Weapons like the Assault Rifle are often times looked upon as less skillful weapons when compared to precision weapons like the Battle Rifle or Covenant Carbine, due to the fact you can kill in the same amount of time no matter where your shots land on an enemy when using an AR. My question is: why is that?
What if automatic weapons (at least spawn-in automatics like the AR/SR) did more damage to the head than the rest of the body on an un-shielded enemy? Let me clarify on the title. Headshot multiplier, not headshot-capable. They wouldn’t be able to 1-shot-kill an un-shielded target with a headshot from an AR, but would be able to kill said target in less time/with fewer rounds if shots land on the head.
What do you think? Should this change be implemented? Why or why not?
I like how Tsassi put it;
One can say a fast firing weapon puts less emphasis on individual shot accuracy.
One can also say a slow firing weapon gives you more time to properly line up shots.
I’m not sure where I stand on that whole issue. Are automatics inherently less skillful, or is this just a stigma that’s been reinforced in the back of our minds by various forms of media?
I see no reason not to add headshot modifiers to automatic weapons though. Modifiers add an additional skillgap and additional depth to the weapon.
Now adding ‘headshots’ to automatic weapons would be very bad, as I can spam in the general area of the head and finish someone off with no effort. Of course that’s not what this thread is about, just throwing it in there.
> I’m not sure where I stand on that whole issue. Are automatics inherently less skillful, or is this just a stigma that’s been reinforced in the back of our minds by various forms of media?
I’d say it is. We consider them to be unskilful because they have always been that way for us. There is no inherent reason why we couldn’t make them more skilful.
The problem I see is that the role of the automatics this far has been an easily approachable weapon for new players. Most players whose first console FPS was Halo have probably resorted to it over the precision weapons in the early stages. That’s why I think the difficulty of use in close range combat shouldn’t change.
But I’ve been an advocate of the headshot bonus for automatics because it offers a chance to add more skill to them without taking away the role of an easy-to-use introductory weapon. The headshot bonus would be irrelevant when sprayed, but when burst fired, the power of headshots would make them more viable at longer ranges.
I see no reason not to add a headshot multiplier on automatics either.
I think automatics deserve some more attention in their design anyway. Adjusting them in ways to free them from their “noob weapon” image and making them more flexible in general, so they become a respectful option in combat.
I think map design should support automatics a little more as well, since to me it has always seemed like that the maps are primarily designed for the precision rifles and are rarely equally supporting both weapon classes.
I have never been a big automatic user but primarily because of the facts that they are not as flexible in combat as the precision rifles and the majority of the maps have never really supported them.
In addition to the concern about the Supressor. The Supressor is an uninspiring weapon, in my opinion, and needs and deserves some major overhauling anyway, especially since it is a Forerunner weapon.
How DARE anyone call the assault rifle, (or in my case the storm rifle and suppressor) a LESS SKILLFUL WEAPON. These automatics take an enormous amount of skill to use correctly, believe me! Its no trivial task aiming them well after the june 3rd aim assist cuts. But if you are skilled they are amazingly good! kill much faster than a BR or a carbine close range!
As for the OP, yes please give automatics a headshot bonus this would be amazing.
As much as I like the CE Plasma Rifle I don’t know if I would want to give that ability to all automatics, at least not initially.
At the same time Nothing ventured, nothing gained and all that. A Storm Rifle with CE PR style spread could work. The AR could work if its bloom worked more like the SAW where the first few shots are actually pretty accurate. I would say even the Spiker could work with tighter spread and the main limiting factor being the ‘drop’.
The only tricky weapons would be the Suppressor and the SMG(if it was to return) with their high spread patterns. Perhaps while all the other autos have 2x multipliers and weapons like the Suppressor or SMG would get only a 1.5x bonus.
Another weapon I feel could use this feature would be the Plasma Pistol(with the 2x). A Reach PP with a slight headshot multiplier? That is what dreams are made of.
