I typed "at the expense of being able to fight enemies at different ranges in a short amount of time" to refer to exactly what those words mean, not choosing the wrong weapon for a given area (which is how you interpreted it). The range of the AR (even if it did more damage) is so short that even on small maps (countdown, asylum) you would at times find yourself being approached by two different enemies either simultaneously or within a very short time who cannot both be fought fairly with one weapon (considering a useful AR and a DMR). In this case, switching would also take long enough to prevent you from doing anywhere near as much damage, which is especially important in cases where you cannot escape, and your teammate is helping to finish them off. This is likely to happen at least once within a match, and it is out of the player's control. It reduces the skill gap because it reduces the amount of damage a skilled player can do down to close to the amount that a less skilled player (who is not affected as much) can do up against two enemies. This means that outnumbering the enemy (at different ranges, which isn't usually planned), which is already appropriately advantageous, becomes a much more significant factor relative to individual skill. It is possible to choose the wrong weapon when rounding a corner for certain sightlines (such as into the countdown concussion rifle area) against one enemy, but this is not as problematic if you can escape. Usually you would choose the AR, because you could back off from a distant enemy, but not a close enemy. Even if the AR's suprerior (to the rifles) range was increased, you would still find these situations on medium sized maps such as H4 haven, or even third floor (small map) Countdown, between the exposed lifts and the other lift holes- you could have to shoot across the gap and to the lifts in a short amount of time. The only reason why I'm giving a couple of examples is because giving more would take too much time. You could think about any map which isn't completely composed of hallways.
Sorry But the BR comparison was between 3 and H4 BRs, not a DMR vs BR set up, I tried to mention this but for some reason I couldn't even get on the webpage and sign in so I was off for a week.
I wouldn't mind that the AR could stand up to the DMR in Reach...if both were as difficult to use. Winning a DMR battle required more aim and an element of luck or great pacing while the AR is...an AR. Autos have a history of being easy to use and bad in Halo. And I actually don't want that weapon role separation for the utility like Zepp said because it makes encounters very rock-paper-scissorsy. I have no way of knowing or controlling what weapon the guy I'm about to turn the corner and fight started with. If he as weapons X, Y, or Z, I win because I have A. If he has B or C, I lose. Stuff like that. One primary was nice IMO because it kept the encounters fair. All pickups were earned, and the primary could still stand a chance although the other weapons had niche roles. I liked that.
I like the BR way better but the DMR is going to be better, unfortunately. Unless they make the BR a good old 4 shot again.
I agree with this. There doesn't seem to be much of an advantage to the BR - it has the three shot spread, plus it has an annoying noise (at least, in my opinion).
no bloom, and a burst makes it easier to get that last headshot once shields are popped. which is better when working as a team and teamshotting people. but DMR is probably a bit better in a straight 1v1 battle.
I like that you would embrace a AR if it was changed to be more skilled which could beat a DMR in CQC. (AR's already require skill to use maybe not much but still requires skill, I win like 90% of my AR vs AR or AR vs DMR battles when I choose to do it, Can't say that's because of luck) I enjoy that gametype to, I would prefer if that stayed in BR/DMR spawns and not in 100% of all gametypes, I would prefer Team slayer had "weapon role separation for the utility" because that's what it was designed to do. (I enjoyed default TS in reach because it had decent "weapon role separation" imo, But hated ZB TS because it made the DMR OP so defeated the purpose.) Idk about you but when I play I don't walk around randomly with random weapons if I'm walking in CQC area ill bring out my CQC weapons or pickup a CQC weapon if i know that's my intent, If i pickup a sniper I don't walk around in CQC areas i camp open areas with long LOS If i walk into a corridor with sniper out and get hard countered by getting shotgunned to the face I accept that as my mistake and take the death I don't say "I have no way of knowing or controlling what weapon the guy I'm about to turn the corner and fight started with." As for the rock-paper-scissoryness I've never understood why that is a bad thing... There is already tons of RPS elements in Halo already I especially don't understand it when "weapon role separation for the utility" is a soft RPS(Soft RPS=rock soft counters scissors etc, Hard RPS=Paper hard counters rock) Couple wiki quotes: -In many real-time strategy, first-person shooter, and role-playing video games, it is common for a group of possible weapons or unit types to interact in a rock-paper-scissors style, where each selection is strong against a particular choice, but weak against another, emulating the cycles in real world warfare (such as cavalry being strong against archers, archers being strong against pikemen, and pikemen being strong against cavalry[29]). Such game mechanics can make a game somewhat self-balancing, and prevent gameplay from being overwhelmed by a single dominant strategy. -In game theory, dominant strategy (commonly called simply dominance) occurs when one strategy is better than another strategy for one player, no matter how that player's opponents may play. Many simple games can be solved using dominance.
