If Halo 5 is to stand a chance......

Games Halo 5: Guardians
1

I think I speak for everyone when I say if you are going to make a new halo, at least improve upon the last game. Just short of having a 1 on 1 sit down with Frank O’conner himself, I’m not sure exactly how to best achieve this. Perhaps I need to sit him down and explain some basics?

First and foremost: Get rid of the damn voting system for maps. The way it should work is as follows:

Select multiplayer
Choose gametype
A list of all the maps appear
Chose the map you want, and get match up with others

If it’s taking to long to get matched up, it’s because you picked a map that no one plays! Tough luck!

This will quickly weed out the bad maps that no one wants to play anyways. No one has time to wait for voting for “none of the above” 3 times in a row until they get the map/game type that they want.

2nd:
Fix the matching system. If I select that I want to play with people in my own country, I shouldn’t be matched up with other people not in the continental USA. Seems like every time I play reach snipers, there’s like 2 guys from USA, 5 from Mexico, and 1 from Columbia. I have no interest in playing with people far away such that shots won’t register due to terrible lag.

3rd
Radar. I realize that making a game appease to the masses by making a game without very much of a skill curve is preferred so that more copies are sold. Yes, yes, we realize that 343i’s motto is that everyone has to be a winner and that no child can be left behind. We understand. Now go make a standard team slayer mode where radar isn’t on. You did good with SWAT and Snipers not having radar, now go do the same for standard team slayer.

There are countless other things that need to be fixed with the game, but if we could just start with these 3, at least we’ll be able to see some light at the end of the tunnel for a POSSIBLE successful Halo 5 launch. Much time went into making Xbox One. 343i should either develop a good game, or take a back seat while everyone plays Destiny instead.

I’m being harsh because I need to be. The sales of Halo 4 and number of players online relative to COD during initial launch are more than enough to justify my position on the matter. If you think you had it rough with COD, just wait until Destiny comes out…

2

Though I agree with what you’re saying, COD would always have a bigger population due to how well known it is, how it appeals to lots of casuals and releases on more consoles than halo does.

Also the ‘COD’ features your on about weren’t invented by COD. If anything loadouts have been around long before COD and should stay in Halo since they can be balanced.

3

> Though I agree with what you’re saying, COD would always have a bigger population due to how well known it is, how it appeals to lots of casuals and releases on more consoles than halo does.
>
> Also the ‘COD’ features your on about weren’t invented by COD. If anything loadouts have been around long before COD and <mark>should stay in Halo since they can be balanced.
[/quote]
</mark>
>
> Can you stop saying this? Because it’s untrue and it cannot. There cannot exist 100% perfect balance with uneven starts. That is why there are lower tier, mid-tier and high-tier characters in Fighting games (or for example League of Legend).
>
> It would be the same with Halo, but each loadout would have their low-tier, mid-tier and high-tier moments in each part of the map, or some of them would just be godlike overall and other useless at all times. This is unbalance, and creates moments where one player always has a bigger chance of killing the other because of his selected loadout.
>
> It is also random in that way that you can’t possibly know what kind of weapon your opponent has chosen to start with, each time someone dies, and respawns.

4

> I think I speak for everyone when I say if you are going to make a new halo, at least improve upon the last game. Just short of having a 1 on 1 sit down with Frank O’conner himself, I’m not sure exactly how to best achieve this. Perhaps I need to sit him down and explain some basics?

~.^

> Radar. I realize that making a game appease to the masses by making a game without very much of a skill curve is preferred so that more copies are sold. Yes, yes, we realize that 343i’s motto is that everyone has to be a winner and that no child can be left behind. We understand. Now go make a standard team slayer mode where radar isn’t on. You did good with SWAT and Snipers not having radar, now go do the same for standard team slayer.

Radar being on, or included period, isn’t a new thing that just started with 343.

Radar on has been a staple default of the majority of game modes since… well… ever. It will be a very strange day indeed when default Team Slayer is made radar-less.

> The sales of Halo 4 and number of players online relative to COD during initial launch are more than enough to justify my position on the matter.

~.^

5

Radar has always been on in default halo game types. I don’t want radarless to be default.

