An Innovative Idea for Halo 4's Skill Gap (Auto Aim Bloom)

Games Other Halo
1

This is an idea I heard somewhere (I forgot where), that, if implemented correctly, would give Halo 4’s rifle and or pistol a huge skill gap.

So the basic idea is that the faster you shoot, the less auto aim you get. It’s bloom reimagined, the faster you shoot the less accurate the rifle becomes, but in a completely non-random way. Very skilled players could shoot the rifle at its fastest rate and remain accurate.

This is generally how it would work (let’s pretend we have a 4 shot semi-auto rifle with perfect accuracy). On the first shot, you’d get about the same auto aim as the DMR. This could be represented by the reticule being green. On the second shot, if fired as fast as possible, you’d get noticeably less auto aim. And so on and so forth, until at the fourth shot and beyond, you get no auto aim, like no scoping with the sniper. The auto aim you recieve could be illustrated by the color of the reticule, from green (regular auto aim) to yellow to orange to red (no auto aim).

Now at four shot at max rof would be obviously very difficult to pull of, and therefore should have a kill time similar to the CE pistol. To maintain the normal auto aim of the first shot, you’d have to shoot about half max rof, which would put the kill time somewhere between the H2 BR and the DMR. All other weapons in the sandbox could be balanced accordingly, each having its own niche and being most effective in that niche.

2

> So the basic idea is that the faster you shoot, the less auto aim you get. It’s bloom reimagined, the faster you shoot the less accurate the rifle becomes, but in a completely non-random way.

As it is, the more bloom a weapon has, the less bullet-magnetism it receives.

But you you are saying is that if you pace your shots, they always aim-assist. And if you spam your shots, they simply fire exactly where you’re shooting inside your little circle-reticle instead of tracking towards the enemy.

Ok but only if the AR becomes a freakin’ laser-beam.

3

> > So the basic idea is that the faster you shoot, the less auto aim you get. It’s bloom reimagined, the faster you shoot the less accurate the rifle becomes, but in a completely non-random way.
>
> As it is, the more bloom a weapon has, the less bullet-magnetism it receives.
>
> But you you are saying is that if you pace your shots, they always aim-assist. And if you spam your shots, they simply fire exactly where you’re shooting inside your little circle-reticle instead of tracking towards the enemy.
>
> Ok but only if the AR becomes a freakin’ laser-beam.

This has nothing to do with the AR. It would only apply to rifles and pistols

4

Keep it simple. Just make recoil get worse as you spam more.

5

I like your idea. I think it is a cool concept. That Idea would be great I just think it would be extremely difficult for a game designer to pull it off. People don’t want more skill to be involved in games for some reason I am unaware of. Reach has no skill gap at all. Don’t listen to people like reaper. He criticizes every persons ideas. The guy thinks he is the all knowing halo guru.

6

Honestly, I don’t really think this would work as well as you think in practice. The best thing is to just lower the autoaim but keep it consistent.

7

> Honestly, I don’t really think this would work as well as you think in practice. The best thing is to just lower the autoaim but keep it consistent.

That was my idea but it didn’t seem like people embrace that. I just like when people try to come up with ideas on how to make the skill gap greater because I like to know I have alot of room to get better at a game without resorting to hiding and camping.

8

Better system is recoil. To where the gun physically moves, but if your good enough you can control it and stay accurate.

9

this is a sick idea mate

10

> > > So the basic idea is that the faster you shoot, the less auto aim you get. It’s bloom reimagined, the faster you shoot the less accurate the rifle becomes, but in a completely non-random way.
> >
> > As it is, the more bloom a weapon has, the less bullet-magnetism it receives.
> >
> > But you you are saying is that if you pace your shots, they always aim-assist. And if you spam your shots, they simply fire exactly where you’re shooting inside your little circle-reticle instead of tracking towards the enemy.
> >
> > Ok but only if the AR becomes a freakin’ laser-beam.
>
> This has nothing to do with the AR. It would only apply to rifles and pistols

I am well aware of what you are proposing.

If you have the new rifle, you can spam all you want at any range and reliably shoot “straight.” The slower you shoot, the pull towards an enemy your shot has.