I understand soft and hard counters. I played SCII for a while. Still do a bit. I suppose it all depends on how well the guns perform against other primaries in their optimum range. Hopefully, (especially if the aim assist isn't molasses thick like Reach) the aiming factor and weapon control will be much more important than the actual weapon in primary v primary. I want very light soft counters. Since you cite the TL wiki, I'll use Starcraft: Not Immortal v Roach, but more of Sentries and Lings. Both have a chance to win, but they require different tactics and arguably the Sentry is a little better off (if it has energy and the guy is good). And I understand that I'll be sticking to my best range with whichever weapon I have, but you can't only waltz down long sight lines with a DMR. There are other areas and map variety you will need to access. If I want to control the power weapons, I'll have to go into areas that aren't the best for my primary. I'm talking strictly how primaries will perform against each other; power weapons can be controlled, and you can identify which ones your opponent has access to. Scouting primaries don't have that luxury anymore. The X beats Y and Y beats Z but Z beats X thing works better in RTSes, because 'Scouting' helps you prepare for different weapons and enemies and react accordingly (depending on how well you and your opponent scout each other). If you were to take scouting out, and make most engagements blind engagements, the game wouldn't be as strategic. Since you have to commit to a primary weapon on spawn and can't switch without finding another, and you have no idea which weapon your opponent is using until you see (and probably engage) them, it isn't nearly as strategic as it would be in an RTS. If I couldn't scout and react to Robo/Stargate/4 Gate/Twilight in Starcraft until I see his army for the first time, PvP would be even more like rock-paper-scissors with ties meaning Colossus wars in the endgame. It wouldn't be nearly as deep. Halo doesn't have nearly as effective a 'scouting' method. I don't expect it to work as well. That's why I don't think it will fit the sandbox. Who knows though, I may be wrong.
This is what I want, It would be like as if the Sentry with energy was a AR in CQC and BR was lings in CQC. Which is why your allowed to have two weapons upon your person at any given time. I want each person to have a weakness, This is why I liked Reach TS, Everyone spawns with AR/Pistol which gives you ability to fight viably at any range Go anywhere do anything you want you still have a chance(Pistol>AR at range and vise versa so not just AR battles) then if you decide to pickup a weapon DMR for your pistol you get better long range potential but lose some CQC potential(pistol>DMR CQC) but then if you swap your AR for a PP you gain melee one shots and noob combo but lose AR reliability in CQC, Its a smorgasbord of choices and tactical decisions which multiples the skill level because each weapon has its own twitch skills someone can't just be "I'm a DMR Demi-god i win all the games" Power weapons are hard counters and "Power" weapons and primaries are soft counters and utility weapons so there is a difference there. You say "finding another" like people will not know the weapon spawns after few games everyone will know every spawn and be able to take routes to gain weapons they want for specific zones. "I have a AR only i will take couple seconds longer to go pickup the DMR before i go in that open area" and that's been true to some degree of every halo game you "have no idea which weapon your opponent is using" because they could of picked up random BR or mauler on there way. Just wanna point out there is scouting not so much preemptive scouting as you would in SC (unless you physically see them/Team mates tell you/hear there weapon firing/proximity voice or promethean vison in Halo 4) but there is real time scouting/combat situation awareness idk what to call it but In CQC if you have shotgun your forgiven for running around engaging on pretty much anyone you want but You don't need to engage every person you see when your weapon is in its suboptimal range, If you ran into a CQC and see enemy with AR and he got first shot and you have a DMR its ok to run it's your fault for having a DMR in CQC. You should of picked up a CQC weapon or spawned with one if you wanted to be optimized in CQC if you don't want to be optimized in CQC your accepting that risk because other benefits outweigh been optimized in CQC(because you spend 99% of game DMRing in open areas not worth time, multiple reasons) adding more depth/strategies. I'm not saying replace the whole game just want to separate the gametypes where there is one "DMR/BR"(akin to previous BR/DMR slayer) gametype and there is a "all weapons equal" gametype(akin to Team slayer but more utility weapons) and both these gametypes could be voted for in lobby for CTF/TS/Oddbal/etc.
