One SuggestedTweak for the next Plasma Pistol

Games Halo 5: Guardians
1

I have one simple suggestion for making the PP work in Halo 5. This suggestion applies to the Plasma Pistol as on-map ordinance or as a loadout option, I don’t really care. The objective is to make the PP a more skilled weapon against both infantry and the wide variety of vehicles.

Assumption: the biggest issue with prior Plasma Pistols is the 1 charge fits all opponents approach. It makes the gun OP as a loadout choice because it guarantees an EMP for infantry sized enemies and all classes of vehicles.

Proposed change: Charge time corresponds to charge power.

Here’s how it would work against the various types of enemies you might face. The way I see it, this would require more skill and timing when using the Plasma pistol. It makes it more difficult to strip infantry shields. It requires more forethought when using against vehicles, because each class of vehicle is affected differently.

1 second charge:
Infantry 25% shield reduction,
Ghost speed slows down, ROF slows down
Banshee minor loss of altitude, ROF slows down.
Warthog/Mantis/Wraith/Scorpion- no effects.

2 second charge:
Infantry 50% shield reduction; character movement slows down.
Ghost + Banshee speed stopped, ROF stopped for 2 seconds
Warthog speed slows down
Mantis/Wraith/Scorpion - minor shield damage (5-10%) and minimal loss of steering

3 second charge:
Infantry 100% shield reduction
Ghost + Banshee stopped, ROF stopped for 3 seconds
Mantis/Wraith/Scorpion - 25% reduction in shield, speed, and ROF.

4 second charge:
Mantis/Wraith/Scorpion - 50% reduction in shield, speed, and ROF for 2 seconds.
Shooter gets splash damage to their shield

5 second charge:
Mantis/Wraith/Scorpion- 75% reduction in shield, speed, and ROF for 3 seconds.
Shooter gets 25% splash damage to their shield

6+ second charge:
Mantis/Wraith/Scorpion - 100 Reduction in shield, speed, and ROF for 4 seconds
Shooter gets 50% splash damage to their shield

So what do you think? Can you fill in the gaps? Assuming perks don’t return to destroy vehicle combat again, I feel this could give the plasma pistol a much needed overhaul.

2

I appreciate what it is you’re trying to do here, but to be honest, the Plasma Pistol was perfectly fine the way it was as a map pickup in the older games. Sure, it was powerful against vehicles, but there were only a few of them on the map, so they couldn’t be spammed.

I say we just go back to that idea instead of making things over-complicated by trying to balance it out. Leave it as it is, stick it on the map, and everybody will be happy.

3

> The objective is to make the PP a more skilled weapon against both infantry and the wide variety of vehicles.

I would agree with your proposed changes if the problem that we see in Halo 4 has to do with the Plasma Pistol being OP or too easy to use. That’s not the problem in Halo 4, so your changes are unnecessary.

The problem we see in Halo 4 is that Plasma Pistols are overabundant. The solution to this problem is both simple and obvious: limit the number of Plasma Pistols in play. We can do this by making them map pickups only and putting only a few on a map.

4

The change is really unnecessary. Just put it on the map and bring it back to Reach levels of power.

As irritating as the plasma pistol is in Halo 4, it was still nerfed by loadouts and doesn’t need to be run into the ground any more.

5

I like the idea, OP! It is very unlikely that the multilayer for the next Halo game will be like Halo: 2 or Halo: 3; it’s actually a bit sad to see so many people still clinging to the past. I admit it; Halo: 2 and Halo: 3’s multilayer are great! I enjoy playing the game to secure power weapons and establish map control. However, we are now living in the “customization” era of FPS games. I would argue that it would not be beneficial for 343 Industries to introduce load-out customization and then simply back off from it in the next installment. If you look at the numbers from previous months, people do not play Team Throw-down or Legendary BRs as much as the other playlists. Yes, I am aware that the people who are not accepting of the new system have moved on now, but I’d argue that so have the people who do like the system; Halo: 4’s population drop is correlated to the amount of games out there. Back in the Halo: 2 and Halo: 3 era, there was not much competition for Halo installments. Anyway, assuming the next Halo installment is not Halo 2: Anniversary, removing load-out customization is not beneficial. I think the OP has brought a valid proposition to further balancing an overused weapon. It might not be perfect on paper or practice, but it’s a start.

