Why Shield bleed is DETRIMENTAL to Halo: Reach multiplayer, despite consistency (Long read from an a

Although I don’t agree with all the other changes being implemented in this TU, I can see the reasons why they are being made, and wouldn’t argue for or against them.

(For you TL;DR folks, the important points are bolded, though this change will be DEVASTATING to Reach balance and I encourage you read the whole thing to see the big picture.)

That is not the case with the shield bleed. Shield bleed at a cursory glance seems to be something good for the game, I mean, why wouldn’t the extra damage go through, right?

Well, here’s the main issue, and why it’s absolutely damaging to have it brought back. Halo is based on, as Bungie has so eloquently put it, the “Golden Tripod” of halo combat: Grenades, Melee, and Guns. The interplay between the three is ESSENTIAL to what makes Halo Halo. Shield bleed, however, absolutely cripples melee as a viable option for combat with the way Reach handles melee combat.

In Halo 1, without Xboxlive to compensate for, there was no melee lunge, it was pure reflexes (occasionally a little lag from the LAN cable, but not really a big deal). Therefore, if someone got the drop on you, you could turn a fight around with clever use of melee and grenades. That’s a huge part of what makes Halo what it is. In any other shooter, you’re shot dead before you can respond. Being able to do meaningful things in response to being shot creates the gameplay of halo.

So Bungie releases Halo 2. Anyone who played this game as much as I can, can attest to the terrible effect of latency on gameplay, affecting the shotgun (More affectionately known then as the Slotgun due to its randomness). But the real problem was it’s effect on melee combat. In most cases, reflexes mattered, but not as much as being host. Host advantage conferred winning melee combat rights to whoever had it. Bungie realized how terrible this was, and though they couldn’t fix it for Halo 2, it was a lesson learned to be applied to…

Halo 3. In Halo 3, Bungie made a major blunder in the way they handled Melee combat. To compensate for the Host Advantage problem in Halo 2, they created the counterattack window, a timeframe in which you can counterattack the enemy for the same damage. This Was, and still is for those of you who play Halo 3, probably the worst part of the game. Initially, if you had even 1 more bullet than they did, it was a guaranteed win. The counterattack window removed all ability to use melee as a comeback method. This results in the incidents where, seemingly at random, two people would run at each other, AR’s Blazing, only to find one more of your opponents bullets hit, so you find yourself respawning, while he finds himself shieldless, but with a free kill.

Bungie “fixed” this by making the damage difference higher, so the result would be less random and more predictable. This means, if you had more shots in on the opponent, you’ll live, they’ll die. The problem with this fix is it completely annihilated any use of melee as a comeback tool. The opponent doesn’t even need to have reflexes or be competent, their melee will hit, and will cancel yours, and you will die. This leads to stale gameplay, as when your shot, your only option is to run away, since you cannot count on melee combat as a trump card.
Some people have the belief that “I shot first, I should win, obviously” Well, then in what sense should there even be shields? As I stated earlier, Halo gameplay, what makes halo unique, is that in Halo combat, you have time to react to being attacked. What keeps halo balanced is having meaningful actions to take when confronted. If you’re unable to comeback if you’re shot first, you may as well just die when the first shot hits. Remove shields and play Swat.

Bungie knew they had to fix this problem for reach. They couldn’t go back to the terrible host advantage of 2, but they couldn’t keep the stale “Melee always favors the winner” system either. The compromise, the way they found to keep melee relevant, and most importantly, to fix the golden tripod of halo combat broken in 3, was to make shields absorb the extra damage.

It isn’t consistent with the other halo games, because Bungie finally found the way to make Melee combat NOT become a host advantage fest, and to not be stale. It required innovative thinking, and the result was the shield absorbing the extra damage. It’s THE SINGLE REASON why it exists in classic reach; it puts melee back in a place MORE CONSISTANT with its use and behavior in Halo 1 and Halo 2. Halo 3 was the outlier, and it was because of the melee tie system. The shield no bleed was a compromise to keep the melee tie system, and to have ‘classic’ halo combat.

