With the second TU enabling back end weapon changes on a per gametype basis, it looks like 343 are already testing out some significant changes. Here's a quote from the most recent update: Thoughts on these changes, or any other possible ones?
Is this going to affect ALL gametypes? Or just some in some playlists and make it extremely difficult for us to figure out which gametype has what invisible settings :|
They haven't made it clear, but they way they're talking about it (as ways to address fundamental primary weapon balancing) makes me think that these will be MM-wide changes. I'd quite like to see a proper Halo 2 or 3 classic gametype put together, now that it's a more viable option. Their backend settings mean they could accurately replicate the proper damage and RoF settings to emulate either of those games very effectively (rather than having to rely on the 110/110 glitch), and removing sprint is provably trivial in terms of implementation. But if the 4sk BR goes in to effect in wider MM then it'll arguably help this cause because they won't need to change the BR from what people are used to in order to make a proper classic gametype. One could also argue that this makes it less worthwhile, but BR only games are unheard of outside of Throwdown and sprint/AAs/perks are a big deal so hopefully it's still seen as different enough to be worth trying, perhaps for one of their short term rotation playlists.
Thank you, Bravo. Pretty much everything's spot on. For you guys to reference, assumed kill times under patch: Carbine 1.4 seconds (current 1.63 seconds) BR 1.43 seconds (current 1.73 seconds) DMR 1.47 seconds (same) LR Unscoped 1.77 seconds (same) LR Scoped 1.4 seconds (same) Using the new assumed damage settings, the only huge outlier is the LR unscoped, with a kill time .34 seconds greater than the BR. That could be brought in line with the other weapons by giving it a ~1.5s kill time (increased RoF? 4sk?) but since the Carbine is the main beneficiary of the LR unscoped's long kill time (BR players will need ~1.85s to get in an extra shot if they miss), I don't think it's a huge deal. The time could be brought down to a little more than 1.6 without interfering with the Carbine buff. Not sure if it's necessary, though, since most of the important times LR players will be scoped in. The choice to increase the LR's red reticule range rather than reduce the DMR's was iffy IMO (more aim assist at longer ranges? meh) but I don't think it'd change much, what with the DMR already being as it is.
Because the weapon that takes no skill to use should definitely be buffed once it requires what is still a ridiculously small amount of skill to use. Can't wait.
**** ya longer light riffle. To make the BR 4 shot though they gun lower the ROF I would hope. And the carbine is my weapon of choice so if its an easier kill I am all good But AR buff? AR don't need a buff all it needs is Automatics to rival it.
PLLEEEEEAAAAASSE use auto text colour. This text is black, and as such is very hard to read on the dark theme. Auto works on both themes because it's dynamic. Anyway. I agree in basic terms, but that argument can only get you so far. They obviously want non precision autos to be just as viable as precision semi autos since they put them both in the primary category. Your argument, even though I agree with it in a basic sense, doesn't hold any more weight here than it did with regards to balancing at release. It's simply shifting the norm down in terms of kill times but aiming to keep the balance between semis and autos the same, which imo is fine. Yes I think the AR is more reward than demand within its intended range, but it's overall less useful so the amount that this ends up actually being an issue is, in my experience, not huge. You also neglected to account for the fact that they've reduced the auto aim on the thing, which actually helps our cause by increasing demand. It isn't just being made more powerful, it's also being made somewhat harder to use.
Oh, sorry, everything dun got screwed up when I copy+pasted from Waypoint. I think that the fact that the gun puts almost no strain on the user is a fine balancing factor, so it should only beat the players that are using more challenging guns and failing at it. Players shouldn't deserve free kills just because they got close enough (or know how to stand around a corner) to throw their life away: that's the mentality that got us the boltshot. It would take an unrealistic amount of nerfing in the sense of removing aim-assist/auto-aim/bullet-magnetism to make the gun actually have a defined skill-gap, and I don't see it making enough of an impact to make the gun any less of a problem, and that's disregarding the fact that they've buffed the damage output. The gameplay that it promotes on the Majestic Maps and in the hubs to everything important in the BTB maps (top mid and all of the small tunnels/bases on Exile, Vortex, Settler, Longbow) is just astounding. I thought the AR was good in Halo 3, when all it did was destroy players that choked with the BR and was deadly when combined with melee on an opponent that couldn't back up. Obviously, things would have to change to accommodate for new mechanics like sprint, but I don't think just buffing the gun to the point that it is deadly at a much wider range, is ridiculously hard to miss with, etc... was the right way of doing it. You can have an automatic rifle that takes skill to use, but that's not what any of the H4 automatics are.
