warzone teams stop playing Warzone, 343 think they solved the problem and keep it it? It's not that they found a solution to the problem. It's like having an issue with your hand and then cutting off the arm. The problem is gone sure but so is the arm. You want to find a solution to blowout games whilst still keeping the Warzone activity levels/desire to play Warzone the same.

When teams and spartan companies can't play for the test period so they think "It's ok we'll just wait it out til it reverts." and then it never does? Well then you've just lost a bunch of activity in that playlist and killed a number of social nights people have playing Halo. It might be different if you join premade lobbies of high ranking/skilled players and you slay your way to victory, but for a lot of Spartan Companies and Halo Communities we have Warzone nights and Warzone is the center of a lot of our social halo playing. You're killing that. You're killing Warzone and you're killing Halo communities.
Judging by people's reactions in this thread? Not very long I reckon.
You're about to Kill the most active Playlist in Halo 5. Please dont implement this, you already did it to WZ assault (which was a terrible idea). If people want to play solo Warzone, then create a Solo WZ playlist or a smaller one. Dont screw up a good thing here.
It's not permanent I think. That's just to test stuff out to see what they will do.
You're right, it's just a test to see that there wouldn't be so much Farming.
Ok, 6 man teams is a horrible idea. I quick core every match, yeah the other team loses but they lose quickly. Guess what I'm going to do now though? Me and 5 other people are going to absolutely Savage every player on that map for 30 minutes straight. You want the games to be longer? That's cool. But they way 343 is doing it means people are going to get absolutely slayed for half an hour.
Regardless if we lose quickly or not, it's not fun. I'm so glad they implemented this.
Cizlin wrote:
Honestly, we can sit and argue back and forth all day, but ultimately what it comes down to is what the data says after implementation. We'll just have to wait and see.
But I would like to think that 343 cares about what people have to say and would read a thread directly titled after one of their updates and even after the data (whether it be in favour of the new limit or not) they would take into consideration how their players feel.

Ultimately I would like to see someone read this thread and the concerns of many and come up with a better solution.
You're about to Kill the most active Playlist in Halo 5. Please dont implement this, you already did it to WZ assault (which was a terrible idea). If people want to play solo Warzone, then create a Solo WZ playlist or a smaller one. Dont screw up a good thing here.
"you're about to kill the most active playlist in halo 5" = wow i can't steamroll with my 12 man premade anymore????

i would agree if 12 man played other 12 man's we all know that isn't the case. so cutting the party size in half, won't "fix" the above issue. but for warzone to be a SOCIAL gametype. 6 man is fine. heck, i would feel even better if they chopped it down to a party of 4.

3 squads of 4 is alot less ridiculous and excessive then an ARMY of 12 in a social gametype
Fishztikz wrote:
Well, you can blame the 12-man farmers who ruined it for all of the 12-man quick corers. Then that can go back to Achilles. All this for a semi-ugly armor. gg guys

Plus, its only test, so if anything goes bonkers it can be reverted
I still believe we wouldn't be having this problem at all if 343 didn't sit down one day and think "hey, let's make a game mode where one team can force the other team to spawn over and over in a death trap of a home base with no ways out other than these big tunnels at the front with no cover, and no way to fight back because they can't get their REQ level high enough. That'll be great!" And I don't blame Achilles personally either because even if that armor set was never a thing, you'd still have the sad people who just want to farm for a nice shiny k/d to feel like they're good. I'm pretty sure that is the real reason that farming takes place the majority of the time. I mean, what did people think would happen? 343 and everyone else should have known this would be the result.

I feel like Warzone would have been far better if it was literally just 12 on 12 BTB, maybe with the AI on the map, and none of this crap with capping bases and only being able to spawn on said bases that you control.
Cizlin wrote:
Honestly, we can sit and argue back and forth all day, but ultimately what it comes down to is what the data says after implementation. We'll just have to wait and see.
But I would like to think that 343 cares about what people have to say and would read a thread directly titled after one of their updates and even after the data (whether it be in favour of the new limit or not) they would take into consideration how their players feel.

