So it’s clear that Halo 5 had issues with the BR being way to OP in the past and then they nerfed it into extinction so now the magnum dominates as the go-to weapon.
I think to avoid this problem they just need to decide which one it’s gonna be. Will the magnum be the go-to weapon? Or will the BR?
Halo 5 has done a great job at showing the mess it creates when both weapons are included
Just fix the BR. Reverse the latest weapon tuning and it’ll be just great.
I feel like they need to make like halo reach and 4 to were the magnum had a lot of power but a lack of ammo per mag to make the DMR or and battle rifle the go to weapon.
They need to create range groups for all the weapons like Halo:CE.
Example:
I hope we go back to the BR - it feels more classically Halo. You don’t feel powerful as a Spartan super-soldier when all you’re wielding is a pistol. I don’t mind that the pistol has dominated 2 games in the series, but a majority of the games use BRs and you feel more prepared for war when you’re wielding something more powerful than a pistol.
> 2533274800521306;4:
> They need to create range groups for all the weapons like Halo:CE.
> Example: - Close range should be shotgun, magnum, and SMG dominate. - Close to low end medium should be assault rifle dominate. - Low end medium to medium should be BR dominate. - High end medium to long should be DMR dominate. - Long to high end long should be sniper rifle dominate (obviously not including no scope talent.)Covenant and Forerunner weapons would also follow these range groups.
Not only does that sound really boring but HCE really doesn’t work like that…
A set up like this might work on paper in games like Battlefield where you have classes and big ranges differences, Halo doesn’t have those.
343 tried to do if with H5 and ended up having too many weapons filling the same “role”,
My take on it: make pistol/BR/DMR “interchangeable” in multiplayer. They should come up with a single good utility weapon and allow players to change the appearance to whichever weapon model (pistol/BR/DMR) the player prefers. That way, they can have a visual variaty without sacrificing balancing and those weapons can have different stats for campaign
> 2533274795938680;5:
> I hope we go back to the BR - it feels more classically Halo.
Yeah, because the first part of a series is not “classic” at all…
> 2533274801973487;6:
> > 2533274800521306;4:
> > They need to create range groups for all the weapons like Halo:CE.
> > Example: - Close range should be shotgun, magnum, and SMG dominate. - Close to low end medium should be assault rifle dominate. - Low end medium to medium should be BR dominate. - High end medium to long should be DMR dominate. - Long to high end long should be sniper rifle dominate (obviously not including no scope talent.)Covenant and Forerunner weapons would also follow these range groups.
>
> Not only does that sound really boring but HCE really doesn’t work like that…
> A set up like this might work on paper in games like Battlefield where you have classes and big ranges differences, Halo doesn’t have those.
> 343 tried to do if with H5 and ended up having too many weapons filling the same “role”,
>
> My take on it: make pistol/BR/DMR “interchangeable” in multiplayer. They should come up with a single good utility weapon and allow players to change the appearance to whichever weapon model (pistol/BR/DMR) the player prefers. That way, they can have a visual variaty without sacrificing balancing and those weapons can have different stats for campaign
I disagree. I played hundreds of hours on Halo:CE system link and I’d say what I posted in relatively close. Not 100% but pretty close.
There is no reason a pistol should be included in with BR and DMR. It should be powerful at close range and weaken over distance. Its a pistol, they are designed for CQB. The BR should be medium range weapon with the DMR being a little bit higher on the medium scale to low on the long rang scale.
Having range types creates a more balanced play environment. The last thing we need is a repeat of Halo 3 where the BR was dominate and every other weapon was useless. Games aren’t fun when you are forced to use only one weapon. My example would mean that all different playstyles would be represented.
> 2533274800521306;7:
> I disagree. I played hundreds of hours on Halo:CE system link and I’d say what I posted in relatively close. Not 100% but pretty close.
