Halo: Combat Evolved Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Why is the Halo CE pistol unbalanced?
  • Subject: Why is the Halo CE pistol unbalanced?
Subject: Why is the Halo CE pistol unbalanced?
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

This is somewhat off topic, but in that podcast what do you think he meant when he said the pistol's coming back?

  • 02.20.2008 10:24 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Rhudebaker
Oh come on. Think about the golden gun. That was a one hit kill pistol. So was the gold PP7. And it shot 7 rounds at a much faster rate. Nobody complained about that. So knock it off.

Sounds to me like a guy pretty much confesses to changing it... "what I expected to happen... and the rest of that entire line, even when somebody else speaks up and makes it hardly understandable. And then they go back to trying to keep it a mystery.

I wasn't playing Goldeneye in its prime, so I wouldn't know if people were complaining. But a one-shot kill pistol in multiplayer doesn't exactly sound balanced, dude. From my experience with Goldeneye's "Golden" weapons, they were all stupidly overpowered and unfit for multiplayer.

  • 02.20.2008 11:30 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I don't think it was about balance back then so much. Sure it had a good reload time, enough time to add cream to the coffee, and you couldn't hold more than 10 rounds I think.

The overpowered weapons were part of what made that game a classic. You better learn to accept it. Same reason Halo CE made it. Not going to be so true for Halo 2 or Halo 3. Don't you see the trend? Take the hint. Even Counter-strike is that way. Look at the AWP. 436 damage in one hit... that's 4 kills right there in one shot. Talk about overkill. And it's a big hit. Get the pan yet?

  • 02.21.2008 8:57 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

i think the pistol was kool and it would of been bad to have a pistol and a br in halo 2 becuase then people would quad shot and you could have no chance of living

  • 02.22.2008 6:56 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Rhudebaker
I don't think it was about balance back then so much. Sure it had a good reload time, enough time to add cream to the coffee, and you couldn't hold more than 10 rounds I think.

The overpowered weapons were part of what made that game a classic. You better learn to accept it. Same reason Halo CE made it. Not going to be so true for Halo 2 or Halo 3. Don't you see the trend? Take the hint. Even Counter-strike is that way. Look at the AWP. 436 damage in one hit... that's 4 kills right there in one shot. Talk about overkill. And it's a big hit. Get the pan yet?

So unbalanced gunplay is what makes a game a classic? Dude, I don't think so.

  • 02.22.2008 6:26 PM PDT

I remember the first time i used it in campaign.......i took a banshee down with it.........

  • 02.22.2008 10:49 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

A good storyline makes a game too, yeah. But balancing of weapons alone sure doesn't do it. Heck, CS doesn't even have a storyline. So yeah, what makes CS so good? The variety of weapons that each server their purpose, and the drive to pick up the most powerful one around when you can, to hold that spot on the map that's a place of authority. Halo 3 doesn't have it, and it'll go down the drain. In Halo 3, you can play the same anywhere on the map. Not in CS. We'll see which one makes the test of time, but CS has 9 years in its favor. Halo 3 won't be such a big deal in 5 years. Goldeneye will be a big deal for years to come. Remember the lack of balancing there that made gameplay so sweet.

  • 02.23.2008 2:00 AM PDT

Well, out in the open (or even in close quarters), the Pistol seems to pretty much raype everything. All the time. It's pretty much the only weapon anyone uses =\ And in the podcast, one of the employees said someone accidentally doubled the damage value of the Pistol, and it was really supposed to be half of that. =[

  • 02.23.2008 4:12 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Yes! You heard it too! Sweet. He didn't expect it to be so good... oh well.

  • 02.23.2008 8:35 AM PDT

1.Arkham Asylum, 2.Mass Effect, 3.Halo CE, 4.Mass Effect 2, 5.Halo 2, 6.Splinter Cell Double Agent, 7.Gears of War 2, 8.Medievil, 9.Oblivion, 10.Crash Team Racing

Posted by: Quackers
The problem was that while it could be beaten by other guns within their specialised area of effectiveness, it destroyed them outside it.

It was only a bit less effective than the other guns inside their best area...but was a -blam!-load more effective than them outside it.


That's why. Few people decide not to use it, it's huge risk walking around without it and few peopleuse combos not including it. It kills everything from AR to Snipers easily. It's bit harder to aim, but when everyone is using it people won't live long no matter where they are.

After playing Hang em High pistolmatch online for first time I can say I didin't like it at all. Game can't get more single dimensional.

