I love the concussion rifle. I really think the complaints about the stun effect (sorry Peg!) are as much about how frustrating it can be to be on the receiving end as about the skill the weapon requires to use. There is still an art to knowing when to go for the direct hit and when (and where) to use splash damage instead, and thereby maximizing how much you can get out of your 15 shots. And on the flip side, there's a significant skill involved in battling against the concussion rifle - jumping at the right time when approaching a CR-wielder can save your ass, or at least give you an extra couple seconds to fight back; and if you can fight through the stun and DMR the guy to death, it feels like a triumph. And the anti-vehicle properties are probably my favorite aspect (except for hearing a guy with a sword break his controller). I do agree that Reach is brutal on vehicles, but the solution there is fixing how fragile the damn things are, and especially NERFING THE SNIPER. The concussion rifle is A-OK with me, but if you put it on a BTB map, especially a relatively constricted one, you need to pretty much not have most of the other anti-vehicle weapons... particularly the sniper.
@ Gordon: Yeah, I guess Rockets are actually a pretty good counter example. I failed to account for the CR as a vastly slimmed down example of the same principle: a powerful weapon where emphasis is shifted more towards gaining the weapon for benefit (rather than emphasis being on how to use it) than is true of other weapons. Again, that's by no means me saying that there's no skill in using it, that's far from the case, but I think it's a little further towards this end of the spectrum (of which Rockets are an exemplar) than other weapons. @Nutduster. I see what you're saying, but I still don't totally buy your arguments for justifying its skill potential with specific respect to the stun. Knowing when to do go for splash or direct damage, to my mind, comes under what I said about knowing when to use it, and how this trumps the actual process of using it (ie. the base skills of aim and prediction, especially the latter since it's a slow projectile). I'd also point out that, even though specifically going for splash damage is definitely a wise choice in certain circumstances (I've snagged many a kill round small doors on Countdown using this approach), my main beef with this argument is the fact that there's no onus on know when to not go for direct damage. The entire point of my objection to such a strong stun is that, even if you go for direct damage at the lower half of their body, you can miss and still see the significant benefit of the splash damage and stun. This does serious harm to the idea of choosing the right approach, because in this sense you're not sufficiently punished for choosing the wrong one. Also, I don't feel that the skill involved in fighting against something can count towards the skill inherent in the weapon itself, in fact I think the opposite is true, the reason there's an increased emphasis on skill needed to battle against it is precisely because it's easy to use in this sense. Sorry, these arguments just sound a little too similar to the ones put forward by those who argue that the AR is just as skilful as the DMR, that the skill comes from knowing when and how to use it, which I feel misses an important distinction. Whether this distinction is between "skill" and "strategy," or is a distinction, made within the overarching term "skill," between the factors of raw coordination and decision making, is really a matter of linguistic semantics (obviously my position on such terms is clear). However, I feel that these arguments gesture at least somewhat to ignoring this key distinction altogether. But still, I'd like to end by returning to the Rocket point. I thoroughly feel that such things have a place within competitive Halo, but function in this different way. I failed to factor that in before, and it is definitely a valid argument against what I said. EDIT: I do, however, agree about your vehicle point. I think that strengthening vehicle's general health, or even just de-emphasising DMRs and Snipers as anti vehicle weapons, is a much more beneficial approach to making them useful again than nerfing weapons like the CR which play an invaluable role in offering possible counters. You can't rely solely on damage stats for countering vehicles, that doesn't account for their different nature and inherent power, you need a physical and practical counter in many situations, the CR is precisely this.
Totally. I am much more interested in a game where the means of taking down vehicles are varied and actually fun - like the concussion rifle, the EMP of a plasma pistol or grenade launcher, and the plasma launcher (and see also: the late, lamented power drain - I had some epic banshee takedowns by using the mancannons on Valhalla as cannons to fire the power drain off of). Chewing vehicles to pieces with slightly overpowered DMR fire or VERY overpowered sniper fire is less interesting by far. You do need to be able to take vehicles down by conventional means if nothing else is available, but they tilted things too far in this direction in Reach.
