Please Bring Back The Halo 3 Magnum

Games Other Halo
161

> > > > Halo 3 Magnum would just be adding in a weak weapon, which would defy the laws of Halo’s upper standard of balance. We don’t need weapons that are “good clean up” weapons. We need weapons that make people want to use them for the advantages they have.
> > >
> > > Why do you people not listen to what I’m saying? It does have advantages! It can be dual wielded and kill anywhere from 1-4 shots depending on what you use it with. You can beat a BR in close quarters if you are good and dual wield it. The Magnum can pick off targets at distances that your other weapons can’t.
> >
> > The inherent problems with this:
> > 1. To do well, the gun relies upon a mechanic that becomes the root cause of the weakness
> > 2. Unless there is enough opportunity for it, no one would consider carrying it without the mechanic in place and it would become one of “those” weapons that the player would typically drop without a second thought.
> > 3. Another weapon (BR, DMR, whatever Rifle we get next) does its job better and has its niche infringed upon.
> >
> > Players need a reason beyond “We might be able to make use of a mechanic that actually makes it somewhat decent to use!” to pick it up and hold it for a period of time, because that’s not reason enough.
>
> You’re referring to dual wielding, correct? You’re also ignoring the other half of what I’m saying, correct?
>
> Countless times, I’ve stated that it is very good by itself. It can beat an Assault Rifle single wield. It is also good for hitting targets your other gun can’t. The BR obviously beats it because it is a BR. An all-purpose weapon. Do you really think that a Magnum by itself should really be able to beat a giant rifle that can do anything? Not to mention the BR is slightly overpowered but that’s another argument that doesn’t have to do with this one.

Yes, I DO the believe the Magnum should be able to beat the BR in a certain situation. If it can’t, then why have it? You’re missing the issue on the balance of the sandbox. If there isn’t a certain point where it can beat the BR at something or some range, then it’s pointless to have it. This is because Halo’s sandbox revolves around the utility. The point of the utility is to have a strong starter weapon that can be used as the workhorse for a player right off of the spawn. the point of the rest of the sandbox is to provide supplements for said utility’s/utilities’ faults and thereby become proficient in a certain set of scenarios. However, if the utilities can do the job of a weapon better than it, then it becomes a weak/pointless weapon and hsouldn’t be in the sandbox.

More often than not, the Magnum loses out to the AR. Only at a longer range does the Magnum persevere, but this role is easily usurped by the BR, and therefore makes the Magnum a throwaway weapon. The lack of a scope, lower damage and a larger reticule than the BR is what makes it much lesser than the BR, and duel-wielding can’t supplement these faults enough to warrant its place in a player’s arsenal.

I also laugh at the “Well of course the Rifle beats the Pistol!” argument. Such a “law” has no place in a competitive game where balance is the key. So the options are: they follow that “law” and make the Magnum weaker than the “main” utility (which I hope is a non-existent weapon in Halo 4) thus making it a pointless weapon, they follow that “law” but drop it from the game to promote balance and total use of the sandbox, or they disregard such an idiotic notion and simply make the gun worth using and able to defeat the “main” utility in a certain set of scenarios.

I’m going to guess which option 343i will take and say it’s the latter option, because that makes the most sense, especially considering that they have openly said that their goal is to promote sandbox variety by making every weapon worth using in certain combat areas and scenarios.

162

halo 3 had a pistol? I thought the only pistol was the plasma pistol.

163

> halo 3 had a pistol? I thought the only pistol was the plasma pistol.

I caught a glimpse of it once, but I had a BR in my hands in the next second and it was gone from my inventory.

