> 2533274816788253;17:
> > 2533274989334266;16:
> > > 2533274816788253;15:
> > > I hate getting descoped as well. Wonder if they ever tried instead of getting descoped just have it knock your sights up or sideways or something.
> >
> >
> > They did it in H4, its called flinch.
>
>
> I though I remembered getting descoped as well though
Nope. In H4 you stayed scoped in when getting shot but your reticle bounced around randomly.
> 2533274816628272;38:
> It’s balance in the fact that whoever is landing more shots is going to have the advantage by not allowing the other guy to scope.
Bam.
In Halo, the person who gets the first shot has a greater chance at winning. Halo isn’t necessarily about balance it’s about being good. That’s why, in previous games, if you had an assault rifle and challenged someone with a br or dmr at even close n, you would most likely lose. Yeah, it’s annoying, but good players learn to play without the scope. So when you get shot, you aren’t completely screwed. I’m not saying you’re bad or “git gud” but learn to compensate for that. It’s all a part of Halo’s learning curve.
> 2533274936879727;42:
> In Halo, the person who gets the first shot has a greater chance at winning. Halo isn’t necessarily about balance it’s about being good. That’s why, in previous games, if you had an assault rifle and challenged someone with a br or dmr at even close n, you would most likely lose. Yeah, it’s annoying, but good players learn to play without the scope. So when you get shot, you aren’t completely screwed. I’m not saying you’re bad or “git gud” but learn to compensate for that. It’s all a part of Halo’s learning curve.
You deserve a Like, my friend.
> I don’t call it a fair gunfight when one is handicapped via being de-scoped while the other isn’t effected.
> What’s wrong with your opponent being able to smart-link while being shot at? Is it that much of a hassle to have an opponent who can fairly fight back?
Firstly, you’re assuming that ADS only gives players advantages with absolutely no disadvantages. Being scoped in provides a slight advantage to long distance aiming, while at the same time restricting FOV. Your aim speed is reduced, which acts as advantage at long ranges, and a disadvantage at close range. Also, the degree of advantage/disadvantage varies depending on the weapon that is being used. Scoping with a sniper rifle comes with significantly greater advantages and disadvantages than aiming with as assault rifle.
Secondly, getting hit first does not severely handicap one player, or give the other player superior bullet-firing abilities. Winning a firefight comes down to your strategy and effectiveness as it pertains to hitting your target.
I really prefer flinch over de-scoping, and it’s one of the reasons why I like Halo 4 so much. I hope they make an armor mod that prevents de-scoping, it’d be my go to mod for Warzone.
> 2533274978553590;45:
> I really prefer flinch over de-scoping, and it’s one of the reasons why I like Halo 4 so much. I hope they make an armor mod that prevents de-scoping, it’d be my go to mod for Warzone.
I hated flinch… I barely use the scope
> 2533274816628272;38:
> That guy with the BR or sniper sitting on the hill? The only way to stop him from getting shots on your team is to shoot and de-scope him making him less accurate.
Or you could prevent exposing yourself in the open and flank that player instead. You know, actual adaptation to a situation instead of spraying.
> 2533274865178253;44:
> >
>
>
> Firstly, you’re assuming that ADS only gives players advantages with absolutely no disadvantages. Being scoped in provides a slight advantage to long distance aiming, while at the same time restricting FOV. Your aim speed is reduced, which acts as advantage at long ranges, and a disadvantage at close range. Also, the degree of advantage/disadvantage varies depending on the weapon that is being used. Scoping with a sniper rifle comes with significantly greater advantages and disadvantages than aiming with as assault rifle.
>
> Secondly, getting hit first does not severely handicap one player, or give the other player superior bullet-firing abilities. Winning a firefight comes down to your strategy and effectiveness as it pertains to hitting your target.
Depending on the mode and weapons, de-scoping can make or break a person’s ability to win a gunfight. Being de-scoped from your assault rifle at closer ranges isn’t much to worry about, but when it’s a long range engagement with a Sniper in Slayer or Battle Rifle in SWAT, getting sprayed in order to de-scope you defeats the purpose of utilizing a weapon a long range. The player already has many avenues in which they can avoid sniper fire, like running to cover, boost dodging, and flanking. Why should they get another advantage by making the sniper scope obsolete because they can spray? Are people that inclined to keep de-scoping simply because they are sick of being sniped?