Very true. I also think they missed a key part of that which I actually criticised (or at least expressed a situational dislike for) before: knowing what to use and when. If you're intent on using nothing but specific anti-infantry weapons like the DMR and Sniper, regardless of the circumstances, you should be punished when this decision isn't right for the circumstance. Putting these two weapons so high up the anti vehicle list negates this a ridiculous amount, because it takes them much further towards always being the right choice. And, as I always say on this subject, this is coming from someone who won't put that combo down regardless of circumstance. Even I feel that I should be punished for that in many situations, vehicles being the central one, but in Reach I'm really not, or at least not as much as I should be.
Yep, exactly. The sniper is the most egregious bad decision they made, in my book - like it's not enough that they have godlike power and range vs. infantry, they also can smoke any non-tank vehicle in just a few shots? That's crazy to me, and it completely devalues the role of other weapons that are actually designed as anti-vehicle.
That I don't have a huge problem with. It's still devastatingly effective. Though the combination of nerfing that and buffing the sniper with respect to vehicles means that if a map offers both, you may as well hold the sniper and disregard the laser - that's kind of dumb. But again, nothing that couldn't be fixed by putting the sniper back in its place as a primarily anti-infantry weapon. Recipe for awesome BTB in a few easy steps: 1. Nerf sniper power vs. vehicles by 50% 2. Increase vehicle health by about 25% 3. Nerf banshee (reduce bomb blast radius, and tie tricking to the energy meter) And of course 4. More designed-for-standard-multiplayer BTB maps.
Yeah that's a good point about the laser, the fact that the Sniper is the better choice 99% of the time does definitely make it feel worse. I still dunno if I'd have increased the charge time and stripped it to 4 shots, I think either still would have been fine, but I guess it's logically not as bad as it feels in the context of current anti vehicle weapons. I completely agree with all of your points, Banshee ones in particular, except I'm not sure about 25% more vehicle health. I don't know if their health relative to the wider sandbox is actually that low tbh. Maybe it's just me, and I'd quite like to see some figures on this, but I feel like Hogs in particular can take more direct damage from Rockets and Nades than was true in Halo 3. Perhaps that's just an explosive specific effect on damage taken, idk, but I still think the main thing making vehicles feel weak is the DMR/Sniper effectiveness. I'd like to try a gametype with that specific issue addressed and see how vehicle health feels, then look at adjustments more in the 10-15% range before 25%.
25% may be an overreaction, and I concede the point about explosives - they do feel weirdly weak, though that may just be in the context of comparing them to the precision weapons. I do feel like AR fire is pretty damaging too, so if we were to lean more toward nerfing specific weapons than buffing general vehicle health, I'd want to put the AR on the list right after the DMR (and both well after the sniper, of course).
I quite liked the Concussion Rifle but still prefer the Brute Shot. Both bring back Halo PC Fuel Rod Gun nostalgia. I once got a Triple kill with it by mortaring the enemy base.
I think the vehicles' inertia is a bigger factor than the damage they can eat. I mean, the hog can take a decent pounding. The problem is once the pounding starts the bloody thing rolls over instead of giving you the opportunity to get cover. DMRs really shouldn't be able to flip a hog. If that was addressed I think the weapons would be less of an issue.
Nutduster, I'd also nerf DMR vs. Vehicles by a small bit as well. You could teamshot a small vehicle with 4 players in the course of a few short seconds. I also would like to dwell on the CR a bit in that I really enjoyed the way it also could create new movement and combat options through jumps and it's ability to push. (read: SaLaYa's montages) Really good design, but some tweaks needed to perfect it.
It's *too* disorienting. And it screws up your aim. But half of that can be blamed on reach's mechanics. EDIT: Problem with halo.. Needs less explosive weapons, needs more lead. Besides in real life, the first thing someone is going to do if they have a gun in their hand is not going to be throwing a grenade..
I know, but seriously? How do grenades that blow up withing like 1.5 seconds after hitting the ground end up in the army? I know its a game, but I just feel that Bungie over-did it with all the explosives.
I always throw my nades out first then, I fire... bring there shields down, n finish em with well place shot... Or when you both bring each other shields down from shooting, back around a corner, throw a grenade, and blam +1 kills. most of the time...
Would you guys rather have vehicle health tied to player health like it used to be or be like it was in Reach?
Halo 4 Community Questions w/ Bravo + BesT MaN - Episode 2 - YouTube EDIT: Halo 4 News - Longbow, Bulletin, 10 Maps, & Figure! - YouTube