6

> > Though I agree with what you’re saying, COD would always have a bigger population due to how well known it is, how it appeals to lots of casuals and releases on more consoles than halo does.
> >
> > Also the ‘COD’ features your on about weren’t invented by COD. If anything loadouts have been around long before COD and <mark>should stay in Halo since they can be balanced.
[/quote]
</mark>
> >
> > Can you stop saying this? Because it’s untrue and it cannot. There cannot exist 100% perfect balance with uneven starts. That is why there are lower tier, mid-tier and high-tier characters in Fighting games (or for example League of Legend).
> >
> > It would be the same with Halo, but each loadout would have their low-tier, mid-tier and high-tier moments in each part of the map, or some of them would just be godlike overall and other useless at all times. This is unbalance, and creates moments where one player always has a bigger chance of killing the other because of his selected loadout.
> >
> > It is also random in that way that you can’t possibly know what kind of weapon your opponent has chosen to start with, each time someone dies, and respawns.
>
> I think you are confusing what balance is. 2 objects don’t have to be identical to be balanced. Presuming the same loadout options are available to all players, players are starting even, it is there choices beyond that point that can change the game.
>
> As for the random elements, weapons have quickly identifiable silhouettes, gun sounds and projectile trails. Some of which glow orange or green, making them real easy to identify. Everything in a loadout should have some kind of pre-warning. That’s how they can be balanced. No invisible perks that can discreetly change the outcome of the match, no AAs indicated only by a butt pack attachment which you can’t really see. We need decent visual and audible cues.
>
> But this is required even for map pick up items as well… Its not like you don’t ever face enemies with different weapons in Arena.

7

> > > Though I agree with what you’re saying, COD would always have a bigger population due to how well known it is, how it appeals to lots of casuals and releases on more consoles than halo does.
> > >
> > > Also the ‘COD’ features your on about weren’t invented by COD. If anything loadouts have been around long before COD and <mark>should stay in Halo since they can be balanced.
[/quote]
</mark>
> > >
> > > Can you stop saying this? Because it’s untrue and it cannot. There cannot exist 100% perfect balance with uneven starts. That is why there are lower tier, mid-tier and high-tier characters in Fighting games (or for example League of Legend).
> > >
> > > It would be the same with Halo, but each loadout would have their low-tier, mid-tier and high-tier moments in each part of the map, or some of them would just be godlike overall and other useless at all times. This is unbalance, and creates moments where one player always has a bigger chance of killing the other because of his selected loadout.
> > >
> > > It is also random in that way that you can’t possibly know what kind of weapon your opponent has chosen to start with, each time someone dies, and respawns.
> >
> > I think you are confusing what balance is. 2 objects don’t have to be identical to be balanced. Presuming the same loadout options are available to all players, players are starting even, it is there choices beyond that point that can change the game.
> >
> >
> > As for the random elements, weapons have quickly identifiable silhouettes, gun sounds and projectile trails. Some of which glow orange or green, making them real easy to identify. Everything in a loadout should have some kind of pre-warning. That’s how they can be balanced. No invisible perks that can discreetly change the outcome of the match, no AAs indicated only by a butt pack attachment which you can’t really see. We need decent visual and audible cues.
> >
> > But this is required even for map pick up items as well… Its not like you don’t ever face enemies with different weapons in Arena.
>
> No, I am not. Those stones have the same mass, thus they are identical and balanced. The only real balance is 100% symmetrical. I do use the words symmetrical and even interchangeably.
>
> For example in Starcraft you wouldn’t really be able to find the number 1 player, as there really only is a 1 number player for each race. The reason for this is that the skill gap is not the same and the races is not symmetrical.
>
> When weapons are placed on the map both players have an equal chance of getting the weapon, thus it is symmetrical and balanced.

8

> No, I am not. Those stones have the same mass, thus they are identical and balanced. The only real balance is 100% symmetrical. I do use the words symmetrical and even interchangeably.
>
> When weapons are placed on the map both players have an equal chance of getting the weapon, thus it is symmetrical and balanced.

Then using the same analogy if 2 completely different weapons have the same ‘mass’ they are balanced.

In this case mass would indicate tactical value.

9

> > No, I am not. Those stones have the same mass, thus they are identical and balanced. The only real balance is 100% symmetrical. I do use the words symmetrical and even interchangeably.
> >
> > When weapons are placed on the map both players have an equal chance of getting the weapon, thus it is symmetrical and balanced.
>
> Then using the same analogy if 2 completely different weapons have the same ‘mass’ they are balanced.
>
> In this case mass would indicate tactical value.

And the tactical value is only the same if the weapons are exactly the same.

