From the bulletin today:
> That gives us the ability to spot trends of people liking certain weapons and not liking certain weapons, and it helps us determine what’s too powerful and what’s not powerful enough. We have ways to see who killed whom with what, and we can even boil it down to say this weapon is 20% more effective than that weapon.
Weapon effectiveness is DIFFERENT based on WHO is using it.
Good lord, how? How can you have such a flawed understanding of fundamental aspects of a shooter.
You need to balance the sandbox based on the best abilities of human beings, not the worst, or average. Simple as that. You can not gather the necessary information from internal testing with a player base that is unskilled.
Any chance of a little context?
> Any chance of a little context?
Sorry, that was a quote from the bulletin today.
> From the bulletin today:
>
>
> > That gives us the ability to spot trends of people liking certain weapons and not liking certain weapons, and it helps us determine what’s too powerful and what’s not powerful enough. We have ways to see who killed whom with what, and we can even boil it down to say this weapon is 20% more effective than that weapon.
>
> Weapon effectiveness is DIFFERENT based on WHO is using it.
>
> Good lord, how? How can you have such a flawed understanding of fundamental aspects of a shooter.
>
> You need to balance the sandbox based on an assumed 100% accuracy. Simple as that. You can not gather the necessary information from internal testing with a player base that is unskilled.
But you’re forgetting that there are a very decent number of people involved in this testing, and some will be better at each weapon than others, so their combined data will get a more-or-less accurate reading of how the weapons fare on average. They’re trying to balance the weapons in that regard, so that someone who is better than average with a Battle Rifle won’t get owned by someone who’s okay with the DMR, but the DMR is overpowered compared to the BR.
> From the bulletin today:
>
>
> > That gives us the ability to spot trends of people liking certain weapons and not liking certain weapons, and it helps us determine what’s too powerful and what’s not powerful enough. We have ways to see who killed whom with what, and we can even boil it down to say this weapon is 20% more effective than that weapon.
>
> Weapon effectiveness is DIFFERENT based on WHO is using it.
>
> Good lord, how? How can you have such a flawed understanding of fundamental aspects of a shooter.
>
> You need to balance the sandbox based on an assumed 100% accuracy. Simple as that. You can not gather the necessary information from internal testing with a player base that is unskilled.
The game must be based on theory and not facts huh?
> > From the bulletin today:
> >
> >
> > > That gives us the ability to spot trends of people liking certain weapons and not liking certain weapons, and it helps us determine what’s too powerful and what’s not powerful enough. We have ways to see who killed whom with what, and we can even boil it down to say this weapon is 20% more effective than that weapon.
> >
> > Weapon effectiveness is DIFFERENT based on WHO is using it.
> >
> > Good lord, how? How can you have such a flawed understanding of fundamental aspects of a shooter.
> >
> > You need to balance the sandbox based on an assumed 100% accuracy. Simple as that. You can not gather the necessary information from internal testing with a player base that is unskilled.
>
> But you’re forgetting that there are a very decent number of people involved in this testing, and some will be better at each weapon than others, so their combined data will get a more-or-less accurate reading of how the weapons fare on average. They’re trying to balance the weapons in that regard, so that someone who is better than average with a Battle Rifle won’t get owned by someone who’s okay with the DMR, but the DMR is overpowered compared to the BR.
I’m sure there are different level of skills, but I am also certain the vast majority of them are not Halo veterans.
In your scenario, if you got a group of MLG pros to play test the game in a serious, competitive environment, for a longer duration than the internal testing. You would know exactly how much stronger every single weapon is than others. If the DMR was overpowered compared to the BR, pros would find out quickest and be able to demonstrate just how OP it is.
> > From the bulletin today:
> >
> >
> > > That gives us the ability to spot trends of people liking certain weapons and not liking certain weapons, and it helps us determine what’s too powerful and what’s not powerful enough. We have ways to see who killed whom with what, and we can even boil it down to say this weapon is 20% more effective than that weapon.
> >
> > Weapon effectiveness is DIFFERENT based on WHO is using it.
> >
> > Good lord, how? How can you have such a flawed understanding of fundamental aspects of a shooter.
> >
> > You need to balance the sandbox based on an assumed 100% accuracy. Simple as that. You can not gather the necessary information from internal testing with a player base that is unskilled.
>
> The game must be based on theory and not facts huh?
Fact: basing your weapon balance on the skill set of noobs will result in unbalance.
Proof: Halo 2, 3 and Reach.
> > > From the bulletin today:
> > >
> > >
> > > > That gives us the ability to spot trends of people liking certain weapons and not liking certain weapons, and it helps us determine what’s too powerful and what’s not powerful enough. We have ways to see who killed whom with what, and we can even boil it down to say this weapon is 20% more effective than that weapon.
> > >
> > > Weapon effectiveness is DIFFERENT based on WHO is using it.
> > >
> > > Good lord, how? How can you have such a flawed understanding of fundamental aspects of a shooter.