I think Halo2 BR is almost as bad, but not exactly. Halo3 BR/Carbine is great, still variable but Snipers and SMGs have their superiorities.

[Edited on 02.24.2008 8:38 AM PST]

  • 02.24.2008 8:35 AM PDT

I haven't seen anyone call it unbalanced. I love the pistol.

  • 02.24.2008 8:44 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: kalle90
I think Halo2 BR is almost as bad, but not exactly. Halo3 BR/Carbine is great, still variable but Snipers and SMGs have their superiorities.
In Halo 2, I absolutely loathed the battle rifle. Halo 3 I still don't like it, but its a lot better. The carbine is a good weapon though. However, I still prefer the pistol over either of them. It was probably overpowered, but it wasn't too accurate. If you're more than 60 feet away probably only about 1 in every 5 shots will actually hit your opponent. Besides, even if it was overpowered, it was cool that way.

  • 02.24.2008 1:50 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Botolf, from the way you talk, I highly doubt you've ever played on XBC with some good players.

You are the definition of a Bungie Kid. Just because there are all those extra weapons in the game, doesn't mean that they are good for the game. And exactly, they shouldn't have been added in the first place.

And yes, the Sniper, Shotgun and Rockets are main weapons in the game. Stop making up terms like "Trio-Weapon".

The AR is just a pray and spray weapon. IE, a backup weapon when left with no more options.

The pistol is the all purpose weapon, why can't you understand that. If you're playing with half-competent adversaries, then you'll realize that.

You can't three shot someone in the feet. I believe it's a 5-6 shot without the headshot, and even then, unless you reset your reticle, you won't be landing every shot.

That is my point exactly. The pistol in the right hands is a very good gun, and in the wrong hands isn't nearly as effective.

I'm pretty sure the pistol doesn't outshine the Rockets at mid range, the sniper at very long range, or the shotgun at point blank range.

Edit: Doesn't mean.

[Edited on 02.27.2008 2:25 PM PST]

  • 02.26.2008 2:47 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

it was fine becauae aiming was a problem in halo 1 oposed to the easy aiming in halo 3 and 2 you know how the crosshair drags along with your oppenent for awhile

  • 02.27.2008 9:28 AM PDT

GT: MasterNinja33

In my Halo 1 LAN and xbconnect experience, Pistol skills go a long way but to win those team double, 4v4 slayer, or objective games you need to control the power weapons (rockets, sniper, and shotty) and powerups. Power weapons aren't just unused secondary weapons like someone posted earlier, they are vital to achieving Halo 1 success.

In my opinion, the pistol is NOT an unbalanced weapon. It helps against all foes, like people with powerups, power weapons, and vehicles.

  • 02.27.2008 12:19 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I spent some of last night and this morning playing Legendary Campaign with the express desire to check out how limiting my Magnum usage affected my gameplay. I went through Silent Cartographer and the first half of Assault on the Control Room without ever picking up and extra ammo for either the Magnum or the Sniper Rifle. I also went without ever picking up a health pack (just to add some extra ooomph to the venture) and never using any vehicles. This is what I found.......

For Silent Cartographer I never even ran out of ammo, and kept the Mag in my possession as either my main weapon or secondary for 90% of the level. When I did not have it, I had a needler. As long as my other weapon was always a Plasma Pistol, I found that never having more than my starting pistol ammo never became a problem, and I still have 30+ rounds left at the end of the level. I found that if I saved my Mag rounds for head shots on de-shielded Elites, and gut shooting Hunters then the ammo lasted forever. Since there is no shortage of Plasma Pistols on that (or any for that matter) level, things were shiny!

As for AotCR, there have been alot of similarities, but I have to admit that it was more difficult to restrain myself with using the pistol. This level is so much more open and long distance than SC that the range of the pistol is alot more inviting. But, nonetheless, I am just coming up on the second Wraith battle (the tower area) and I still have over 25 rounds left in the Mag. Granted I can hear my heart beating because I only have one health blip left (this part is a son of a breach playing this way), but not relying heavilly on the Magnum proves to me that it is handy, but not overpowered FOR CAMPAIGN PLAY. On Legendary, it is exceptionally handy, but it is not the be all to end all for weapon choice. I have not died any more often or any less often (although this is the first time my xbox has even been on in the last two weeks), but I have approached certain battles a bit differently knowing I would not be picking up any spare rounds. It is actually kinda cool, a bit more realistic knowing you cannot always rely on rounds laying around for one to scrounge........Resource Management 101!

