put zero bloom on all precision weapons

Games Other Halo
1

343i originally claimed they wanted to implement 85% bloom to make precision weapons reliable at long range.

This was a good idea.

However, by decreasing bloom they have essentially buffed the DMR in every respect,not just its effectiveness at long range, which I don’t think is necessary.

A better way to handle precision weapons would be to make them Zero Bloom, and give them a slower rate of fire.

At 85% bloom, it is still possible to spam in close quarters because the rate of fire hasn’t been changed. In close quarters, precision weapons with bloom fire too fast and are not adequately counterbalanced by decreased accuracy.

In short, decreasing bloom was a universal buff to the DMR. Instead, the DMR should have been buffed only at long range. To do this, make it Zero Bloom but give it the rate of fire equal to the time it would take a player to fire off shots at complete accuracy with an 85% bloom weapon.

ZB precision weapons with a rate of fire balance mean they are very good at long range, and potentially good at close range but only if you have mastered them.

2

I’ve been suggesting something like this for a while. But to 85% bloom for the DMR and closer to 100 for the other two. But naturally we will likely get the “Precision weapons are supposed to be horribly OP” treatment from the competitive community. I wouldn’t be surprised if they wanted the AR to be a potato gun at this point.

3

Increase the bloom rate to 115%.

4

> Increase the bloom rate to 115%.

Let’s have 4v4 games have a 100 score limit and a time of 1 hour, too.

5

> > Increase the bloom rate to 115%.
>
> Let’s have 4v4 games have a 100 score limit and a time of 1 hour, too.

If you want. Although getting to 100 will take about 15 minutes.

6

> > Increase the bloom rate to 115%.
>
> Let’s have 4v4 games have a 100 score limit and a time of 1 hour, too.

Really pointless post.

OP i agree that 85% has been an unwarranted buff for the DMR, but the solution is NOT to just throw ZB into everything. ZB DMR is an acquired taste at best, and the sandbox would probably better be served by reducing DMR usefulness at short range and increasing the importance of aiming the gun properly and taking measure shots at your enemy, like with the 115% bloom idea.

Anther idea i had was to make it so that the DMR CANNOT headshot someone at all if the bloom is past a certain threshold, say just the radius of the “outer” reticle, that would probably be enough. This means that you can spam shield off if you want, but it will be totally impossible to spam a headshot on someone, and if you want the headshot then everyone is gonna have to slow their roll and actually aim for it.

This might work but it may also feel somewhat artificial. Then again, i cant imagine it would feel any worse than getting spammed in the head.

Honestly this is just about the only sandbox adjustment i would support from default Reach.

7

I agree to lower the DMR rate of fire and implement ZB.

8

> Anther idea i had was to make it so that the DMR CANNOT headshot someone at all if the bloom is past a certain threshold, say just the radius of the “outer” reticle, that would probably be enough. This means that you can spam shield off if you want, but it will be totally impossible to spam a headshot on someone, and if you want the headshot then everyone is gonna have to slow their roll and actually aim for it.

I’ve been saying that all the time. I’ve also suggested that you can’t achieve headshots without being zoomed in.

9

> > Anther idea i had was to make it so that the DMR CANNOT headshot someone at all if the bloom is past a certain threshold, say just the radius of the “outer” reticle, that would probably be enough. This means that you can spam shield off if you want, but it will be totally impossible to spam a headshot on someone, and if you want the headshot then everyone is gonna have to slow their roll and actually aim for it.
>
> I’ve been saying that all the time. I’ve also suggested that you can’t achieve headshots without being zoomed in.

Ah well perhaps thats where i got the idea from lol.

10

> I agree to lower the DMR rate of fire and implement ZB.

But you can already do this…just stop spamming the trigger and shoot properly. Its been this way since launch. Your basically arguing for 343i to hold your hand while your shooting your rifle!

ARRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGHH!

11

> Increase the bloom rate to 115%.

i want to try this, actually. hopefully with evade starts also :smiley:

if it raises the kill times too much it would be horrible, however. the kill times are already slow enough in default reach.

ZB DMR with a 4 shot kill and 1.6 second kill time would be awesome. the current DMR shoots too fast for my liking. it feels ‘rushed’ when you are shooting. i prefer less shots / second but more damage, personally.

12

> > I agree to lower the DMR rate of fire and implement ZB.
>
> But you can already do this…just stop spamming the trigger and shoot properly. Its been this way since launch. Your basically arguing for 343i to hold your hand while your shooting your rifle!
>
> ARRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGHH!

