Melee & Bleedthrough ?

Games Other Halo
93

> > Halo 3 AND Halo Reach had terrible Melee systems. 2 hit kill Melee is garbage. It should have bleedthrough like Halo 3, yes, but it should also do ALOT less damage.
> >
> > Melee attacks should kill in 3 hits, taking 2 hits to fully drain a shield, and one after shield is drained to kill. Doing exactly 40% damage, when a player’s health is 60% Shields, and 40% health. Meaning that it is Impossible to kill in a single melee while shields are UP, however, meleeing a shield drained opponent ALWAYS finishes him off.
> >
> >
> > To Clarify:
> >
> > Player is at 100% health.
> >
> > 60% is Shields, 40% is health.
> >
> > 1 Melee Attack deals 40% of that damage.
> >
> > This leaves the player with 20% Shields, and 40% health.
> >
> > 2 Melee Attacks deal 80% of that damage.
> >
> > This leaves the player with 0% Shields, and 20% Health.
> >
> > 3 Melees kill.
> >
> >
> > IF a Player is at 1% Shield, and they are melee attacked, they will be left at 1% Health. IF a Player is at 0% Shields, and 40% Health, they will die.
>
> Yeah that might work – I just hate when you shot someone a few times and its still a 2 hit melee to kill them and its the same for them to kill me 2 hit melee…

Or we could just ditch the Yoink!ing terrible health system of H2/H3/Reach and opt for a sensible system that could allow for either 2 or 3 hit melees.

Option 1: 2HK Melee
Player is at 100%
50% is Shields, 50% is Health

Melee damage: 50%

1 First melee takes away shields leaving 0% shields, 50% health

2 Second melee kills however if a player has say 1% shield, 50% health than the melee will leave the player with 0% shields, 1% health

This option removes the deathcharge(No dying from one melee with 3/4 shields) while still keeping up the pace of melee.

Option 2: 3HK Melee(This time we will use fractions)
Player is at 6/6
3/6 is Shields, 3/6 is Health

Melee does 2/6 damage

1 first melee leaves the player with 1/6 shields, 3/6 health

2 Second melee leaves player with 0/6 shields, 2/6 Health

3 Third melee kills

This option also removes deathcharge and gives weapons and even more prominent role in CQC.

94

Bleedthrough

95

> Bleedthrough

96

“two hit melee kill is garbage”

Yeah, 3 melee hits is soooooooo much better. Besides, with your model and someone wanted to actualy kill with melee on a weakened opponent, wouldn’t you end up killing in two hits? People call for faster kill times and you’re slowing it down.

3 hit kill is dumb. Halo 2/3 did it just fine.

97

For the people that are saying they want a 3 hit melee system. I ask you, Have you played Halo2 before the first patch. It was a 4 or sometimes even 5 hit beatdown. Obviously that is not the same as 3 but if you go back and play that you will be amazed at how bad anything higher than 2 is.

98

> the same as 3 but if you go back and play that you will be amazed at how bad anything higher than 2 is.

2 Hit works

99

> > > Halo 3 AND Halo Reach had terrible Melee systems. 2 hit kill Melee is garbage. It should have bleedthrough like Halo 3, yes, but it should also do ALOT less damage.
> > >
> > > Melee attacks should kill in 3 hits, taking 2 hits to fully drain a shield, and one after shield is drained to kill. Doing exactly 40% damage, when a player’s health is 60% Shields, and 40% health. Meaning that it is Impossible to kill in a single melee while shields are UP, however, meleeing a shield drained opponent ALWAYS finishes him off.
> > >
> > >
> > > To Clarify:
> > >
> > > Player is at 100% health.
> > >
> > > 60% is Shields, 40% is health.
> > >
> > > 1 Melee Attack deals 40% of that damage.
> > >
> > > This leaves the player with 20% Shields, and 40% health.
> > >
> > > 2 Melee Attacks deal 80% of that damage.
> > >
> > > This leaves the player with 0% Shields, and 20% Health.
> > >
> > > 3 Melees kill.
> > >
> > >
> > > IF a Player is at 1% Shield, and they are melee attacked, they will be left at 1% Health. IF a Player is at 0% Shields, and 40% Health, they will die.
> >
> > Yeah that might work – I just hate when you shot someone a few times and its still a 2 hit melee to kill them and its the same for them to kill me 2 hit melee…
>
> Or we could just ditch the Yoink!ing terrible health system of H2/H3/Reach and opt for a sensible system that could allow for either 2 or 3 hit melees.
>
> Option 1: 2HK Melee
> Player is at 100%
> 50% is Shields, 50% is Health
>
> Melee damage: 50%
>
> 1 First melee takes away shields leaving 0% shields, 50% health
>
> 2 Second melee kills however if a player has say 1% shield, 50% health than the melee will leave the player with 0% shields, 1% health
>
> This option removes the deathcharge(No dying from one melee with 3/4 shields) while still keeping up the pace of melee.
>
> Option 2: 3HK Melee(This time we will use fractions)
> Player is at 6/6
> 3/6 is Shields, 3/6 is Health
>
> Melee does 2/6 damage
>
> 1 first melee leaves the player with 1/6 shields, 3/6 health
>
> 2 Second melee leaves player with 0/6 shields, 2/6 Health
>
> 3 Third melee kills
>
> This option also removes deathcharge and gives weapons and even more prominent role in CQC.