164

> > > > > Halo 3 Magnum would just be adding in a weak weapon, which would defy the laws of Halo’s upper standard of balance. We don’t need weapons that are “good clean up” weapons. We need weapons that make people want to use them for the advantages they have.
> > > >
> > > > Why do you people not listen to what I’m saying? It does have advantages! It can be dual wielded and kill anywhere from 1-4 shots depending on what you use it with. You can beat a BR in close quarters if you are good and dual wield it. The Magnum can pick off targets at distances that your other weapons can’t.
> > >
> > > The inherent problems with this:
> > > 1. To do well, the gun relies upon a mechanic that becomes the root cause of the weakness
> > > 2. Unless there is enough opportunity for it, no one would consider carrying it without the mechanic in place and it would become one of “those” weapons that the player would typically drop without a second thought.
> > > 3. Another weapon (BR, DMR, whatever Rifle we get next) does its job better and has its niche infringed upon.
> > >
> > > Players need a reason beyond “We might be able to make use of a mechanic that actually makes it somewhat decent to use!” to pick it up and hold it for a period of time, because that’s not reason enough.
> >
> > You’re referring to dual wielding, correct? You’re also ignoring the other half of what I’m saying, correct?
> >
> > Countless times, I’ve stated that it is very good by itself. It can beat an Assault Rifle single wield. It is also good for hitting targets your other gun can’t. The BR obviously beats it because it is a BR. An all-purpose weapon. Do you really think that a Magnum by itself should really be able to beat a giant rifle that can do anything? Not to mention the BR is slightly overpowered but that’s another argument that doesn’t have to do with this one.
>
> Yes, I DO the believe the Magnum should be able to beat the BR in a certain situation. If it can’t, then why have it? You’re missing the issue on the balance of the sandbox. If there isn’t a certain point where it can beat the BR at something or some range, then it’s pointless to have it. This is because Halo’s sandbox revolves around the utility. The point of the utility is to have a strong starter weapon that can be used as the workhorse for a player right off of the spawn. the point of the rest of the sandbox is to provide supplements for said utility’s/utilities’ faults and thereby become proficient in a certain set of scenarios. However, if the utilities can do the job of a weapon better than it, then it becomes a weak/pointless weapon and hsouldn’t be in the sandbox.
>
> More often than not, the Magnum loses out to the AR. Only at a longer range does the Magnum persevere, but this role is easily usurped by the BR, and therefore makes the Magnum a throwaway weapon. The lack of a scope, lower damage and a larger reticule than the BR is what makes it much lesser than the BR, and duel-wielding can’t supplement these faults enough to warrant its place in a player’s arsenal.
>
> I also laugh at the “Well of course the Rifle beats the Pistol!” argument. Such a “law” has no place in a competitive game where balance is the key. So the options are: they follow that “law” and make the Magnum weaker than the “main” utility (which I hope is a non-existent weapon in Halo 4) thus making it a pointless weapon, they follow that “law” but drop it from the game to promote balance and total use of the sandbox, or they disregard such an idiotic notion and simply make the gun worth using and able to defeat the “main” utility in a certain set of scenarios.
>
> I’m going to guess which option 343i will take and say it’s the latter option, because that makes the most sense, especially considering that they have openly said that their goal is to promote sandbox variety by making every weapon worth using in certain combat areas and scenarios.

First off, the BR is just another weapon in the sandbox, it doesn’t revolve around it. The BR is currently overpowered because it beats all weapons in their niche area, however that is another discussion.

The only time you’re really supposed to pick up the Magnum is for dual wielding. The Magnum is a weaker BR. They’re both supposed to get headshots and be accurate. They are both supposed to have less range. The Magnum is great against other weapons (even power weapons. I’ve taken out snipers with it because I made them unscope while I got closer to them). It’s strength is from dual wielding, accuracy, and range. Not all 3 must be combined for it to be good, but those are its advantages. Dual wield and you can beat the BR. Single wield it can beat many other things. The Magnum is a weapon which strength come from intelligence. Dual wield with a Plasma Pistol for a noob combo but careful not to miss. SMG, Spiker, and Plasma Rifle all kill in 3 shots if you hit the head. Another Magnum makes it 4 shot like the BR. If you’re good, you can kill him faster than he can kill you. That’s where the main power comes from, adapting the weapon to the situation you’re in and based on your skills and preferences. It can hold its own against most weapons by itself, but is better for dual wielding.