Scorch, when you said "rock paper scissors" were you referring to my post in a different thread? It's a response to something different, where it was suggested that each weapon have an rps pattern with cov, human and pros. This one? http://www.forgehub.com/forum/halo-...-weapons-aas-tactical-support-packages-4.html You mean like we already have now? With DMR starts and pistol starts gametypes in the same game? Or do you want Infinity slayer multiple viable starting weapons with a different classic playlist with BR starts only? (Or should it be light rifle starts? Is there a fully precise, no spread, no bloom rifle out of the 4 rifles? The carbine please? Is that going to be a fast-finger-trigger-pulling-semi-auto-ROF test? I hope not.)
I'd just like to address this in terms of Pistol as half of the starting combo. I dislike the Pistol as the precision/ranged option in a starting combo for 2 reasons. The first is that it is, for the most part, ineffective in terms of the design of most Reach maps. At any sort of range (more specifically the range you're talking, ie. when you get outside of effective AR range) the kill times are way too slow to actually rely on it. This time requirement is defined by player speed and general size of LoS (ie. how long you see someone for before they get to cover or are out of effective range) and the issues with the Pistol lie in the very slow RoF you have to use to maintain accuracy at any kind of range as well as the small clip size which allows you 1 kill per reload at the absolute maximum. The second is that, even outside of these design aspects, it's stupidly random. Significant bloom and spread make it unreliable as ****, so even if you get in to a duel where both players commit to fighting, don't abuse the hugely long kill times at range to just avoid the other player and pace as much as is required, the randomness can either give one player the kill for no apparent reason, or in many cases screw them both over by no one dying before they have to reload, effectively rendering the battle moot. These are both pretty regular occurrences at the staple ranges of most Halo 4v4 maps. Basically, I very much disagree with your defined roles within the AR/Pistol starting combo. The Pistol is not functional enough to fill the role you're talking about, and if you listen to the way Bungie have always discussed it then I'd argue it wasn't even meant to. It's not a ranged primary, even just in less powerful terms than the DMR, it's a sidearm. At range it does not hold its own as a killing weapon, it's for occasional cleanups. I'd argue that, as a weapon useable in its own right, it fits in to pretty much the exact same range role as the AR (perhaps very slightly longer, but not enough to give it its own ranged role). It just works better for people who prefer semi auto to auto. As such, this is my main beef with the AR/Pistol starting combo. It isn't a "go anywhere, do anything" combo at all. It gives you one ranged capability but two ways to go about it, leaving anything outside of that range as mostly out of your capability, and plagued by randomness when you do have a go. This is why the AR Pistol combo is so frustrating to most people with awareness beyond AR range. You can basically see an entire game going on around the map but be given no real options to get stuck in other than to get up close. This limits both the strategic and raw skill aspects of the game, limiting its depth absolutely. Personally. I agree with the idea that a single, reliable primary is very much preferable, and trumping other players on weapon role terms can come from the pickup aspect of the game. However, if we must approach this from a starting primary + secondary perspective then I'd much prefer a DMR primary and a stronger AR secondary. I always thought the AR would have had much more potential if it were beefed a little at shorter range. I'd also like to see damage drop off used in favour of bloom as a range limiting mechanic, since it works absolutely (as opposed to limiting range via randomness, which inherently doesn't work all the time) yet doesn't compromise consistency.
The DMR is probably more precise, by the way, the new BR seens to present a little lack of Bloom. I still prefer the Magnum.
So, like a spiker without leading, or a rifle without releasing the trigger in CQC areas? I think that bloom which only sends shots to the outer the edge of the reticle would be suitable for the AR, seeing as how so many would be used to the bloom. There would still be landed shots on top and bottom of the enemy when outside of optimal range/reticle size, but the effect would be so insignificant as to make shooting at the wrong range/not pacing no longer viable. There wouldn't be a gradual drop-off of accuracy, it would be clearly defined/apparent. Don't forget that I mean spawning with a Reach-like spiker and the H3 BR (kill times), or just under 85% bloom kill times if that is too hard to readjust to (I think that might be true for myself and many others, but not MLG playlist players). What if the spiker/other slow projectile weapons reduced a target's movement acceleration to Reach levels when being hit? Basically for the fifth of a second between spiker shots, such that complete accuracy is necessary for a sustained effect. That would allow the strafe to be predictable enough for the slower (than bullets, but fast for visible projectiles) projectiles to be led appropriately.