To use another example. You can’t find the number 1 Starcraft player in the world because there are 3 different races. As the skillgap is higher for Teran players, than the other races, great players in Starcraft say that if you are “to use Halo’s ranking system” a level 45 playing with Teran. You could be a 50 in any of the other races.

That is why finding the number 1 most skilled player (the winners) doesn’t work with loadouts or different races or whatever, because balance is impossible.

The only way to find the number 1 player is to find the number 1 player of each race playing against the same race as they are themselves.

So you have 1 number 1 teran player, 1 number 2 protoss player and 1 number 1 zerg player.

This is unbalance between races, just like there would be unbalance between loadouts.

10

> > Though I agree with what you’re saying, COD would always have a bigger population due to how well known it is, how it appeals to lots of casuals and releases on more consoles than halo does.
> >
> > Also the ‘COD’ features your on about weren’t invented by COD. If anything loadouts have been around long before COD and <mark>should stay in Halo since they can be balanced.
[/quote]
</mark>
> >
> > Can you stop saying this? Because it’s untrue and it cannot. There cannot exist 100% perfect balance with uneven starts. That is why there are lower tier, mid-tier and high-tier characters in Fighting games (or for example League of Legend).
> >
> > It would be the same with Halo, but each loadout would have their low-tier, mid-tier and high-tier moments in each part of the map, or some of them would just be godlike overall and other useless at all times. This is unbalance, and creates moments where one player always has a bigger chance of killing the other because of his selected loadout.
> >
> > It is also random in that way that you can’t possibly know what kind of weapon your opponent has chosen to start with, each time someone dies, and respawns.
>
> Wrong. The reason I’m saying this over and over on the forums is because it’s possible. You have only mid and short range weapons to choose from so there is no huge advantage at any range. The god like weapons like the DMR and LR are removed from loadouts which Im presuming you havnt thought of. Yes you dont know what weapons theyre spawning with but it will be either mid or short ranged so you can plan accordingly. Also how would this make any difference since you would be playing to your chosen weapons strengths and would more than likely be in a situation where it wouldnt matter all too much about their weapon choice since you would be at an advantage over them.

11

> 3rd
> Radar. I realize that making a game appease to the masses by making a game without very much of a skill curve is preferred so that more copies are sold. Yes, yes, we realize that 343i’s motto is that everyone has to be a winner and that no child can be left behind. We understand. Now go make a standard team slayer mode where radar isn’t on. You did good with SWAT and Snipers not having radar, now go do the same for standard team slayer.

Halo is a motion tracker(MT) not radar, to better explain my response, just an FYI.

The better fix for MT is to bring it back to the dumb days, it won’t go away all together, sadly… Shorter distance covered on the scan and simply show a DOT, none of this above, below or same level crap. The smarter you make the MT the more campy the game turns into.

I would rather see a radar based system in Halo that shows friendly player always on, enemy players firing or sprinting only. Walking normal speed, no reason to show, it would promote MOVING around the map. Every Halo that releases seems to introduce more and more camping.

12

> > > No, I am not. Those stones have the same mass, thus they are identical and balanced. The only real balance is 100% symmetrical. I do use the words symmetrical and even interchangeably.
> > >
> > > When weapons are placed on the map both players have an equal chance of getting the weapon, thus it is symmetrical and balanced.
> >
> > Then using the same analogy if 2 completely different weapons have the same ‘mass’ they are balanced.
> >
> > In this case mass would indicate tactical value.
>
> And the tactical value is only the same if the weapons are exactly the same.
>
> To use another example. You can’t find the number 1 Starcraft player in the world because there are 3 different races. As the skillgap is higher for Teran players, than the other races, great players in Starcraft say that if you are “to use Halo’s ranking system” a level 45 playing with Teran. You could be a 50 in any of the other races.
>
> That is why finding the number 1 most skilled player (the winners) doesn’t work with loadouts or different races or whatever, because balance is impossible.
>
> The only way to find the number 1 player is to find the number 1 player of each race playing against the same race as they are themselves.
>
> So you have 1 number 1 teran player, 1 number 2 protoss player and 1 number 1 zerg player.
>
> This is unbalance between races, just like there would be unbalance between loadouts.

Again this is not true, we are talking about the value of the tactic not the function of the tactic it’s self. A kettle and a pair of shoes can be worth the same amount of money on the high street but they are very different items physically that fulfil very different roles. A Sniper rifle, a Shotgun and a grenade launcher can all be said to be balanced if you have an equal chance of doing well with them and they have an equal size impact on the game.