165

Keep trying, Magnum sucked. I give you 2/10

166

> Keep trying, Magnum sucked. I give you 2/10

Keep trying, your attempt at being insulting and somewhat funny sucked. I give you 1/10.

167

> First off, the BR is just another weapon in the sandbox, it doesn’t revolve around it. The BR is currently overpowered because it beats all weapons in their niche area, however that is another discussion.

Wrong entirely, but ‘that is another discussion.’

> The only time you’re really supposed to pick up the Magnum is for dual wielding.

Then, again, the only reason it’s weak is to promote a mechanic that isn’t readily available to use, anyway. In essence, it’s still weak.

> The Magnum is a weaker BR. They’re both supposed to get headshots and be accurate. They are both supposed to have less range. The Magnum is great against other weapons (even power weapons. I’ve taken out snipers with it because I made them unscope while I got closer to them).

You just told me why the Halo 3 magnum shouldn’t be in the game. It’s a “weaker BR.” If that’s the case, then it has no place in a game that is to promote sandbox balance and variety if another weapon overcomes its strengths entirely.

> Its strength is from dual wielding, accuracy, and range. Not all 3 must be combined for it to be good, but those are its advantages. Dual wield and you can beat the BR. Single wield it can beat many other things.

I guaruntee you the BR beats it on all accounts, even when dual-wielded. Both the scope and the burst make it a much better choice for a 4sk weapon.

> The Magnum is a weapon which strength comes from intelligence.

I fail to see how. Intelligence doesn’t supplement the lack of a scope, the weaker strength, and the larger reticule.

> Dual wield with a Plasma Pistol for a noob combo but careful not to miss. SMG, Spiker, and Plasma Rifle all kill in 3 shots if you hit the head.

that, again, promotes a mechanic where the weapon needs it in order to do well.

> Another Magnum makes it 4 shot like the BR. If you’re good, you can kill him faster than he can kill you.

The Magnum only becomes a 4sk assuming you fired both Magnums simultaneously and land every hit. This is because dual-wielding actually weakens both weapons so that having two weapons isn’t totally overpowered.

> That’s where the main power comes from, adapting the weapon to the situation you’re in and based on your skills and preferences. It can hold its own against most weapons by itself, but is better for dual wielding.

Except it’s not a very adaptable weapon. The larger reticule, and thus a larger spread, makes it difficult to land a shot at longer range. The low RoF and low damage per shot make it unusable in short range (and it usually requires a bash to supplement it). The only range it is truly effective in is Mid range, which gives it a pseudo-adaptability, and even then it’s just beat out by the BR, even with dual-wielding, due to a tighter spread, a scope, and a higher damage per pull of the trigger (BR, 18 per burst. Magnum, 15 per shot). If dual-wielding is required for it to do decently against the BR, than the base weapon is still bad because it relies too much upon a mechanic that isn’t readily available for use right off the spawn for it to excel it its target niche.

168

This is a tricky topic. The Reach pistol was pretty balanced, in my opinion. It wasn’t as powerful as the CE pistol, but had a scope and could outdo the AR in most situations, especially since at close-range you can spam the trigger with more accuracy. But, to bring back the Halo 3 or Halo 2 pistols would demand the return of dual-wielding, and I’m on the fence about that.

On one hand, dual-wielding added a lot of spice to normal situations, and added a (perhaps hollow) layer of versatility to dual-wieldable weapons, but dual-wielding as a mechanic, so far in the Halo series, has only served to weaken dual-wieldable weapons when used by themselves.

Reach really balanced all of the weapons; now in Reach, every weapon is useful by itself. I fear that the advent of dual-wielding in Halo 4 would only reintegrate the balance problems with dual-wieldable weapons.

Therefore, I believe that the Halo series should stick to the scoped, Reach/TU pistols.