The point of the system is consistency. In a nutshell, Melee can’t be 2 hit kill, it leads to terrible melee+melee fights. Also if a player HAS shields, he CANNOT die in one hit. But if he has no shields, he HAS to die in one hit. Again for consistency.

Therefore a 40% Melee Damage in a situation where a player’s health is 60% Shields vs 40% health is the only way for it to make sense.

Anyway, based on timing Melees, in a 5 shot kill scenario, shooting him Once should not affect the number of Melees required to kill. If you shoot him 2 or 3 times, it should be 2 melees to kill. If you shoot him 4+ times he will die in one Melee.

Likewise if you Melee first then shoot, it should be 2 shots to kill. And if you Melee Twice than shoot, it should be one shot.

Creating a system where Melee is a burst of damage when used properly, but isn’t something you can rely on alone as a weapon. Used correctly, a Melee can ‘effectively’ replace 3 DMR body shots in a battle (This takes into account that DMR should deal 15% player damage. thats 5 shot headshot / 7 shot bodyshot kill with an excess 5% damage):

Legend:
S = Shoot - May Melee after Instantly, or Shoot after 1 Pace
M = Melee - May Melee or Shoot after 3 Paces
K = Kill

S-S-SM—S=K (10 paces)
S-S-SM—M=K (10 paces)
S-S-S-S-S=K (9 paces)
M—M—S=K (9 paces)
M—M—M=K (9 paces)
S-S-S-SM=K (8 paces)
S-SM—S=K (8 paces)
S-SM—M=K (8 paces)
M—S-S=K (7 paces)
SM—S=K (6 paces)
SM—M=K (6 paces)
M—SM=K (6 paces)

As you can see from the chart, Melee can be used to either decrease your kill time if used correctly, or increase it if used incorrectly depending on your combo. 3 Melee attacks is a very weak combo compared to, say, one Melee, and 2 Shots.

100

> For the people that are saying they want a 3 hit melee system. I ask you, Have you played Halo2 before the first patch. It was a 4 or sometimes even 5 hit beatdown. Obviously that is not the same as 3 but if you go back and play that you will be amazed at how bad anything higher than 2 is.

Melee Post Patch in Halo 2, and Melee in Halo CE were 3 hit, and they worked GREAT. Yes pre-patch it was 4-5, and it was bad. But it ISNT 3 hit. And 3 hit is proven to work. MLG was also 3 hit in Reach until TU Bleethrough, and wonky Melee Damage percentages got in the way of them making it impossible for a good 3 hit kill system of Melee.

3 hits is necessary, because Double Pummels are garbage, and in a 3 hit kill system, there are several scenarios that can beat a triple pummel, especially if triple pummels are the exact same kill time as 5 shots.

The only weapons that should kill in 2 melee attacks are Brute weapons (or any other weapon SPECIFICALLY MADE to have a bayonette. And the only ones that should kill in 1 are the Energy Sword and Hammer (Or any weapons SPECIFICALLY MADE to be a Melee only power weapon).