Anyway situational imbalance is a good thing. You don’t ever want there to ever be one strategy to rule them all but at the same time if loadouts can’t sometimes tip the balance they serve little purpose strategically. All we need from loadouts is a well designed multi-layered metagame. We want people to form subtle advantageous strategies, but just as importantly we wan’t other players to try and figure out how to counter these strategies, strategies that can be countered… then we want players to form new strategies…

I don’t think it should completely replace Arena, Arena is awesome, but an Arena/Loadout hybrid is not without merit if done right. Though I can’t defend things like PODs or instant respawn… shudder

13

> > > > No, I am not. Those stones have the same mass, thus they are identical and balanced. The only real balance is 100% symmetrical. I do use the words symmetrical and even interchangeably.
> > > >
> > > > When weapons are placed on the map both players have an equal chance of getting the weapon, thus it is symmetrical and balanced.
> > >
> > > Then using the same analogy if 2 completely different weapons have the same ‘mass’ they are balanced.
> > >
> > > In this case mass would indicate tactical value.
> >
> > And the tactical value is only the same if the weapons are exactly the same.
> >
> > To use another example. You can’t find the number 1 Starcraft player in the world because there are 3 different races. As the skillgap is higher for Teran players, than the other races, great players in Starcraft say that if you are “to use Halo’s ranking system” a level 45 playing with Teran. You could be a 50 in any of the other races.
> >
> > That is why finding the number 1 most skilled player (the winners) doesn’t work with loadouts or different races or whatever, because balance is impossible.
> >
> > The only way to find the number 1 player is to find the number 1 player of each race playing against the same race as they are themselves.
> >
> > So you have 1 number 1 teran player, 1 number 2 protoss player and 1 number 1 zerg player.
> >
> > This is unbalance between races, just like there would be unbalance between loadouts.
>
> Again this is not true, we are talking about the value of the tactic not the function of the tactic it’s self. A kettle and a pair of shoes can be worth the same amount of money on the high street but they are very different items physically that fulfil very different roles. A Sniper rifle, a Shotgun and a grenade launcher can all be said to be balanced if you have an equal chance of doing well with them and they have an equal size impact on the game.
>
> Anyway situational imbalance is a good thing. You don’t ever want there to ever be one strategy to rule them all but at the same time if loadouts can’t sometimes tip the balance they serve little purpose strategically. All we need from loadouts is a well designed multi-layered metagame. We want people to form subtle advantageous strategies, but just as importantly we wan’t other players to try and figure out how to counter these strategies, strategies that can be countered… then we want players to form new strategies…
>
> I don’t think it should completely replace Arena, Arena is awesome, but an Arena/Loadout hybrid is not without merit if done right. Though I can’t defend things like PODs or instant respawn… shudder

"In a symmetric game, options are the same for each side. Symmetry in a game begins to break down very rapidly in longer games, where players have different strategic options, so most symmetric games are short, or rely more heavily on tactics than long-term strategy.

Asymmetric games are those games where the players do not stand on equal ground. Different options provide different advantages and disadvantages to each player. Because a head on attack is more advantages for one player does not mean it is as advantageous for another player. Rock is no longer on the same level with Paper or Scissors.

<mark>Symmetry implies balance. If both players have an equal set of options (or equal odds) then only their individual skill levels or decisions will determine their success. ← This is not the case with load-outs and asymmetry</mark> On the other hand, Asymmetry does not preclude balance–an asymmetric game can still have statistical balance, even if the individual options are not balanced against one another."

Balance = Equal chance of killing

When two players meet with options that are not balanced against it each other the moment is going to be unbalanced. One person will win, because he picked something, while the other player picked something else.

This is also something people call for paper, scissor, rock, gameplay and is why you don’t have the option to choose a loadout weapons in MLG or team hardcore (or whatever it is called in Halo 4).

Situational unbalance is a bad thing. This is what I have been trying to explain the hole time. Because my own skill purely isn’t to decide my own success.

The difference from this and picking up a weapon off the map is that all players have equal chance of obtaining the weapon, thus regaining balance.

