From what I’ve heard, read, and seen about the upcoming TU, I’m more than a bit worried of what will become of Reach (yes, I enjoy Reach as-is, because it’s improved upon Halo, /opinion). While I’ve been told that the TU will not affect the game itself, only the pontential custom games have, there’s one thing that worries me, and it isn’t bloom.
The reintroduction of shield-bleed can do nothing but hurt the balance of Reach’s gameplay, as it defeats the purpose of shields in general, and needlessly buffs melee. Yes, my main argument against shield-bleed does revolve around what it does to the melee system. (repeating myself,) As I said before, bleed buffs melee, and it not only does this, but it also causes melee to be extremely unbalanced and catering to non-competitive players. In example, if a player with no shields and a player with 50% shields melee each other at the same moment, both will die, and that isn’t right. This nerfs the shotgun more than it already is, which really isn’t acceptable.
If 343 knew what was good for Reach, they’d keep the shields as-is, but nerf melee, making it a four-hit-kill.
It adds depth to the melee system; forcing players to actually shoot before they punch. This also eliminates the Sprint+Melee combo that is just way too effective at the moment.
By the way, Shotgun+Melee will become a strategy again, it will only become more useful.
> It adds depth to the melee system; forcing players to actually shoot before they punch. This also eliminates the Sprint+Melee combo that is just way too effective at the moment.
>
> By the way, Shotgun+Melee will become a strategy again, it will only become more useful.
Buffing something that needs to be nerfed doesn’t add any depth, at all. A much, much better way to promote gunplay is to nerf melee.
And sure, Shotgun/melee will be a strategy again, but magnum/melee, AR/melee, and just about everything else will be just as effective. Oh, and Sprint/melee won’t go away as a result of bleed, it will only worsen (not that it’s actually bad to begin with).
Reach didn’t really improve on anything except fixing the sniper. reach has what seems to be no skill involved anymore. if 343 wants to fix Bungie’s massive mistake of a game please for the love of all that is needed in this world let them. I was just in a game about 7 min ago and i just got how irradiated at the dmr also know as the designated MARKSMAN rifle (how ironic a name) for being such a skill-less weapon. halo 1 2 and 3 have had powerful head-shot weapons the halo 1 pistol was 3 shot after all, then came out with halo 2(which is the best in the series multilayer wise) and made it 4 shot, which was just fine. then halo 3 came out and it was 4-5 shot and in reach its 5 shot if you pace the shots which no one does anyways so your dmr spamed by some scrub who thinks he is good, but has never played halo 1 2 or 3…
please tell me some one else feels my frustration…
343 Industries realizes how controversial Reach has become. Instead of driving another wedge between the already splintered community, they are creating some playlists that will contain the TU updates while leaving others alone. In my eyes, it’s a very smart move by 343. Vanilla Reach’s shield mechanic, along with everything else, will still exist in Matchmaking. You and I will both have our places to play.
> If 343 knew what was good for Reach, they’d keep the shields as-is, but nerf melee, making it a four-hit-kill.
Should you plain disagree with the details of the TU, I believe there is an official thread for that here and here. Drop by those two places if you haven’t done so already. Furthermore, don’t forget to comment here after you test the Beta Hoppers. I hope that helps!
Look at it this way, Reach was suppose to be a Bungie swan song to send off of all things Halo. Even I will say it failed to do that completely by not allowing some of the TU additions to already be default options.
Reach is missing a lot of that “Halo2/3” feeling, and though I love it for that, for those that feel otherwise, it is a problem. The TU will address this.
the damage tables and such don’t really need to be changed at all too much, except for key weapons such as the dmr. get rid of bloom or make it so i can turn it off for every game type and make it 4 shot (most game types) and it will make me and a lot of other halo veterans very very very happy.
> From what I’ve heard, read, and seen about the upcoming TU, I’m more than a bit worried of what will become of Reach (yes, I enjoy Reach as-is, because it’s improved upon Halo, /opinion). While I’ve been told that the TU will not affect the game itself, only the pontential custom games have, there’s one thing that worries me, and it isn’t bloom.
