HOW TO MAKE THE BEST MELEE SYSTEM

Games Halo Infinite
#1

Hello. This time I would like to say a few ideas to improve the current melee system and to create a unique and varied melee system for Halo Infinite. These are my suggestions:

  • Make it deeper: right now, we only have the same melee (one shot in the back, two anywhere else). However, in Halo 2 there were different levels of melee (I’m not talking about button combos): a static one was the least powerful, a moving one did more damage and a jumping melee was the best one (nearly depleting shields). Objective modes objects were also different: for example, to kill in just one shot to defend yourself with the flag or with a bomb you had to jump and aim to the player. If you weren’t able to do that, you had the option to kill in two shots or run away. That type of melee rewarded skill, and added variety to the gameplay. Not only that, you had more tactics to play and people had to take smart decissions while in combat. This one can be balanced by making the player shields and health 50/50; a melee will deal 50 of damage, killing in 2 hits unless you’re not moving or not jumping (the static melee will deal 34 of damage, killing in 3 hits), but I’m not sure. - Do different effects of it; instead of having the same effect for all weapons, introduce at least two different kinds of melee (remember the Reach Magnum or the Halo 2 BR.). I’ll explain this one: older Halo games (I don’t remember if the Halo 5 magnum had it too), Reach included, had two or three random effects for the melee. For example, a player with a plasma pistol will sometimes hit with the pistol, and sometimes with the hand, but doing the same damage for balance purpouses. - Make it realistic by having some weapons with a better melee: if you remember Halo CE and Halo 2, you’ll realize those games had different melees in each weapon. While there was a standard type, guns such as the Rocket Launcher or the Assault Rifle (the Halo 3 one) had a more powerful melee. The Halo 2 brute cannon (I’m not sure about the Halo 3 one) also had this feature. Halo 5 had some features in its REQ weapon variants that gave them a better melee. This is a logical and realistic feature, and weapons such as pistols will still have a decent melee (the one I said in my first statement). - Make new and original ways to melee; Halo 5 tried this one with the Spartan Charge and Ground Pound, but not all of the population accepted them (included me). Halo Reach introduced a new way to melee in the back (assasination), which Halo 4 improved (for example, with a flag one). - Reduce its range. Currently, Halo 5 has a too long ranged melee that doesn’t allow the enemy to scape before the player hits him, even sprinting, or to stand back from him to shoot the player in a different way or tactic. This issue is worse combined with the Armor Abilities, such as Sprint or Thrust. In my opinion, Halo 3 had the best balanced range, while Halo 2 Anniversary was so short (it didn’t make sense with the Halo 2 classic melee mechanics). - Remove the lunge: it only leads to combat issues like in the fifth point. I think that with the Halo 3 range, but removing the lunge feature, we have the best balance. Even the Halo 2 one if we want a longer range, but not like the CE one where the player seems to have so long arms. - Don’t make it an auto-aiming feature, that only leads to kill easier an experienced or even a casual player, who plays tactically and is jumping or crouching to evade the enemy’-Yoink!-. In my opinion, you should at least aim the melee to make it balanced. Otherwise, there’s no point in crouching or confusing your enemy while you’re in battle; he will hit you by pressing only the melee button, which is an unfair advantage and leads to uninteresting fights. I think Halo CE was the best one. - Finally, I’ll suggest to keep the different ways to melee for the close range weapons, like the Halo 3 Sword: it had a faster attack with the B button, and a slower one with the rigth stick.In my opinion, this is the best melee Halo Infinite could have. I took old melee mechanics and the new ones and mixed them. And what about new players who don’t know about the deep of the new melee? Just explain it in the manual or in the game, so people will understand it. I would like to see your opinions.
#2

All of this depends on how the gunplay is. If its the same as H5 I’d only want a reduction in the auto-aim. The thruster ability would make it almost impossible to hit people. If it goes back to old school H3 had a good balance for range and auto-aim. Some of the guns have different punching animations in H5 it’s been awhile since I played so i could be wrong on that one. On your last point the sword and hammer both have different attack animations and stats for their primary and melee attacks in H5.