> > >
> > > You need to balance the sandbox based on an assumed 100% accuracy. Simple as that. You can not gather the necessary information from internal testing with a player base that is unskilled.
> >
> > But you’re forgetting that there are a very decent number of people involved in this testing, and some will be better at each weapon than others, so their combined data will get a more-or-less accurate reading of how the weapons fare on average. They’re trying to balance the weapons in that regard, so that someone who is better than average with a Battle Rifle won’t get owned by someone who’s okay with the DMR, but the DMR is overpowered compared to the BR.
>
> I’m sure there are different level of skills, but I am also certain the vast majority of them are not Halo veterans.
>
> In your scenario, if you got a group of MLG pros to play test the game in a serious, competitive environment, for a longer duratiohn than the internal testing. You would know exactly how much stronger every single weapon is than others. If the DMR was overpowered compared to the BR, pros would find out quickest and be able to demonstrate just how OP it is.
Except all the ‘MLG pros’ would use is the Battle Rifle & DMR, they wouldn’t even bother touching the new weapons they have never heard of.
> From the bulletin today:
>
>
> > That gives us the ability to spot trends of people liking certain weapons and not liking certain weapons, and it helps us determine what’s too powerful and what’s not powerful enough. We have ways to see who killed whom with what, and we can even boil it down to say this weapon is 20% more effective than that weapon.
>
> Weapon effectiveness is DIFFERENT based on WHO is using it.
>
> Good lord, how? How can you have such a flawed understanding of fundamental aspects of a shooter.
>
> You need to balance the sandbox based on an assumed 100% accuracy. Simple as that. <mark>You can not gather the necessary information from internal testing with a player base that is unskilled</mark>.
Well if you know so much more about balancing a game than the fine folks at 343i, WHY dont you go to college so you can make games yourself?
Also, using the word “noobs” in your posts takes away from your credibility.
> I’m sure there are different level of skills, but I am also certain the vast majority of them are not Halo veterans.
>
> In your scenario, if you got a group of MLG pros to play test the game in a serious, competitive environment, for a longer duration than the internal testing. You would know exactly how much stronger every single weapon is than others. If the DMR was overpowered compared to the BR, pros would find out quickest and be able to demonstrate just how OP it is.
Their track record of debunking the precision weapons in Halo: Reach states otherwise.
MLG players are not concerned with a varied sandbox, they are concerned with a technically skilled sandbox.
But I will say this, the day MLG players want the AR removed from their gametypes because it is too useful, that is the day the AR will have achieved balance since its reintroduction.
> > > > From the bulletin today:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > That gives us the ability to spot trends of people liking certain weapons and not liking certain weapons, and it helps us determine what’s too powerful and what’s not powerful enough. We have ways to see who killed whom with what, and we can even boil it down to say this weapon is 20% more effective than that weapon.
> > > >
> > > > Weapon effectiveness is DIFFERENT based on WHO is using it.
> > > >
> > > > Good lord, how? How can you have such a flawed understanding of fundamental aspects of a shooter.
> > > >
> > > > You need to balance the sandbox based on an assumed 100% accuracy. Simple as that. You can not gather the necessary information from internal testing with a player base that is unskilled.
> > >
> > > But you’re forgetting that there are a very decent number of people involved in this testing, and some will be better at each weapon than others, so their combined data will get a more-or-less accurate reading of how the weapons fare on average. They’re trying to balance the weapons in that regard, so that someone who is better than average with a Battle Rifle won’t get owned by someone who’s okay with the DMR, but the DMR is overpowered compared to the BR.
> >
> > I’m sure there are different level of skills, but I am also certain the vast majority of them are not Halo veterans.
> >
> > In your scenario, if you got a group of MLG pros to play test the game in a serious, competitive environment, for a longer duratiohn than the internal testing. You would know exactly how much stronger every single weapon is than others. If the DMR was overpowered compared to the BR, pros would find out quickest and be able to demonstrate just how OP it is.
>
> Except all the ‘MLG pros’ would use is the Battle Rifle & DMR, they wouldn’t even bother touching the new weapons they have never heard of.
Nice ignorant generalization there.
OP I think you’re overreacting completely and drawing the wrong conclusion here.
If the testing pool is large enough, they should have a range of skill levels involved to closely simulate the players who will be around for the real game. And I believe it’s more important to balance the game with that audience in mind - the general group of people who will play the game, and populate the matchmaking playlists; rather than the handfull of pro players who will do tournaments among themselves. If MLG were testing this, I’m sure they’d complain and say the BR/DMR were terribly underpowered if any other weapon came close to killing them.
> > > From the bulletin today:
> > >
> > >
> > > > That gives us the ability to spot trends of people liking certain weapons and not liking certain weapons, and it helps us determine what’s too powerful and what’s not powerful enough. We have ways to see who killed whom with what, and we can even boil it down to say this weapon is 20% more effective than that weapon.
> > >
> > > Weapon effectiveness is DIFFERENT based on WHO is using it.
