halo infinites weapons on a perfect world

Games Halo Infinite
#1

i am certain that halo infinite is too far into development for feedback like this to be implemented or taken into acount, i write this with hope that im guessing right and hit the nail head on.

the community is locked in the debate of “classic vs modern gameplay” when i think the problem, and the less talked about topic, hit scan vs bullet physics.
i whole hearthedly belive that a mix of both can be implemented with a bullet physic base, giving diferent weapons diferent ratios off bulet speed to further represent their role in the sandbox, i would be taken the weapons performance from halo 5 to base my examples

firstly i would have the AR, BR and Magnum as bullet physic working guns, similar akin to halo 3s bullet physics (giving the magnum a bit of a boost) this 3 being the most comon weapons you stumble upon on the series of games and most comonly encountered, this with a halo 5s style of bloom (giving the magnum a bit more bloom) i belive would maek a fun and competitive weapon stats

secondly i would have the SMG and DMR being hit scan for this emphasing that this ar more of a specialized role of weapon over the previous mencioned, Giving the DMR the edge it should have over longer ranges and difirenciated so its not just “another precicion weapon” and the SMg would get a small buff on the headshot and nerf the regular body multiplier so it performs as it should as an armour piercing close range power house, this of cours being dependant if we are geting dual weild back or not.

the rest of the sandbox i feel have their place well stablished and perfom as they should, the only quirks would be adding bloom to the carbine and having neadls break the shiled before a supercombine can be achived on both the needler, and needle rifle/carbine

if we were to get brute weapons back they 100% should have a mele damage boost for them to not be “just another shield drainer” for the spiker and the such, something akin to the knight blade bayonet, not a one shot but a damage boost.

any thoughts or feedback? how do people feel on “hitscan vs bullet physics”?

#2

il add that the storm rifle shuld just be the original plasmea rifle

#3

Interesting thoughts on the SMG, I think they could work as an armour breaking weapon like you say.

Personally, I was never a fan of the DMR and storm rifle. The DMR was just too strong without bloom that it made the BR redundant. It will probably be one of the most difficult weapons to balance effectively. I would reduce the fire rate on it significantly, but make it hitscan. The reduction in fire rate means at close to medium ranges it would be inferior to the BR due to longer kill times, while making it hitscan aides in maintaining its effectiveness at long range. The fire rate reduction also means snipers can easily deal with someone with a DMR trying to take a long range fight with them.

The storm rifle should literally be deleted from the game (as should the DMR now that I think about it).

I believe the projectile BR is superior to the hitscan one. Its design in H3 was just difficult enough to be lethal in the right hands, but very average when being held by the rest of the population. In other words, it had a high skill ceiling, which is what you want.

#4

> 2535444514063000;3:
> Interesting thoughts on the SMG, I think they could work as an armour breaking weapon like you say.
>
> Personally, I was never a fan of the DMR and storm rifle. The DMR was just too strong without bloom that it made the BR redundant. It will probably be one of the most difficult weapons to balance effectively. I would reduce the fire rate on it significantly, but make it hitscan. The reduction in fire rate means at close to medium ranges it would be inferior to the BR due to longer kill times, while making it hitscan aides in maintaining its effectiveness at long range. The fire rate reduction also means snipers can easily deal with someone with a DMR trying to take a long range fight with them.
>
> The storm rifle should literally be deleted from the game (as should the DMR now that I think about it).
>
> I believe the projectile BR is superior to the hitscan one. Its design in H3 was just difficult enough to be lethal in the right hands, but very average when being held by the rest of the population. In other words, it had a high skill ceiling, which is what you want.

yeah rbother you get it! the slow fire rate or higer bloom either or would help the dmr into its own role

#5

No hitscan weapons except when the weapon is a literal laser. Also no headshot capable weapon should have any random spread or bloom.

As far as basic UNSC weapons go, to get the most out of the sandbox while keeping most of the sandbox intact I would suggest the following for the basic weapon sandbox

Universal BR/AR starts
BR: Main starting weapon, no spread, no bloom, no recoil, otherwise similar to most other BR incarnations.