Ultimately I would like to see someone read this thread and the concerns of many and come up with a better solution.
Absolutely, and I think they're looking for a better solution. I fully sympathize with your situation, and I would actually like to see two Warzone playlists: one you can enter only with a fireteam size of 6 or less and one you can only enter with a fireteam size greater than 6. I think that this test, therefore, is a good step to see if such a solution is workable for farming reduction. If they find good results, then I would lobby them to add in a "Big FireTeam Warzone" type playlist, as described above.
Cizlin wrote:
Honestly, we can sit and argue back and forth all day, but ultimately what it comes down to is what the data says after implementation. We'll just have to wait and see.
I'm sorry, but I do not feel that is the point. We are attempting to bring to light why this decision is not the right one for the community at large. To "wait and see" is not the answer needed.

One of the reasons of creating Spartan Companies was to allow people to play together and what best place to do it but a playlist created with the biggest team size; however, how does this decision allows all of us to take advantage of this feature?
I understand why they implemented this in Warzone Assault and that it's okay there. In WA the spawns can be easily exploited by defending teams of twelve and that they couldn't be fixed, so they limited the team size to 6.

While it's fine there though, there's nothing wrong with 12 man teams in regular. I really hope it won't be a permanent change.
Cizlin wrote:
Honestly, we can sit and argue back and forth all day, but ultimately what it comes down to is what the data says after implementation. We'll just have to wait and see.
I'm sorry, but I do not feel that is the point. We are attempting to bring to light why this decision is not the right one for the community at large. To "wait and see" is not the answer needed.

One of the reasons of creating Spartan Companies was to allow people to play together and what best place to do it but a playlist created with the biggest team size; however, how does this decision allows all of us to take advantage of this feature?
Yeah, I realize I was rather hasty in this response. See my more recent reply for a better argument.
It's funny really.. I mean, the implementation of Warzone has created vast Spartan Companies and communities..
These communities thrive on being able to play together in a meaningful manner with an objective to win the game ASAP (not all but most).

When all these teams get slapped in the face by 343i and have the ability to play in their large parties taken away from them, what will they do?
They will stop playing. This will happen and lo and behold, the number of blowout games drops! But, as a result, the population for Warzone goes way down.

Instead of doing the smart thing and MAYBE making a solo queue for those that dont have a team to play with, 343 says "nah, lets take a chainsaw to an operation that requires a scalpel."

If I weren't part of a community that takes pride in itself and doesn't allow its members to farm and hold the objective, I'd be all aboard with the idea that all the Warzone communities out there should stack their 6 man fireteams and just kill, kill, kill.

What's the next step after that? With 343's logic it would be to axe the fireteam size again! Before you know it, Warzone ends up being solo queue only.... which could have been the solution FROM THE GET GO.
Not the solution I was looking for, randoms should not match against teams, but I'm willing to try it. This will in no way negatively impact my current experience in WZ and may make it more enjoyable.
Warzone is a mess, and I don't think we'll see a significant improvement until they make a better version for Halo 6. But in the meantime, as someone who hasn't played Warzone in months, this new six-person fireteam limit is going to get me to play Warzone again. So at least it's a good change for people like me.
Ok but how long will it last?
Judging by people's reactions in this thread? Not very long I reckon.
I hope so Vanguard, but honestly if at this point this is the decision they came to for a fix.... I'm not entirely sure how much more faith I can give 343 that will make the right choice anymore. So I wouldn't be surprised if it stays longer than expected. There have been a number of 'tests' or updates that practically killed certain playlists (or at least made them horrific to play) and it took months for it to be fixed and months in a FPS MP gamecycle is a long time to survive when things are messed up.
Faming Simulator 2016 in Halo!

