Intelligent Discussion of SmartScope on Automatics

Games Halo 5: Guardians
#1

I’d like to have one. I’ve seen tons of -Yoinking!- and moaning and whining and complaining, both in favor of (often directed against the Battle Rifle or DMR) and against (often in favor of the BR or DMR). Between all of this there’s some good arguments for and against that get lost in the tide.

I’d like to present my stance (short version thereof to avoid too much start text), then debate it. I… don’t know how much luck I’ll have but here goes.

Mine is against, with exception of the SMG on condition of removal of the spread reduction conferred by zoom. The Assault Rifle as it stands steps on too many toes. It’s the same weapon from the hip as it was in Halo 3 and Halo 4 (adjusted for sandbox/mechanic variations) but when you add that layer of accuracy, it becomes far easier to teamfire someone down using a longer ranged rifle at mid-long range than it should be.

With this mechanic, my beloved MA5-series is treading on the territory of the Carbine (based upon Halo 4 here, so subject to change) and the Battle Rifle. It also skirts dangerously close to competing with the retooled LightRifle at similar distances of engagement.

The SMG has enough firepower per-shot and fire rate to get those shots downrange to make it very nearly a tiny SAW in experienced hands. Add to that the zoom’s accuracy increase and it starts looking less like a mere SMG and more like a power weapon. If this is the route they wish to go with the SMG, very well. However, I ask they make them rarer on the battlefield if this is the case.

So, that’s my bit! Please, I beg you not to blindly agree or disagree. There is no discussion within these responses if the start post is not challenged with support or agreed upon with extra points added on.

EDIT: Post on this subject in Cannonfodder14’s thread. This is roughly the ‘long version’: - Link -
Do excuse any bizarre spacing errors; Waypoint’s been giving me hell this week about that.

#2

ADS on automatics don’t work in my opinion, but this is just my opinion

IT buffs the range on the AR to BR lengths and (in my opinion at least) unbalances the weapon

I would ultimately like to see ADS removed for both the AR and SMG, however since I know this won’t happen I would settle for a range reduction in and out of ADS and removal of the headshot modifer

#3

The idea that the AR and SMG are too powerful at mid-range (15 or more meters) is tripe. A target needs to be either extremely weak or stationary and every bullet has to hit the target. That does not happen that often.

What they did was necessary in order to give them a chance to defend themselves and make them viable weapons. It is clear that 343 thought that through in there own testing.

YMMV but that is my opinion.

More here. https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/forums/6e35355aecdf4fd0acdaee3cc4156fd4/topics/the-ar-and-smg-are-fine/51d72427-55aa-4f99-8ab8-4694a2f47a9f/posts

#4

> 2533274833138074;3:
> The idea that the AR and SMG are too powerful at mid-range (15 or more meters) is tripe. A target needs to be either extremely weak or stationary and every bullet has to hit the target. That does not happen that often.
>
> What they did was necessary in order to give them a chance to defend themselves and make them viable weapons. It is clear that 343 thought that through in there own testing.
>
> YMMV but that is my opinion.
>
> More here. https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/forums/6e35355aecdf4fd0acdaee3cc4156fd4/topics/the-ar-and-smg-are-fine/51d72427-55aa-4f99-8ab8-4694a2f47a9f/posts

Ah! Yes, I do believe I made a longer version of my OP in your thread. Your thread actually got me thinking about this, so you have my thanks there.

Here is said post in your thread! Am going to link that in the OP as well, methinks. Bear in mind, and I apologize for not voicing this in that post, that some points of this argument are based on the assumption that the AR user(s) fired first and/or has kept shots-on-target throughout the engagement with at least 65% accuracy.

Also, I believe I may need to revise my terms for range to something more… unified? 15m is Close-Mid to me, being a mid-range area nearer to close than long. Mid-range to me is ‘Visible at edge of radar’, so 28m thereabouts. Mid-Long being roughly effective scoped DMR range and Long being ‘I can’t see you if I don’t have my sniper scope up’
Pretty sure my terms need work. Perhaps we could chat over Xbox sometime? I’d love to discuss this in a less awkward format than forums as I think you might be seeing something I’m not. I will, however, proceed with the rest of the post (for argument’s sake) with the assumption I’m not missing something.

I have absolutely no issue with their firepower as such, it’s that accuracy boost that gets me. The Assault Rifle in previous games took quite a bit of handling to bring effectively to blows against anything headshot-capable at all. It was, in my experience at least, not intended to be used as such though. The AR’s traditional place is at about 10-15m, often with a melee for the kill, yes? Using it outside that range against things rated to do just that takes higher levels of aim ability but is fully feasible; I’ve managed it well in Halo 4 and Reach without zoom.

