Halo 3 Multiplayer Advice

Now, I’m no expert, but I’m worth giving attention to on the matter, because I tend to be better at other players at taking the unspoken skill of playing and making sense of it for lesser players to reach the next level of gaming prowess. What you’re reading now is the second volume of Halo 3 writing here; how to play well in multiplayer.

We can reasonably account for all you need to know by saying that playing well in multiplayer is a three-part aspect that you should master. The first aspect is strategic thinking — thinking about what you should do next in relation to your enemy with the game’s goal in mind; the second aspect is tactical — your immediate movement in coordination of your team and in awareness of your enemy; the third is instinctual — exactly what you are doing while you move, which are your firing habits, your ability to toss grenades, your melee judgment, all of which in this last category must be performed without taxing your ability to communicate and monitor the situations around you. We’ll start with describing the last two items, then move on to strategy later on.

Notice that while some might not differentiate between tactical and instinctual, I do. If you’ve ever considered the karate-technique (I suggest also reading the article contained through that link, as they suppliment the discussion here with more specific items), I am sort of suggesting that. But I submit that there is enough of a difference between thinking tactically while in a firefight, and simply performing in a firefight, that we must regard them as separate from the start. Both of these should be happening simultaneously, but with distinction from each other, and if you can do this, you will have an edge of clearly understanding what you should be thinking about, and have a way to correct problems in your tactical and instinctual behavior. It all comes down to creating accessable and versatile models of the behavior of the players.

To illustrate, I’ll introduce a rather novel concept for you to center your thinking on. Consider that you are playing a different game altogether, called Ring Battle. In this game, each player is a dot located inside a set of two rings, one ring larger than the other, the smaller ring inside the larger. These two sets of rings, which make up the player’s reaching ability, move around a large, spacious maze, and attempt to run into each others’ dots. If a player’s largest ring is larger than other player’s, he is able to make contact with that player’s dot before the other player can do the same, and in doing so, eliminates that player. So you see, the object of the game is to stay away from rings bigger than yours, and eliminate what you can of smaller rings. Throughout the map, there are other spare rings that the dots can pick up to trade one of their existing rings for — some items are smaller, and some larger. To spice the game up, the programmers add a variable of intensity to the rings — that is, some rings, while perhaps being shorter than others, are more capable of quickly eliminating the dot. This lets smaller-dot players “camp” in corners, or drop in on larger-ringed players, penetrate their dot, and eliminate them with a higher variable of intensity. So now, even a player with shorter rings can defeat a longer-ringed player if he plays to his ring’s strength — but unless he is playing smart and with purpose, he should always avoid larger ringed foes.

The analogy is probably apparent to you; the two rings represent the reach, and within that reach, the power, of whatever two weapons you have at the time, and the dot is you, at the center of it. In slayer game types, your tactics should actually center around the location of spare rings that you can pick up, and who also has them picked up. This way of thinking should help you realize the tactical value of the weapons above your own ability to play with them — weapons are tactical goals to have and keep away from the enemy. Regard this as more important than your ability with these weapons, for keeping them from the enemy also keeps superior rings from the enemy.

Thinking like this gives you an edge — it takes away the ego of engaging higher-ringed enemies, it gives you a formula to win against them, and gives you a simple visual idea try to keep track of enemies, and how you should handle arriving at or avoiding confrontation. This represents your tactical thinking: pondering abstractly about where your enemies are, whether you should move to confront them, and if the power of your weapons is superior within the distance and spaciousness of your confrontation. Choose the right ring, choose the right time, and then let your instinctual abilities control how your ring kills that dot.

Your instinctual ability is going to have to overlap with tactical thinking until you get used to the game enough that you do not think about it. At first you will have to seriously concentrate a thought or two on firing, throwing grenades, switching between weapons in the heat of a fight, jumping, melee, keeping track of the radar for surprise threats, retreating around a corner, and noticing your health. You want to get to the point that while you do all of this instinctually, that you are also communicating tactically with teammates about your situation, and have awareness about the other rings in your area.

I’ll leave most of the instinctual thinking to your own style and self-learning. However it is important to say something of bad habits. A bad habit is something that gets you killed against a ring that you should have overcome, but in bad form did not. You know that you have a bad habit if you consistently lose in situations where you’re tactically sound; you engage a dot with a stronger ring than theirs, but you still lose. It is then time you go into theater mode, surface your bad instinct, review it, and take the time to remember and think about this flaw in playing until it corrects itself and can go back into instinct.