If they have the resources it would be really cool if they had multiple attack animations for each gun though.

#3

The same system is fine, it just needs two tweaks:

  • Remove lunging towards the opponent when meleeing (all Halos past CE are guilty of this)
  • Make the weapon’s melee hitbox have to align with the player hitbox in order for the melee to register

(for reference, here is a video demonstrating just how hard it is to melee in CE compared to 2: HALO 2 is NOOBIFIED - YouTube )

2 to the front and 1 to the back is a good system otherwise and shouldn’t be changed.

I think making it so that melee has different power depending on your weapon and momentum needlessly complicates things and results in imbalance in the sandbox (for example: say the rocket launcher now has 1 hit kill melee since it’s bigger than a pistol; that buffs something that doesn’t need to be buffed. Or now say a momentum system is put in place and you have to be jumping forwards to destroy shields in one hit. That just nerfs flag carriers/oddball carriers, etc. even harder than they have to be).

#4

I never really cared for the Halo 2 system, but at the very least I would want to start with CE as an inspiration.

No Lunge(aside from Sword and Hammer obviously) or excessive auto aim. It just isn’t necessary, I don’t want to hear anything about how a melee system without those things would be ‘outdated’ or ‘not modern’ or some such nonsense as the quick melee in Overwatch functions in a similar way.

Each weapon has a different melee speed and reach. It only adds more depth to every weapon in the sandbox and also functions as an additional balancing tool. One of the things that kept the CE Pistol in check is the fact that engaging within melee distance with it was an objectively bad choice while using it.

Damage isn’t as large a concern for me outside of bladed weapons ala Spiker/Brute shot. But Ideally if base melee with most small arms does roughly 50 damage(for example) then any large bulky weapons(rockets/fuel rod/etc) would do 55-60 whereas bladed weapons would do 70.

Aside from the above, a more controversial position I have regarding melee is this: If you have some shields left and are at full health, you should not die to one frontal melee from a normal weapon(aka not a heavy or bladed weapon). You should do damage to the underlying health for sure, but unless the underlying health is damaged or your shields are gone, you should survive one frontal melee, if only just barely.

Too many close quarters fights in Halo end in two players charging straight at each other firing their weapons and moving in for a melee finisher. Bungie saw that this was a problem in Halo 3, but unfortunately they completely failed to adequately address it in Reach. as no-bleedthrough shields was a horrible system.

What I would propose is simple. A player should have 50 health and 50 shields, base melee should deal 50 damage(the specific numbers don’t matter). You still get the two hit kill melee, but you don’t end up using every auto weapon as little more then a club. Also unlike Reach, any damage you do to an opposing players shields still matters once they get into melee range. If one player is charging at you going for a double melee like they would in Reach and you get them down to 1 point of shield left, then when you both melee you will be left with 0shield/50health while the other player is left with 0shield/1health and vulnerable to a tickle from basically any weapon you would use. In Reach this would leave you both with 0Shield/45 health(Reach uses a similar system to Halo 2/3 where the HP of health is lower than shields, 70shields/45health if I remember correctly) which would reward the mindless charger and punish the player for getting hits before they reached you.

Melee should be a tool in the player’s arsenal not the end of a majority of close range fights.

#5

> 2535420025135189;1:
> - Make it deeper: right now, we only have the same melee (one shot in the back, two anywhere else). However, in Halo 2 there were different levels of melee (I’m not talking about button combos): a static one was the least powerful, a moving one did more damage and a jumping melee was the best one (nearly depleting shields).

If you think about it, it seems like Halo 2’s melee system is like a very early version of Halo 5’s. You’ve got normal melees, but a melee attack while moving is like a Spartan Charge, and a falling melee is like a Ground Pound. Of course it’s more complex in Halo 5, but I thought it’s an interesting way to think about it.