169

> This is a tricky topic. The Reach pistol was pretty balanced, in my opinion. It wasn’t as powerful as the CE pistol, but had a scope and could outdo the AR in most situations, especially since at close-range you can spam the trigger with more accuracy. But, to bring back the Halo 3 or Halo 2 pistols would demand the return of dual-wielding, and I’m on the fence about that.
>
> On one hand, dual-wielding added a lot of spice to normal situations, and added a (perhaps hollow) layer of versatility to dual-wieldable weapons, but dual-wielding as a mechanic, so far in the Halo series, has only served to weaken dual-wieldable weapons when used by themselves.
>
> Reach really balanced all of the weapons; now in Reach, every weapon is useful by itself. I fear that the advent of dual-wielding in Halo 4 would only reintegrate the balance problems with dual-wieldable weapons.
>
> Therefore, I believe that the Halo series should stick to the scoped, Reach/TU pistols.

There is away we can have both the Reach/TU and the Halo 3 Pistol, make the pistol so you can dual wield, but can’t use the scopes on the pistols when holding two. When you’re wielding one pistol, you can use the scope, but if you pick up an extra pistol, you can’t use the scope.

170

I have to agree. I felt the pistol was really balanced in Halo 3 and dual-wielding pistols = omg!

171

Halo Reach Beta Magnum > Halo CE Magnum

It’s true.

172

> Halo Reach Beta Magnum > Halo CE Magnum
>
> It’s true.

Or not.

173

> Halo Reach Beta Magnum > Halo CE Magnum
>
> It’s true.

I wouldn’t go that far, but it certainly was good. Reach’s magnum makes AR starts a little more tolerable in this game.

174

> > First off, the BR is just another weapon in the sandbox, it doesn’t revolve around it. The BR is currently overpowered because it beats all weapons in their niche area, however that is another discussion.
>
> Wrong entirely, but ‘that is another discussion.’
>
>
>
> > The only time you’re really supposed to pick up the Magnum is for dual wielding.
>
> Then, again, the only reason it’s weak is to promote a mechanic that isn’t readily available to use, anyway. In essence, it’s still weak.
>
>
> > The Magnum is a weaker BR. They’re both supposed to get headshots and be accurate. They are both supposed to have less range. The Magnum is great against other weapons (even power weapons. I’ve taken out snipers with it because I made them unscope while I got closer to them).
>
> You just told me why the Halo 3 magnum shouldn’t be in the game. It’s a “weaker BR.” If that’s the case, then it has no place in a game that is to promote sandbox balance and variety if another weapon overcomes its strengths entirely.
>
>
> > Its strength is from dual wielding, accuracy, and range. Not all 3 must be combined for it to be good, but those are its advantages. Dual wield and you can beat the BR. Single wield it can beat many other things.
>
> I guaruntee you the BR beats it on all accounts, even when dual-wielded. Both the scope and the burst make it a much better choice for a 4sk weapon.
>
> > The Magnum is a weapon which strength comes from intelligence.
>
> I fail to see how. Intelligence doesn’t supplement the lack of a scope, the weaker strength, and the larger reticule.
>
> > Dual wield with a Plasma Pistol for a noob combo but careful not to miss. SMG, Spiker, and Plasma Rifle all kill in 3 shots if you hit the head.
>
> that, again, promotes a mechanic where the weapon needs it in order to do well.
>
> > Another Magnum makes it 4 shot like the BR. If you’re good, you can kill him faster than he can kill you.
>
> The Magnum only becomes a 4sk assuming you fired both Magnums simultaneously and land every hit. This is because dual-wielding actually weakens both weapons so that having two weapons isn’t totally overpowered.
>
> > That’s where the main power comes from, adapting the weapon to the situation you’re in and based on your skills and preferences. It can hold its own against most weapons by itself, but is better for dual wielding.
>
> Except it’s not a very adaptable weapon. The larger reticule, and thus a larger spread, makes it difficult to land a shot at longer range. The low RoF and low damage per shot make it unusable in short range (and it usually requires a bash to supplement it). The only range it is truly effective in is Mid range, which gives it a pseudo-adaptability, and even then it’s just beat out by the BR, even with dual-wielding, due to a tighter spread, a scope, and a higher damage per pull of the trigger (BR, 18 per burst. Magnum, 15 per shot). If dual-wielding is required for it to do decently against the BR, than the base weapon is still bad because it relies too much upon a mechanic that isn’t readily available for use right off the spawn for it to excel it its target niche.