101

> > > > Halo 3 AND Halo Reach had terrible Melee systems. 2 hit kill Melee is garbage. It should have bleedthrough like Halo 3, yes, but it should also do ALOT less damage.
> > > >
> > > > Melee attacks should kill in 3 hits, taking 2 hits to fully drain a shield, and one after shield is drained to kill. Doing exactly 40% damage, when a player’s health is 60% Shields, and 40% health. Meaning that it is Impossible to kill in a single melee while shields are UP, however, meleeing a shield drained opponent ALWAYS finishes him off.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > To Clarify:
> > > >
> > > > Player is at 100% health.
> > > >
> > > > 60% is Shields, 40% is health.
> > > >
> > > > 1 Melee Attack deals 40% of that damage.
> > > >
> > > > This leaves the player with 20% Shields, and 40% health.
> > > >
> > > > 2 Melee Attacks deal 80% of that damage.
> > > >
> > > > This leaves the player with 0% Shields, and 20% Health.
> > > >
> > > > 3 Melees kill.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > IF a Player is at 1% Shield, and they are melee attacked, they will be left at 1% Health. IF a Player is at 0% Shields, and 40% Health, they will die.
> > >
> > > Yeah that might work – I just hate when you shot someone a few times and its still a 2 hit melee to kill them and its the same for them to kill me 2 hit melee…
> >
> > Or we could just ditch the Yoink!ing terrible health system of H2/H3/Reach and opt for a sensible system that could allow for either 2 or 3 hit melees.
> >
> > Option 1: 2HK Melee
> > Player is at 100%
> > 50% is Shields, 50% is Health
> >
> > Melee damage: 50%
> >
> > 1 First melee takes away shields leaving 0% shields, 50% health
> >
> > 2 Second melee kills however if a player has say 1% shield, 50% health than the melee will leave the player with 0% shields, 1% health
> >
> > This option removes the deathcharge(No dying from one melee with 3/4 shields) while still keeping up the pace of melee.
> >
> > Option 2: 3HK Melee(This time we will use fractions)
> > Player is at 6/6
> > 3/6 is Shields, 3/6 is Health
> >
> > Melee does 2/6 damage
> >
> > 1 first melee leaves the player with 1/6 shields, 3/6 health
> >
> > 2 Second melee leaves player with 0/6 shields, 2/6 Health
> >
> > 3 Third melee kills
> >
> > This option also removes deathcharge and gives weapons and even more prominent role in CQC.
>
> snip

You are missing the point I made. I can get behind a 3HK melee. But Melee will NEVER be properly balanced if we have an unbalanced health and Shield. 60/40 shield/health does nothing good for gameplay an we will never get a good melee system and don’t fixthe health system so that health and shields are equal. 50/50>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>60/40

102

If I shoot someone 2 or 3 times 1 melee should kill them / it should not be a even battle

103

Agreed with FUNZBOB. 2 HK is much faster gameplay.

Regarding the 50/50 health/shields - mind explaining why a 60/40 screws up balance?

104

Bleedthrough.

The problem with it in Reach was that people couldn’t adapt to it after having the game out for about a year. And so they complained, and complained, and complained until something was done.

105

Bleedthrough, the more they take from Halo 3 MM system the better imo.

106

> Bleedthrough, the more they take from Halo 3 MM system the better imo.

Very True Sir

107

Shield popping as is gives is great.
My problems are how slow reloading is and how slow it feels to swap to a lot of weapons.

I don’t believe shield popping would feel so bad to some players if they knew they could swap out to their PP or Magnum and reliably down the shields of a player for a melee kill/headshot on a sprinter attempting/ambusher who sprung their trap much too soon.

Something else for me, if the Sword gets to carve through melees, it should still receive damage from melees.

108

Bleedthrough. Because if i unload DMR into him while he sprints at me, and i have full sheilds but dont quite manage to take down his and we melee eachother, we shouldnt be left with the same health.

That is all.

109

> Bleedthrough. Because if i unload DMR into him while he sprints at me, and i have full sheilds but dont quite manage to take down his and we melee eachother, we shouldnt be left with the same health.
>
> That is all.

I hate that happening in Reach …

I don’t want that to happen in Halo 4.

110

> If I shoot someone 2 or 3 times 1 melee should kill them / it should not be a even battle

If the player has any shields at all then 1 melee to the front shouldn’t be a kill. Significant damage? Yes. Kill? No.

Like I said before it dumbs down the CQC gap considerably to have a H3 system of health/melee. Bleedthrough is good(and not specific to Halo 3), but everything else about the melee/health system is awful. It turns every non-headshot weapon into a CLUB.

Melee should work in service of the gunplay not the other way around. In Halo 3 every non-headshot weapon was in service to a melee. Nearly every CQC gunfight devolved into “how do I get enough shots to melee” instead of “how I should use melee to help me in the GUNFIGHT.”

111

> > If I shoot someone 2 or 3 times 1 melee should kill them / it should not be a even battle
>
> If the player has any shields at all then 1 melee to the front shouldn’t be a kill. Significant damage? Yes. Kill? No.
>
> Like I said before it dumbs down the CQC gap considerably to have a H3 system of health/melee. Bleedthrough is good(and not specific to Halo 3), but everything else about the melee/health system is awful. It turns every non-headshot weapon into a CLUB.
>
> Melee should work in service of the gunplay not the other way around. In Halo 3 every non-headshot weapon was in service to a melee. Nearly every CQC gunfight devolved into “how do I get enough shots to melee” instead of “how I should use melee to help me in the GUNFIGHT.”

The Club

112

Bleedthrough is necessary, it’s been a part of Halo for a long time and unlike many other things, it’s always been good and added to the game experience. Halo Reach showed us how awful a Halo game without bleedthrough is, and I doubt many would ever want to return to that, when they know what it means.