Personally, I don’t think we need a complicated melee system. As long as melee attacks can consistently kill in two hits, it should work fine. I don’t want a system like, for instance, in Halo Reach where even a little bit of shields would absorb an entire melee attack. It would lead to situations like this: A guy charges you. You hose him down to 10% shields with your weapon. He melees you, removing your shields. You melee him, removing his shields. He melees you again, killing you. That makes no sense.

As for melee lunge, I’m not so sure. I don’t want people to be practically flying at me from unreasonable distances at close range. But at the same time, I don’t want to feel like I have t-rex arms.

#6

>

> 2533274978553590;5:
> > 2535420025135189;1:
> > - Make it deeper: right now, we only have the same melee (one shot in the back, two anywhere else). However, in Halo 2 there were different levels of melee (I’m not talking about button combos): a static one was the least powerful, a moving one did more damage and a jumping melee was the best one (nearly depleting shields).
>
> If you think about it, it seems like Halo 2’s melee system is like a very early version of Halo 5’s. You’ve got normal melees, but a melee attack while moving is like a Spartan Charge, and a falling melee is like a Ground Pound. Of course it’s more complex in Halo 5, but I thought it’s an interesting way to think about it.
>
> Personally, I don’t think we need a complicated melee system. As long as melee attacks can consistently kill in two hits, it should work fine. I don’t want a system like, for instance, in Halo Reach where even a little bit of shields would absorb an entire melee attack. It would lead to situations like this: A guy charges you. You hose him down to 10% shields with your weapon. He melees you, removing your shields. You melee him, removing his shields. He melees you again, killing you. That makes no sense.
>
> As for melee lunge, I’m not so sure. I don’t want people to be practically flying at me from unreasonable distances at close range. But at the same time, I don’t want to feel like I have t-rex arms.

I don’t agree at all in your first point. While it’s true, they’re different things: in Halo 5 they are new ways to melee (abilities), and they need a certain period of time to work; for example, spartan charge needs you to be sprinting, and ground pound requires like 2 or 3 seconds to fall to your enemy, while in Halo 2 they’re just different types of melee that aren’t related to any abilities, only to skill and tactic. It can be seen as an evolved system; however, we could combine them to create a more complex and deeper melee.

In my opinion, I agree that Reach isn’t the best way to make a melee balanced with weapons. I just would like to have a system similar to Halo 2; you can kill in two hits unless you’re standing in the same place while in combat, a situatuon that is very rare to appear, and by that way there are more possibilities, the system is richer. What’s wrong with making it more complex and deeper? It just adds variety, improves players tactics and leads to interesting figths, instead of just shooting a bit with your weapon and then melee anywhere, finishing the fight. And to make everyone understand it, just explain it in the manual or in the game.

Finally, I think lunge is unnecesary and only leads to issues such as the ones I described in the post (but I didn’t remember the lunge feature), but having a melee range like CE is having so long arms, which is a bit unrealistical. So as far as I’m concerned, I think the best way to keep it consistent is make the range like Halo 3 but removing the lunge. Even Halo 2 range could work if you want a longer melee, but shorter than CE.