6

it’s better as a map pickup, and is well-balanced as so.

It has the power of Neutralizing a vehicle is used correctly, but in halo, skill is not needed to use it correctly, because you can just insta-spawn back with anotehr plasma pistol.

Your idea is neat, but it’s unessesary

7

I’d prefer a powerful rapid fire like CE with the EMP, and a considerable and not laughable battery, then place 2-3 of them on a map.

8

I’d much like to see it return as an map pickup instead of a modified loadout weapon. As it stands, its biggest role is to EMP and stun vehicles. In Halo 3 and Reach, they were considered power weapons in their own right due to the fact that not only you can stop the enemy’s rampage in a vehicle, but you can have a chance of taking it without doing significant damage to it. This in turn allows that team to use it against them.

As a map pickup, it limits the frequency you are likely to run into such a problem. You are more than likely to see it on one person on the enemy team. It took skill(of varying degree depending on who you are playing against) to take the other team’s plasma pistol and extending more use against their vehicles. It acts as a dead zone in bases: Stick around too long, and your vehicle may be taken away or destroyed with ease.

In Halo 4, everywhere is a potential dead zone to vehicles, especially with how maps are designed. Killing a player doesn’t resolve the issue, as they come back with a fresh PP just to use against you again. Save for a few maps, there are plenty of places a person can hide out and emp you as you pass by. Not necessarily the maps’ fault, but with the over-abundance of PPs, its no wonder most vehicles you see are going to be a ghost, or a vehicle that will one shot you.

The Plasma Pistol isn’t the problem. The problem is that it is over-abundant. If 343’s answer to vehicle combat being a little too dominant is a problem, they should have made the Plasma Pistol spawn more frequently, instead of allowing everyone to spawn with it. This was something that can be done in Forge, and the results can easily be replicated in previous games simply by allowing everyone to spawn with it as a secondary weapon and watch as vehicle combat breaks apart.

Just put the gun back on the ground where it belongs, let it spawn a little more frequently, and the plasma pistol issue is solved. Do the same thing to Plasma Grenades. Make the frag grenades flip ghosts and warthogs again, and we got ourselves a much more balanced vehicle combat.

9

> I like the idea, OP! It is very unlikely that the multilayer for the next Halo game will be like Halo: 2 or Halo: 3; it’s actually a bit sad to see so many people still clinging to the past. I admit it; Halo: 2 and Halo: 3’s multilayer are great! I enjoy playing the game to secure power weapons and establish map control. However, we are now living in the “customization” era of FPS games. I would argue that it would not be beneficial for 343 Industries to introduce load-out customization and then simply back off from it in the next installment. If you look at the numbers from previous months, people do not play Team Throw-down or Legendary BRs as much as the other playlists. Yes, I am aware that the people who are not accepting of the new system have moved on now, but I’d argue that so have the people who do like the system; Halo: 4’s population drop is correlated to the amount of games out there. Back in the Halo: 2 and Halo: 3 era, there was not much competition for Halo installments. Anyway, assuming the next Halo installment is not Halo 2: Anniversary, removing load-out customization is not beneficial. I think the OP has brought a valid proposition to further balancing an overused weapon. It might not be perfect on paper or practice, but it’s a start.

Change isn’t always good, you know. Many of us who “cling to the past” do so because the previous games worked better. 343 could certainly have added great things that worked; instead they chose to radically change core features which have worked for years. Are we supposed to just shrug off ALL the people we lost and continue on in the same direction that got us here? That doesn’t seem smart for the franchise’s sake. And, as for this:

> Halo: 4’s population drop is correlated to the amount of games out there. Back in the Halo: 2 and Halo: 3 era, there was not much competition for Halo installments.