> > >
> > > Good lord, how? How can you have such a flawed understanding of fundamental aspects of a shooter.
> > >
> > > You need to balance the sandbox based on an assumed 100% accuracy. Simple as that. You can not gather the necessary information from internal testing with a player base that is unskilled.
> >
> > The game must be based on theory and not facts huh?
>
> Fact: basing your weapon balance on the skill set of noobs will result in unbalance.
>
> Proof: Halo 2, 3 and Reach.
Completely inverted. The imbalances in Halo since CE have come from the assumption of 100% effectiveness on the player’s part. Hence the lack of use of weapons other than the BR/DMR and powerweapons by “high level” players.
The BR/DMR have proven themselves to be extremely effective in the hands of very precise players, while the weapons like the AR and PR have proven themselves to be loathed by those same players because of the lack of reward for being precise.
> > I’m sure there are different level of skills, but I am also certain the vast majority of them are not Halo veterans.
> >
> > In your scenario, if you got a group of MLG pros to play test the game in a serious, competitive environment, for a longer duration than the internal testing. You would know exactly how much stronger every single weapon is than others. If the DMR was overpowered compared to the BR, pros would find out quickest and be able to demonstrate just how OP it is.
>
> Their track record of debunking the precision weapons in Halo: Reach states otherwise.
> MLG players are not concerned with a varied sandbox, they are concerned with a technically skilled sandbox.
>
> But I will say this, the day MLG players want the AR removed from their gametypes because it is too useful, that is the day the AR will have achieved balance since its reintroduction.
What do you mean their track record of debunking precision weapons in Reach?
And if every weapon was skillful, you would have a varied sandbox at all levels of play.
They mentioned collecting a ton of stats…I wonder if hit%, and health/shield/life-force remaining upon scoring a kill compared to what it was before the encounter began are also recorded. Those stats would make it so a player’s initial skill wouldn’t matter as much in balancing…you’d be able to see how accurate they are, and how close the loser came to winning.
> > I’m sure there are different level of skills, but I am also certain the vast majority of them are not Halo veterans.
> >
> > In your scenario, if you got a group of MLG pros to play test the game in a serious, competitive environment, for a longer duration than the internal testing. You would know exactly how much stronger every single weapon is than others. If the DMR was overpowered compared to the BR, pros would find out quickest and be able to demonstrate just how OP it is.
>
> Their track record of debunking the precision weapons in Halo: Reach states otherwise.
> MLG players are not concerned with a varied sandbox, they are concerned with a technically skilled sandbox.
>
> But I will say this, the day MLG players want the AR removed from their gametypes because it is too useful, that is the day the AR will have achieved balance since its reintroduction.
The AR can’t outclass the BR at any range.
Close range is almost an exception. The BR should always beat out an AR at close range given that the user hits every single shot.
What’s the point of the introduction of a precision weapon that takes skill to use that’s near useless against the most noob-friendly weapon of the series? It’s been demonstrated time and time again that over 75% of the reticule can be off of the target, yet every single shot can hit, given that the trigger isn’t held down and spammed.
If you’re going to let the AR beat a BR 100% of the time in a close distanced fight given that the AR user doesn’t screw up badly, then make the AR dramatically harder to use.
> > > > From the bulletin today:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > That gives us the ability to spot trends of people liking certain weapons and not liking certain weapons, and it helps us determine what’s too powerful and what’s not powerful enough. We have ways to see who killed whom with what, and we can even boil it down to say this weapon is 20% more effective than that weapon.
> > > >
> > > > Weapon effectiveness is DIFFERENT based on WHO is using it.
> > > >
> > > > Good lord, how? How can you have such a flawed understanding of fundamental aspects of a shooter.
> > > >
> > > > You need to balance the sandbox based on an assumed 100% accuracy. Simple as that. You can not gather the necessary information from internal testing with a player base that is unskilled.
> > >
> > > The game must be based on theory and not facts huh?
> >
> > Fact: basing your weapon balance on the skill set of noobs will result in unbalance.
> >
> > Proof: Halo 2, 3 and Reach.
>
> Completely inverted. The imbalances in Halo since CE have come from the assumption of 100% effectiveness on the player’s part. Hence the lack of use of weapons other than the BR/DMR and powerweapons by “high level” players.
> The BR/DMR have proven themselves to be extremely effective in the hands of very precise players, while the weapons like the AR and PR have proven themselves to be loathed by those same players because of the lack of reward for being precise.
Did you read what you just said?
Both weapons are being used precisely by good players, yet one rewards precision and the other doesn’t. So if they were balanced according to those players’ abilities…they AR would not be useless. Yet it is, because Bungie decided to balance their sandbox around noobs…who miss with the BR.
You just proved my point even further.
Edited by Moderator - Please do not flame/attack others.
*Original post, click at your own discretion.
i zsee dumb people.
only use pros feedback yeah right
that’s like only asking the morbidly obese how to run and build a restaurant.