Bleed Through

So I understand the fundamental mechanics of “bleed through.”

My question is what is supposed to be the most competitive. I would think that bleed through would be but I’ve seen complaints that somehow no bleed through is better. What are opinions and ideas behind this mechanic? I’m always partial to a good example situation or metaphor.

If I shoot a player and melee while that player proceeds to just sprint towards me and hit me, I deserve the kill because I have dealt more damage.

No bleedthrough is horrible.

> So I understand the fundamental mechanics of “bleed through.”
>
> My question is what is supposed to be the most competitive. I would think that bleed through would be but I’ve seen complaints that somehow no bleed through is better. What are opinions and ideas behind this mechanic? I’m always partial to a good example situation or metaphor.

Your shots shouldn’t be negated. That’s my opinion on why bleedthrough is better. If I shoot and melee, I should be doing more damage than someone who just melees. It’s simple math and common sense.

I think bleed-through is excellent.

No bleed-through is -Yoink- IMO. If they have 5 percent shield, why should my melee not harm there health? It’s STUPID!

Ok, this is what I thought as well.

Apparently a few people just confused me with their backwards logic.

Thanks for the input.

Its like this - bleed = automatically hit someone the moment they come in range, regardless of anything else, because if you dont he will. Nobleed = have to actually make a tactical decision if you should hit someone when they come in range depending on a few different factors.

I made my mind up long ago about which seems to be the most competitive. Im not even trying to put a bias on the argument, thats just how i logically see it.

Bleed-meleeing should be an automatic function of the game IMO, and save the spare controller button for something more important.

Bleed makes every form of damage do that amount of damage.
No bleed makes it sometimes do less, depending on the enemy’s shield strength.

> If I shoot a player and melee while that player proceeds to just sprint towards me and hit me, I deserve the kill because I have dealt more damage.
>
> No bleedthrough is horrible.

Thats just it though, you didn’t do more damage, you died. You shot more bullets, that does not mean you deserve the kill. You weren’t smart enough to punch him.

> > If I shoot a player and melee while that player proceeds to just sprint towards me and hit me, I deserve the kill because I have dealt more damage.
> >
> > No bleedthrough is horrible.
>
> Thats just it though, you didn’t do more damage, you died. You shot more bullets, that does not mean you deserve the kill. You weren’t smart enough to punch him.

You completely miss read it, how is shooting someone then smacking them while they just smack you, you not doing more damage?

> > If I shoot a player and melee while that player proceeds to just sprint towards me and hit me, I deserve the kill because I have dealt more damage.
> >
> > No bleedthrough is horrible.
>
> Thats just it though, you didn’t do more damage, you died. You shot more bullets, that does not mean you deserve the kill. You weren’t smart enough to punch him.

Yes but do you really want every single close quarters situation in a game to come down to just who punches the fastest rofl? I mean cmon. Bleedthrough is much better and makes it possible to win up close in ways other then just spamming melee.

Bleedthrough is better overall and really just makes more since in general. I will never understand what there reasoning could have possibly been for changing it on halo reach.

> If I shoot a player and melee while that player proceeds to just sprint towards me and hit me, I deserve the kill because I have dealt more damage.
>
> No bleedthrough is horrible.

I should be playing a First Person Shooter, not a First Person Fighter.

H3 was nothing but melee derp fests in CQC because of the low requirements to kill via melee.

If Bleedthrough is to come back then health values need to equal shield values or we need 75% Melee.

> > If I shoot a player and melee while that player proceeds to just sprint towards me and hit me, I deserve the kill because I have dealt more damage.
> >
> > No bleedthrough is horrible.
>
> I should be playing a First Person Shooter, not a First Person Fighter.
>
> H3 was nothing but melee derp fests in CQC because of the low requirements to kill via melee.
>
> If Bleedthrough is to come back then health values need to equal shield values or we need 75% Melee.

Like how all I have to do is punch twice to win every close quarters battle in Reach? Provided I have at lest 0.00000000000000000000000000000001% shield left.

Bleedthrough only worked with mlg settings otherwise is was just a melee derp fest.

> > If I shoot a player and melee while that player proceeds to just sprint towards me and hit me, I deserve the kill because I have dealt more damage.
> >
> > No bleedthrough is horrible.
>
> I should be playing a First Person Shooter, not a First Person Fighter.
>
> H3 was nothing but melee derp fests in CQC because of the low requirements to kill via melee.
>
> If Bleedthrough is to come back then health values need to equal shield values or we need 75% Melee.

Some of that is because the Halo 3 BR was a much slower killing weapon compared to the Halo 2 BR, so it was more difficult to squeeze off the necessary 3 shots for the beatdown before the other person got in your face. I don’t know if you played any Halo 2, but post-patch the game was 2 melees for a kill, and 3 shots + melee for a kill, like in Halo 3 (except one melee did not kill shields, but still left you one shot). The difference is that the Post-Patch H2 BR was more accurate than the H3 BR ever was.

> Like how all I have to do is punch twice to win every close quarters battle in Reach? Provided I have at lest 0.00000000000000000000000000000001% shield left.

Except for all the times that I’ve had players rush me while I put shots into them to strip shields and then one shot them with my first after they throw the first melee.

> > > If I shoot a player and melee while that player proceeds to just sprint towards me and hit me, I deserve the kill because I have dealt more damage.
> > >
> > > No bleedthrough is horrible.
> >
> > Thats just it though, you didn’t do more damage, you died. You shot more bullets, that does not mean you deserve the kill. You weren’t smart enough to punch him.
>
> Yes but do you really want every single close quarters situation in a game to come down to just who punches the fastest rofl? I mean cmon. Bleedthrough is much better and makes it possible to win up close in ways other then just spamming melee.
>
> Bleedthrough is better overall and really just makes more since in general. I will never understand what there reasoning could have possibly been for changing it on halo reach.

I think I read somewhere that Bungie wanted to slow the game down to take advantage of AAs (bad idea) and solve Host issues in Halo 3 that resulted in unfair beatdowns occasionally. Of course, in Reach we now have unfair beatdowns BECAUSE of no-bleed.

> > If I shoot a player and melee while that player proceeds to just sprint towards me and hit me, I deserve the kill because I have dealt more damage.
> >
> > No bleedthrough is horrible.
>
> I should be playing a First Person Shooter, not a First Person Fighter.
>
> H3 was nothing but melee derp fests in CQC because of the low requirements to kill via melee.
>
> If Bleedthrough is to come back then health values need to equal shield values or we need 75% Melee.

I agree with the weakened melee damage, but we need bleed-through. But now that people will be spawning with mainly BRs and DMRs, there may not be as much ‘melee derp fests’.

You know, the correct solution is to reduce melee damage down to 75% or 50% to make it a 3 melee hit kill.

Personally I like no-bleedthrough because it makes CQC much more smarter and can reduce exchanged kills while bleedthrough is an automatic twitch/habit players have gotten way too used to that’s not at all that constitent as non-bleedthrough.

> > Like how all I have to do is punch twice to win every close quarters battle in Reach? Provided I have at lest 0.00000000000000000000000000000001% shield left.
>
> Except for all the times that I’ve had players rush me while I put shots into them to strip shields and then one shot them with my first after they throw the first melee.

Except all those times I could only get 3 shots in, and all 3 of those shots were negated in favor of his melee.

I like bleed because it encourages fast-paced gameplay, which is what Halo is supposed to be about.