> 1) It rewards good map movement. A BR with spread is not as effective from the low ground, because high ground players can use high ground cover to reduce their bodies exposure from low ground enemies. A high precision weapon like a DMR can bypass this advantage, but a BR with spread can not. Hence, the existence of BR spread rewards the player with the good positioning (high ground) and punishes the player with poor positioning (low ground).
High ground advantage does not vanish when you give players aaccurate weapons. A player on high ground has better visibility over the map, readily available cover, and they are more difficult to get to. In an encounter the player with high ground already has complete control over the flow of the encounter, because they can only expose what they need to see the opponent, and can take cover at will. High ground already has all the advantages it needs to be rewarding.
> 2) By limiting long range effectiveness with spread, you indirectly make the sniper more effective. This is good because players who time and control the sniper, as well as position themselves effectively should be rewarded with an advantage.
If you really want to make a precision weapon less effective against snipers, you can do this by decreasing its zoom level. Or, if you really want players to make less damage at range (which I don’t think is good design), you can just decrease the amount of damage per bullet by distance. Again, no randomness needed for what you want to accomplish.
> 3) It forces players to use the map to compensate for its deficiency at long range, therefore increasing the skill ceiling in map positioning. If a weapon is hyper accurate at extreme range, the necessity to move around the map is reduced.
The comment on this is essentially the same as above, with an additional emphasis on the fact that a weapon being accurate doesn’t make it powerful. If you want a weapon that is ineffective at range, you don’t need randomness to accomplish that.
> 4) Higher mechanical skill ceiling. Using the BR actually requires more precision than the DMR. Good players (Halo 3) knew that in order to 4 shot someone, you would need to shoot 3 in the chest and 1 to the head. Prior to those 3 shots you can NOT aim for the head because the spread will cause bullets to miss. This is different to the DMR, in which you can land any of your shots at any part of the body, be it head, chest or even legs, so long as the final shot is in the head. Hence, the skill gap is significantly reduced with the DMR, as it would be with any weapon that has zero spread.
Or, you know, you could just have headshots make more damage than bodyshots on a shielded opponent: e.g., 3 bodyshots and 1 headshot or 3 headshots to kill (alternatively 4 body and 1 head or 4 head). Or if you want to be more lenient you can split it all kinds of ways like 1 body and 3 head, or 2 body and 2 head. In any case, no randomness needed.
In trying to come up with arguments in favor of spread, you neglect the downsides, and miss the obvious alternatives. Randomness in a supposed-to-be skill-based game is almost always a liability. What it intends to accomplish almost never adds sufficient depth to justigy the randomness, and can almost always be accomplished by using non-random methods and a bit of creative thinking.
> I think weapon spread is actually a good idea as long as it’s not random. Halo’s has always been random which just makes weapons feel clunky and inconsistent, whereas a game like CS:GO has completely predictable spread patterns, that add a layer of consistency and mastery, as well as factoring into weapon balance and uniqueness. Halo could do by adopting spread patterns, but randomness has to go.
In CS, recoil and spread is a response to the fact that headshots with automatic and fast-firing weapons can kill in a split-second. It is there to prevent the player from simply holding their reticle in vicinity of the opponent’s head aand spamming away (which is fairly trivial in a game where players are slow and strafing is not highly effective). It is there out of necessity, and the predictability is merely to make it palatable.
In Halo where encounters last multiple seconds, and players can move around quickly in combat, there is no need for recoil or spread. Forcing the player to fight their weapon in addition to a quickly moving opponent doesn’t add any value to the encounter because there is already a much deeper level of play in predicting and reacting to an opponent’s strafe patterns than there is in memorizing a set of predetermined spread patterns.
> The BR has to have spread, it is literally a burst firing weapon. Demanding all 3 bullets land in the exact same spot defeats the purpose of the burst mode all together.
This is not true. A burst means that the player needs to hold their reticle in the correct spot for the whole duration of the burst in order for all shots to land. This is in contrast to a single-shot weapon, for which the reticle needs to be in the correct spot only at the exact moment the shot is fired.