And lets be honest, how often does the extra 3 damage from your DMR shot matter? The fact is the shield bleed function PRIMARILY functions in relation to Melee combat. Switching it in this way will be incredibly damaging to Reach gameplay.

The short version is, Lack of shield bleed is the only thing keeping the “Tie” melee system created to solve host advantage in halo 3 from having all sorts of other negative impacts. It was a very elegant solution which put melee back in a position where it was a viable answer for the person behind. Adding in bleed will simply remove one more tool from the person who needs them most.

I IMPLORE YOU, 343 INDUSTRIES, IF YOU CARE ABOUT THE GAMEPLAY OF HALO: REACH, UNDERSTAND HOW DAMAGING THIS CHANGE REALLY IS.

I understand at this point due to the politics of XBL and updates and whatnot it’s probably far, far too late to stop this change, but I’m hoping that you’ll see fit to revert it.

I didn’t read the whole post because it is all solved with this: ITS NOT BEING IMPLEMENTED INTO ALL PLAYLISTS! JUST THE ANNIVERSARY PLAYLISTS!

Beyond Ed:

I salute you.

I was literally just going to make a forum on this EXACT topic.

0 bloom, 85 bloom or 100 bloom; pick your poison I really dont care, and I can easily adapt to any of the three. But ever since halo 2, Ive hated bleed through, it was the worst in H3 with the 1 second of AR and the melee, or what it will become in reach - 1 poorly placed grenade or a 2 shot pistol spam + melee = kill.

Honestly I picture myself as “strongly against the TU” and its not even because of the changes to the weapons, its just the bleed through. In a lag storm the bleed through ruins gameplay and creates sloppy dmr/magnum battles, it isnt as bad in a good host, but after you get melee’d it can leave you saying “why the hell did that just happen” where having shields pop gives a defined line of vulnerability.

Bungie took bleed through out because it was a scourge for 6+ years. Please lets not take a step back.

If you dont like it play default reach playlists.

I will be avoiding default reach once the TU 0% bloom playlists are out

I dont want randomness or double beatdown kids in my games.

I’ve been saying that bleed is horrible since the first time I played Halo3 over XBL.

regarding no-bleed melees only, i completely disagree.

when there is no bleed melees, you have to actually know what the range is in which shooting is a viable strategy to have ANY effect on the outcome of the battle. quite frankly, this is abysmal. i shouldnt have to know the exact centimeters distance from my target to know if shooting will have any effect on the outcome of the battle. this literally could not be any less intuitive in this regard. it should be SHOOT -> MELEE -> person who dealt more damage wins. its the most intuitive, straight forward, non-contradictory melee system 343 could possibly use (post patch halo 3 melee system, updated to 2011 standards).

with the halo 3 melee system (post patch), if someone gets the jump on you with their weapon and tries to go in for the melee, you could simply backpedal to dodge it, then move forward and melee them back. trump card re-activated.

obviously this is a bit different with reach because you cant backpedal, but you could still out-shoot someone that got the drop on you in halo 3, and you could also, provided you were good enough, wait a SPLIT SECOND after they melee you (while you continue to shoot), then return with your melee to sneak in a bit of extra damage. this extra damage was often enough to either let you tie, or actually make you win outright, in some situations.

of all the melee systems, i prefer the halo 1 melee. this is because it had no lunge, and it had a button combo in which you could melee twice in rapid succession, making melee a valuable contender, and a force to be reckoned with in the hands of a skilled user. in halos 3 and reach, you have to be abysmal at the game to be too slow to melee twice as fast as you can. in halos 1 and 2, you could melee VERY fast, so it benefited people who practiced, and hardened their melee prowess.