One beautiful thing about separating instinct and tactics is that we can also separate a difference between a bad habit on an instinctual level, and a bad habit on a tactical level. This sort of bad habit though, we will rename to ‘bad thinking’, and you also now have a way to quickly realize where your thinking went wrong — chances are that you were thinking poorly if you were not taking serious considerations to avoid larger rings than yours, or shorter, more intense rings at close range. If this is your problem, don’t be stupid! The abstraction is there to eliminate the ego and aid with the kills. Tactically retreat, tactically inform your teammates of the threat, and think, think always.

Given the option, you should always consult your tactical thinking before firing a shot. If you are a sniper, your tactic should be to engage any foolish dot that you can, but while you instinctually attempt that, also become informed through teammates of other rings closing in, and make the right tactical choice if things change — if things become hairy, hope that your enemy’s instinct is weaker.

One overlapping item to consider is grenades. These weapons are in a ‘ring class’ all their own, with incredible range, and just as much short-intensity to boot. Your tactical considerations of grenades should be upon any long-range throws, as well as the amount you have remaining, and where-and-when to go to get more. Your instinctual grenade throw should occur as soon as an opponent is BOTH aware of you, and one of their rings puts you in danger.

It is good in general to set a sort of “Ok, release instinct” sense in a firefight, where unless you are caught unaware and must react, to always choose when to engage your enemy with the most ideal tactical position in prize.

Strategy, the final leg of this writing, is the most simple to describe, but perhaps the most difficult to master, for its mastery is not for one to have alone, but for a team. So far I have only exuded on what it is like to think tactically if one is facing single or multiple rings, but not how one should go about it if they have teammates to cooperate with, to complement of the rings of.

Preferably, all focused objectives and enemies should be met simultaneously with teammates, and it is important to develop this simple technique. Teammates should determine a word or group behavior that allows them from multiple angles to engage the same enemy or objective. “As One” is my suggested wording; once suggested — or if by designation of leader, ordered — the team should communicate their positions and pace of approach to the team’s target (”crouching”, “with caution”, “quickly”, “currently engaged”), then on an attack command all commence with a tactical orientation of their teammates and reported enemies, then instinctually taking down their targets on superior ground, or rotating to better-suited teammates in a tactical way, to conquer and win.

A quote that would be good to hear from yourself or a teammate that exemplifies all three items would be “he’s got a shotgun, I’m moving out,” (presuming the enemy’s location is apparent). This information keeps the team informed, allows strategy to be adjusted, or tactics rotated, and just as importantly, keeps the teammate alive, as he tosses a grenade or two in retreat.

In situations where multiple goals should be attended to, such as multi-flags, or team slayers where gathering weapons and ad-hoc positions of defense are most important, it is a good idea to either give abstract orders ahead of time (”I need two people to secure rockets, two to take stealth”) or come up with some form of addressing multiple but specific teammates quickly (”team alpha” might suffice to address two distinct players who might tactically play close together).

But to write further strategy would be to become overbearing here. The amount of game types makes the topic too saturated to give a satisfying exploration of. It is due for the player to come up with his own strategies in the game and outside of it, to train and play hard with his teammates, and resolve better plans to replace poorer ones.

To sum the relationship up:

Tactical:
Accounting for enemies, reacting to their weapons in relation to their reach and power within the variance of that reach.
Deciding which enemies to avoid and which enemies to encounter.
Communication with your team about the above. Moving along with and in complement to your team with these things in mind.
Deciding to crouch under radar or expose oneself to detection.
Deciding any sort of possible surprise or opening attack.

Instinctual:
One’s ability within a tactically-decided attack.
One’s survival against an unexpected enemy attack.
Affinity for constant cover and the dynamic of that cover with enemy weapons/grenades.

Strategy:
Overall coordination with the team about goals.
The use of tactical knowledge to change the dynamic of the team through given commands.
While tactical communication is only used to share information, strategic communication’s purpose is to give commands.
Assessment and prediction of the enemy’s tactical and strategic underpinnings, and how to counter this through teamwork.