AR: The other spawn weapon, 32 round mag, 2X scope, faster melee with better range than BR, the only scoped weapon which can quick camo. Effectively a ODST SMG with an AR skin. The idea is that every player spawns with 2 versatile starting weapon with one being more competitive oriented(BR) and the other being more casual friendly(AR)

SMG: The one true bullet hose. No scope.

Magnum: Turbocharged version of the H2 Magnum. Powerful 1v1 weapon at close range but lacks versatility.

DMR: Dedicated long range counter sniper. 4X scope minimum preferably a 5X scope. Great at pinning down snipers and cross mapping but like the sniper rifle it is weaker the closer you get.

Removed the SAW.

Naturally there is plenty I would change about the Covenant and Forerunner sandboxes as well but the UNSC sandbox has been a problem for a while now.

#6

> 2533274819446242;5:
> No hitscan weapons except when the weapon is a literal laser. Also no headshot capable weapon should have any random spread or bloom.
>
> Universal BR/AR starts
> BR: Main starting weapon, no spread, no bloom, no recoil, otherwise similar to most other BR incarnations.

Disagree with no spread on the BR. I usually dislike randomness, but done in the right way it can be an effective tool. BR spread is one such example.

Having BR spread is good for the following reasons:

  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).

  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.

  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.

  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.

#7

> 2535444514063000;6:
> > 2533274819446242;5:
> > No hitscan weapons except when the weapon is a literal laser. Also no headshot capable weapon should have any random spread or bloom.
> >
> > Universal BR/AR starts
> > BR: Main starting weapon, no spread, no bloom, no recoil, otherwise similar to most other BR incarnations.
>
> Disagree with no spread on the BR. I usually dislike randomness, but done in the right way it can be an effective tool. BR spread is one such example.
>
> Having BR spread is good for the following reasons:
>
> 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).
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
> 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.

I use to completely agree with you, but after using the halo 3 BR again in MCC after playing reach, 4 and 5, I’m going to disagree. Using the halo 3 projectile BR is a terrible experience at anything other than close range. Random headshot kills in swat all the way across narrows is all I need to say. The same nonsense applies to regular gametypes as well after you’ve broken the shield obviously. We don’t added randomness on top of server latency. Even just connecting to a US West host from US East on MCC with ping around 60-70 and the halo 3 BR is terrible. I have no idea how I tolerated this a decade ago.

#8

> 2535444514063000;6:
> Disagree with no spread on the BR. I usually dislike randomness, but done in the right way it can be an effective tool. BR spread is one such example.
>
> Having BR spread is good for the following reasons:
>
> 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).
>
> 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.
>
> 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.
>
> 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.

1.) A BR with spread is not as effective period. Taking the high ground is always going to be an advanatage regardless of what weapon you have and blundering into a low open killzone is always going to leave you at a disadvantage. You don’t need random spread to encounrage good map movement.

2.) The sniper does not need to be made any more effective, indirectly or otherwise. Picking up the long range OHK capable weapon is a reward unto itself and one of the tools we use to encourage map movement as a power weapon. The point of a utility weapon like the BR or H5 magnum is that they are versatile enough to challenge most weapons off spawn if you have the skill. There are better ways to temper effectiveness at range than by using random spread, which is why I suggested that almost every weapon should be projectile rather than hitscan.

3.) The necessity to move around the map is only reduced by bad map designs, not by accurate weapons. The point of having power weapons on the maps is to encourage players to leave the naturally strong power positions on the maps. Random spread doesn’t actually force more movement on a bad map, at best it just shrinks the distance at which players engage in the trench warfare.

4.) Good players already aim for the body regardless of spread until they can get a more reliable headshot. RNG does not make shooting the weapon more difficult, it only makes it more random. Random chance =/= skill. Players with perfect aim will often be screwed over by the random spread and by that same token, players with bad aim are often rewarded with headshots and partial damage. What makes a weapon difficult to use is a combination of aim assist, bullet magnetism, and projectile speed. RNG does not increase the skillgap, it lowers it.

