As far as we know, the UNSC weapons arsenal is the only tried and true weapons arsenal, insofar as the developer’s illustration and implementation of engineering, technology, and design of weaponry, mirroring what we see in the real world. The majority if not the totality of armaments utilized by the UNSC are based on real technologies that exist today.
Over the years, I have monitored statistics, noted the changes, and, most importantly, played with every single one of the weapons in the Halo series (aside from the specialized Warzone Requisitions). I shouldn’t have to mention my track record as far as my history playing Halo from CE to Guardians, but I think it fair to note I have an extensive history with the Halo franchise. Despite this, I can’t say that I’m still actually all that much of a fan anymore. Sorry haha! As I’ve gotten older, priorities have switched and moved around. I’m not the gamer/player I once was.
With that said, having come this far, I can look at Halo and more notably the UNSC weapons arsenal with more objective clarity than I could have back in, say, my years playing Halo 3, when I was a serious and devoted player… and in matchmaking especially.
I’ve always enjoyed the Battle Rifle despite some of its criticisms. I remember I used to hear a lot of bickering about how it was over-powered and that the Assault Rifle, without a precision-based headshot damage multiplier, was at odds with just about every other weapon in the game. I wouldn’t be surprised to hear that same criticism today in these forums, but I’m not an avid forum goer… just a guy that had an itch to give my two cents about that topic, as well as to speak on things I like and that I think can be improved upon in the UNSC weapons arsenal.
For starters, I never thought that the precision weapons were necessarily over-powered, but I do see and agree that the performance of the standard Battle Rifle and DMR kind of pose a threat and ruin it somewhat for those of us who would otherwise choose to use an automatic rifle or SMG. That being the case, and although I like the AR and SMG in principle as automatic weapons, I almost never choose choose them as a starting weapon when given a choice. The reason is pretty obvious, I hope. The AR and SMG, for some reason, have never had a precision-based headshot damage multiplier.
I am not one to just say leave it alone. The automatic weapons are, by some mysterious precedent unknown to me, only ever non-precision weapons. The counter-argument here is that if the AR/SMG/SAW had a precision weapon style to it, they would essentially just be Automatic Battle Rifles. I ask then, so? Why not? You could make things a bit more interesting should we be given, just as in the real world, the option of a weapon system that is adaptable to a specific, practical use and implementation on the battlefield. Not saying we don’t have that… but let me explain.
Why even have just one kind of multiplier. The head is not the only area of the body that, when shot, will likely do some serious harm, even before killing you. For example, if I shoot your legs, at least I might cripple you temporarily and render you unable to move or run.
Basically, I think it’s kind of wrong to sort of discriminate the utility of weapons solely on whether or not it injures my head more or less than the rest of me. What I’d like to see is a greater scope on the hit box for all weapons to be categorically precision-based. Maybe if I shoot your hands or into your arm and weapon, you might flinch more than if I were to do the same damage to the torso or head.
Sure, headshots are awesome, but that’s not all there is to a shootout. Sometimes, especially in a situation where you are taking damage or outmatched, aiming for the head might not be the best option every single time. An automatic precision weapon would be an awesome tool for countering semi-automatic, slower-firing weapons. A lot of bullets flying at you and hitting you rapidly has a greater effect to stun and disable an opponent momentarily.
Anyway, that’s all for now!