Also, the argument that de-scoping should stay simply because it’s been in Halo for so long doesn’t mean it’s always right. I know it’s off topic a bit, but Call of Duty was always proud to have Stopping Power and Juggernaut back in 2007. Just because it’s been around a lot time ago, doesn’t mean it should be a staple for the series. I’ve been playing Halo online multiplayer since 2005 and to this day, I never agreed to keeping de-scoping. The moment Halo 4 fixed it and made gunfights fair, people hated it. Why hate against fairness? Because it allows snipers to actually kill you? If that’s the case, do what I mentioned earlier–evade, flank, or engage with a sniper yourself.
Just dont use the scope like everyone else.
> 2533274809242032;49:
> Just dont use the scope like everyone else.
Thank you very much for solving the biggest issue. Next time I use a sniper at long range, I’m use going to hipfire. Totally makes sense. sarcasm
> 2597611927948033;1:
> For those unfamiliar with the topic, de-scoping is a feature in Halo. As you are looking through the scope of a sniper rifle, DMR, or in smart-link with any other weapon, you are forced out of it after receiving damage.
>
> Now a lot of people say de-scoping balanced. How can this balance be explained with a valid explanation to support it? Are people so inclined to keeping it because it’s a “classic Halo formula” and nothing more? Are people supporting de-scoping because they believe the person who shoots first should always win?
>
> IMO, I say de-scoping is not balanced because it creates a huge advantage in favor of the one who shot first or sprayed the most often. I don’t call it a fair gunfight when one is handicapped via being de-scoped while the other isn’t effected. What’s wrong with your opponent being able to smart-link while being shot at? Is it that much of a hassle to have an opponent who can fairly fight back?
De-scoping is what makes suppressing fire a strategy in this game. Me and my brother have used the tactic in every Halo. It lets you keep a sniper or opposing gunner suppressed while your team-mate goes in for the kill. De-scoping prevents snipers from murdering you over and over. Basically a good feature to have all around on all guns. It gives the person who was shot at first a chance to disorient the attacker’s aim and turn the tide of the fight. In a nutshell. it’s balanced bro.
> 2597611927948033;48:
> > 2533274865178253;44:
> > >
> >
> >
> > Firstly, you’re assuming that ADS only gives players advantages with absolutely no disadvantages. Being scoped in provides a slight advantage to long distance aiming, while at the same time restricting FOV. Your aim speed is reduced, which acts as advantage at long ranges, and a disadvantage at close range. Also, the degree of advantage/disadvantage varies depending on the weapon that is being used. Scoping with a sniper rifle comes with significantly greater advantages and disadvantages than aiming with as assault rifle.
> >
> > Secondly, getting hit first does not severely handicap one player, or give the other player superior bullet-firing abilities. Winning a firefight comes down to your strategy and effectiveness as it pertains to hitting your target.
>
>
> Depending on the mode and weapons, de-scoping can make or break a person’s ability to win a gunfight. Being de-scoped from your assault rifle at closer ranges isn’t much to worry about, but when it’s a long range engagement with a Sniper in Slayer or Battle Rifle in SWAT, getting sprayed in order to de-scope you defeats the purpose of utilizing a weapon a long range. The player already has many avenues in which they can avoid sniper fire, like running to cover, boost dodging, and flanking. Why should they get another advantage by making the sniper scope obsolete because they can spray? Are people that inclined to keep de-scoping simply because they are sick of being sniped?
>
> Also, the argument that de-scoping should stay simply because it’s been in Halo for so long doesn’t mean it’s always right. I know it’s off topic a bit, but Call of Duty was always proud to have Stopping Power and Juggernaut back in 2007. Just because it’s been around a lot time ago, doesn’t mean it should be a staple for the series. I’ve been playing Halo online multiplayer since 2005 and to this day, I never agreed to keeping de-scoping. The moment Halo 4 fixed it and made gunfights fair, people hated it. Why hate against fairness? Because it allows snipers to actually kill you? If that’s the case, do what I mentioned earlier–evade, flank, or engage with a sniper yourself.
**Are people that inclined to keep de-scoping simply because they are sick of being sniped?**Case in point. If someone is out in the wide open in Warzone and I snipe their shields off or repeatedly zing them from across the map, what other defense do they have? Of course they should be able to de-scope me. Sniping is easy, there has to be some challenge here.
Also, snipers should take a killshot and then move. If you miss, or only pop shields, then the person you failed to kill should be able to de-scope you, if they are smart and quick enough to locate you and land a hit. And CoD? You bring CoD into this? No, just no. In no way is it related or should be compared in any way, CoD is CoD and Halo 4 already pulled too much from it, that’s why it was hated.