Ah fair enough. I don't disagree. But again, how is that any more true with this buff than it was at release, considering equivalent primaries are also getting buffs (apart from the DMR, which doesn't need one)? It just sounded like you were saying that this makes the situation worse than they are now in a general balance way, but I don't think it really will overall. The AR isn't nearly as much of a problem as the Boltshot was or even is now, and I know that's not justification for it in itself but it just seems like a slightly hyperbolic comparison. In principle I agree with your assessment, but honestly at that point why put it in the game? You're talking about pretty strong competitive value, which I agree with and is exactly why the thing hasn't been in MLG since CE. But if that was the aim when developing the game, they probably wouldn't have non precision autos at all. And frankly I just don't see it as a practical problem to the same degree I see it as a problem in principle. I spend sooo much time in those exact areas you talk about, particularly Exile's tunnels, and I just don't die to it as often as it seems like I should considering how at home it is there. The DMR and BR are capable enough, and AR use frankly rare enough in my experience, to make me not really care for the most part. I can't see this buff changing my mind hugely considering the benefits I'll see as a BR user. .....wha? The Halo 3 AR was basically a glorified Mauler. Burst and beat. How can you criticise easy kill weapons, and even focus particularly on the Boltshot (which fills a similar niche, though more powerful I'll admit), yet say that was good? I think you and I must have played different games.
I mean, I'm definitely using quite a bit of hyperbole and prediction to make my point. Getting close to someone is considered a skill in itself, I suppose, but it's just not one that is particularly difficult to manage: it's not difficult to use at it's optimal range, in terms of actual aiming, and its crippled range is not hard to stay on top of. Don't even get me started on the boltshot (I hate the fact that players get choices on what they bring into the game to begin with), but I'm not only complaining about either of these weapons because I'm just butthurt that they're killing me. Whenever I score an easy kill with the boltshot or the AR, I get the exact same thought: "wow, that would have turned out COMPLETELY differently had I been forced to use something that took skill. I thought I was screwed and I really don't deserve that kill." I have a class that implements pretty much everything that I'm not proud of, and it sickens me that I do perfectly well by AR charging, boltshotting, and plasma nading people that are using skillful weapons perfectly. Regardless of what weapon we're talking about, I think they both deliver that undeserved accomplishment. How many people here actually think that the new AR is going to give people a hard time aiming? I foresee a buff that outweighs the nerf: I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest if the nerfed aim-assist is a barely noticeable change even though the entire gun gets a damage buff. I think the AR would have been just fine if everything else was buffed without it, minus the DMR. The gun would still be defined by those principles that promote such terrible (IMO) gameplay, but buffing it just makes it a bigger thorn in my side. I mean, of course 343 wants the AR to be a viable option, but they also want Halo to be defined by a Spartan in a wheelchair soooooo......yeah. Like I said before, I don't say all of this from just the perspective of someone who's absolutely butthurt and experiences the gun solely when I'm just dying from the other end of it: I'll abuse it where I see fit, and I do much better than I deserve to, so we definitely have differing experiences with it and I'd like to think that a lot of what I'm saying is more practicality than it is principle. I don't think "capable enough" should be how the precision guns work at this range: I think the AR should reward players for catching other players off-guard or taking advantage of players that choke, rather than reward players for having suicidal ways of approaching fights. I guess my problem is that this game, and Reach, have options, which means they pack the game with ways of offering crutches to people that can't aim when they're playing a shooter, rather than promoting the idea that "the better man wins." But you're right, if the gun was as useless as I'd want it to be, there would be no point in it being an option. I think they could figure SOMETHING out that the AR could do that makes it good against fighting a specific type of player: have it balance out people using a specific ability, or have it work more effectively at slowing an opponent who is running away, I dunno, just something that doesn't make it so dangerous against a player that is moving all over the place with perfect aim, aka doing everything right. I mean, it was still annoying, easy, and it was the most complained about thing on forums everywhere, but you had to try really hard to get killed by an AR without including melee into the equation. I guess "good" isn't the right word, just better than what it is now.
Someone from 343i (think it was Bravo, have to double check) stated 50% aim assist reduction, and the AR needs perfect shots to kill two people in one clip, so a good guess for damage is one or two bullets less. It'll almost certainly be harder to use overall, and average kill times won't change much at all.
I think that all the other weapons are all good already and only the DMR needs a nerf. IMO, I kind of like longer kill times. Makes Halo unique.
The current changes are putting the weapons between 1.4 and 1.5s kill times - CoD and such shooters normally have kill times close to .5 seconds. There's nothing to be worried about in terms of uniqueness.
My only complaint is the Light Rifle buff. They shouldn't buff the Light Rifles red reticule range, they should nerf the DMR's. Part of the (massive) problem in BTB is the range on the damn DMR. You can stand on the pelican on Ragnarok and hit people behind the large rock on the far (waterfall) side of the map. Giving the LR the ability to do that is terrible because now we've got two guns that will stall map movement instead of one. I like the BR/Carbine buff though.
Halo's 1-3 had faster killtimes (with the Magnum being at 0.6s which is still faster than most call of duty weapons, if not all) as compared to Halo 4. The Halo 4 BR will still kill slower than all the others because it's still got the slowest firerate of all iterations.
No it hasn't. It fires faster than the Halo 3 BR did, but takes longer to kill overall because it's a 5sk rather than the 4sk of Halo 2 and 3. I believe it actually fires fractionally faster than even the Halo 2 BR.