teak the REDUNDANT sandbox elements

quite frankly, making 10 guns when only 2 are actually good is pointless.

look at halo reach as a prime example of redundancy in the sandbox. in AR start games, you also spawn with a pistol that is strictly better in every single situation. so whats the point of the AR? same with the plasma repeater. whats the point? if the guns arent actually good at any range, if they dont serve any purpose outside of ‘lets hold hands’ range (where you can just melee for infinitely more success in the first place, with no-bleed), whats the point of having these weapons in the game AT ALL?

a common misconception amongst our ill informed community is that competitive players want to have 1 gun to rule them all. this couldnt be further from the truth. we just dont want 46 redundant weapons that serve no purpose other than ‘well i didnt have enough time to pick up another weapon, and im out of ammo, so i guess i have to use this POS till i can find a replacement’. currently thats the role that the AR, spiker, and plasma repeater play.

either make the AR and friends actually viable at a range outside ‘lets hold hands’ range, or dont even put them in the game. we shouldnt give players the delusion that their favorite weapon, the AR, is even remotely good when that couldnt be further from the truth. they’ll continue to use their precious AR, thinking halo is just like call of duty, and continue to get massacred by pistol users or utility weapon users because their gun is strictly worse, and regardless of how flawless their shooting is, its not going to make their gun not terrible.

i propose, at close range to close-medium range (the distance from snipe spawn to the entrance to the ring), the AR will BEAT the utility weapon provided its user can retain 85% accuracy. this way, the AR will serve a purpose other than being a last resort ‘oh jeez, i have to use this POS now because im out of ammo’. if the AR user cannot maintain 85% accuracy, and the utility weapon user retains 100% accuracy and lands the headshot, the utility weapon should win. past this range the utility weapon should also win.

with this change, the AR will serve a purpose, but not be completely oppressive against the utility weapon.

Agree 100%

Agreed. I wish it was like Halo CE. Where every weapon was powerful, and they had their own niche.

My Assault Rifle Specs:
Lets take the DMR, and Assault Rifle in Halo Reach. They both use the same rounds. Which means they both would do the same damage. So if the DMR can kill in 7 shots. The Assault Rifle would to. But do to balancing reasons the Assault rifle can do half damage. So it would take 14 rounds for it to kill. So the AR can be the other half of the Precision Weapon.

Precision Weapon:
Damage: High. Can kill a shielded Spartan in 7 shots.
Mag size: 15-30 rounds. If it’s a 3 round burst weapon. It will be 30. If it’s semi it will be 15.
Rate of fire: 3 round burst like the BR. Or semi automatic like the DMR.
Affective range: Medium-Long.
Accuracy: Vary high. If you pace your shots.

Assault Rifle:
Damage: Medium. Half of the Precision Weapon damage.
Mag size: 30-60.
Rate of Fire: Selective: Make the AR act like an AR.
-5 round burst.
-Automatic.
Affective range:
-Automatic: Short-Medium
-5 round burst: Medium-Long.
Accuracy: Low-medium.
-5 round burst: Medium.
-Automatic: Low.

Well, IMO they need a close range, full auto weapon like the AR for Campaign.

The precision weapon should be able towin at close range only if 100% accuracy is maintained, otherwise the weapon that fills the Close-medium range niche should win if they can maintain 100% accuracy also. Not ‘They win with 85% accuracy’, otherwise the AR would dominate and less skilled players would be actively encouraged to use a weapon that requires les skill to use.

Therefor I agree, apart from the slight over-buffing of the AR as you suggested.

> Well, IMO they need a close range, full auto weapon like the AR for Campaign.

He’s not saying to get rid of it, but to tweak it so that it serves a combat purpose outside of extreme close range. Make it effective as a burst-fire weapon and ineffective at full auto outside of extreme close range.

> > Well, IMO they need a close range, full auto weapon like the AR for Campaign.
>
> He’s not saying to get rid of it, but to tweak it so that it serves a combat purpose outside of extreme close range. Make it effective as a burst-fire weapon and ineffective at full auto outside of extreme close range.

That, I can agree with.

Hopefully 343i is aware of this and allows all weapons to be useful.

To quote myself on a previous thread:

> All the weapons should be relatively equal and each have their own niche (which multiple, redundant weapons can fit, for diversity’s sake)!
>
> For example:
> Sniper Rifle works at long range on infantry.
> Rocket Launcher works on vehicles (and to a lesser extend, infantry) at close range.
> Spartan Laser works on vehicles at medium-long range.
> Shotgun works at close range on infantry.
> Battle Rifle works at medium-long range on infantry.
> Assault Rifle works at close-medium range, more effective on armor.
> Plasma Rifle works at close-medium range, more effective on shields.
> Plasma Pistol kills shields and EMPs vehicles.
> Needler works in hallways on infantry.
>
> etc.