But compare that to the AR where the quicker it fires, the less precise it is. And it doesn’t register headshots. Nor does it have a scope. Luckily in Reach, with any weapon that has bloom, the slower you fire, the more magnetism is associated with it.

So now we are left with the 2 ranged scenarios

  1. Short-range and less: The AR must fire quickly to kill. The quicker it fires, the less precise it is. Even with perfect accuracy, a spraying player can still miss.
    The new rifle too must fire quickly to kill. The quicker it fires, the more precise it becomes. With perfect accuracy, the spamming player will not miss.

  2. Mid-range (and greater): The AR must fire more slowly to kill. Much more slowly to reliably kill as the spread will cause the player to reload most times at that range before getting a kill (unless it has 60 rounds of course)
    The new rifle can fire at any speed it chooses. Firing fast means if a player misses, it’s because they missed. Firing slower increases the chances of hitting and requires less aim. It decreases precision but increases aim.

The Focus and Sniper rifles are the fullauto and semi-auto weapons with no precision handicaps. The AR and DMR are the fullauto and semi-auto weapons with handicaps. If the “spawning” weapon is to be a laser or sniper, I want them to be a laser or sniper.
So yes, as a form of balance, replacing the AR with a Sentinel-beam like weapon is what I will take if such changes are to be made. If burst/single-shot weapons don’t loose precision, full-auto weapons don’t either.

11

I posted this idea quite some time ago, but got rolled over by trolls pretty quickly.

This type of a system would work pretty great.

Basically you lose “control” of your gun when you spam too quickly. Spammers are already punished a great deal for it, but with this it would basically be a definite win for the better shooter!

12

OP’s idea is genius. I would love to see how that would work out in a real game.

> If burst/single-shot weapons don’t loose precision, full-auto weapons don’t either.

As if it’s impossible to modify only one weapon…

13

> > If burst/single-shot weapons don’t loose precision, full-auto weapons don’t either.
>
> As if it’s impossible to modify only one weapon…

That’s what I am saying, you can’t just modify the semi’s. You’ve got to redesign the whole box.

14

> > So the basic idea is that the faster you shoot, the less auto aim you get. It’s bloom reimagined, the faster you shoot the less accurate the rifle becomes, but in a completely non-random way.
>
> As it is, the more bloom a weapon has, the less bullet-magnetism it receives.
>
> But you you are saying is that if you pace your shots, they always aim-assist. And if you spam your shots, they simply fire exactly where you’re shooting inside your little circle-reticle instead of tracking towards the enemy.
>
> Ok but only if the AR becomes a freakin’ laser-beam.

or they could just buff the AR’s damage, or fire rate, or tweak its bloom algorithm to allow for controlled bursts (should be this way anyways IMO).

theres a number of things they could do without making the AR a sniper rifle accurate weapon. you should not be able to cross map with the AR. i dont care what kind of DMR you have.

as for OP: i disagree. i dont think this way is optimal. its basically like the faster you shoot, the harder aiming becomes. i’d rather have it so the faster you shoot, the more terrible your gun is (and also have the gun have a 1, 2, pause, 1, 2, pause optimal cadence for 100% accuracy).

15

Yes the proposed idea feels as though it is to allow a player to do just that, shoot like an AR with sniper rifle precision across a map. Pretty much any map.

16

> Yes the proposed idea feels as though it is to allow a player to do just that, shoot like an AR with sniper rifle precision across a map. Pretty much any map.

Notice I say rifle or pistol, not AR. The AR should stay similar, but should become harder to use because as of now it has literally zero skill gap.