This is a great idea! /sarcasm
Good. Hopefully this'll help quell the bit of farming that still remains in Warzone. Still not happy about the JiP thing, though. This does jack -Yoink- to that aspect, which is much more common than farming IMO.
FORGE PLAY wrote:
Solo Player should petition for a Solo Queue Playlist then. That would be a better solution.
Petitions are against the Waypoint rules. You know that, right?
For me this is a fantastic move. I can normally hold my own but games against top 12 man teams are simply not fun. Doesn't matter if they quick core or farm, they are not fun for the losing team.
However I can see why this has upset many people as well. I don't have the luxury of 11 like minded friends to party up with yet if I did if be pissed if they told me I couldn't do it anymore.
The obvious solution is two playlists for different fireteam sizes.

At least for a while at least us solo players will have more of a chance.
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not promote griefing.

*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show
FORGE PLAY wrote:
I think The teams are more up set on losing fast easy xp/rp. Wrecking solos. 6 man teams will make it harder to do this. I think this will help war zone more than hurt. The masses are solos.
Halo 5 just pushes teams.
Small groups recruiting the better players stacking a full team of better players.

When randoms are usually 1-5 good people few average and some bad.
And no communication^

Communication is almost half of a teams skill.
Making the team of better players almost invincible!?!
You'really plain wrong. I walk in with 12 champions in a premade lobby, communicate, and 3 minutes later collect my experience and go. Good luck, there's just a huge skill gap. YES IT PUSHES TEAMS. IT'S A TEAM BASED GAME AND PLAYLIST. IF YOU DON'T HAVE A TEAM IT'S GOING TO BE HARD FOR YOU. AM I TAKING CRAZY PILLS? SERIOUSLY HOW IS THIS THAT COMPLICATED? IF YOU DO NOT WANT TO PLAY TEAMS DO NOT GO INTO A TEAM BASED PLAYLIST. PROBLEM SOLVED. CAN I HAVE A PAYCHECK NOW 343?
Didn't know if was a full team play list. My bad. I must not be able to read. And it doesn't seem to stop me from entering solo.
But hey if wrecking us low skilled players is what you enjoy. Have fun. That's why we all buy and play video games. To have fun.
We are looking to have fun... IN 12 V 12 MATCHES WHICH WE NOW CAN'T HAVE. WE NOW HAVE TO HOPE WE HAVE COMPETENT RANDOMS.
Cizlin wrote:
Cizlin wrote:
Honestly, we can sit and argue back and forth all day, but ultimately what it comes down to is what the data says after implementation. We'll just have to wait and see.
But I would like to think that 343 cares about what people have to say and would read a thread directly titled after one of their updates and even after the data (whether it be in favour of the new limit or not) they would take into consideration how their players feel.

Ultimately I would like to see someone read this thread and the concerns of many and come up with a better solution.
Absolutely, and I think they're looking for a better solution. I fully sympathize with your situation, and I would actually like to see two Warzone playlists: one you can enter only with a fireteam size of 6 or less and one you can only enter with a fireteam size greater than 6. I think that this test, therefore, is a good step to see if such a solution is workable for farming reduction. If they find good results, then I would lobby them to add in a "Big FireTeam Warzone" type playlist, as described above.
The trouble with this (and the test) though is that by limiting the fireteam size you are immediatly cutting out a portion of players. Put it this way, you're never going to have trouble playing a playlist in a small group. The smaller the group the more playlists you get to chose from, the more people you get the more your choices are lowered until you have to play Warzone (once you get 8 or more) so you're never struggling for playlists when you have a small party but the moment you hit 9 people you have one playlist to chose. Warzone. Make that a 6 player limit now you only have BTB at 8 max players. Now you force a choice where people have to split parties into other playlists.

When you are a community based around large playlists this is basically suffocating your community and those large halo nights you adore. Even without all the strategy and tactics and team work that you make up for specific playlists, just from a core social standpoint, you are slapping them in the face and telling them "No. No fun for you."

You are already limited as it is once you reach 7 people. Why limit it further? Don't limit it and THEN later add in the bigger playlist. Keep the big playlist and at the SMALL playlist as a test.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. ...
  8. 122