> Precision Weapon:
> Damage: High. Can kill a shielded Spartan in 7 shots.
> Mag size: 15-30 rounds. If it’s a 3 round burst weapon. It will be 30. If it’s semi it will be 15.
> Rate of fire: 3 round burst like the BR. Or semi automatic like the DMR.
> Affective range: Medium-Long.
> Accuracy: Vary high. If you pace your shots.
>
> Assault Rifle:
> Damage: Medium. Half of the Precision Weapon damage.
> Mag size: 30-60.
> Rate of Fire: Selective: Make the AR act like an AR.
> -5 round burst.
> -Automatic.
> Affective range:
> -Automatic: Short-Medium
> -5 round burst: Medium-Long.
> Accuracy: Low-medium.
> -5 round burst: Medium.
> -Automatic: Low.

I actually really like this idea. They could easily put a “firing mode” switch on one of the D-Pad buttons, and then the AR could actually be viable at medium range. The bursts would be a little in-accurate, but having a headshot-capable AR would be pretty bad–Yoink-.

It would work as long as the AR couldn’t headshot unless the shields were down. The first bullet from the burst would hit straight and true, but the other 4 would have enough spread on where they wouldn’t hit the head at medium range. With your damage settings, that means it could kill in 3 bursts at close range (If the user landed a headshot), and probably 4-5 at medium range (Considering some shots would miss)

There would have to be some serious testing involved…But I would love a burst setting for the AR.

All calls for balance should be answered with “easier said than done”

Yes, there should be more viability amongst the weapon set, but finding that balance is not easy. I personally would like to see every map be equally playable for every gametype… but like I said…

So you want someone who can maintain 85% accuracy with a gun that is easier to aim, to beat someone who can maintain 100% accuracy with a gun that is harder to aim?

Um…no.

Why don’t we either drop the AR from Halo entirely since it has always been a worthless weapon that only serves to keep noobs nooby, or make it so there is a significant skill gap in the operation of the weapon so that if an AR user does beat a utility weapon user he deserves to.

We should just get rid of all automatic weapons as they really serve no purpose in Halo. The turret is about the only automatic weapon in Halo that functions how an automatic should in a FPS.

> So you want someone who can maintain 85% accuracy with a gun that is easier to aim, to beat someone who can maintain 100% accuracy with a gun that is harder to aim?
>
> Um…no.
>
> Why don’t we either drop the AR from Halo entirely since it has always been a worthless weapon that only serves to keep noobs nooby, or make it so there is a significant skill gap in the operation of the weapon so that if an AR user does beat a utility weapon user he deserves to.
>
> We should just get rid of all automatic weapons as they really serve no purpose in Halo. The turret is about the only automatic weapon in Halo that functions how an automatic should in a FPS.

What is this, I don’t even…

> > So you want someone who can maintain 85% accuracy with a gun that is easier to aim, to beat someone who can maintain 100% accuracy with a gun that is harder to aim?
> >
> > Um…no.
> >
> > Why don’t we either drop the AR from Halo entirely since it has always been a worthless weapon that only serves to keep noobs nooby, or make it so there is a significant skill gap in the operation of the weapon so that if an AR user does beat a utility weapon user he deserves to.
> >
> > We should just get rid of all automatic weapons as they really serve no purpose in Halo. The turret is about the only automatic weapon in Halo that functions how an automatic should in a FPS.
>
> What is this, I don’t even…

The truth.

I disagree, I think using each weapon as effectively and properly as you can possibly use them can be just as effective as others in their own designed scenarios. It’s like saying the Plasma Rifle from Halo 3 is pointless when most of you guys didn’t know that it’s melee distance was a bit further then the human Assault Rifle which enabled people to kill faster then those using the standard Assault Rifle. The Plasma Repeater deals more damage in close quaters then the Assault Rifle in Reach and it fires for longer giving it the upperhand in battles with more then one person (close quaters still).

> So you want someone who can maintain 85% accuracy with a gun that is easier to aim, to beat someone who can maintain 100% accuracy with a gun that is harder to aim?
>
> Um…no.
>
> Why don’t we either drop the AR from Halo entirely since it has always been a worthless weapon that only serves to keep noobs nooby, or make it so there is a significant skill gap in the operation of the weapon so that if an AR user does beat a utility weapon user he deserves to.
>
> We should just get rid of all automatic weapons as they really serve no purpose in Halo. The turret is about the only automatic weapon in Halo that functions how an automatic should in a FPS.

Your nescient bias opinion astounds me based on no real evidence, it is inpractically concluding. I believe that the Assault Rifle holds genuine purpose in Halo, as well as giving the game variety it also denotes the use of power weapons in specific moments and scenarios. Your answer is as pointless as stating this: ‘Every weapon in the game should be removed because the Sniper Rifle is more powerful then all the rest.’ The reason there is a variety like we know today is for balance. The Assault Rifle is as useful as it is for a reason; that being to make the player strive and work for other more powerful weapons.