Another point I actually just realized is likely the reason the BR, LightRifle and DMR feel a bit OP rangewise is because they were built with the assumption people would be also utilizing SmartScope with AR/SMG against them at various points. If you remove the SmartScope bonus accuracy across the board to bring it back in line with ‘Classic’ zoom mechanics and take zoom entirely off everything automatic but the SMG -which at this point will operate almost exactly like the ODST SMG- it removes the need for this extra bit of range and the ranged rifles can be cut back a couple notches. We of course need to keep shots-to-kill the same, though.

Perhaps, and this would be secondary in favor for me to my own idea (of course), but a compromise of slightly reduced firing rate in exchange for that accuracy for automatics could also solve my issue.
It’s also worth pointing out, and I seriously hate to bring ‘skill level’ into arguments about mechanics if at all possible, but you did admit you’re not proficient with the AR or BR and this little detail may also be slanting your view. Admittedly, my lesser ability myself with the Battle Rifle especially compared to the AR could indeed be slanting mine as well, so… Hmm.

If I’ve taken your meaning entirely wrong, of course, do correct me.

Edited for additions/grammar.

#5

> 2533274827546373;4:
> > 2533274833138074;3:
> > The idea that the AR and SMG are too powerful at mid-range (15 or more meters) is tripe. A target needs to be either extremely weak or stationary and every bullet has to hit the target. That does not happen that often.
> >
> > What they did was necessary in order to give them a chance to defend themselves and make them viable weapons. It is clear that 343 thought that through in there own testing.
> >
> > YMMV but that is my opinion.
> >
> > More here. https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/forums/6e35355aecdf4fd0acdaee3cc4156fd4/topics/the-ar-and-smg-are-fine/51d72427-55aa-4f99-8ab8-4694a2f47a9f/posts
>
>
> Ah! Yes, I do believe I made a longer version of my OP in your thread. Your thread actually got me thinking about this, so you have my thanks there.
> Here is said post in your thread! Am going to link that in the OP as well, methinks.
>
> Also, I believe I may need to revise my terms for range to something more… unified? 15m is Close-Mid to me, being a mid-range area nearer to close than long. Mid-range to me is ‘Visible at edge of radar’, so 28m thereabouts. Mid-Long being roughly effective scoped DMR range and Long being ‘I can’t see you if I don’t have my sniper scope up’
> Pretty sure my terms need work. Perhaps we could chat over Xbox sometime? I’d love to discuss this in a less awkward format than forums as I think you might be seeing something I’m not. I will, however, proceed with the rest of the post (for argument’s sake) with the assumption I’m not missing something.
>
> I have absolutely no issue with their firepower as such, it’s that accuracy boost that gets me. The Assault Rifle in previous games took quite a bit of handling to bring effectively to blows against anything headshot-capable at all. It was, in my experience at least, not intended to be used as such though. The AR’s traditional place is at about 10-15m, often with a melee for the kill, yes? Using it outside that range against things rated to do just that takes higher levels of aim ability but is fully feasible; I’ve managed it well in Halo 4 and Reach without zoom.
>
> If I’ve taken your meaning entirely wrong, of course, do correct me.

I responded to your post earlier.

I found that Halo Reach’s AR to be astonishingly accurate in two or three shot burst and in my opinion if it were given at least a 2.5X power optic it would have done well. Same with Halo 4’s AR.

Provided that the blooming reticle at least have a stationary chevron ^ in the center to allow the user to know were the center of the reticle is. I would like the same with all other small-arms. Also that a selector switch that would allow the AR to fire from either semi. two or three round burst or full auto. The D-pad still has empty buttons that can be used for that.

I would also like to have it headshot in singleplayer at least.

#6

Ah, I had missed your reply. Thanks for letting me know. I’m… intrigued by your Assault/Battle Rifle fusion proposal. You’re suggesting a select-fire Jack-Of-All-Master-Of-None type UNSC gun that entirely replaces them both, I’m assuming? Would be interesting, but I have worries about that as well since it would effectively be an either/or BR or AR, yes? Or are you proposing the BR functionality be cut back to basically an AR with SmartScope and an option for regulated burst fire?

The Reach AR was crippled significantly by the exclusion of Melee Bleedthrough, marginalizing its effect in encounters that ended in fistfights if shields were nearly but not entirely broken. It was, however, remarkably tight as you say. Functionality in Reach allowed the AR and Magnum to fill the role of the absent Battle Rifle if used in tandem.

I think my primary issue, after our brief discussion so far, with SmartScope isn’t the zoom itself but the ability of it to be effective at full-auto roughly on the 2/3 mark of the Battle Rifle’s range if zoomed. Of course descope is a factor, but most of my kills in this manner have been shooting someone who was entirely unaware of me either below me or running across a bridge at my level when at an elevated position. My being able to mow them down at this range before they can even turn and fire on me, whilst firing it without bursting, is the crux of the problem.

