We all know that on October 4th, there will be an 85% bloom playlist included in the beta hopper. If decreasing bloom means decreasing how far the reticle expands outward after each shot, wouldn’t that make spamming even more optimal at mid-range?
I must be delusional.
I reckon. Hopefully it means it takes 85% of the normal time to reset. Otherwise…you’re absolutely right, it will be worse.
343i’s logic amuses me. This is their mindset:
“Oh, everyone hates bloom, so we should have less of it. Hurr durrr.”
That just heightens the problem we’re trying to solve. If anything, they should’ve decreased the size of the hit boxes. But hey, zero bloom works too.
I think what 85% bloom does is make the DMR more consistent. In other words both players spamming will hit their targets consistently, so in the end it comes down to aim.
I would just opt for zero bloom.
> I think what 85% bloom does is make the DMR more consistent. In other words both players spamming will hit their targets consistently, so in the end it comes down to aim.
>
> I would just opt for zero bloom.
So the bloom will only come into play at longer ranges then? I think they are trying to eliminate the guesswork and say spam at close-mid range but at longer ranges you have to pace or something along those lines.
> I think what 85% bloom does is make the DMR more consistent. In other words both players spamming will hit their targets consistently, so in the end it comes down to aim.
>
> I would just opt for zero bloom.
Yes, but then pacing your shots would still mean nothing, which is the whole point of a bloom mechanic. Zero bloom is the only solution that 343i has given us, which I’m perfectly okay with.
> > I think what 85% bloom does is make the DMR more consistent. In other words both players spamming will hit their targets consistently, so in the end it comes down to aim.
> >
> > I would just opt for zero bloom.
>
> Yes, but then pacing your shots would still mean nothing, which is the whole point of a bloom mechanic. Zero bloom is the only solution that 343i has given us, which I’m perfectly okay with.
I agree completely.
Wouldnt it reduce randomness at close ranges. I for one will give it a chance. We dont know until we try
> > I think what 85% bloom does is make the DMR more consistent. In other words both players spamming will hit their targets consistently, so in the end it comes down to aim.
> >
> > I would just opt for zero bloom.
>
> Yes, but then pacing your shots would still mean nothing, which is the whole point of a bloom mechanic. Zero bloom is the only solution that 343i has given us, which I’m perfectly okay with.
I have a feeling it will make mid-range combat more consistent, while punishing spamming at long range. I really want to see it in action first, though.
343is logic is truly mind boggling. Reducing bloom just means spamming is an almost guaranteed hit at close range and random at long range as a pose to an almost guaranteed miss at long range and randomness at short range. This just creates new problems where old ones left. I’m not even sure they understand why people dislike bloom. The slow DMR kill times are a secondary issue.
Sigh
I guess I should reserve judgement until beta hoppers is released…
> Wouldnt it reduce randomness at close ranges. I for one will give it a chance. We dont know until we try
Well I suppose it would, but I never really had a problem at close ranges since the hit boxes are pretty much watermelons. The main problem with bloom was mid-range encounters, which I thought 343i was trying to solve.
> I think what 85% bloom does is make the DMR more consistent. In other words both players spamming will hit their targets consistently, so in the end it comes down to aim.
>
> I would just opt for zero bloom.
if 85% bloom makes every shot hit on target then that would be good but the problem is that bloom magnifies the ffects of aim assist, the bigger the reticle is the easier it is to aim.
with no bloom it requires more skill to aim since the effects of aim assist aren’t magnified due to bloom.
i choose no bloom.
> 343is logic is truly mind boggling. Reducing bloom just means spamming is an almost guaranteed hit at close range and random at long range as a pose to an almost guaranteed miss at long range and randomness at short range. This just creates new problems where old ones left. I’m not even sure they understand why people dislike bloom. The slow DMR kill times are a secondary issue.
>
> Sigh
>
> I guess I should reserve judgement until beta hoppers is released…
They should’ve just decreased the size of the hit boxes. A much more logical solution.
Eff it. Zero bloom all the way.
Okay, this is cool. Let’s try it out first then complain. Cause your complaints won’t change anything until it’s out. 
> Okay, this is cool. Let’s try it out first then complain. Cause your complaints won’t change anything until it’s out.
I’m just explaining what 85% bloom would pretty much do. I don’t think I’d have to experience it firsthand to know the result, but I certainly will try it out when it is out.