> There is no reason a pistol should be included in with BR and DMR. It should be powerful at close range and weaken over distance. Its a pistol, they are designed for CQB. The BR should be medium range weapon with the DMR being a little bit higher on the medium scale to low on the long rang scale.
Please tell my hwo CE included range groups? You had a utility weapon (pistol), niche weapons (rockets/snipe) and weapons viable at short ranges that come with different “bonuses” (stun, fast double melee, quick camo). Sure, you could force your concept onto the sandbox but dumping it down to simply looking at range wouldn’t do HCE sandbox justice.
How would you differentiate the weapons’ performances? Random spread (people still hate H3 for doing so…)? Damage drop-off? Both don’t sound really appealing to me. You could introduce different aim assists based on range but it would leave short range weapons either being useless because longer range weapons are superior in every way or you would be stuck with a super contra intuitive situtaion where a weapon has a “aim assist sweet spot” (what I mean is something like BR: bad aim assist at 0m-15m, good aim assist at 15m-30m, bad aim assist at >30m)
Plus, do Halo maps even offer enough varying distances to justify so many “range classes”? How would you handle snow balling (I believe thats the correct term)?
Having so many diffrent weapons does work in games like BF where you create a class based upon how you want to play, using maps with sight lines ranging from 1m to 100/200m but it this way of balancing doesn’t really add to the experience of shooters like Halo.
> Having range types creates a more balanced play environment. The last thing we need is a repeat of Halo 3 where the BR was dominate and every other weapon was useless. Games aren’t fun when you are forced to use only one weapon. My example would mean that all different playstyles would be represented.
So whats the big difference between pistol/BR/DMR (other than their visuals and their sound)?
Note:I’m talking about classic Halo modes (1-16 players)
> 2535448062173159;1:
> So it’s clear that Halo 5 had issues with the BR being way to OP in the past and then they nerfed it into extinction so now the magnum dominates as the go-to weapon.
>
> I think to avoid this problem they just need to decide which one it’s gonna be. Will the magnum be the go-to weapon? Or will the BR?
>
> Halo 5 has done a great job at showing the mess it creates when both weapons are included
Fix the BR please
Bring back the BR it’s a primary the magnum is a secondary something you are willing to discard or use as a last ditch effort not your primary choice of fire
I hope the Magnum is the primary precision for the majority of modes/playlists, but also hoping that the BR is allowed to be the primary precision for BTB and the Warzone environment (if it manages to return in some form). The key is to properly distinguish the roles of the two weapons such that the BR is allowed to excel with more RRR range, but the Magnum is able to be easier to wield within it’s (shorter) RRR ranges while also holding a slight lethality advantage over the BR. Halo 5 was so close to nailing this after the weapon tuning, but messed up when they nerfed the BR’s RRRs and added just a bit too much horizontal recoil.
> 2533274801973487;8:
> > 2533274800521306;7:
> > I disagree. I played hundreds of hours on Halo:CE system link and I’d say what I posted in relatively close. Not 100% but pretty close.
> > There is no reason a pistol should be included in with BR and DMR. It should be powerful at close range and weaken over distance. Its a pistol, they are designed for CQB. The BR should be medium range weapon with the DMR being a little bit higher on the medium scale to low on the long rang scale.
>
> Please tell my hwo CE included range groups? You had a utility weapon (pistol), niche weapons (rockets/snipe) and weapons viable at short ranges that come with different “bonuses” (stun, fast double melee, quick camo). Sure, you could force your concept onto the sandbox but dumping it down to simply looking at range wouldn’t do HCE sandbox justice.
> How would you differentiate the weapons’ performances? Random spread (people still hate H3 for doing so…)? Damage drop-off? Both don’t sound really appealing to me. You could introduce different aim assists based on range but it would leave short range weapons either being useless because longer range weapons are superior in every way or you would be stuck with a super contra intuitive situtaion where a weapon has a “aim assist sweet spot” (what I mean is something like BR: bad aim assist at 0m-15m, good aim assist at 15m-30m, bad aim assist at >30m)
> Plus, do Halo maps even offer enough varying distances to justify so many “range classes”? How would you handle snow balling (I believe thats the correct term)?