Also, I made an edit to my above post thinking it wouldn’t be seen for a while. Edit as follows [spoilered for space consumption]:

Another point I actually just realized is likely the reason the BR, LightRifle and DMR feel a bit OP rangewise is because they were built with the assumption people would be also utilizing SmartScope with AR/SMG against them at various points. If you remove the SmartScope bonus accuracy across the board to bring it back in line with ‘Classic’ zoom mechanics and take zoom entirely off everything automatic but the SMG -which at this point will operate almost exactly like the ODST SMG- it removes the need for this extra bit of range and the ranged rifles can be cut back a couple notches. We of course need to keep shots-to-kill the same, though.

Perhaps, and this would be secondary in favor for me to my own idea (of course), but a compromise of slightly reduced firing rate in exchange for that accuracy for automatics could also solve my issue.

It’s also worth pointing out, and I seriously hate to bring ‘skill level’ into arguments about mechanics if at all possible, but you did admit you’re not proficient with the AR or BR and this little detail may also be slanting your view. Admittedly, my lesser ability myself with the Battle Rifle especially compared to the AR could indeed be slanting mine as well, so… Hmm.

#7

> 2533274827546373;6:
> Ah, I had missed your reply. Thanks for letting me know. I’m… intrigued by your Assault/Battle Rifle fusion proposal. You’re suggesting a select-fire Jack-Of-All-Master-Of-None type UNSC gun that entirely replaces them both, I’m assuming? Would be interesting, but I have worries about that as well since it would effectively be an either/or BR or AR, yes? Or are you proposing the BR functionality be cut back to basically an AR with SmartScope and an option for regulated burst fire?
>
> The Reach AR was crippled significantly by the exclusion of Melee Bleedthrough, marginalizing its effect in encounters that ended in fistfights if shields were nearly but not entirely broken. It was, however, remarkably tight as you say. Functionality in Reach allowed the AR and Magnum to fill the role of the absent Battle Rifle if used in tandem.
>
> I think my primary issue, after our brief discussion so far, with SmartScope isn’t the zoom itself but the ability of it to be effective at roughly the 2/3 mark of the Battle Rifle’s range if zoomed. Of course descope is a factor, but most of my kills in this manner have been shooting someone who was entirely unaware of me either below me or running across a bridge at my level when at an elevated position. My being able to mow them down at this range before they can even turn and fire on me, whilst firing it without bursting, is the crux of the problem.
> Also, I made an edit to my above post thinking it wouldn’t bee seen for a while. Edit as follows [spoilered for space consumption]:
>
>
>
> Another point I actually just realized is likely the reason the BR, LightRifle and DMR feel a bit OP rangewise is because they were built with the assumption people would be also utilizing SmartScope with AR/SMG against them at various points. If you remove the SmartScope bonus accuracy across the board to bring it back in line with ‘Classic’ zoom mechanics and take zoom entirely off everything automatic but the SMG -which at this point will operate almost exactly like the ODST SMG- it removes the need for this extra bit of range and the ranged rifles can be cut back a couple notches. We of course need to keep shots-to-kill the same, though.
>
> Perhaps, and this would be secondary in favor for me to my own idea (of course), but a compromise of slightly reduced firing rate in exchange for that accuracy for automatics could also solve my issue.
>
> It’s also worth pointing out, and I seriously hate to bring ‘skill level’ into arguments about mechanics if at all possible, but you did admit you’re not proficient with the AR or BR and this little detail may also be slanting your view. Admittedly, my lesser ability myself with the Battle Rifle especially compared to the AR could indeed be slanting mine as well, so… Hmm.
>

What I propose is a BR ( which is really an assault rifle) or a new weapon that allows the user to switch between a semi-auto, 3 round burst or a slower full auto capability. It would eliminate the redundancy issues that the BR and AR create. It would bring the best of both the AR and BR without being overpowered at mid range compared to other weapons.

But the AR’s power was necessary if it is to remain a viable weapon. While it may have some side affects as you noted, there is nothing we can do about it without making it useless in the face of BR and DMR users.

We can continue our debate later, I am going to bed now. So good night.

#8

Very well. I’ll see you later, then. I’m liking this new gun idea more and more, by the way.

While I do like it, I cannot see any hope of something like this happening for Halo 5. It’s not ready yet, the time’s not right. Someday, mayhap, we’ll see it though. In the mean time, we have a Battle Rifle, an Assault Rifle, an SMG and a DMR as the ‘UNSC Primaries’ and will just have to deal with that. The question here is how to make them play nice.

I have a proposal on that matter that is within realm of realistic expectations. I am assuming Smart Scope is here to stay across the board. Working from there, perhaps a version of my SMG suggestion applied to the entire armory of automatics? Keep the zoom, but remove the accuracy bonus. This way, it does have an advantage to using the scope in the same way anything ever did Halo 4 and backwards from in the increased chance to hit.