De-scoping is fair. It sounds to me like you are frustrated because you have difficulty getting quick sniper kills and then your opponent de-scopes you, possibly losing you a kill or your life.
My suggestion would be to pick your spots carefully and only take shots you are 99% sure will land on the skull. Otherwise, you deserve to be de-scoped. Because missing isn’t sniping.
> 2533274857642512;51:
> > 2597611927948033;1:
> >
>
>
> De-scoping is what makes suppressing fire a strategy in this game. Me and my brother have used the tactic in every Halo. It lets you keep a sniper or opposing gunner suppressed while your team-mate goes in for the kill. De-scoping prevents snipers from murdering you over and over. Basically a good feature to have all around on all guns. It gives the person who was shot at first a chance to disorient the attacker’s aim and turn the tide of the fight. In a nutshell. it’s balanced bro.
Suppressing fire is always a strategy, but it shouldn’t offer too much of an advantage by de-scoping someone.
Without de-scoping…
Reward: Suppressing a sniper forces him to back off to avoid damage.
Risk: Suppressing fire will won’t stop a sniper and he may get a kill
With de-scoping…
Reward: Suppressing a sniper forces him to back off
Reward: The sniper cannot sight in and return fire from a distance
Risk: The sniper could possibly make a hipfire shot?
If you’re getting killed by a sniper over and over again, try to remain in cover and flank. Always going in the open when a sniper is out there is not a good idea, but people seem inclined to repeating their mistakes.
> 2597611927948033;1:
> IMO, I say de-scoping is not balanced because it creates a huge advantage in favor of the one who shot first or sprayed the most often. I don’t call it a fair gunfight when one is handicapped via being de-scoped while the other isn’t effected. What’s wrong with your opponent being able to smart-link while being shot at? Is it that much of a hassle to have an opponent who can fairly fight back?
You having the power weapon gives you the advantage. I assume you are a call of duty player by the way you describe this as an issue.
You said the other is not affected by “de-scoping” but actually they are. Every weapon zooms out when you take damage not just the sniper. Welcome to halo an FPS game thats actually balanced.
> 2533274805919869;54:
> > 2597611927948033;1:
> >
>
>
> Welcome to halo an FPS game thats actually balanced.
By not allowing a sniper to engage a target because someone sprays and nicks the sniper in his leg? Oh boy.
> 2597611927948033;53:
> > 2533274857642512;51:
> > > 2597611927948033;1:
> > >
> >
> >
> > De-scoping is what makes suppressing fire a strategy in this game. Me and my brother have used the tactic in every Halo. It lets you keep a sniper or opposing gunner suppressed while your team-mate goes in for the kill. De-scoping prevents snipers from murdering you over and over. Basically a good feature to have all around on all guns. It gives the person who was shot at first a chance to disorient the attacker’s aim and turn the tide of the fight. In a nutshell. it’s balanced bro.
>
>
> Suppressing fire is always a strategy, but it shouldn’t offer too much of an advantage by de-scoping someone.
>
> Without de-scoping…
> Reward: Suppressing a sniper forces him to back off to avoid damage.
> Risk: Suppressing fire will won’t stop a sniper and he may get a kill
>
> With de-scoping…
> Reward: Suppressing a sniper forces him to back off
> Reward: The sniper cannot sight in and return fire from a distance
> Risk: The sniper could possibly make a hipfire shot?
>
> If you’re getting killed by a sniper over and over again, try to remain in cover and flank. Always going in the open when a sniper is out there is not a good idea, but people seem inclined to repeating their mistakes.
Nine times out of ten if I’m sniping, and someone de-scopes me, all I have to do is reposition slightly. For example, crouch and move left or boost to cover and peek around, then re-scope and go for kill. De-scoping is actually much easier to handle than it is to do to someone else at, long range. And at close range it’s not even an issue. In fact, if you are ADS in close range, it’s likely that you are making a mistake. Position should top priority as a sniper and if it’s done right, de-scoping will never be an issue.
> 2597611927948033;55:
> > 2533274805919869;54:
> > > 2597611927948033;1:
> > >
> >
> >
> > Welcome to halo an FPS game thats actually balanced.
>
>
> By not allowing a sniper to engage a target because someone sprays and nicks the sniper in his leg? Oh boy.
map awareness and good aim will fix ur problem. It is very hard to stay alive with the sniper in Arena though when you play solo. Everyone is scattered all over the map making spawns weird.