14

> > > > > No, I am not. Those stones have the same mass, thus they are identical and balanced. The only real balance is 100% symmetrical. I do use the words symmetrical and even interchangeably.
> > > > >
> > > > > When weapons are placed on the map both players have an equal chance of getting the weapon, thus it is symmetrical and balanced.
> > > >
> > > > Then using the same analogy if 2 completely different weapons have the same ‘mass’ they are balanced.
> > > >
> > > > In this case mass would indicate tactical value.
> > >
> > > And the tactical value is only the same if the weapons are exactly the same.
> > >
> > > To use another example. You can’t find the number 1 Starcraft player in the world because there are 3 different races. As the skillgap is higher for Teran players, than the other races, great players in Starcraft say that if you are “to use Halo’s ranking system” a level 45 playing with Teran. You could be a 50 in any of the other races.
> > >
> > > That is why finding the number 1 most skilled player (the winners) doesn’t work with loadouts or different races or whatever, because balance is impossible.
> > >
> > > The only way to find the number 1 player is to find the number 1 player of each race playing against the same race as they are themselves.
> > >
> > > So you have 1 number 1 teran player, 1 number 2 protoss player and 1 number 1 zerg player.
> > >
> > > This is unbalance between races, just like there would be unbalance between loadouts.
> >
> > Again this is not true, we are talking about the value of the tactic not the function of the tactic it’s self. A kettle and a pair of shoes can be worth the same amount of money on the high street but they are very different items physically that fulfil very different roles. A Sniper rifle, a Shotgun and a grenade launcher can all be said to be balanced if you have an equal chance of doing well with them and they have an equal size impact on the game.
> >
> > Anyway situational imbalance is a good thing. You don’t ever want there to ever be one strategy to rule them all but at the same time if loadouts can’t sometimes tip the balance they serve little purpose strategically. All we need from loadouts is a well designed multi-layered metagame. We want people to form subtle advantageous strategies, but just as importantly we wan’t other players to try and figure out how to counter these strategies, strategies that can be countered… then we want players to form new strategies…
> >
> > I don’t think it should completely replace Arena, Arena is awesome, but an Arena/Loadout hybrid is not without merit if done right. Though I can’t defend things like PODs or instant respawn… shudder
>
> Balanced = Equal chance to kill.
>
> <mark>If you spawn with different weapons the chance is not going to be equal.</mark> Therefore it is unbalanced. How hard is this concept to grasp?
>
> No, we don’t really want unbalance in our game in any way or form.
>
> You are talking about something entirely different. Balance between each weapon in a sandbox, where let’s say: The weapons are on the map.

You’re still missing the point.

I’m going to give you yet another example, in fact, this example has been around since the beginning: The Fuel Rod Gun (Halo CE) and the Rocket Launcher.

Both of these weapons are balanced. In a Team Rockets game, the choice between spawning with a Rocket Launcher or a Fuel Rod Gun wouldn’t lead to imbalance. The only thing it would lead to is allowing flexibility in playstyles - the Fuel Rod Gun functions as a mortar, making it good for taking out people in hard-to-reach places. However, this also gives it a large skill-gap, because not only to you have to lead your shots, but you also have to arc them. On the other hand, the Rocket Launcher is a point-to-shoot weapon. All you have to do is aim, lead, and fire. However, the projectile moves slower, and the ROF is slower.

Both weapons are balanced with each other, and both weapons are different.

Also, can you please tell me what the problem is with loadouts besides saying that it’s “not arena”?

15

> Balanced = Equal chance to kill.
>
> If you spawn with different weapons the chance is not going to be equal. Therefore it is unbalanced. How hard is this concept to grasp?
>
> You are talking about something entirely different. Balance between each weapon in a sandbox, where let’s say: The weapons are on the map.

Wow Ok. You said loadouts can’t be balanced. Yes they can. But of course they will create situational imbalance. I mean obviously they will. That’s what they are designed to do. But that is besides the point. I mean picking up a weapon off the map creates situational imbalance. Putting it in loadouts just frees it up, allows it to be available off spawn.

As a competitive player you are always trying to put your self in a position that you have the advantage. Whether that be getting the high ground, picking up a weapon then using it in a combat range that suits it, or team-shooting an isolated enemy… That’s kind of the point of playing the game.

If loadout options are the same for each team, it is still symmetrical, just like when pick up item layouts are symmetrical on a map it is balanced. Both teams had the same options available to them.

16

  • 1 -
    I prefer Halo 3’s voting system.
    But a mix of your idea and the Halo 3 voting system would be great.
    EXAMPLE:
    I search in the Team Objective Playlist.
    I’m placed into a matched lobby.
    We first vote for the gametype.
    CTF, Oddball, and KOTH are the options.
    CTF is voted by majority.
    We then vote for the map.
    So we’d be playing CTF on whatever map.

  • 2 -
    Dedicated Servers.