And you want Bungie to hold your hand while you get an extra half second to aim, or run away, or make a sandwich between shots.

13

Edit: That was rather mean of me lol.

Eh don’t expect ZB to gain much momentum outside of the hardcore crowd. It’s good settings that i like but 85 is probably going to be used more often.

14

> the sandbox would probably better be served by reducing DMR usefulness at short range and increasing the importance of aiming the gun properly and taking measure shots at your enemy, like with the 115% bloom idea.
>
> Anther idea i had was to make it so that the DMR CANNOT headshot someone at all if the bloom is past a certain threshold, say just the radius of the “outer” reticle, that would probably be enough. This means that you can spam shield off if you want, but it will be totally impossible to spam a headshot on someone, and if you want the headshot then everyone is gonna have to slow their roll and actually aim for it.
>
> This might work but it may also feel somewhat artificial. Then again, i cant imagine it would feel any worse than getting spammed in the head.
>
> Honestly this is just about the only sandbox adjustment i would support from default Reach.

115% bloom is an interesting idea. From what I am understanding from it, it sounds like it will make a headshot monumentally difficult after your first shot unless you slow down and aim.

This would make the DMR far less effective at close range, but I have a serious reservation about using this method rather than a Zero Bloom with a Rate of Fire implementation.

115% bloom will not lessen the rate of fire of the DMR, but it will severely lengthen the time required to line up a killing headshot.

115% bloom sounds good to stop a player from spamming headshots in close quarters, but I think it will do something else that would be very frustrating.

For Example:

Your teammate has put some shots into a player who then turns and sprints away to avoid dying. You are in a position to cut the sprinting enemy off. The enemy needs a shot to his shields and a headshot to die. You squeeze off a round and hit him so that his shields are low enough, you need only to score a headshot to kill him. You see the sprinting enemy running for a nearby doorway to escape, but you cannot score another headshot because you’re DMR is still recovering from its bloom and is too inaccurate. You spam shots into his body, but his health absorbs it and he escapes.
Tragedy!

115% bloom does not lower the rate of fire of the DMR, but it does increase the amount of time you have to wait to hit a headshot after a previous shot. Players will most likely respond to this by using the high rate of fire to spam down shields, recover, then line up the killing headshot.

This is a big problem though because:

115% bloom is too severe a rate of fire nerf for headshots, especially when players are using sprint on maps like countdown and you have far less time to line up the killing headshot. With Zero Bloom and a slight rate of fire nerf (one that forces the player to use the 85% bloom recovery time rather than giving him the choice to spam out shots faster) you don’t need to wait longer after a shot to line up a killing headshot. Every shot is potentially the killshot with how accurate it is, and is effectively counterbalanced by rate of fire. You will then be able to kill off those wounded, sprinting soldiers with great relish.

15

> > the sandbox would probably better be served by reducing DMR usefulness at short range and increasing the importance of aiming the gun properly and taking measure shots at your enemy, like with the 115% bloom idea.
> >
> > Anther idea i had was to make it so that the DMR CANNOT headshot someone at all if the bloom is past a certain threshold, say just the radius of the “outer” reticle, that would probably be enough. This means that you can spam shield off if you want, but it will be totally impossible to spam a headshot on someone, and if you want the headshot then everyone is gonna have to slow their roll and actually aim for it.
> >
> > This might work but it may also feel somewhat artificial. Then again, i cant imagine it would feel any worse than getting spammed in the head.
> >
> > Honestly this is just about the only sandbox adjustment i would support from default Reach.
>
> 115% bloom is an interesting idea. From what I am understanding from it, it sounds like it will make a headshot monumentally difficult after your first shot unless you slow down and aim.
>
> This would make the DMR far less effective at close range, but I have a serious reservation about using this method rather than a Zero Bloom with a Rate of Fire implementation.
>
> 115% bloom will not lessen the rate of fire of the DMR, but it will severely lengthen the time required to line up a killing headshot.
>
> 115% bloom sounds good to stop a player from spamming headshots in close quarters, but I think it will do something else that would be very frustrating.
>
> For Example:
>
> Your teammate has put some shots into a player who then turns and sprints away to avoid dying. You are in a position to cut the sprinting enemy off. The enemy needs a shot to his shields and a headshot to die. You squeeze off a round and hit him so that his shields are low enough, you need only to score a headshot to kill him. You see the sprinting enemy running for a nearby doorway to escape, but you cannot score another headshot because you’re DMR is still recovering from its bloom and is too inaccurate. You spam shots into his body, but his health absorbs it and he escapes.
> Tragedy!
>
> 115% bloom does not lower the rate of fire of the DMR, but it does increase the amount of time you have to wait to hit a headshot after a previous shot. Players will most likely respond to this by using the high rate of fire to spam down shields, recover, then line up the killing headshot.
>
> This is a big problem though because:
>
> 115% bloom is too severe a rate of fire nerf for headshots, especially when players are using sprint on maps like countdown and you have far less time to line up the killing headshot. With Zero Bloom and a slight rate of fire nerf (one that forces the player to use the 85% bloom recovery time rather than giving him the choice to spam out shots faster) you don’t need to wait longer after a shot to line up a killing headshot. Every shot is potentially the killshot with how accurate it is, and is effectively counterbalanced by rate of fire. You will then be able to kill off those wounded, sprinting soldiers with great relish.