  • 02.28.2008 1:22 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Well, that's rather interesting. However, the argument here really is about multiplayer, not campaign. We've pretty much established that the campaign is balanced fine (or at least I think we have). The people that are saying it isn't balanced are all talking about multiplayer.

  • 02.28.2008 7:34 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: No1 But Some1
Botolf, from the way you talk, I highly doubt you've ever played on XBC with some good players.

You are the definition of a Bungie Kid. Just because there are all those extra weapons in the game, doesn't mean that they are good for the game.

/Stopped reading there.

-Questioning my competence to talk on this issue
-Insulting me, insinuating I'm some fanboy sheep who can't think for himself
-Misreading my post and repeating something I haven't claimed (has happened multiple times in this thread, actually)

I can't be bothered to respond to the whole thing if it nosedives before it even begins. Poor form, sir.

  • 02.28.2008 10:54 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Rade9098
Well, that's rather interesting. However, the argument here really is about multiplayer, not campaign. We've pretty much established that the campaign is balanced fine (or at least I think we have). The people that are saying it isn't balanced are all talking about multiplayer.

.

A large contributing factor is the fact that those Elites aren't packing Mags' ;)

  • 02.28.2008 10:57 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Gamertag: the Mota Boy

You have reached the voice message system. To place this call as urgent, press eleven.

The reason that many (well, I at least) don't like the Pistol is not because it's unbalanced, but because it's so pwerful it makes the battles short and unintertaining. It's gamestyle isn't in line with how a lot of people today prefer it. Also, a lot of people like the chance to at least get to shoot back, to feel that they were given a fair shake. With the old pistol it was truely whoever started shooting first won (granted that people were of comparable skill). It made the battle too short and uneventful. Also, everbody uses it so that game has little variety. I play XBC and I try to get people to play a game with me with no Snipes (no pistol or sniper). They refuse and leave without even giving me the chance to put the pistol back in.

As much as I hate to say it, the CE diehard attitude and their beloved hand cannon are probably what eventually killed CE. The game had plenty of variety, they just didn't want to use it. I'll continue to use XBC for sentimental reasons, but I'll admitt that CE isn't aging as well as it could and I blame it's community.

[Edited on 02.29.2008 11:10 PM PST]

  • 02.29.2008 11:04 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Botolf
/Stopped reading there.

-Questioning my competence to talk on this issue
-Insulting me, insinuating I'm some fanboy sheep who can't think for himself
-Misreading my post and repeating something I haven't claimed (has happened multiple times in this thread, actually)

I can't be bothered to respond to the whole thing if it nosedives before it even begins. Poor form, sir.

Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realize it was your time of the month; my apologies.

I am questioning your competence on the issue: from what you are saying you seem not to ever have played beyond the "playing with a younger sibling/cousin" level.

I am insinuating that you are a near mindless fanboy. You have yet to say one thing that speaks ill of Bungie's decisions.

I am calling it as I see it: You're a BK, plain and simple.

So ignoring what you don't want to face? Good tactics when were in kindergarten, but face it, this isn't like the abuse your ass took from your uncle when you were a kid.

  • 03.02.2008 1:17 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Botolf is far from being a fan boy. I don't agree with what he says all the time but I find he's more mature than most others I talk with in these forums and I think you're putting words in his mouth (he doesn't think Halo 3 is better merely because it has more weapons, vehicles, etc.). If he was a simple-minded fan boy, then what good do you think you're doing for those who aren't by disrespecting and insulting him? There's no need for this hostility, dudes. Can't we all just get along and be dudes?

[Edited on 03.02.2008 6:44 AM PST]

  • 03.02.2008 6:43 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: No1 But Some1
Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't realize it was your time of the month; my apologies.

I am questioning your competence on the issue: from what you are saying you seem not to ever have played beyond the "playing with a younger sibling/cousin" level.

I am insinuating that you are a near mindless fanboy. You have yet to say one thing that speaks ill of Bungie's decisions.

I am calling it as I see it: You're a BK, plain and simple.

So ignoring what you don't want to face? Good tactics when were in kindergarten, but face it, this isn't like the abuse your ass took from your uncle when you were a kid.

And the attacks continue. I'll no longer try to reason with you, as you're quite set in your abrasive ways. I'll just end here by saying you have no idea what the hell you're claiming about me in the above post. You're willfully ignorant and generally hostile towards me for no sane reason, and I won't put up with it any longer. Find somebody else to share your childish behavior with.