I swap my pistol out for DMR in team slayer 99.99% of the time because I do rely on my AR for CQC but in battle things don't always run perfectly I might need to reload with my AR( because I had it out and prepared) and its quicker to swap weapons then reload or you might simply run out of AR ammo and pistol has more potential in more CQC situations but I accept that negative because I prefer having more reliable long range damage from DMR. Ignoring how crap and unreliable the the actual weapons are, I was just describing how I play team slayer, If I was in a situation where I and my enemy only had a AR and pistol each, When I see someone with a AR I will use my pistol at range because like you said the pistol has a range which is "perhaps very slightly longer" it doesn't give it its ranged role but it has a slightly more reliable and faster kill time the more distance between you and a AR wielder. To demonstrate both weapons are pretty much equally viable weapons with slightly different roles and I enjoy that aspect. I probably shouldn't of worded it "go anywhere do anything" because it obviously cant fulfill a role of a DMR or long range fights but it can put up a fight against any weapons at melee to medium range viably and do damage at the far end of medium range with scoped pistol Which gives you utility(at there respective ranges) to do almost anything from spawn then trade out your general utility to gain specific bonuses(getting DMR instead of pistol for longer ranges but lose slight CQC effectiveness etc) This is a completely different topic, I would argue that not been able to shoot everyone at any range adds more depths and strategic and raw skill elements to the game giving it more depth. One thing I enjoy about team slayer when not everyone has a DMR I can control fights I know how many team mates and enemy's are in the vicinity to evaluate risk and our chances of winning without worrying about to many random across map shots. You never know if a in a semi open area a random DMR is gonna shoot you across map for 90% of there damage potential (slowing down for bloom) which pretty much means you died because a random enemy had a DMR looking in your general direction making it a 2v1. In team slayer that is still an issue but not everyone spawns with a DMR so less of a factor but everyone spawns with a pistol which can still be deadly if your in a 1v1 fight and across map someone gets 1-2 shots(10% of damage potential) of pistol on you weakening you enough for other guy to finish you off more as a across map support instead of a 2v1. Basically adds more depth into potential situations instead of "Everyone can fight everyone" Not to mention with limited range you gain a ton more zoning choices, If you can shoot across map with DMR you can zone the whole map but I don't want everyone to be able to zone the whole map all game with limited range you are forced to choose where you want to zone and why. Kinda comparable to DMR battles on hemorrhage which I enjoy they have a limited range but still can kill at long distance if your lucky so you can only fight people in your own area(which i think is a good thing) while getting support shots from allies. But sniper shoot the whole map which is like DMR is team slayer which is fine to have but not when everyone spawns with a weapon that ranges the whole map. If you use the AR solely how you would use a SMG from halo 3 is does fulfill the same role decently I'm pretty sure that's what they intended but to allow it some ranged capability mixing AR/SMG together As for "trumping other players on weapon role terms can come from the pickup aspect of the game" that could be true I never said i wanted Halo 4 COD system or reach's loadout system or Halo 3 spawning system, I just want the weapon sandbox to have more general use utility weapons at the same level. Not: Power weapons>DMR>other weapons>niche weapons. I want: Power weapons>DMR and other utility weapons one for each respective range>other weapons>niche weapons
@Zepp - Yeah, that was the post I was talking about. Thanks for clearing that up! I don't think loadout weapons spawn on map. Even if they do, I think it's safe to say there won't be as many considering the diversity of spawn choices. Having to go out of my way to grab another primary in hopes that one of my now two primaries will be the trump card to each area seems like it would create much more stagnant gameplay. Isn't the point of a loadout to start with whatever you need? This goes back to the power weapon thing I mentioned earlier: Power weapons are fine IMO. You can identify when your opponent has a power weapon based on whether it is at its spawn or not. If it isn't when it's due to be up, and one of your teammates doesn't have it, you can predict that they have the shotgun. If the game is AR/BR starts, I'll be careful around CQC with a BR because I know they started with a CQC weapon. It it's Pistol/AR starts, I'll bolt to a DMR and keep my distance. With loadout starts, I don't know whether to run from CQC (if they started with an auto primary) or engage (DMR or LR primary). Secondaries are now significantly weaker than primaries and add an extra variable so I won't add them into this. The point is that I have no basis on which I can guess my opponents kit in Loadout games. It's like the argument against AAs being only visible on your back. Once again, forcing players to find another weapon just to be able to fight with a chance in other ranges seems to be counter-intuitive for a loadout game. I should be able to build my kit for any range, without having to use Firepower. That's been the point of primary weapons in every Halo thus far: to give everyone a standard weapon to fight at any range. Other weapons are controlled and earned. Separating the utility role out seems like a bad idea to me. It doesn't seem to add any strategy besides random risks and unpredictable engagements. You cannot argue that it adds an element of luck in a place where there wasn't one: They have a choice of primary weapons that is very significant that I have NO control over, and NO ability to predict what they will have pre-sighting them. Adding in a random element does not add strategy.