I feel it isn’t quite fair to say that. It holds some truth, but the last Halo game that swelled in population numbers and stayed close to the original formula was in 2007. After that we had Reach, the beginning of the drastic changes we have now. I’d at least like to see how the older gameplay would last in today’s competition first before following that conclusion.

10

> I like the idea, OP! It is very unlikely that the multilayer for the next Halo game will be like Halo: 2 or Halo: 3; it’s actually a bit sad to see so many people still clinging to the past. I admit it; Halo: 2 and Halo: 3’s multilayer are great! I enjoy playing the game to secure power weapons and establish map control. However, we are now living in the “customization” era of FPS games. I would argue that it would not be beneficial for 343 Industries to introduce load-out customization and then simply back off from it in the next installment. If you look at the numbers from previous months, people do not play Team Throw-down or Legendary BRs as much as the other playlists. Yes, I am aware that the people who are not accepting of the new system have moved on now, but I’d argue that so have the people who do like the system; Halo: 4’s population drop is correlated to the amount of games out there. <mark>Back in the Halo: 2 and Halo: 3 era, there was not much competition for Halo installments.</mark> Anyway, assuming the next Halo installment is not Halo 2: Anniversary, removing load-out customization is not beneficial. I think the OP has brought a valid proposition to further balancing an overused weapon. It might not be perfect on paper or practice, but it’s a start.

This is utterly false. Halo at the time of Halo 2 was a relatively new arena shooter on the market that was battling against Unreal, Quake, and a plethora of shooters on the PC and not to mention you had things like The Elder Scrolls III: Morrowind storming the console by force.

In the Halo 3 era the rise of CoD came about with the revolutionary MW, and Battlefield BC, Oblivion, Prey, and other popular titles that slip my mind. Halo has never had it easy, they’ve just outdone everyone until about the end days of Halo 3, with a slight revival at Reach’s launch.

11

I like what you’re trying to do but like what others have already have said the PP needs to be a map pick up simply because it has the power to EMP vehicles, there’s no way around that fact.

However! The PP serves an important purpose in load outs and whether or not it’s the PP that does it in Halo 5 that purpose will none the less need to be filled.

The PP’s purpose in load outs is of course an enemy weakener. While automatics have the Magnum to compensate for long and the long range rifles have the Bolt shot (or possibly the PR and SMG)to compensate for CQC the medium range rifles don’t really need range compensation but what they do need is damage compensation.

While the medium range rifles are useful at almost any range that would be reasonable for a load out weapon they’re not going to be as powerful as an AR in CQC or a DMR in long range so they need a weapon like the PP that can be designed to quickly weaken an opponent so that the playing field is evened out a bit.

Anyways explanations aside the PP has a purpose in load outs that must be filled. So it’s either we get a replacement enemy weakener or we re do the PP to work with load outs.

Personally I think the CE PP is the best possible option, it’d still have it’s shield draining ability but in the form of a charged bolt that sticks to the target causing continuous damage but no EMP. It’ll keep it’s enemy weakener trait while also eliminating it’s effects on vehicle game play.

Plus I think that EMP weapons should be their own class of power weapon to go along side CQC weapons, sniper rifles, grenade launchers etc. They should still have the ability to kill an opponent rather easily but the EMP should be the main focus of these types of weapons. I guess you could throw the PP into this category if it isn’t brought back to the CE version and placed on the map but I’m not too sure if treating the PP like a full fledged power weapon is the right thing to do. All my own opinion of course.

There’s also the option of of having the PP replaced with a new enemy weakener side arm. Maybe that Forerunner lazer pistol that was cut could serve this purpose or maybe bring back the Sentinel beam but have it more focused on weakening opponents over actually killing them, I also had an idea for Flame pistol a while back that could fill this purpose too. Anybody got any better ideas?

12

We shouldn’t have to nerf weapons so the load out system will work. Remove the loadouts and put it back on the map.

13

I do completely agree with everyone saying to put it back as a power weapon. Everyone has one on them in Halo 4 and it’s crazy in BTB. I have a short video here where I talk about it if anyone wants to see. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cPAvL_HZa7E&list=UUE8RmBcTaEkV-49HrDbqJyA