Halo 3 Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: The Only BR Thread
  • Subject: The Only BR Thread
Subject: The Only BR Thread

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
It's the same way with the M6D though. You can still score hits/headshots with it with the reticule completely off the person and with the reticule not even "red".
Not quite "the same"...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnATdmHs0GQ

  • 02.20.2009 12:38 PM PDT

MY LOVE FOR YOU IS LIKE A TRUCK...
Posted by: Langley
--on another note, I think MLG Chewhatever is an idiot.

Posted by: Achronos
There is a reason I am user ID 1 and my account creation date is before this site came online.

Posted by: Nokterne
Posted by: BerserkerBarage
It's the same way with the M6D though. You can still score hits/headshots with it with the reticule completely off the person and with the reticule not even "red".
Not quite "the same"...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnATdmHs0GQ


Yes, it pretty much is. Take the M6D and shoot from half way across HEH (ie place 1 guy from in the corner of "needler" walkway) have the other stand at the end of that walkway (from Shotty to the Blue Base). The bullet spread from the M6D will make some bullets hit and some miss. Even when the gun is NOT red reticule the M6D can hit at this range because of bullet spread.

Even in HCE, M6D battles at range could very well be determined by bullet spread. Just like in Halo 3.

~B.B.

  • 02.20.2009 2:06 PM PDT

Honestly, this must be a joke. Child, listen, stop trying to defend yourself because clearly you are incapable of it. The only idiot in this thread is yourself, and trust me, it is obvious. So, how about you do as I asked earlier and log off, mommy and daddy wouldn't want you staying up this late.
-- Direct Control, BAMF

Posted by: Jiggly Luv
Posted by: H0gbinlad3n
I'm just wondering, what if the spread was the same everytime and not a random number? Like the first bullet always deviated 0.10 degrees and the second 0.15 and the third 0.20 (just examples), so that the BR has the range Bungie wants it to, but without the randomness. Would that work?
It would make the gun more predictable, which is all most of us want. However, it would still be random like this. The bullets would still randomly shoot, only just in the same degree from the center each time. A better formula would be if the bullets shot in the same location each time. Either way, there is no reason why the first bullet shouldn't shoot perfectly straight on a consistent basis. Also, if the wide spread was a constant, people would still complain that the spread is too wide. At least with the spread being a "surprise" there is a chance that it is tight every once in a while.


So your saying that it should have the same degree of spread but also in the same direction from the center? Sounds pretty good.

  • 02.20.2009 2:46 PM PDT

Posted by: Nokterne
Posted by: ANGRY B3ARD 89
True. I just dont really know how big the difference from Halo 2 is since I never played online until halo 3
The auto-aim and magnetism for the BR in Halo 2 was completely ridiculous, and probably played a large role in what made the gun seem so overpowered. The gun also had zero spread,


I wanted to chime in here and correct you on this. The BR did have a spread, it's just that on mid-range distances you rarely saw the spread post-patch because of the auto-aim. Now pre-patch H2 the BR did have a massive spread, basically the same as what we're playing with today in H3.

Post-patch though, you had to definitely lead your shots on larger maps outside the red-reticule where the auto-aim wasn't as massive. You can really see the auto-aim's effects on small maps, for example, just get base to base on Midship and back up as far as you can back into the bases and try four-shotting free-standing targets. It'll probably happen, but then try strafing, you still have to lead at extreme distances with the BR in h2.



but interestingly, even with the high auto-aim, magnetism, and lack of aim acceleration in Halo 2, people were pretty much never 4-shot-killed from the "sniper distance" that everyone has referenced so often.

All Bungie had to do to make the BR balanced in Halo 3 was reduce the auto-aim and magnetism. They did so, but also decided to throw in a random spread and give each individual bullet in the BR's burst its own data packet (as opposed to each burst getting one data packet, like in Halo 2), something that no doubt contributes to the "bullet refund" registration issues that only exaggerate the issues with the gun.


Spot on with that post...Bungie isn't designing their games good anymore.

  • 02.20.2009 3:43 PM PDT

Multiplayer Gameplay
Halo:CE------------------Reach--------Halo2-----------------H alo3
Campaign Experience
Reach----Halo:CE-----------------ODST-----Halo2---------Halo3

Glad that Halo 3 garbage is dead, thanks to Reach.
Unfreakenbelievable!!

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
Posted by: Nokterne
Posted by: BerserkerBarage
It's the same way with the M6D though. You can still score hits/headshots with it with the reticule completely off the person and with the reticule not even "red".
Not quite "the same"...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NnATdmHs0GQ


Yes, it pretty much is. Take the M6D and shoot from half way across HEH (ie place 1 guy from in the corner of "needler" walkway) have the other stand at the end of that walkway (from Shotty to the Blue Base). The bullet spread from the M6D will make some bullets hit and some miss. Even when the gun is NOT red reticule the M6D can hit at this range because of bullet spread.

Even in HCE, M6D battles at range could very well be determined by bullet spread. Just like in Halo 3.

~B.B.
B.B. is right to an extent. The M6D was affected by a spread. However, the bullet magnetism/assist affected it far more. In order for the spread to cause a missed bullet, the reticule would have to be pretty far off the target. With the H3 BR even half the reticule won't guarantee that all the bullets will hit.