Good points. I should have been more clear, my full proposal is 115% bloom (IE same adjustment as 85% but in the opposite direction) PLUS a slightly faster reticle reset time, so that overall reticle reset time remains about the same as in 100% bloom (or even faster than normal, who knows, it would need playtesting). I agree with you that the game would not be served by slowing down headshots from default. Badly punished for spamming, but quickly forgiven when you start pacing, thats the aim here.

I think this is overall superior to the ZB + lower rate of fire method, because that method can already be wholly emulated by just firing slower with the existing system. Which means forcing it on everyone would only serve to remove a tactical option from battle, namely last-ditch spamming someones shield off close range and then melee. No way you could do that with ZB + lower ROF. Of course that last ditch-spamming really shouldnt result in a headshot for you the VAST majority of the time, it should be an emergency measure when youre in a tight spot and likely to die anyway. Thats the rationale behind 115% bloom + faster reset, to make fluky headshots quite unlikely whilst not unduly slowing the pace of the game or allowing people to stroll out of view while youre waiting like you described.

16

We all know they are not going to lower the ROF. It is nice to talk about though, gives 343 insight.

The ZB ROF does feel rushed, and kinda sloppy. But it is 1000x better than 100 or 85. At least in ZB the better player with better aim wins(assuming you are not playing laggy opponents)

I am not against bloom, just its implementation in Reach.
For 115% to work you would need a 4SK DMR, and NO STRAFE ACCELERATION. With such slow movement speeds, combined with having to pace, anybody will be able to aim a shot given those variables. The skill gap would stay the same or even get worse.

17

This coveted “skill gap” is not the be all and end all of a game like you seem to imply. I think youll find that when a studio makes a game, it is fun which fills that category. The fun factor completely drives game design. The vast majority of people already playing Reach do so because it is fun for them…or they wouldnt be playing it. Well, apart from the section of the community which claims to hate Reachs guts yet still plays it all the time, which confounds me.

And the rest of that post really is describing a different game to Halo all-together. Even CE had substantial movement inertia yet that is still held up as some magnum opus. Honestly what your describing sounds a lot like quake arcade to me, go and download it from XBLA and see what you think. I dont see any reason why competitive people wouldnt prefer it over Reach tbh.

18

Basically what I’m taking away from this thread is that there are many theoretical options to attempting to fix the problems with bloom, and 343i picked the one that doesn’t really help the overall balance.

19

> This coveted “skill gap” is not the be all and end all of a game like you seem to imply. I think youll find that when a studio makes a game, it is fun which fills that category. The fun factor completely drives game design. The vast majority of people already playing Reach do so because it is fun for them…or they wouldnt be playing it. Well, apart from the section of the community which claims to hate Reachs guts yet still plays it all the time, which confounds me.
>
> And the rest of that post really is describing a different game to Halo all-together. Even CE had substantial movement inertia yet that is still held up as some magnum opus. Honestly what your describing sounds a lot like quake arcade to me, go and download it from XBLA and see what you think. I dont see any reason why competitive people wouldnt prefer it over Reach tbh.

God forbid someone find a big skill gap fun, right?

20

God forbid a videogame turns into an inaccessible tryhard hellhole because the devs are under the impression that all that matters is “skill gap”. Remember that were talking about people who look back at the BXR etc button combos with rose tinted glasses as something that was great for “skill gap”, and which bungie had to state outright was just cheating. Possibly superbounce too i cant remember.

I dont dispute that you find damn tough games to be to your liking and thats fine, just keep it amongst yourselves because i play for fun above all else and i think its quite likely that so do the majority of the playerbase.