>
> Having so many diffrent weapons does work in games like BF where you create a class based upon how you want to play, using maps with sight lines ranging from 1m to 100/200m but it this way of balancing doesn’t really add to the experience of shooters like Halo.
>
>
> > Having range types creates a more balanced play environment. The last thing we need is a repeat of Halo 3 where the BR was dominate and every other weapon was useless. Games aren’t fun when you are forced to use only one weapon. My example would mean that all different playstyles would be represented.
>
> So whats the big difference between pistol/BR/DMR (other than their visuals and their sound)?
>
> Note:I’m talking about classic Halo modes (1-16 players)
I’ll be honest I am lost on your argument. It seems you miss the concept of weapon balance based on range.
From what I can tell you want the pistol/BR/DMR to be one or the other in a match and have it where you can take the pistol but change the look to a BR or DMR?
It also sounds like you what a Halo where the BR/DMR are the only weapons anyone uses?
I would greatly prefer the BR as the precision weapon. It’s iconic at this point and it may be nostalgia talking but there’s no better feeling than out-BR’ing somebody, or hitting that perfect 4 shot. Even though I played CE probably way more than 2 and 3, killing someone with the pistol doesn’t have the same euphoric feeling to me.
They can easily have both weapons balanced in the game, they just went overboard with the nerfs to the BR. I really like having the magnum as the starting weapon and then the BR as a pick up.
To be honest, I really don’t care which one will be our starting weapon design wise.
When it comes to gameplay I think that this question can’t be answered that easily on it’s own. It depends on various factors. Will Infinite have dual wielding, the Sandbox overall, Projectile / Hitscan (which games do we take as a foundation?), the weapon variety > sometimes less is more, I’d rather have way less weapons but each weapon should have it’s own benefits.
My personal opinion, if Dual Wielding comes back
> 2533274800521306;12:
> I’ll be honest I am lost on your argument. It seems you miss the concept of weapon balance based on range.
The concept of “balance based on range” isn’t that hard to understand, the question is, does the game benefit from such a balancing and how do you achieve such a balancing?
Development isn’t a black box where a Dev is sitting in front of a PC an yells “weapon balance based on range” and the PC creates such a sandbox. If you want a sandbox that is mainly focused around range, you need game mechanics and ideas on how to create a weapon that actually performs good at the distance you want it to perform good and bad at the distance you want it to perform bad and you need maps that offer varying lines of sight that offer different ranges.
Range is an important factor for any balancing, but balancing purely based up on intended range doesn’t make for a good Halo.
> 2533274800521306;12:
> From what I can tell you want the pistol/BR/DMR to be one or the other in a match and have it where you can take the pistol but change the look to a BR or DMR?
I think trying to distinguish weapons as similar as pistol/BR/DMR by creating minor weaknesses for each just so there is a tiny difference only waters down the game. IMO Halo needs a more streamlined sandbox that offers true gameplay verity (more than just weapon X is pretty much the same as weapon Y but has a higher RRR, which is basically what you seem to want?).
One or two semi-automatics would be enough to create an interesting gameplay but people love verity and lore stuff so why not give it to them? Why not have a customization options next to armor for your support (different AR types) and your utility weapon (different pistol/BR/DMR/etc)? The look of the weapon changes but the gameplay performance stays the same.
> 2533274800521306;12:
> It also sounds like you what a Halo where the BR/DMR are the only weapons anyone uses?
No, I want an utility weapon to be the center of the sandbox with other interesting and powerfull niche weapons filling different roles in the sandbox just how it was in HCE/H2/H3/Reach.
Having x different versions of a semi automatic precision weapon with different RRR is the opposite of interesting.