Would this be sufficient? And at this point, would it leave the mid-ranged guns of all makes with an advantage? If so, how to we bring them in line with the rest of the sandbox again without breaking them? We can’t alter shots-to-kill for the Battle Rifle or DMR without destabilizing the entire thing. Perhaps fire rate? Scope magnification adjustment?

Also, I do believe it’s time for me to retire as well. Signing off for the night.

#9

> 2533274827546373;8:
> Very well. I’ll see you later, then. I’m liking this new gun idea more and more, by the way.
>
> While I do like it, I cannot see any hope of something like this happening for Halo 5. It’s not ready yet, the time’s not right. Someday, mayhap, we’ll see it though. In the mean time, we have a Battle Rifle, an Assault Rifle, an SMG and a DMR as the ‘UNSC Primaries’ and will just have to deal with that. The question here is how to make them play nice.
>
> I have a proposal on that matter that is within realm of realistic expectations. I am assuming Smart Scope is here to stay across the board. Working from there, perhaps a version of my SMG suggestion applied to the entire armory of automatics? Keep the zoom, but remove the accuracy bonus. This way, it does have an advantage to using the scope in the same way anything ever did Halo 4 and backwards from in the increased chance to hit.
>
> Would this be sufficient? And at this point, would it leave the mid-ranged guns of all makes with an advantage? If so, how to we bring them in line with the rest of the sandbox again without breaking them? We can’t alter shots-to-kill for the Battle Rifle or DMR without destabilizing the entire thing. Perhaps fire rate? Scope magnification adjustment?
>
> Also, I do believe it’s time for me to retire as well. Signing off for the night.

I would be ok with that but you have to realize that scoping does increase accuracy in previous games anyway. - YouTube

You would have to rebuild the entire system from the ground up.

#10

Perhaps removing the headshot multiplier and adding a tad more base health would help offset the advantages of scoped automatics. This would slightly increase the kill times for automatics without affecting that of precision weapons.

#11

Purely in terms of max effectiveness and range of the guns (IE: disregarding how easy or hard it is to use it that effectively/at that range) I think both the SMG and AR are fine.

The SMG is intended to be a short range gun, and the AR is intended to be a short/medium range gun. Both are designed to still be serviceable, though not excelling at ranges outside of those, just as it is for all the other guns.

I don’t see how anybody can claim that the AR is killing good BR users out at medium or medium/long ranges consistently: It probably happened a lot more then people are used to in halo during the first week when there were AR starts just because everybody had one, people were new to the game and to the BR/DMR, and that people are used to the guns being mostly useless, but to me it’s pretty clear that trying to use the AR at medium range or farther on a BR or DMR or Light rifle user isn 't easy, and you really have to be a lot better then the other player for that to go well.

Furthermore, if the AR is nerfed to where it has less range, then why use it over the SMG? Speaking of the SMG, I have seen people claim it’s a monster out to medium ranges too, but that’s even more ridiculous, past 15 feet or so the AR has a large advantage, and a competent BR user is about on an even playing field as the SMG user, if not higher.

People are trying to compare the AR and SMG to how they used to preform and are trying to pigeon hole them into filling the same roles, when the whole point is that they didn’t preform well like that and they are different now.

I want you guys to think honestly at how often you guys have been killed by the SMG or AR at more then 4 warthogs away when you had the BR, and think to see if it seems like they won so often to they point that they are OP. If the answer is yes, how often are you getting beat out by other guns? Is the AR or SMG killing you disproportionally more?

I’d wager the answer is no.

All of that said, I am 100% in favor of making it so simply holding down the trigger with the AR is less useful, and making bursting more effective/ more manageble, to where you have to burst to kill at medium ranges with it, and rewokring it so you can’t get random head shots with it due to spread. Possible ideas for that are:

  • Reducing the ROF but increase the damage, so it has the same TTK (note that in general the times to kill on everything needs to be increased, but here I mean in regards to once that’s already done), but so this way shot placement and accuracy is more important, due to you having less of a chance to hit due to volume of fire, and each hit being more important.- Increasing the spread per shot but make it so the spread dissipates much faster, maybe make it so the spread increase per shot exponential with the amount of time the trigger is held down, along with bullet mangeitsm going down the longer a burst goes on (this is dependent on the game being able to read rapid but separate bursts as being separate, or else it might think more then one burst is just the trigger being held down one time)- Making it so only the first few shots in a burst get a headshot modifier, or the bonus damage from said modifier scales with which bullet in a burst it is (Say right now the modifier is 3x damage, it’d be changed so that the first bullet has 3x, the second has 2.6x, the third is 2.2x, the fourth is 1.8x, and so on)Also, the SMG should not have a headshot modifier at all.