> Beyond Ed:
>
> I salute you.
>
> I was literally just going to make a forum on this EXACT topic.
>
> 0 bloom, 85 bloom or 100 bloom; pick your poison I really dont care, and I can easily adapt to any of the three. But ever since halo 2, Ive hated bleed through, it was the worst in H3 with the 1 second of AR and the melee, or what it will become in reach - 1 poorly placed grenade or a 2 shot pistol spam + melee = kill.
>
> Honestly I picture myself as “strongly against the TU” and its not even because of the changes to the weapons, its just the bleed through. In a lag storm the bleed through ruins gameplay and creates sloppy dmr/magnum battles, it isnt as bad in a good host, but after you get melee’d it can leave you saying “why the hell did that just happen” where having shields pop gives a defined line of vulnerability.
>
> Bungie took bleed through out because it was a scourge for 6+ years. Please lets not take a step back.

this ‘defined line of vulnerability’ could easily be replicated by an alternate, smaller, shields popping effect (or similar). this absolutely cannot be a reason for no-bleed.

in halo 3, if they AR you, then go for the melee… you just back up. and they cant melee you. this should be obvious.

in halo reach, with bleedthru melees, you have the same mechanics they do. what this means is, if you get the jump on them and do the same thing they do, you’ll win. if they get the jump on you, you have to use some jukes and possibly a ‘IMMA MELEE YOU… NOT… BUT NOW I WILL!’ strategy to come out ahead.

in halos 1 and 2 (save host advantage in halo 2, obviously), the player who performed the melee sequence more skillfully (button combos) would win.

if anything, no bleed melees actually ENCOURAGE the derp fest way of playing where you just run at someone (in a first person shooter) and melee twice instead of actually trying to shoot. not only that, it makes the AR literally pointless. AR is already massively out-performed by the DMR PRE-UPDATE, and with no-bleed its literally POINTLESS to even SHOOT THE AR almost all the time because sprint + melee + melee is more powerful at the AR’s niche range.

I’ll take a traded kill any day before i want to not get the kill on someone I put 3 shots into and then melee’d while they sprint up to me and double melee…one takes skill, the other does not…honestly I have noticed far less melee trading in these customs then I ever did in vanilla, the window to melee after the sheilds popped was huge. Plus you had a visual cue to let you know when to press the button!! stupid…

> I’ll take a traded kill any day before i want to not get the kill on someone I put 3 shots into and then melee’d while they sprint up to me and double melee…one takes skill, the other does not…honestly I have noticed far less melee trading in these customs then I ever did in vanilla, the window to melee after the sheilds popped was huge. Plus you had a visual cue to let you know when to press the button!! stupid…

THIS.

people actually SHOOTING in a first person shooter being able to beat people that just SPRINT AND MELEE TWICE?

seems optimal.

Good post OP. What this really means is there is no one solution that will work.

With shield bleed through enabled, however, it makes the game more about shooting first and using the melee as a secondary attack rather than the primary means of killing an opponent. I have had it happen to me numerous time where I will be shooting someone, they charge me, we both melee each other and we are left with the same amount of health remaining. It’s BS… Then it comes down to whoever gets that second beat down in first.

If I dealt him 3 shots of damage with my DMR why should my opponent be able to Sprint right to me and land a melee and leave us both be at the same level of health to die?

Having the shield absorb all of the damage until it was popped was a good idea in theory but in practice it causes more harm than good in my opinion.

> Good post OP. What this really means is there is no one solution that will work.
>
> With shield bleed through enabled, however, it makes the game more about shooting first and using the melee as a secondary attack rather than the primary means of killing an opponent. I have had it happen to me numerous time where I will be shooting someone, they charge me, we both melee each other and we are left with the same amount of health remaining. It’s BS… Then it comes down to whoever gets that second beat down in first.
>
> If I dealt him 3 shots of damage with my DMR why should my opponent be able to Sprint right to me and land a melee and leave us both be at the same level of health to die?
>
> Having the shield absorb all of the damage until it was popped was a good idea in theory but in practice it causes more harm than good in my opinion.