I would prefer that. But the DMR is my go to weapon regardless.
> 2533274801973487;16:
> > 2533274800521306;12:
> > I’ll be honest I am lost on your argument. It seems you miss the concept of weapon balance based on range.
>
> The concept of “balance based on range” isn’t that hard to understand, the question is, does the game benefit from such a balancing and how do you achieve such a balancing?
> Development isn’t a black box where a Dev is sitting in front of a PC an yells “weapon balance based on range” and the PC creates such a sandbox. If you want a sandbox that is mainly focused around range, you need game mechanics and ideas on how to create a weapon that actually performs good at the distance you want it to perform good and bad at the distance you want it to perform bad and you need maps that offer varying lines of sight that offer different ranges.
> Range is an important factor for any balancing, but balancing purely based up on intended range doesn’t make for a good Halo.
>
>
>
>
> > 2533274800521306;12:
> > From what I can tell you want the pistol/BR/DMR to be one or the other in a match and have it where you can take the pistol but change the look to a BR or DMR?
>
> I think trying to distinguish weapons as similar as pistol/BR/DMR by creating minor weaknesses for each just so there is a tiny difference only waters down the game. IMO Halo needs a more streamlined sandbox that offers true gameplay verity (more than just weapon X is pretty much the same as weapon Y but has a higher RRR, which is basically what you seem to want?).
> One or two semi-automatics would be enough to create an interesting gameplay but people love verity and lore stuff so why not give it to them? Why not have a customization options next to armor for your support (different AR types) and your utility weapon (different pistol/BR/DMR/etc)? The look of the weapon changes but the gameplay performance stays the same.
>
>
>
>
> > 2533274800521306;12:
> > It also sounds like you what a Halo where the BR/DMR are the only weapons anyone uses?
>
> No, I want an utility weapon to be the center of the sandbox with other interesting and powerfull niche weapons filling different roles in the sandbox just how it was in HCE/H2/H3/Reach.
> Having x different versions of a semi automatic precision weapon with different RRR is the opposite of interesting.
You have for the most part just said the exact same point that I have been trying to make this entire time. I honestly think we have just misunderstood each other.
There needs to be just one utility precision weapon that players spawn with, whether it is pistol shaped or rifle shaped it doesn’t much matter to me. However i would prefer it be single shot for the sake of consistency.
The Halo sandbox is in desperate need of an overhaul and some trimming. There doesn’t need to be a to be utility Magnum and a BR and a DMR and a Carbine to boot all occupying more or less the same niche.
Players should spawn with one precision utility weapon and one auto spray weapon, the rest of the weapons being niche map pickups. Map weapons shouldn’t be simply “better” or alternative versions of existing archetypes, nor should they turn gunfights into simply cases of rock, paper, scissors.
The way I see it there are more or less 2 options for handling the spawning weapon and the plague of redundant weapons.
1.) Utility Magnum spawn, BR/DMR(pick one) niche pickups
2.)Utility BR/DMR spawn(again pick one), niche Magnum.
My own personal preference:
*Utility magnum/Auto Spray AR off spawn
*DMR ala SPV3
*ODST style SMG
*Cut BR and SAW, though the BR would be fine alternative if it was effectively a burst fire version of the SPV3 DMR
Obviously the UNSC weapons aren’t the only problem, but the thread is more about the starting weapons.
P.S. Halo always has and always will play better with an uncompromised utility weapon, if you are concerned with certain weapons “dominating” take it up with the redundant and/or underpowered weapons in the sandbox.
I think that halo 2 had the balance between the magnum and battle rifle down pretty well. However, if dual wielding isn’t included the magnum will probably feel like the carbine because of high ROF and low damage. I think that the battle rifle and carbine are fine because one has a burst fire pattern and the other has lower damage but fires faster. I’d like to see the DMR removed though, as it’s the same as the battle rifle except that all of its damage is in 1 shot, not 3.