Botolf is far from being a fan boy. I don't agree with what he says all the time but I find he's more mature than most others I talk with in these forums and I think you're putting words in his mouth (he doesn't think Halo 3 is better merely because it has more weapons, vehicles, etc.). If he was a simple-minded fan boy, then what good do you think you're doing for those who aren't by disrespecting and insulting him? There's no need for this hostility, dudes. Can't we all just get along and be dudes?
Spot on, I'm glad somebody can talk about this civilly and understand what I'm saying.

[Edited on 03.02.2008 5:41 PM PST]

  • 03.02.2008 5:33 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

My previous post was far from an attack, I am simply explaining myself.
I'm not going to try and say it in a nice way, I'm going to tell you how it is.

And as it stands, you still have to show any competence in Halo: CE multiplayer.

I'll go through this in a manner you might like a bit more.

Yes, and you should too. Weapons that are barely used are pointless additions and shouldn't have been added in the first place.
Thereby, you think every last gun in Halo 3 should be used. Why is that? I have no clue. Bungie isn't a "God" figure, and as of yet, they've been far from perfect.

I never said this. If all the new weapons can be balanced, that will create balance. Adding in more weapons alone does nothing.
Did I ever say that you said that? I said it seems that you think in this manner.

There is no such accepted term as a "Trio" weapon.
Trio weapon, not a "main" weapon.


I've played a lot of Halo multiplayer, so I believe I can say that the PR isn't nearly powerful enough to warrant much use.

Between taking down shields in less than a second, freezing an opponent in their tracks, and following up with a melee or BLB, it's a very effective gun if used in the right situation. (Overshield perhaps). Watch some MLG gameplays, they don't ignore the gun if it's laying on the ground.

Not powerful enough in my experience, the lack of accuracy is my main grief with it.
With downed shields, even at midrange, shooting at full auto, you can kill an opponent within a second or two.

Not if it's to the detriment of all the other "main" weapons, you don't.
Main weapon is the AR and Pistol, all others are secondary or power weapons first off.
The pistol in the right hands negates the power weapons and specialty weapons to the point where greater skill will conquer more often.

You don't have to land headshots to tear people apart with the pistol, skill is pretty moot.
I'd agree if your opponent stood still and didn't bother to shoot back. The pistol's reticule had to be reset with a flick from time to time, so during a 1v1 you weren't always going to land the shots are "supposed" to. And correct me if I'm wrong, but landing 3 headshots in a row within about a half of a second is a lot more effective and difficult than getting 5 out of 12 bullets to hit an opponent over the course of four or five seconds, right?

That's because you're comparing the performance of trio weapons to "main" weapons, its a stupid comparison. Trio weapons are always designed to have more punch than "main" weapons, it's a FPS constant, pretty much.

"Change the rules, and only use an AR, PP, PR, Needler. You will probably lose to the pistol"

You misread what I said. Take a somewhat skilled player and give him a pistol, with his novice adversary using power weapons. The person that is better will win 9/10 times.

Now give the experienced person an AR or something of that nature and let the novice keep the guns he had. Without a reasonable way to defend himself, the somewhat skilled player will lose much more often than before.

The pistol destroys balance by outshining every single "main" weapon, and it shows. Halo multiplayer degrades into people using trio weapons and the pistol, and not much else. It's boring.
Plasma Rifle/AR close range will more likely win.
Rockets will most likely win.
Sniper will most likely win.
Shotgun will most likely win.
But the pistol gives a person the chance to survive and kill his opponent.




  • 03.02.2008 9:37 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: No1 But Some1
My previous post was far from an attack, I am simply explaining myself.
I'm not going to try and say it in a nice way, I'm going to tell you how it is.

Hardly "far from an attack", friend, you'd piss off quite a few people if you talked with them in such a manner ;) Anyways, gun balance can be looked at from so many different angles and perspectives, there isn't any "this is just how it is" involved.

And as it stands, you still have to show any competence in Halo: CE multiplayer.
My total playtime and skill level in Halo 1 multiplayer hasn't been recorded on any program or website that I'm aware of, so I'm afraid that's quite impossible. I expect many others in this thread are no different, so I give them the benefit of the doubt before questioning their competence.



Thereby, you think every last gun in Halo 3 should be used. Why is that? I have no clue. Bungie isn't a "God" figure, and as of yet, they've been far from perfect.
I don't demand perfection, I just enjoy the gunplay far more when it hits close to the "sweet spot" where most of everything is useful in many situations.