Yes which is why you choose to spawn with whatever weapons you need. If you happen run out of ammo or decide you need a certain weapon for a certain situation you didn't foresee for you can change your weapon. Kinda confusing when talking about multiple games because each game has different spawning system, I want the weapon sandbox to involve multiple utility weapons of equal value that are in abundance in game whether it be: -Everyone spawns the same in halo 3 with like AR/Pistol and there is decent number of utility weapons around the map -Reach loadouts where you get choice of AR or Pistol or DMR or etc and a few utility weapons spawn on map in key area's -Halo 4 class system anyone can choose any combo of utility weapons from spawn. Any of those systems can accommodate my desires Idk about you but I don't know who has the power weapons 24/7 I know where there potentially in use when they respawn how many shots they probably have left but I don't always know if my team has them or enemy team has them or which player on that team even has it. There are heaps of unknown elements but you play around those factors when you know there is that potential, Eg:"Pistol/AR starts, I'll bolt to a DMR and keep my distance." You know the enemy spawns with Pistol/AR so its most likely to encounter that so you counter play that but they could of picked up a DMR or any other weapon making an unknown element. When there is a shotgun sword on a small map I'm assuming you will generally stick to the most open area's to keep most distance between you and the sword/shotgun. But assuming your using the Halo 4 weapon spawning system you know anyone can spawn with bunch of weapons so instead of directly countering everyone's default spawn (with one weapon) You choose to make your positives as positive as you can to avoid been countered by choosing long range weapons and sticking to open areas or CQC weapons and sticking to CQC, Or picking combination of weapons to be useful at any range but not be the best at any range(as in DMR and AR spawn. BR/AR spawn would be better CQC so your not the "best" at CQC even though it could turn out to be a perfectly balanced and fair ARvsAR battle but in the chance you need to swap weapons BR>DMR in CQC) There are still unknown factors just as there always was but I'm pretty sure players are smart enough to play around that, Not just play how they did in Halo 3 and be like "WTF he spawned with a different weapon then I did I was totally not prepared and or expecting that..." This seems more an argument towards Halo 4 spawning system then my multiple utility weapon sandbox premise though. Which is why you get two spawning weapons my goal is to remove the need for a "One weapon does everything" If you spawn with DMR and AR you have all ranges covered. But if you choose to spawn with AR/Pistol your choosing to limit your range for better CQC. It doesn't force a player to "find another weapon just to be able to fight with a chance in other ranges" most likely if they choose only CQC weapons they wont want to fight in other ranges because they intentionally choose to be a CQC specialist(and choose not to spawn with DMR or BR) but if they where to find them self's in a situation they needed to they have that choice by picking up a long range weapon on map. I want all utility weapons to be equally as strong and only given slight advantage at there specific ranges so you don't get a very significant advantage just by choosing to spawn with DMR.