This. Although I think melee damage should be upped a bit… er I mean lowered. 6 ar shots is pretty low… 2 plasma pistol shots… think about invasion… yeah. crazy stuff:) just saying…

The solution is to DECREASE melee damage…that would work with and without bleed-through. Though generally, I don’t care for bleed through, as it makes the game messy. You no longer really know where you stand on health, since you can be dropped while you still have shields…too much of a random element.

> Good post OP. What this really means is there is no one solution that will work.
>
> With shield bleed through enabled, however, it makes the game more about shooting first and using the melee as a secondary attack rather than the primary means of killing an opponent. I have had it happen to me numerous time where I will be shooting someone, they charge me, we both melee each other and we are left with the same amount of health remaining. It’s BS… Then it comes down to whoever gets that second beat down in first.
>
> If I dealt him 3 shots of damage with my DMR why should my opponent be able to Sprint right to me and land a melee and leave us both be at the same level of health to die?
>
> Having the shield absorb all of the damage until it was popped was a good idea in theory but in practice it causes more harm than good in my opinion.

“Why should he be able to come back if I shot first” Is the basic argument if your post. I already counter-argued this point: What makes halo, halo, is that unlike most other shooters, you have time to react to being shot. This gives you an option to counterplay what your opponent is doing. HOWEVER, Being able to react to being shot is ABSOLUTELY MEANINGLESS if you don’t have the tools in your kit to have a fighting chance. What you’re saying is “I SHOT FIRST THEREFORE i SHOULD WIN”

If what you want is to come to pass, then the only option the other player EVER HAS is to run away, because melee can’t be counted on to even the score. We’re going back to the dark ages of halo 3 here, halo 3 unquestionably had the worst, most broken melee system. It was the fault of the counterattack window. No shield bleed counteracts the counter attack window and keeps it in check, allowing melee to remain viable for the ‘defender’

Being forced into exactly one line of action is bad for gameplay, if your only viable option is to run, then that’s all that will ever happen. Trying to get a melee in to even the fight won’t happen, because you can just DERP and hit melee at your leisure countering mine, just like it was in h3. This is bad for gameplay.

[edit] for those saying “JUST PLAY CLASSIC PLAYLISTS DERP” nothing i’ve read leads me to believe this change is optional like bloom. nothing. Everything i’ve read basically says “Oh btw, this is how shield bleed is handled now!”

I’ve said that the melee system in halo 3 was garbage for YEARS. I was honestly pleased to see bungie fixed it so elegantly. To see you undo this fix is heartbreaking, because it means a return to useless melee, and running from every encounter unless I shot first.

Wait, bleedthrough ruins melee combat? What the hell is wrong with you?

Yes, shield bleed ruins melee combat. Nothing is wrong with me. I articulated why it’s a terrible decision, and why it’s bad for gameplay in my original post.

If you’re going to react that way, suggesting something is wrong with me, provide a counterargument.

If this change goes live, the only option any player has is to run away, since melee combat is a guaranteed loss for the person who got shot first. As it is now, you have the chance to turn it around if you can get to them before your shields break. This gives you options, and makes for actual gameplay choices. You don’t want there to be choices or options for the person who’s been shot. Why? If you ‘deserve’ the kill on the basis of the first shot, then why bother with shields to begin with?

If they have no meaningful way to counterplay being shot, then halo becomes EXACTLY LIKE every other shooter. The shields become superfluous, because apparently despite his 75% shields AND health bar, you ‘deserve’ the kill for shooting first. So again, why have shields at all? just play swat.

> Yes, shield bleed ruins melee combat. Nothing is wrong with me. I articulated why it’s a terrible decision, and why it’s bad for gameplay in my original post.
>
> If you’re going to react that way, suggesting something is wrong with me, provide a counterargument.
>
>
> If this change goes live, the only option any player has is to run away, since melee combat is a guaranteed loss for the person who got shot first. As it is now, you have the chance to turn it around if you can get to them before your shields break. This gives you options, and makes for actual gameplay choices. You don’t want there to be choices or options for the person who’s been shot. Why? If you ‘deserve’ the kill on the basis of the first shot, then why bother with shields to begin with?
>
>
> If they have no meaningful way to counterplay being shot, then halo becomes EXACTLY LIKE every other shooter. The shields become superfluous, because apparently despite his 75% shields AND health bar, you ‘deserve’ the kill for shooting first. So again, why have shields at all? just play swat.