> 2597611927948033;53:
> > 2533274857642512;51:
> > > 2597611927948033;1:
> > >
> >
> >
> > De-scoping is what makes suppressing fire a strategy in this game. Me and my brother have used the tactic in every Halo. It lets you keep a sniper or opposing gunner suppressed while your team-mate goes in for the kill. De-scoping prevents snipers from murdering you over and over. Basically a good feature to have all around on all guns. It gives the person who was shot at first a chance to disorient the attacker’s aim and turn the tide of the fight. In a nutshell. it’s balanced bro.
>
>
> Without de-scoping…
> Reward: Suppressing a sniper forces him to back off to avoid damage.
> Risk: Suppressing fire will won’t stop a sniper and he may get a kill
>
> With de-scoping…
> Reward: Suppressing a sniper forces him to back off
> Reward: The sniper cannot sight in and return fire from a distance
> Risk: The sniper could possibly make a hipfire shot?
That’s contradicting. If dealing damage won’t affect his aim then he won’t have to back down.
Every time someone snipes, they do so near some cover (unless they’re an idiot). When a sniper gets de-scoped, they strafe behind cover to reorient themselves, then pop back out to try again. If you’re getting 5’d across the map by a magnum, you’re doing it wrong.
> 2597611927948033;48:
> > 2533274865178253;44:
> > >
> >
> >
> > Firstly, you’re assuming that ADS only gives players advantages with absolutely no disadvantages. Being scoped in provides a slight advantage to long distance aiming, while at the same time restricting FOV. Your aim speed is reduced, which acts as advantage at long ranges, and a disadvantage at close range. Also, the degree of advantage/disadvantage varies depending on the weapon that is being used. Scoping with a sniper rifle comes with significantly greater advantages and disadvantages than aiming with as assault rifle.
> >
> > Secondly, getting hit first does not severely handicap one player, or give the other player superior bullet-firing abilities. Winning a firefight comes down to your strategy and effectiveness as it pertains to hitting your target.
>
>
> Depending on the mode and weapons, de-scoping can make or break a person’s ability to win a gunfight. Being de-scoped from your assault rifle at closer ranges isn’t much to worry about, but when it’s a long range engagement with a Sniper in Slayer or Battle Rifle in SWAT, getting sprayed in order to de-scope you defeats the purpose of utilizing a weapon a long range. The player already has many avenues in which they can avoid sniper fire, like running to cover, boost dodging, and flanking. Why should they get another advantage by making the sniper scope obsolete because they can spray? Are people that inclined to keep de-scoping simply because they are sick of being sniped?
>
> Also, the argument that de-scoping should stay simply because it’s been in Halo for so long doesn’t mean it’s always right. I know it’s off topic a bit, but Call of Duty was always proud to have Stopping Power and Juggernaut back in 2007. Just because it’s been around a lot time ago, doesn’t mean it should be a staple for the series. I’ve been playing Halo online multiplayer since 2005 and to this day, I never agreed to keeping de-scoping. The moment Halo 4 fixed it and made gunfights fair, people hated it. Why hate against fairness? Because it allows snipers to actually kill you? If that’s the case, do what I mentioned earlier–evade, flank, or engage with a sniper yourself.
As I said, the advantages and disadvantages can change drastically depending on the weapon (and, yes, the game mode to an extent as well). Scoping in with a sniper rifle grants a huge advantage against a player who’s on the other side of the map with an assault rifle. Yes, that assault rifle player can spray a few shots from long range to de-scope the sniper player, but that doesn’t prevent the sniper player from hitting his target, nor does it give the other player an unfair advantage. Let me reiterate that: The assault rifle player must fire a lot of rounds, or fire bursts over a long period of time to take down the sniper player, yet the sniper players can 1-shot the other player without the need of a scope. The sniper player has the clear advantage at long range. However at close range, the sniper player is at a significant disadvantage when facing that assault rifle, and to an even greater degree when scoped in.
In swat, your ability to scope in can provide a much more accurate shot, but comes with the cost of that shot taking more time, which is a huge risk. In swat you generally have 2 strategies available: fire fast and often, or take your time to line up the perfect shot. Both have their own risks and rewards.
Again, winning a gunfight depends more on your strategy and tactics, and your ability to hit your target, not whether you can freely scope in and out.
Lastly, I never said that de-scoping should stay in Halo because it has always been there. Good mechanics should stay, bad mechanics should go. I can understand that you don’t like de-scoping, but that doesn’t mean that it’s unfair, or unbalanced.