Everything you want to accomplish through spread can be done better by good map design and reduction in auto aim, magnetism, and projectile speed.

We don’t need RNG on headshot weapons, especially not the main utility we spawn with(be it a BR or Magnum).

#9

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.

#10

A few comments as I read through:

  • 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. - A perfect niche already exists for the DMR - the role of a marksman rifle. It should be slow firing, high recoil and high damage. And since it is a marksman rifle it should be the 2nd most powerful rifle in the game, ideally a 3 shot kill.
#11

> 2535444514063000;6:
> 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.

> 2535444514063000;6:
> 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.

> 2535444514063000;6:
> 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.

> 2535444514063000;6:
> 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.

> 2535410506010406;9:
> 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.

> 2533274808548953;10:
> 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.

#12

> 2533274825830455;11:
> 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.

This is fair enough; I hadn’t considered how spread would affect a strafe-centric gunfight. Thanks for the response!

> 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.

Headshots doing more damage on shields may not make sense logically, but that would reward more consistently accurate aiming. Didn’t Halo 5 have this property on certain guns, or was that only after their shields were dropped? Either way, something like this would widen the skill gap in terms of aim and strafing, so on paper I’d welcome it.

#13

> 2533274825830455;11:
> > 2535444514063000;6:
> >
>
>
>
> > 2533274808548953;10:
> > 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.

Actually in reality a burst firing weapon means it fires (typically) 3 bullets upon 1 trigger pull. This is done to conserve ammo and control aim since continuous full auto firing of a gun can result in tremendous upkick recoil leading to many shots missing high over the intended target.

Now back to Halo implications and thinking this through. Since the BR was programmed with little to no recoil, it’s pointless that it even has a burst firing mode at all. The BR should upkick upon trigger pull, with each shot landing in the same spot relatively, but since the gun recoils, the firing pattern produces a spread.

So back to my original point, it the BR has no upkick, and no spread, then the burst mode is pointless.

#14

> 2533274808548953;13:
> > 2533274825830455;11:
> > > 2535444514063000;6:
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > > 2533274808548953;10:
> > > 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.
>
> Actually in reality a burst firing weapon means it fires (typically) 3 bullets upon 1 trigger pull. This is done to conserve ammo and control aim since continuous full auto firing of a gun can result in tremendous upkick recoil leading to many shots missing high over the intended target.
>
> Now back to Halo implications and thinking this through. Since the BR was programmed with little to no recoil, it’s pointless that it even has a burst firing mode at all. The BR should upkick upon trigger pull, with each shot landing in the same spot relatively, but since the gun recoils, the firing pattern produces a spread.
>
> So back to my original point, it the BR has no upkick, and no spread, then the burst mode is pointless.

I’d be curious as to whether you even read my post, because nothing here relates to what I wrote. I’d assume not since you failed to acknowledge the fact that a burst and a single shot behave differently in gameplay.

#15

> 2533274825830455;14:
> > 2533274808548953;13:
> > > 2533274825830455;11:
> > > > 2535444514063000;6:
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > 2533274808548953;10:
> > > > 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.
> >
> > Actually in reality a burst firing weapon means it fires (typically) 3 bullets upon 1 trigger pull. This is done to conserve ammo and control aim since continuous full auto firing of a gun can result in tremendous upkick recoil leading to many shots missing high over the intended target.
> >
> > Now back to Halo implications and thinking this through. Since the BR was programmed with little to no recoil, it’s pointless that it even has a burst firing mode at all. The BR should upkick upon trigger pull, with each shot landing in the same spot relatively, but since the gun recoils, the firing pattern produces a spread.
> >
> > So back to my original point, it the BR has no upkick, and no spread, then the burst mode is pointless.
>
> I’d be curious as to whether you even read my post, because nothing here relates to what I wrote. I’d assume not since you failed to acknowledge the fact that a burst and a single shot behave differently in gameplay.

No I did, and I do. I was merely explaining why a burst firing rifle without spread is nonsensical - which is the point my post was describing originally.