#7

> 2533274819446242;4:
> I never really cared for the Halo 2 system, but at the very least I would want to start with CE as an inspiration.
>
> No Lunge(aside from Sword and Hammer obviously) or excessive auto aim. It just isn’t necessary, I don’t want to hear anything about how a melee system without those things would be ‘outdated’ or ‘not modern’ or some such nonsense as the quick melee in Overwatch functions in a similar way.
>
> Each weapon has a different melee speed and reach. It only adds more depth to every weapon in the sandbox and also functions as an additional balancing tool. One of the things that kept the CE Pistol in check is the fact that engaging within melee distance with it was an objectively bad choice while using it.
>
> Damage isn’t as large a concern for me outside of bladed weapons ala Spiker/Brute shot. But Ideally if base melee with most small arms does roughly 50 damage(for example) then any large bulky weapons(rockets/fuel rod/etc) would do 55-60 whereas bladed weapons would do 70.
>
> Aside from the above, a more controversial position I have regarding melee is this: If you have some shields left and are at full health, you should not die to one frontal melee from a normal weapon(aka not a heavy or bladed weapon). You should do damage to the underlying health for sure, but unless the underlying health is damaged or your shields are gone, you should survive one frontal melee, if only just barely.
>
> Too many close quarters fights in Halo end in two players charging straight at each other firing their weapons and moving in for a melee finisher. Bungie saw that this was a problem in Halo 3, but unfortunately they completely failed to adequately address it in Reach. as no-bleedthrough shields was a horrible system.
>
> What I would propose is simple. A player should have 50 health and 50 shields, base melee should deal 50 damage(the specific numbers don’t matter). You still get the two hit kill melee, but you don’t end up using every auto weapon as little more then a club. Also unlike Reach, any damage you do to an opposing players shields still matters once they get into melee range. If one player is charging at you going for a double melee like they would in Reach and you get them down to 1 point of shield left, then when you both melee you will be left with 0shield/50health while the other player is left with 0shield/1health and vulnerable to a tickle from basically any weapon you would use. In Reach this would leave you both with 0Shield/45 health(Reach uses a similar system to Halo 2/3 where the HP of health is lower than shields, 70shields/45health if I remember correctly) which would reward the mindless charger and punish the player for getting hits before they reached you.
>
> Melee should be a tool in the player’s arsenal not the end of a majority of close range fights.

I agree with you in the weapon damage point, there should be a basic for all weapons melee like I said, and a more powerful one (just a bit for balance purpouses) for the energy/OP weapons. Although this can lead to balance issues (because you buff some weapons that doesn’t need to be buffed, like a user said), you described another case where it improves balance (with the CE magnum).

While your idea is good, can’t it be combined with different melee tactics like Halo 2 momentum system? If we do that, the jumping melee and running melee would do 50 base damage (depleting your shields and killing in two hits) and the static melee will continue killing in 3 hits (doing 33,333… base damage). By that way you keep that thought, and make the melee system deeper and more tactical and varied.

I agree with you in the lunge removing, but then make the range like Halo 3/Halo 2 to not seem to have too long arms, like I said before in a quote.

#8

> 2533274875705074;3:
> The same system is fine, it just needs two tweaks:
>
> - Remove lunging towards the opponent when meleeing (all Halos past CE are guilty of this)
> - Make the weapon’s melee hitbox have to align with the player hitbox in order for the melee to register
>
> (for reference, here is a video demonstrating just how hard it is to melee in CE compared to 2: HALO 2 is NOOBIFIED - YouTube )
>
> 2 to the front and 1 to the back is a good system otherwise and shouldn’t be changed.
>
> I think making it so that melee has different power depending on your weapon and momentum needlessly complicates things and results in imbalance in the sandbox (for example: say the rocket launcher now has 1 hit kill melee since it’s bigger than a pistol; that buffs something that doesn’t need to be buffed. Or now say a momentum system is put in place and you have to be jumping forwards to destroy shields in one hit. That just nerfs flag carriers/oddball carriers, etc. even harder than they have to be).

I agree with the lunge removing. And in the second point, I think it is the same I said in “don’t make it an auto-aiming feature”, as I understand it.

While the current system is good and balanced, why not add tactics and ways to melee to it making it varied and deeper (you still keep that system, but in a different way; you kill in two hits unless you’re not moving, which improves battles and creates interesting figths where the skill and smart decissions will win)?