You know, I can see that this isn’t going anywhere so I’m just going to end this here.

175

> This is a tricky topic. The Reach pistol was pretty balanced, in my opinion. It wasn’t as powerful as the CE pistol, but had a scope and could outdo the AR in most situations, especially since at close-range you can spam the trigger with more accuracy. But, to bring back the Halo 3 or Halo 2 pistols would demand the return of dual-wielding, and I’m on the fence about that.
>
> On one hand, dual-wielding added a lot of spice to normal situations, and added a (perhaps hollow) layer of versatility to dual-wieldable weapons, but dual-wielding as a mechanic, so far in the Halo series, has only served to weaken dual-wieldable weapons when used by themselves.
>
> Reach really balanced all of the weapons; now in Reach, every weapon is useful by itself. I fear that the advent of dual-wielding in Halo 4 would only reintegrate the balance problems with dual-wieldable weapons.
>
> Therefore, I believe that the Halo series should stick to the scoped, Reach/TU pistols.

Problem with that is that all the weapons in Halo 3 were balanced and useful on their own or with dual wielding. The SMG beat the AR in close quarters, the Plasma Rifle did bonus shield damage so you could win melee battles and didn’t need reloading, the Spiker did bonus melee and health damage, Plasma Pistol… Melee and noob combos I guess? The Mauler? Corner camping and mauling dudes.

Nobody ever really used those weapons because the people got all try-hard and m1g Pr0 or something and only used BRs.

176

I think a combo of the halo reach and halo 3 magnum. The halo 3 magnum needs to be less clunky and be around the accuracy and speed of halo reach pistol. Also a quick drawing weapon, so you can, when your AR runs out of ammo, quickly change and finish him with a headshot. Trust me, that was fun. But yeah, not quite as accurate as Halo Reach (otherwise you can snipe with it) but more accurate than halo 3.

And dual wielding was a very good tactical aspect for halo, it must be back for halo 4.

177

> > Well this may be your opinion, but honestly, I doubt most of the community will want 343 to actually do this. The CE pistol is loved by almost all Halo fans.
>
> Doubt that’s going to happen because 343 even said that the Magnum is “wildly overpowered.”

It’s unfortunate that 343 doesn’t understand Halo.

178

> > > Well this may be your opinion, but honestly, I doubt most of the community will want 343 to actually do this. The CE pistol is loved by almost all Halo fans.
> >
> > Doubt that’s going to happen because 343 even said that the Magnum is “wildly overpowered.”
>
> It’s unfortunate that 343 doesn’t understand Halo.

They’re right; it is.

179

Bring back the H2 M6C magnum. The pre-patch magnum, when duel-wielded, was an absolute beast. I used to love wrecking banshees and warthogs with those little guns.

181

> > And don’t think people can do good with the Magnum?
> > Proof 1
> > Proof 2
> > Proof 3
>
> You can’t call that proof nor would 3 games by 1 player ever be enough proof to cause a complete change in something. You were either playing against new-players that lack thumbs or de-rankers/boosters. I’m sure anyone with half a brain cell could do perfectly fine by cooking those people with plasma pistols.
>
>
> Also, I would hope that Halo 4 reintroduces dual-wielding so they would HAVE to implement the older pistols if they were able to be dual wielded: aka the ones that are crappy on their own.

They are far from crappy on their own.