#16

> 2533274819446242;5:
> Removed the SAW.

Everyone has made good points but this makes no sense. The SAW is underused in multiplayer maps and very fun but balanced weapon, it is a monster in close range and a bearly avobe average in mid range with correct burst firing and strafing, it is crimanly underused in multiplayer maps and other than visualy i think it fits very well in the sandbox!

if the problem is “its too easy to use and kill people” then why dont people complain about the rocket launcher? it is even easier to get kills with it and a similar skill requirments too use in mid range, you can out strafe a saw in close-ish to mid range and kill the user with precicion weapons where a rocket launcher will just blast you

the saw should stay, LMGs are cool as heck and should be in halo

#17

> 2535413583977612;16:
> > 2533274819446242;5:
> > Removed the SAW.
>
> Everyone has made good points but this makes no sense. The SAW is underused in multiplayer maps and very fun but balanced weapon, it is a monster in close range and a bearly avobe average in mid range with correct burst firing and strafing, it is crimanly underused in multiplayer maps and other than visualy i think it fits very well in the sandbox!
>
> if the problem is “its too easy to use and kill people” then why dont people complain about the rocket launcher? it is even easier to get kills with it and a similar skill requirments too use in mid range, you can out strafe a saw in close-ish to mid range and kill the user with precicion weapons where a rocket launcher will just blast you
>
> the saw should stay, LMGs are cool as heck and should be in halo

The SAW has never been a balanced. The reason it doesn’t show up in most multiplayer maps is because it would be completely broken. From close to even mid-range the SAW is basically unmatched without another power weapon. The rocket launcher at least has the threat of splash damage at close range to worry about and said rockets can be dodged at longer ranges. Meanwhile if you run into a SAW without a instant kill capable weapon or staying at long range you lose the gunfight every time to anyone who still has their thumbs.

A well designed power weapon has actual weaknesses that can be exploited by “normal weapons” and the SAW just doesn’t have those weaknesses.

Putting all that aside, the main problem with the SAW is just that it is just another bullet hose, making it the 3rd UNSC bullet hose on top of the AR and SMG. Otherwise we could just remove the SMG instead, but I suspect that won’t be a popular choice. If someone can actually find a unique place in the sandbox that isn’t one bullet hose to rule them all then I’m all ears. I would rather invest in making the turret class weapons more usable than bother with the SAW.

#18

> 2533274825830455;11:
> > 2535444514063000;6:
> > 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.

Yes I’m well versed in the advantage of high ground thanks. I said BR spread encourages good map movement, not that high ground is useless without BR spread. I was emphasising that methods used to limit body exposure become less effective when you have a utility weapon with extreme precision at range. This applies not just to high ground but any use of terrain which allows you to limit body exposure. Anyone saying “it’s still more difficult to hit those targets with a precision weapon” is missing the point completely. Spread acts a hard cap on its effectiveness when shooting against such opponents, forcing players to find solutions through decision making and not raw skill alone. In this way, the BR added depth to gameplay like the DMR never has nor will.

> 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.

Zoom level may be applicable to controller, where aim assist is basically essential to use weapons with reasonable proficiency, and so this is idea may work here. It does not apply for PC though. Zoom or not, competent KBM players will easily make full use of a weapon like the DMR with no zoom at ridiculous ranges. As an aside, this is why the sniper (if it is the same as previous iterations) will be busted in H:I on PC, just like it is in MCC PC).

Regarding your second point I agree, and would never suggest such a mechanic for Halo.

> 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.

This would be quite the departure from what Halo has done in the past and I’m not sure it would work. At a surface level though, I wouldn’t be opposed if it could be proven to be balanced, be fun, and work for Halo’s sandbox.

> 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.

As I said, I normally don’t like randomness. BR spread is one of few examples that apply randomness in a way that actually does add significant depth to gameplay.