And answering your third point. I agree with you that it can buff things that doesn’t need that buff, but if you think about it like a user said, it can have a balance purpouse too (for example, with the CE magnum). However, it is just a bit more of damage; if we make players shields and health 50/50, that weapons will deal 5 or 10 more of damage, combined with the momentum tactics (the static melee will do 34+5, and the other ones 50+5, assuming players have 50/50 health and shields).
And talking about the flag carriers, this system just add a bit of difficulty to survive, which can be ignored if you are smart or skilled (you have to jump, aim the playef while you’re falling and melee him), rewarding you for that.

#9

  1. I can agree with that, though just no more spartan charge type of things.

  2. Alright, different animations should be obvious. It just brings variation and makes the gameplay look less mechanical.

  3. Weapon melee damage, definitely. Heavy weapons should be like a heavy blunt damage since they have slower animations, same with long weapons (acceleration and such like sweeping with spear vs swinging with dagger). Some weapons should also have extra damage like brute shot with its blade and needler with its crystal spikes (something like with the animation from the first game when Chief takes the needler on his other hand and hits with the crystals, it didnt do extra damage back then though).

  4. Not much to a melee, its really auite basic function including slashing, bashing, smashing and such but everything is basically some form of impact with force coming from speed, mass and such of the used object.
    The H5g stuff were melee type of attacks but those were just rather out of place in what is supposed to be scifi FPS.
    And the assassinations, basically those are just extra animations to more effective but also more basic melee. Im fine with them and occasionally even use them but there should always be an option to turn them off.

  5. Not much to that, the range should be something what it would be realistically for the model, also, different weapons could have different range.

  6. Lunging should only be for special weapons like energy sword.

  7. Definitely no auto aiming, its just as cheap as those homing bullets in some weapons.

  8. Definitely, how else would you get those actual swordfights in Halo that arent over in a second?

But the basic melee stuff should be kept simple like with the 2 hits to front and 1 to back.

#10

> 2533274890014309;9:
> 1. I can agree with that, though just no more spartan charge type of things.
>
> 2. Alright, different animations should be obvious. It just brings variation and makes the gameplay look less mechanical.
>
> 3. Weapon melee damage, definitely. Heavy weapons should be like a heavy blunt damage since they have slower animations, same with long weapons (acceleration and such like sweeping with spear vs swinging with dagger). Some weapons should also have extra damage like brute shot with its blade and needler with its crystal spikes (something like with the animation from the first game when Chief takes the needler on his other hand and hits with the crystals, it didnt do extra damage back then though).
>
> 4. Not much to a melee, its really auite basic function including slashing, bashing, smashing and such but everything is basically some form of impact with force coming from speed, mass and such of the used object.
> The H5g stuff were melee type of attacks but those were just rather out of place in what is supposed to be scifi FPS.
> And the assassinations, basically those are just extra animations to more effective but also more basic melee. Im fine with them and occasionally even use them but there should always be an option to turn them off.
>
> 5. Not much to that, the range should be something what it would be realistically for the model, also, different weapons could have different range.
>
> 6. Lunging should only be for special weapons like energy sword.
>
> 7. Definitely no auto aiming, its just as cheap as those homing bullets in some weapons.
>
> 8. Definitely, how else would you get those actual swordfights in Halo that arent over in a second?
>
> But the basic melee stuff should be kept simple like with the 2 hits to front and 1 to back.

That could be a good and realistic addition: different melee range for some weapons. And of course, keep the sword lunge.

#11

It’s refreshing to see that others want a more in-depth and skillful melee system that was a part of what made CE and even H2 so fun and enjoyable.

Weakened base Damage, affected by momentum, weapon dependent, and no lunge/accuracy dependent (Halo CE).

The spam n slam in H3 was one of my least favorite mechanics in such a great game, and now it’s plaguing MCC Reach that wasn’t even present in OG TU. They added bleed through in game with a sandbox designed with no bleedthrough in mind, and didn’t even bother to make tweaks to accommodate bleedthrough such as cutting melee damage in half.

#12

The awsum
Don’t forget, we got us a grapple.
How does that play into melee mechanics?

#13

> 2533274871318832;11:
>

Please don’t revive old topics, thank you!