In Halo we just don’t have a batch of power weapons, we have a hierarchy of continuity; weapons that justify what Halo is.

A weapon’s usefulness should always be relative to the skill required to achieve a certain level of usefulness. In other words, Assault Rifle for example, has always been a pretty much useless weapon that doesn’t require much skill. But it could easily be more useful if burst firing was encouraged by giving it a damage boost or a higher rate of fire, but higher bloom rate. So, that a good player could use it effectively all the way up to mid range, but a regular player who only wants to spray can still use it as ineffectively.

Same goes for other weapons. For example, I think Reach did pretty good job with the Plasma Pistol, it actually felt somewhat useful. Had it had slightly better damage against unshielded opponents, it would’ve been a truly useful weapon. Plasma Rifle is another good example, what ever happened to the weapon after CE, the stun feature made it an unique weapon.

Currently, we have a bunch of weapons that have potential to be interesting and useful. I could easily see a sandbox where even the niche weapons are viable options in competitive play, they just need some work.

> A weapon’s usefulness should always be relative to the skill required to achieve a certain level of usefulness. In other words, Assault Rifle for example, has always been a pretty much useless weapon that doesn’t require much skill. But it could easily be more useful if burst firing was encouraged by giving it a damage boost or a higher rate of fire, but higher bloom rate. So, that a good player could use it effectively all the way up to mid range, but a regular player who only wants to spray can still use it as ineffectively.
>
> Same goes for other weapons. For example, I think Reach did pretty good job with the Plasma Pistol, it actually felt somewhat useful. Had it had slightly better damage against unshielded opponents, it would’ve been a truly useful weapon. Plasma Rifle is another good example, what ever happened to the weapon after CE, the stun feature made it an unique weapon.
>
> Currently, we have a bunch of weapons that have potential to be interesting and useful. I could easily see a sandbox where even the niche weapons are viable options in competitive play, they just need some work.

And from hopes and hints of the Halo 4 team we can expect a much more refined Halo. I have no doubts so far.

> A weapon’s usefulness should always be relative to the skill required to achieve a certain level of usefulness. In other words, Assault Rifle for example, has always been a pretty much useless weapon that doesn’t require much skill. But it could easily be more useful if burst firing was encouraged by giving it a damage boost or a higher rate of fire, but higher bloom rate. So, that a good player could use it effectively all the way up to mid range, but a regular player who only wants to spray can still use it as ineffectively.
>
> Same goes for other weapons. For example, I think Reach did pretty good job with the Plasma Pistol, it actually felt somewhat useful. Had it had slightly better damage against unshielded opponents, it would’ve been a truly useful weapon. Plasma Rifle is another good example, what ever happened to the weapon after CE, the stun feature made it an unique weapon.
>
> Currently, we have a bunch of weapons that have potential to be interesting and useful. I could easily see a sandbox where even the niche weapons are viable options in competitive play, they just need some work.

This, except for power weapons, or at least some.

Rockets, for example, are very effective at the same time very easy to use. This is because they are placed on the map to create incentive to control them (since they offer pretty much free kills).

But, for basic weapons you are absolutely correct.

> > A weapon’s usefulness should always be relative to the skill required to achieve a certain level of usefulness. In other words, Assault Rifle for example, has always been a pretty much useless weapon that doesn’t require much skill. But it could easily be more useful if burst firing was encouraged by giving it a damage boost or a higher rate of fire, but higher bloom rate. So, that a good player could use it effectively all the way up to mid range, but a regular player who only wants to spray can still use it as ineffectively.
> >
> > Same goes for other weapons. For example, I think Reach did pretty good job with the Plasma Pistol, it actually felt somewhat useful. Had it had slightly better damage against unshielded opponents, it would’ve been a truly useful weapon. Plasma Rifle is another good example, what ever happened to the weapon after CE, the stun feature made it an unique weapon.
> >
> > Currently, we have a bunch of weapons that have potential to be interesting and useful. I could easily see a sandbox where even the niche weapons are viable options in competitive play, they just need some work.
>
> This, except for power weapons, or at least some.
>
> Rockets, for example, are very effective at the same time very easy to use. This is because they are placed on the map to create incentive to control them (since they offer pretty much free kills).
>
> But, for basic weapons you are absolutely correct.

I was meant to mention the power weapons, but seems like that was something I forgot. But yes, this excludes the Rocket Launcher, it’s of course meant to be as powerful as it is and quarantee the kills when you manage to control it. Shotgun and Energy Sword are also excluded as they seem to do what they are meant to do pretty well.

But generally how I see it when it comes to power weapons, it’s like this: Short range power weapons (Rocket Launcher, Shotgun, Energy Sword) are excluded, they don’t need to require skill to be effective because they have a well definded area of effect. Long range power weapons (Sniper Rifle, Spartan Laser) on the other hand obviously need to require skill as with their range, they can’t be dominant unless you have the ability to use them.