17

> > > So the basic idea is that the faster you shoot, the less auto aim you get. It’s bloom reimagined, the faster you shoot the less accurate the rifle becomes, but in a completely non-random way.
> >
> > As it is, the more bloom a weapon has, the less bullet-magnetism it receives.
> >
> > But you you are saying is that if you pace your shots, they always aim-assist. And if you spam your shots, they simply fire exactly where you’re shooting inside your little circle-reticle instead of tracking towards the enemy.
> >
> > Ok but only if the AR becomes a freakin’ laser-beam.
>
> or they could just buff the AR’s damage, or fire rate, or tweak its bloom algorithm to allow for controlled bursts (should be this way anyways IMO).
>
> theres a number of things they could do without making the AR a sniper rifle accurate weapon. you should not be able to cross map with the AR. i dont care what kind of DMR you have.
>
> as for OP: i disagree. i dont think this way is optimal. its basically like the faster you shoot, the harder aiming becomes. i’d rather have it so the faster you shoot, the more terrible your gun is (and also have the gun have a 1, 2, pause, 1, 2, pause optimal cadence for 100% accuracy).

Why? The way I proposed, it would increase the skill gap enormously, which is always good. Why should everyone’s gun become equally bad the faster you shoot? There’s no skill gap there.

18

> > Yes the proposed idea feels as though it is to allow a player to do just that, shoot like an AR with sniper rifle precision across a map. Pretty much any map.
>
> Notice I say rifle or pistol, not AR. The AR should stay similar, but should become harder to use because as of now it has literally zero skill gap.

Yes, hence my statement. You want to machine gun your new rifle or pistol from across a map because that way you can just kill them with a stream of bullets. To boot, you want the weapon to be more accurate when shooting at close range if shooting slower if you just remotely aim at the enemy.

Meanwhile you want the AR to remain inaccurate at any range by making it a bullet-hose that doesn’t fire a stream of bullets. Even if I am 100% accurate, my chances of beating the new rifle are slim to none. I need luck to win that one with someone remotely my already “low” skill level or more.

So what weapon am I going to choose any time of the the day? The one that is inaccurate all the time or the one that can’t miss up close and will spam an enemy to death at long range?

19

> Yes the proposed idea feels as though it is to allow a player to do just that, shoot like an AR with sniper rifle precision across a map. Pretty much any map.

except they would be aiming with a needle to fire across the map with his idea. i dont think you, nor the OP understands that the more autoaim you lose, the more unplayable the game becomes over xbox live. if this was mouse and keyboard, sure, you can just point and shoot and it wouldnt make THAT much of a difference. the problem is we are aiming with controllers, so aiming is already inherently harder. when you remove auto aim by shooting faster the game doesnt just become strictly harder to play, it becomes EXPONENTIALLY harder to play, ON TOP of being less and less playable the faster you shoot. i feel like this change would actually make the game feel MORE sloppy, as there will still be no ‘optimal’ way of shooting (unless, of course, they added in something like a 1, 2, pause, 1, 2, pause cadence to retain 100% accuracy and the same autoaim properties.).

at the end of the day, this might be a good idea, but it will absolutely NEVER be implemented by 343, nor any game developer. the fact of the matter is that this idea is actually probably TOO skill intensive. whats a bad player who currently spams going to do when he runs up against this? hes gunna get slaughtered every time and never play halo again.

reaper, why is it that the ONLY CHANGE that the AR should receive in your eyes is laser-like accuracy? why would we go from the AR being niched to close / close-medium range to being a ranged weapon all of a sudden? this isnt COD, lets keep the AR out of distance battles please.

there are a number of other buffs the AR could recieve. for example, the AR could get a slight damage buff, a slight increase in rate of fire, or a slight buff to its bloom so you can burst fire it for a bit more optimal shooting (and more skill gap).

you seem to think the less random factor in shooting the utility weapon instantly means the AR will be 100% terrible unless it shoots in a laser, when this literally could not be further from the truth, and there are a number of things (previously stated) that could niche the AR better at close to close-medium range without making it a COD assault rifle to use for any range of encounter.

20

> reaper, why is it that the ONLY CHANGE that the AR should receive in your eyes is laser-like accuracy?

It is not the only change it should receive. It is the conclusion to any suggestion that the BR/DMR should be without precision lose.
I am game for a gauss-rifles and lasers as being the basis for the next sandbox. They are not imbalanced. They are imbalanced when the competition isn’t as precise over the same time when played in the same game together.

And I agree that lessening aim-assists too much will make console games almost unplayable. More so in games where headshots aren’t always OSKs for every weapon.