>
> The reintroduction of shield-bleed can do nothing but hurt the balance of Reach’s gameplay, as it defeats the purpose of shields in general, and needlessly buffs melee. Yes, my main argument against shield-bleed does revolve around what it does to the melee system. (repeating myself,) As I said before, bleed buffs melee, and it not only does this, but it also causes melee to be extremely unbalanced and catering to non-competitive players. In example, if a player with no shields and a player with 50% shields melee each other at the same moment, both will die, and that isn’t right. This nerfs the shotgun more than it already is, which really isn’t acceptable.
>
> If 343 knew what was good for Reach, they’d keep the shields as-is, but nerf melee, making it a four-hit-kill.
Sprint + Double Melee.
This is the dominant CQC tactic in Reach right now. It also nullifies your argument.
I played the Bleed-thru settings at PAX. It really doesn’t make that huge of a difference, other than stopping the aforementioned tactic.
Judging by how you worded your post, It sounded like Reach was your first Halo game or earliest was Halo 3.
But anyway the Title update won’t effect the core experience in anyway, its only adding features, for free. And you like you said, if you enjoy default Reach… Great! if you don’t like the new features, you can always go back to your untouched Halo experience!
> Stop complaining untill October 3rd when the playlist Beta Hoppers comes out. Then you can complain or praise all you want.
^this.
People don’t eve need hands on to give feedback anymore. People are already leaving feedback on Halo 4’s multiplayer on here even though the only thing we’ve got is a CGI trailer…
Have you experienced Halo 3’s melee system? That was the best one to date in any Halo game and they are finally including it in Reach. I can honestly say that I am one happy boy.
> Have you experienced Halo 3’s melee system? That was the best one to date in any Halo game and they are finally including it in Reach. I can honestly say that I am one happy boy.
This.
In Halo 3 you got more health and you won a simultaneous melee fight against other player, unlike Reach with all that stupid kill trading.
Reach is horrible as it is now, and 343i is going to save it.
> > From what I’ve heard, read, and seen about the upcoming TU, I’m more than a bit worried of what will become of Reach (yes, I enjoy Reach as-is, because it’s improved upon Halo, /opinion). While I’ve been told that the TU will not affect the game itself, only the pontential custom games have, there’s one thing that worries me, and it isn’t bloom.
> >
> > The reintroduction of shield-bleed can do nothing but hurt the balance of Reach’s gameplay, as it defeats the purpose of shields in general, and needlessly buffs melee. Yes, my main argument against shield-bleed does revolve around what it does to the melee system. (repeating myself,) As I said before, bleed buffs melee, and it not only does this, but it also causes melee to be extremely unbalanced and catering to non-competitive players. In example, if a player with no shields and a player with 50% shields melee each other at the same moment, both will die, and that isn’t right. This nerfs the shotgun more than it already is, which really isn’t acceptable.
> >
> > If 343 knew what was good for Reach, they’d keep the shields as-is, but nerf melee, making it a four-hit-kill.
>
> Sprint + Double Melee.
>
> This is the dominant CQC tactic in Reach right now. It also nullifies your argument.
>
> I played the Bleed-thru settings at PAX. It really doesn’t make that huge of a difference, other than stopping the aforementioned tactic.
Shield bleed through should have been in the game right at the launch.
Without bleed through, I can pump 4 DMR shots into a guy thats sprinting at me so he only has a little bit of shields left. We then exchange melees, but have an equal amount of health. Even though I got 4 shots into him, we are equal. Do you see the problem here?
Adding bleed through to this game will make gameplay so much better.
> In example, if a player with no shields and a player with 50% shields melee each other at the same moment, both will die, and that isn’t right.
That is not how Halo 3 worked and I don’t expect the TU to work that way either. In your example the player with 50% shields wins the fight and is left with no shields…but alive. They only both die if their shields are low enough for a death and both of their shields are the same. So getting more shots into the other player before the melee means you win.