One thing I definitely like about the idea is that it would also level the playing field in Campaign/Co-Op. Auto weapons often get left behind in the campaign even more so than in multiplayer, especially on higher difficulties. Balance just as important in campaign as in multiplayer and being able to drop Grunts or shieldless Elites with a few AR burst would help quite a bit.
I’d like to see the automatic weapons be given zoom functionality like the ODST SMG. It would help to lessen the disparity of loadout weapons if every weapon was viable up to around midrange.
Damage multipliers are another interesting idea that could help too.
Performing as they currently do, no I don’t think that’s a good idea. Automatics are currently designed to work in close quarters, where the target is much larger making accuracy not so important. Adding headshot multipliers would deem them anymore skillful since there’s no skill getting a HS when the bullets are flying everywhere in the big circle of the reticule.
> I’m not sure where I stand on that whole issue. Are automatics inherently less skillful, or is this just a stigma that’s been reinforced in the back of our minds by various forms of media?
The latter and I’d say its a cultural influence rather than one of the media. In no other community I’ve been in has semi-automatic weapons received the veneration that they do here. Why is that? Well it is probably the result of our broken sandbox. A semi-automatic is inherently less useful than an automatic because not only do you have greater range and accuracy but the headshot factor (which lets semi-autos pair very well with grenades, melee attacks, and PP’s and so intrude on CQC) and the opportunity to get more kills per clip as a result of all this AND greater power. It’s a standard set by the very first game but the effect is simply that in anything else (besides a power weapon) you’re identifying yourself as someone who doesn’t see the most obvious tactical choice in this game. Ie. a skill-less noob.
Now if you go to other products you don’t see this sort of group behavior (at least as far as I can tell) because just about any other game (Rainbow Six, Ghost Recon, Section 8, Space Marine, Unreal Tournament, Jedi Knights ect.) has the balance between autos and semi-automatic weapons down right [enough]. So the choice of one or the other can’t be used as a binary indicator of player quality, each weapon type has their uses which are near enough even to each other in the grand scheme of things. Thus argument which takes more skill is nearly unheard of. Yes semi-automatic weapons are more precise but it takes fewer successful hits in order to secure a kill. And with generally greater range it takes a lot less effort to set those kills up with semi-automatics than automatics, and there is generally less risk involved as well. But even with greater risk involved you can let a small bit of imprecision slide with an automatic weapon, and so on and so on.
At any rate there are so many conflicting aspects to this dichotomy and value judgements pervasive throughout all of it that just about no one is making an issue of this except us, because we have a rather unique situation, bred from Halo’s characteristic ill-balance, that forces the two weapons into cultural roles as well as functional ones.
I really do not see any real reason to add headshot multipliers into automatic weaponry, especially at its current mechanics making this a very difficult task to perform.
In all weapons, whether it be a precision or automatic, shooting at the head does as much damage as shooting at the torso or foot on a shielded target. The headshot multiplier is only in effect when you have a precision weapon, and the target has its shields popped.
Automatics currently do not have an effective rate to lower its bloom, which would be either too high to rely on a headshot or be too slow of a damage output to kill a mid range weapons at close range without usage of.cover. Without something similar to an ADS feature(which no one wants), headshot multipliers on automatic weapons would be a massive nerf since the chances of this to work would be too small.
To me, automatics at close range take just as much skill to use as a BR at mid range. You can’t spray with either guns and expect to be successful. You have to think, especially since the MT can give your position off to others, and if they will back say to.make automatic weapons useless (if they have half a brain).
> How DARE anyone call the assault rifle, (or in my case the storm rifle and suppressor) a LESS SKILLFUL WEAPON. These automatics take an enormous amount of skill to use correctly, believe me! Its no trivial task aiming them well after the june 3rd aim assist cuts. But if you are skilled they are amazingly good! kill much faster than a BR or a carbine close range!
>
> As for the OP, yes please give automatics a headshot bonus this would be amazing.