They upped player speed so strafing is a bit more effective now, and you have grenades and a gun to kill them with. I don’t think landing one shot on you at far-medium range means you might as well go kill yourself before they do with these things in mind. Maybe in close range, but then again, if you are engaging in a melee combat in close range, you should at least try to fight because you surely are going to die anyway no matter what system you use if you just turn and run. It’s just stupid when I pop a guy’s shields only for him to run up and smack mine off in half the time so that we are on equal playing fields all of the sudden. He surely wasn’t more skilled than me in that regard, so why should he have an equal chance to kill me as me able to kill him? At least with halo 3’s such a thing doesn’t happen so whether I got the first shot or not, so long as I deal more damage, I get the kill should I go in for melee, rather than Reach’s at times. Am I saying it should be if I get the first shot I should get the kill? Absolutely not, in fact, I’m encouraging just the opposite, but I also want a system based on skill. That’s why I like the Halo 3 system better. If you take shields, grenades and guns into account along with melee, there still are other choices when you use the halo 3 system, but you seem so blind with rage you can’t understand this.

Besides, if you don’t like it, don’t play the classic playlist. Simple as that.

It isn’t the bleedthrough that’s the problem.
It’s the power of the melee, in my opinion.

Let’s say we decrease the melee power to around 60%. Then if you put 3 dmr shots in someone so the victim have like 20% shield and 100% health. Then you descide you go into cqc. You punch the victim but he don’t get killed but his health still get’s damaged to around 30% health. Then the one who placed the shots get an advantage without getting an too easy kill, as it should be.

I think bleedthrough is a good thing but the melee system needs some adjusting.

There is a major legitimate reason players don’t understand the golden triangle of Halo. And here’s why:

The Triangle has the GUNS on the TOP POINT being the MOST IMPORTANT. And the Grenades and Melee are below that.

Until players who preach about the Golden triangle meaning Grenades and Melee need to be lethal get this. They will continue to be VERY VERY wrong.

Adding Bleed through to Melee actually takes Melee away from being a lethal move that can win games all by itself. And turns it into a tool to SUPPORT GUNS. Which is what Grenades and Melee does. They aren’t the weapons, the weapons are the guns. Melee and Grenades are meant to SUPPORT guns. Using them effectively shouldn’t score you kills where you just melee the player over and over. It should score you kills where you were in a firefight, and used a single expertly timed Melee to gain the advantage over the enemy player.

Same goes for Grenades. A player should not be able to LT their way to winning the game. Rather grenades should be used to support gunplay, forcing enemy players out of cover (Unless they are stupid), or stripping the shields of an enemy you can’t see yet.

But ultimately that’s all they should be. Tools, not weapons.

Bleed Through on Melee will remove Melee’s advantage over weapons and force players to actually think about SHOOTING the enemy.

All they need to do now is reduce Melee’s damage so it’s a 3 Melee kill. (1 Melee on a Shieldless opponent.)

> If you dont like it play default reach playlists.
>
>
> I will be avoiding default reach once the TU 0% bloom playlists are out
>
>
> I dont want randomness or double beatdown kids in my games.

You have a good post but you fail to see the counter argument. Sprint double melee is just as stale and even more frustrating.

Also what hurts melees more than anything is the auto aim and the insane lunges that occur in Reach. Bleed through is good because it quickens gameplay and doesn’t offer the redundant double smacks that happened in reach so many times.

What would make melee a viable comeback weapon in anyone’s arsenal is to make it much harder to use. (by reducing the auto aim and lunge within melee’s)

The double melee is also a good thing in my opinion because otherwise it is completely based on whose connection is better. If auto aim and lunge were reduced this would not be a problem.