#19

> 2533274819446242;17:
> > 2535413583977612;16:
> > > 2533274819446242;5:
> > > Removed the SAW.
> >
> > Everyone has made good points but this makes no sense. The SAW is underused in multiplayer maps and very fun but balanced weapon, it is a monster in close range and a bearly avobe average in mid range with correct burst firing and strafing, it is crimanly underused in multiplayer maps and other than visualy i think it fits very well in the sandbox!
> >
> > if the problem is “its too easy to use and kill people” then why dont people complain about the rocket launcher? it is even easier to get kills with it and a similar skill requirments too use in mid range, you can out strafe a saw in close-ish to mid range and kill the user with precicion weapons where a rocket launcher will just blast you
> >
> > the saw should stay, LMGs are cool as heck and should be in halo
>
> The SAW has never been a balanced. The reason it doesn’t show up in most multiplayer maps is because it would be completely broken. From close to even mid-range the SAW is basically unmatched without another power weapon. The rocket launcher at least has the threat of splash damage at close range to worry about and said rockets can be dodged at longer ranges. Meanwhile if you run into a SAW without a instant kill capable weapon or staying at long range you lose the gunfight every time to anyone who still has their thumbs.
>
> A well designed power weapon has actual weaknesses that can be exploited by “normal weapons” and the SAW just doesn’t have those weaknesses.
>
> Putting all that aside, the main problem with the SAW is just that it is just another bullet hose, making it the 3rd UNSC bullet hose on top of the AR and SMG. Otherwise we could just remove the SMG instead, but I suspect that won’t be a popular choice. If someone can actually find a unique place in the sandbox that isn’t one bullet hose to rule them all then I’m all ears. I would rather invest in making the turret class weapons more usable than bother with the SAW.

while i can see your point and frustration i dissagree, but it is true that most multiplayer maps would probably not be suited for it, maby decrese its red reticle range so it has a harder time at mid range.
And to contrast on why it is not “another bullet hose” i dont see the problem in it actually being the be all end all of UNSC automatics, The AR should be bad against shield but good against unarmored, the SMG is a fast fire rat low damage, since it is supposed to be shooting an armour piercing round i proposed in the original post for it to have extra headshot damage over a below avarage body damage modifier, the SAW being the be all end all is automatic a mirror of how actual firearms performe on a level plain field, should it be tweaked for beter balancing, perhaps as you have mentioned it may inded be needing it, and the turrets do need a buff, not so much a stat wise but hitbos wise, a problem that it is shared with the vehicles, if your turret gets hit you should not recive damage to the shileds, they should actually work, that combined with good mad placement of the turrets and good maps, should be enugh

#20

> 2535413583977612;19:
> while i can see your point and frustration i dissagree, but it is true that most multiplayer maps would probably not be suited for it, maby decrese its red reticle range so it has a harder time at mid range.
> And to contrast on why it is not “another bullet hose” i dont see the problem in it actually being the be all end all of UNSC automatics, The AR should be bad against shield but good against unarmored, the SMG is a fast fire rat low damage, since it is supposed to be shooting an armour piercing round i proposed in the original post for it to have extra headshot damage over a below avarage body damage modifier, the SAW being the be all end all is automatic a mirror of how actual firearms performe on a level plain field, should it be tweaked for beter balancing, perhaps as you have mentioned it may inded be needing it, and the turrets do need a buff, not so much a stat wise but hitbos wise, a problem that it is shared with the vehicles, if your turret gets hit you should not recive damage to the shileds, they should actually work, that combined with good mad placement of the turrets and good maps, should be enugh

“Actual firearm” performance is irrelevant, this is about game design not “realism.” Having 4 weapons that fill the same role in an arena shooter is shallow, boring, bad design. Picking up a SAW over your AR or SAW isn’t an choice, its just a numbers game. You are not changing how you play when you pick one bullet hose over another, just the weapon skin and some statistics.

The reason I brought up the turret is that we could still have the “LMG” without it being just another boring bullet hose. I’d love to see a real solution to deal with the SAW, but keeping the status quo give or take a few balance tweaks is not a solution.

Sometimes weapons get removed, that is just the reality of game development, it really shouldn’t be that controversial.