Did I ever say that you said that? I said it seems that you think in this manner.
All the same, you seemed to be coming to a conclusion I had denied many other times in this thread.

There is no such accepted term as a "Trio" weapon.
The specific term itself, no, as I coined it here, but the thing I was referring to was the archetypal FPS [shotgun]-[sniper]-[rockets] class of weaponry that's regarded as a separate class from all the other weapons. "Trio weapon" is a whole lot easier to say than "archetypal FPS [shotgun]-[sniper]-[rockets] class weapon" :p

Between taking down shields in less than a second, freezing an opponent in their tracks, and following up with a melee or BLB, it's a very effective gun if used in the right situation. (Overshield perhaps). Watch some MLG gameplays, they don't ignore the gun if it's laying on the ground.
I realize it's effective in the right situations, but I don't believe it's powerful enough to be useful through the entire game (I want guns that can do this, you may not, each to his own), there's many more situations where it becomes so trivially outgunned. I can see pros enjoying better use of it, but I'm no pro, and Bungie's goal is to target the masses.

With downed shields, even at midrange, shooting at full auto, you can kill an opponent within a second or two.
And until the shields are down, it behaves almost like a "half-weapon", it can be made up with your second weapon, of course, but then you're cutting out other weapon choices just to make up for the weaknesses of the AR. You may prefer having it this way, but I don't.

Main weapon is the AR and Pistol, all others are secondary or power weapons first off.
The pistol in the right hands negates the power weapons and specialty weapons to the point where greater skill will conquer more often.

Skill by accuracy, yes, but I'm no fan of it tipping the balance so drastically. Let's say Player A did this in the game:

-Picks up rockets, fights with Player B

Player B does this:

-Picks up the Pistol, fights with Player A

When it's in the right hands, as you say, and the player with Rockets dies, this is the way I look at it:

-Player A used his knowledge of the map to secure a powerful weapon
-Player A probably put in more travel time
-Player B probably spawned with the Pistol, or secured it close to spawn
-Player B probably puts in less travel time, if any

Player B used the map better, played smarter, but Player A triumphed because of his ability to aim, more than anything else. MLG and other shooting-skilled oriented players like this, and that's fine for them, but the mainstream doesn't like it as much.

I prefer a different balance, where tactics are as equally important as the ability to shoot. Player A played the game smarter than Player B by arming himself with a weapon that should give himself an advantage, and that should be rewarded most of the time against players who did not take such advantages. Skill in shooting should be rewarded as well, too, but in the situation you mention, the effort to get the result is disproportionate.

That's my view on how gunplay should work, at least.

I'd agree if your opponent stood still and didn't bother to shoot back. The pistol's reticule had to be reset with a flick from time to time, so during a 1v1 you weren't always going to land the shots are "supposed" to. And correct me if I'm wrong, but landing 3 headshots in a row within about a half of a second is a lot more effective and difficult than getting 5 out of 12 bullets to hit an opponent over the course of four or five seconds, right?
Wall of text above is probably better here than a giant rehash, but I'll note that even though latency in HPC makes landing headshots with the Pistol difficult, it's still an insanely attractive weapon to have, is always used, and is a problem, in my opinion.

You misread what I said. Take a somewhat skilled player and give him a pistol, with his novice adversary using power weapons. The person that is better will win 9/10 times.

Now give the experienced person an AR or something of that nature and let the novice keep the guns he had. Without a reasonable way to defend himself, the somewhat skilled player will lose much more often than before.

While we're on the first, I'll reference the wall again, I believe skill to shoot is overvalued.

On the second, I'd warrant the novice player deserves the kills, as he made more of an effort to get weapons, the time invested should be noted, too.

Plasma Rifle/AR close range will more likely win.
(Not well enough, in my opinion)

(Trio weapons > else typically, just one reason why I maintain they're not classifiable as "regular" weapons)
[Rockets will most likely win.
Sniper will most likely win.
Shotgun will most likely win.]

But the pistol gives a person the chance to survive and kill his opponent.

A weapon giving the player a chance to survive and kill his opponent is a good goal, but I believe the pistol crosses the line into territory of domination with little resistance. My solution would have been either nerf the pistol down into the neighbourhood of the other "main" weapons, or buff the "main" weapons to the point where they're far more useful.

  • 03.02.2008 11:53 PM PDT