How on earth can you assess this weapons role, pro's and con's without talking about unreliability and ineffectiveness. If you "ignore how crap and unreliable the Pistol is," then you're basically talking about a DMR and your argument makes no sense. I don't see your point. You're saying that when it's the only option you use it. That's not an argument to justify how good it is. You're also going back on your whole argument by admitting that they only have slightly different roles. OK, so we've reached a meeting point here. The AR/Pistol combo pretty much definitively limits the ranged potential of the game. You say "at their respective ranges" and "do almost anything" as if those things don't completely contradict each other. The very fact that it limits the range so heavily is what stops you from doing even close to anything, it's what makes this combo such a limited starting one. You don't trade out one of them for a DMR for "specific bonuses," you do it to gain a utility weapon which is fundamentally useful at the majority of core ranges in Halo maps, because neither of the starting weapons are this. I think it's ridiculous how non DMR start games basically necessitate you going out of your way off spawn to get a proper utility weapon. It's not a case of "Oh I'll go and get this if I want a specific boost in a given instance," you just need to go and get one off spawn otherwise the majority of the game in range terms is just out of your capability. This is a fundamental point. It's not a different topic, it's the core of why the AR/Pistol combo limits the nature of the game. First off, there is no logical way you can argue that it increases the raw skill aspect. It forces players in to shorter ranges, where battles are objectively easier due to a larger target and more aim magnetism. It also adds a huge luck factor, further de-emphasising the role of raw skill as the thing that defines a battle's outcome. As for the strategic side: People confuse "restricting the player" with "making the game more strategic" all the time and it really makes no sense. On the surface of it, making the player adhere more strongly to a given strategic approach (ie. get to where you want to fight because you can't do anything from range) does demand that the player focus more strongly on the strategic side of the game to achieve anything, but that's not the same as actually enhancing the strategic side of the game. What it does is reduce the number of viable strategies, and the ones that are left behind are less demanding on the player because of their simplicity. You're either doing it right, or doing it wrong, and doing it right isn't very hard in either strategic or raw skill terms. It is an utterly limiting factor to the depth of the game. See, this is my issue. You take aspects like coordinated map control and teamwork and just call it a "random enemy." That's not random chance screwing you over, that's you getting outplayed. All I can see here is you basically saying that you like Pistol starts because they make the game easier for you, since you can just focus on what's in front of you at a shorter range and don't have to extend your awareness out as much, since things beyond a very restrictive range impact upon battles nearly not at all. It's making the game much, much more simple by slimming down what you have to pay attention to, and thus how you have to adjust your strategy on a moment to moment basis. An ability to effectively team shot is what defines the 4v4 aspect of this game, and the AR Pistol start almost negates it (which even you accept with your "10% damage" comment). This is an entirely self contradictory statement. But the process of zoning a smaller area is much simpler and easier. You've got less to control, less to be aware of, less ability to help your team mates, and doing so is less about raw skill because of how ineffective the Pistol often is. It places a much lesser demand on the player in skill terms, and whilst it puts more of a focus on using certain strategies, the strategies themselves are less demanding. It gives you fewer options, and the options it does give you are putting a lesser demand on the player, so it's worse in both senses. It's dumbing down the game. The fundamental difference here is spread. The DMR only has bloom, no spread, so it's theoretically 100% accurate if you pace enough. You can NEVER guarantee that the Pistol will be 100% accurate. Even if you only fire a shot once every 10 minutes, spread will still affect it and mean you miss due to random chance. This is what makes it totally different from cross mapping on Hemorrhage with a DMR, that's much harder but at least consistent. The nature of the Pistol doesn't make it harder to use at range ("harder" meaning that the exact same potential for damage is there, it just places a greater demand on the player to achieve it), it limits the effective range near absolutely. You can't control spread, so there's no extra demand, it just adds a huge randomness factor making it largely ineffective. OK, two things. One, you were talking about why AR and Pistol starts are good, but now you're talking about nerfing the DMR. These are two completely different things. First you were talking about making it harder to get (ie. not starting with it) and now you're talking about making it less useful. That wouldn't fix all the things you've complained about above at all. You'd still get pressured from range by DMRs, because that's its defined range role. All nerfing it would do is make it a less viable option at closer ranges, which wouldn't affect your complaints at all, since they were all based around how the DMR is useful outside of Pistol range, which it still would be otherwise you would have made it utterly pointless. Secondly: Your little descriptions there talk about overall effectiveness but compare utility weapons to specialist role weapons. You're basically saying that you want a game without utility weapons, which would be a massive departure for Halo, and for FPSs in general tbh. It becomes all about choosing rather than using at this point, turning the game in to one which defines the outcome of situations by what you chose to use rather than what you do with it. It'd become a rock, paper, scissors deal then, with a very small emphasis on raw skill in encounters. That's the beauty of utility weapons within a sandbox like Halo. You get a utility weapon which puts multiple levels of demand on the player, meaning they have to be aware of a much greater range to make informed strategic decisions, and enabling them to use their skills in aiming and strafing to win battles, but beyond this you still get defined weapon roles which are more useful based on situations, basically niche and power weapons.