The aim assist is still high, and it’s not hard to kill some one ten feet away when you are spraying a wall of bullets. The probability of hitting someone in that situation is pretty high.
> Performing as they currently do, no I don’t think that’s a good idea. Automatics are currently designed to work in close quarters, where the target is much larger making accuracy not so important. Adding headshot multipliers would deem them anymore skillful since there’s no skill getting a HS when the bullets are flying everywhere in the big circle of the reticule.
Humor me for a bit here.
Sentinel Beam.
Headshot modifier.
Cuts off after a certain distance to prevent long range sniping.
> > Performing as they currently do, no I don’t think that’s a good idea. Automatics are currently designed to work in close quarters, where the target is much larger making accuracy not so important. Adding headshot multipliers would deem them anymore skillful since there’s no skill getting a HS when the bullets are flying everywhere in the big circle of the reticule.
>
> Humor me for a bit here.
>
> Sentinel Beam.
> Headshot modifier.
> Cuts off after a certain distance to prevent long range sniping.
>
> What now?
> > How DARE anyone call the assault rifle, (or in my case the storm rifle and suppressor) a LESS SKILLFUL WEAPON. These automatics take an enormous amount of skill to use correctly, believe me! Its no trivial task aiming them well after the june 3rd aim assist cuts. But if you are skilled they are amazingly good! kill much faster than a BR or a carbine close range!
> >
> > As for the OP, yes please give automatics a headshot bonus this would be amazing.
>
> The aim assist is still high, and it’s not hard to kill some one ten feet away when you are spraying a wall of bullets. The probability of hitting someone in that situation is pretty high.
Seeing as that is within effective range, of course it will be as easy as killing someone with a BR or CC at 20 ft. Both weapons have a higher amount of aim assist at that range as well.
> > > How DARE anyone call the assault rifle, (or in my case the storm rifle and suppressor) a LESS SKILLFUL WEAPON. These automatics take an enormous amount of skill to use correctly, believe me! Its no trivial task aiming them well after the june 3rd aim assist cuts. But if you are skilled they are amazingly good! kill much faster than a BR or a carbine close range!
> > >
> > > As for the OP, yes please give automatics a headshot bonus this would be amazing.
> >
> > The aim assist is still high, and it’s not hard to kill some one ten feet away when you are spraying a wall of bullets. The probability of hitting someone in that situation is pretty high.
>
> Seeing as that is within effective range, of course it will be as easy as killing someone with a BR or CC at 20 ft. Both weapons have a higher amount of aim assist at that range as well.
>
> Your point?
> The latter and I’d say its a cultural influence rather than one of the media. In no other community I’ve been in has semi-automatic weapons received the veneration that they do here. Why is that? Well it is probably the result of our broken sandbox. A semi-automatic is <mark>inherently less useful than an automatic</mark> because not only do you have greater range and accuracy but the headshot factor (which lets semi-autos pair very well with grenades, melee attacks, and PP’s and so intrude on CQC) and the opportunity to get more kills per clip as a result of all this AND greater power. It’s a standard set by the very first game but the effect is simply that in anything else (besides a power weapon) you’re identifying yourself as someone who doesn’t see the most obvious tactical choice in this game. Ie. a skill-less noob.
… Wut. Idaho, I admire you as a writer, but a slight reduction in the Shakespeare category might make it a little more comprehensible, not to mention that you might easier avoid the nonsensical (as highlighted).
Anyways, back on track, headshot multipliers are a definite plus, but something that I’ve wanted for years is automatic weapons with a tighter spread. I see no reason why in all but two games they’ve been all spread and all aim assist, when they could easily have a SAW-esque spread (as it exists when burst fired) with minimal/precision weapon type aim assist. The Halo 3 assault rifle and the CE era plasma rifle got this right.
Canonically it would make sense for once, not to mention it’s a slight bit unpleasant that the Halo 4 assault rifle’s reticule occupies half the screen.