  • 3 -
    Radar is a staple of basic Halo.
    It should stay as default.

  • Loadouts -
    I think loadouts could definitely be balanced if set up as follows:
    Primary: BR or Covenant Carbine
    Secondary: AR or Plasma Rifle
    This way, you know your opponent spawns with a mid-range precision weapon and short-range automatic weapon.
    However, players are still allowed choice.

17

We could argue gameplay mechanics until we’re blue in the face but the below quote from OP is simply the best idea I’ve seen in months on these forums that LITERALLY nobody could validly argue…

First and foremost: Get rid of the damn voting system for maps. The way it should work is as follows:

Select multiplayer
Choose gametype
A list of all the maps appear
Chose the map you want, and get match up with others

If it’s taking to long to get matched up, it’s because you picked a map that no one plays! Tough luck!

Soooooooooo /signed

18

I mean, of course all (just making up number) 10 maps are checked ‘on’ by default.

If you hate a map, uncheck it. Done. If you like variety leave all 10 checked. If you like a map so you’re spamming it but your sick of it (RAGNAROK… my goodness)… uncheck it. If you wanna play it until you’re thumbs are purple, uncheck the 19. Etc. Virtually nobody loses, ever, without control. Perfect system.

Plus think about DLC ‘hint hint’

19

> > Though I agree with what you’re saying, COD would always have a bigger population due to how well known it is, how it appeals to lots of casuals and releases on more consoles than halo does.
> >
> > Also the ‘COD’ features your on about weren’t invented by COD. If anything loadouts have been around long before COD and <mark>should stay in Halo since they can be balanced.
[/quote]
</mark>
> >
> > Can you stop saying this? Because it’s untrue and it cannot. There cannot exist 100% perfect balance with uneven starts. That is why there are lower tier, mid-tier and high-tier characters in Fighting games (or for example League of Legend).
> >
> > It would be the same with Halo, but each loadout would have their low-tier, mid-tier and high-tier moments in each part of the map, or some of them would just be godlike overall and other useless at all times. This is unbalance, and creates moments where one player always has a bigger chance of killing the other because of his selected loadout.
> >
> > It is also random in that way that you can’t possibly know what kind of weapon your opponent has chosen to start with, each time someone dies, and respawns.
>
> So… allowing the choice between a Battle Rifle or Carbine as your spawn-in precision weapon and the choice between an Assault Rifle or Storm Rifle as your spawn-in automatic weapon can’t be balanced? Loadouts are currently bloated with many unbalanced and random factors (AAs, ‘Perks’, and grenade choice), but that needn’t be the case in the next game’s implementation.
>
> Spawn each player with both a BR/CC and an AR/SR (allowing weapon skins), and you have balanced choice.

20

> > > Though I agree with what you’re saying, COD would always have a bigger population due to how well known it is, how it appeals to lots of casuals and releases on more consoles than halo does.
> > >
> > > Also the ‘COD’ features your on about weren’t invented by COD. If anything loadouts have been around long before COD and <mark>should stay in Halo since they can be balanced.
[/quote]
</mark>
> > >
> > > Can you stop saying this? Because it’s untrue and it cannot. There cannot exist 100% perfect balance with uneven starts. That is why there are lower tier, mid-tier and high-tier characters in Fighting games (or for example League of Legend).
> > >
> > > It would be the same with Halo, but each loadout would have their low-tier, mid-tier and high-tier moments in each part of the map, or some of them would just be godlike overall and other useless at all times. This is unbalance, and creates moments where one player always has a bigger chance of killing the other because of his selected loadout.
> > >
> > > It is also random in that way that you can’t possibly know what kind of weapon your opponent has chosen to start with, each time someone dies, and respawns.
> >
> > So… allowing the choice between a Battle Rifle or Carbine as your spawn-in precision weapon and the choice between an Assault Rifle or Storm Rifle as your spawn-in automatic weapon can’t be balanced? Loadouts are currently bloated with many unbalanced and random factors (AAs, ‘Perks’, and grenade choice), but that needn’t be the case in the next game’s implementation.
> >
> > Spawn each player with both a BR/CC and an AR/SR (allowing weapon skins), and you have balanced choice.
>
> As those two weapons are honestly just “re-skins” of each other you don’t really get this, bad situational advantage, and that is why those options are okey.
>
> It’s also very few options.
>
> In Halo 4 the BR and Carbine has some advantages over each other, but in Halo 3 they are really similar.