Well since we don't know what changes they've made to either weapon, nor have we played halo 4 multiplayer, there's no really no point in voting or thinking about this until a few days after the game's release. This is all idle speculation based on (at least) two different game experiences.
My whole argument is I want a bunch of utility weapons that only have slightly different roles. Everything else is just explanations and justifications and reasoning of the different aspects of why I want that. Ok I will try and make it clear what I want, If i had control of Halo 4 I would make 4 human utility weapons, AR/Pistol/DMR/BR (assuming I had control of damage reliability etc) AR>Pistol=BR>DMR in short range Pistol>BR>AR=DMR in medium range DMR>BR>Pistol>AR at long range But the advantages are only slight except the DMR cant short range and AR cant long range. Then using any loadout system you want: -Halo 3 spawn Spawn with DMR and AR but have bunch of BR's and pistols on map. -Halo Reach loadouts: loadout1=DMR/AR, loadout2=DMR/Pistol, loadout3=AR/Pistol, loadout4=BR or loadout1=DMR loadout2=AR loadout3=Pistol loadout4=BR but have more of the weapons on map -Halo 4 system just have them as spawning options. Keep in mind this is for team slayer the default gametype, There would be BR slayer where everyone spawns with BR and has the "BR>everything" gameplay. But I would like to know what do you think the purpose and or goal and or gameplay should be like in Team slayer? without turning it into DMR/BR Slayer because that already exists. (can't say TS shouldn't exist either or its just for crap players) You may have meant it in a different way but that's the very core issue I want fixed the DMR/BR is to powerful compared to other weapons I want other utility weapons to be useful so your not required to pick up a DMR/BR every game and it be useful at any range. The reason I'm using Reach's TS as an example is because its the closest I've seen to achieving that, If the AR was bit more stronger in CQC and Pistol was more reliable at longer distance and DMR was slightly worse in CQC but more reliable at medium range that would be perfect. It isn't restricting a player, Its giving the player more choices and more choices=more possible strategies. In a game where everyone spawns with (where the BR>other weapons) there is a lot of strategies. That is true. But if you change the weapon spawns and make other utility weapons viable (like my example start post) people can spawn with or pickup a BR and if everyone in the game choose to spawn with BR or picked up one at that point ALL strategies from BR spawns are there, But then you add more strategies from the other viable utility weapons, Someone has AR there better in CQC so I can't fight that guy there but he cant shoot me at this range here etc etc etc etc. It accommodates most BR only strategies but involves more which adds depth. If everyone can fight everyone there is no variance there just is. If some people cant fight some people at certain ranges it adds more potential situations Zoning a smaller area is easier but you don't have less to be aware of, It's generally risky in open areas because not everyone has a DMR but you still have to contemplate someone might have DMR and there pistol shots might damage you so you have more to consider and be aware of. You only have less ability to help your team if your choose to stay at long range with short range weapon Main issue here is I think having to choose your area to zone a smaller area is more skilled and you think been able to zone the whole map is more skilled, Which when i think about it both are equally skilled situations one suited for TS and one suited for BR slayer. I've had to come at it from different angles to argue against specific points, I don't have a issue with DMR>Pistol at long range that's what I want. I just dont want the DMR>pistol/AR and short range as well. So making it a less viable option at close range(not medium range) would fix it. My problem is when BR or DMR > other weapons at any range. DMR is fine out ranging the AR but the AR should be able to out shoot the DMR in close range easier. I want few select general use utility weapons for each range not just one for every range. I want a few utility weapons not just one, But I do want slight more emphasis on choosing weapons and each weapon has its own raw skill and specific raw skill to overcome the other utility weapons slight advantage. Not just the raw skill of a DMR vs DMR battle And that's the reason why me and a lot of people enjoy BR slayer. Going back to question at start of the post, If people can get that from BR slayer why would anyone play Default team slayer? Why can't Team slayer be the multiple utility weapon strategic rock papper scissorsish gameplay that still involves power weapons and niche weapons and regards raw twitch skills as important.