The "skill" with the M6D was pretty much to put the reticule over the target. In order to score a headshot, the "skill" was to put the reticule above the head. In contrast, the "skill" with the H3 BR is to put the center of the reticule over the target and pray when going for a 4sk, 5sk, 6sk, 7sk, 8sk, etc. In order to score a headshot with the H3 BR when someone's shields are low, the "skill" is sweeping the reticule across the vicinity of the head or putting the reticule somewhere close to the head and praying.

In regards to the video...I think the reason why at close range the M6D missed and the BR hit was because, for one, the M6D is a single-shot and the BR is a burst-fire, and two, bullets and magnetism was more dependent on the location of the reticule versus in H3 bullets are independent from the reticule and magnetism is more dependent on the bullet rather than the reticule. Also, the distances were inconsistent between the H1 and H3 versions, which means the M6D had a different angle at where it was being aimed at. This is only an educated guess.

  • 02.20.2009 3:57 PM PDT

Posted by: dan91bauer
I wanted to chime in here and correct you on this. The BR did have a spread, it's just that on mid-range distances you rarely saw the spread post-patch because of the auto-aim. Now pre-patch H2 the BR did have a massive spread, basically the same as what we're playing with today in H3.
Yes, it had a spread, but it was so small that it only really factored into BTB games on Halo 2s largest maps. And even then, it was only in a very narrow distance "bracket" that the spread would prevent 4-shot-kills from occurring consistently if you had perfect aim (which no one did, because the distance between players in an average BTB game are generally beyond "red-reticle" range).

I ran some tests. I booted up a splitscreen game on Coagulation, and started testing out the Halo 2 BRs distance and consistency. Turns out, the Halo 2 BR has an actual distance cap. Beyond a certain distance (about 1/3 to 1/4 the length of Coagulation) the bullets just stop. Move few steps closer, and you can get a consistent five-shot kill with perfect aim to the head. As you continue to move closer (but still stay at a distance much larger then across Midship) you start getting consistent four shot kills.

The distance where the spread starts to affect consistency is too close to the distance cap for it to have really had a significant affect on gameplay.

It'll probably happen, but then try strafing, you still have to lead at extreme distances with the BR in h2.That seems to contradict with this...

Posted by: Bungie Weekly Update: 6/20/08
Halo 2's Battle Rifle was a hitscan weapon, which is fancy terminology for "instant-hit" which is slightly less fancy terminology for "if the reticule is red when you pull the trigger (in good networking conditions) the bullet packet will hit the target."

  • 02.21.2009 12:27 AM PDT

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
Yes, it pretty much is. Take the M6D and shoot from half way across HEH (ie place 1 guy from in the corner of "needler" walkway) have the other stand at the end of that walkway (from Shotty to the Blue Base). The bullet spread from the M6D will make some bullets hit and some miss. Even when the gun is NOT red reticule the M6D can hit at this range because of bullet spread.

Even in HCE, M6D battles at range could very well be determined by bullet spread. Just like in Halo 3.
I assume you mean that it's not red reticle because of where you are aiming, as opposed to distance. I also assume you were pulsing the trigger, and not holding it down. Correct?

I'm not denying that the M6D had a spread. However, the degree to which the spread of the M6D affected gameplay was much less then that of the Halo 3 BR spread. My point is that the current design of the BR robs players of shots they should get at range, and gives them shots that they shouldn't get in close combat. A tighter BR spread would cause players to require better aim to hit an opponent, especially when aiming for a headshot.

  • 02.21.2009 1:39 AM PDT

MY LOVE FOR YOU IS LIKE A TRUCK...
Posted by: Langley
--on another note, I think MLG Chewhatever is an idiot.

Posted by: Achronos
There is a reason I am user ID 1 and my account creation date is before this site came online.

Posted by: Nokterne
I assume you mean that it's not red reticle because of where you are aiming, as opposed to distance. I also assume you were pulsing the trigger, and not holding it down. Correct?


Yep, it's not red reticule because of where I'm aiming. I did it various ways for a few hours. I held down the trigger for some. I pulsed the trigger for some. I pulsed the trigger slower for some. I fired some shots while scoped. I fire some shots unscoped. It didn't change the overlying outcome.

The shots at that range were "random". Some times I'd 8SK, some times I'd 12SK.

I'm not denying that the M6D had a spread. However, the degree to which the spread of the M6D affected gameplay was much less then that of the Halo 3 BR spread. My point is that the current design of the BR robs players of shots they should get at range, and gives them shots that they shouldn't get in close combat. A tighter BR spread would cause players to require better aim to hit an opponent, especially when aiming for a headshot.

See, I'm not so sure about the difference in spread between HCE and H3. It's easy to do tests in HCE and H3 with stationary targets. The problem with HCE is that I don't have theater to go back and check to see where the person is aiming versus where their shots hit. Of course, there are some additional things that would make it hard to tell when comparing shooting moving targets (like I don't think the M6D bullet moves at the same speed as the H3 BR shot)

But it's easy to show that even with the M6D that the bullet spread and bullet magnetism could reward players that should miss. Although, from when I tested I don't think I ran across a time where I aimed "center mass" and missed because of the M6D bullet spread. Of course, that's more to do with single shot versus burst fire.

Oh and to just reiterate, I'm not suggesting that the M6D doesn't have a higher "skill-gap" as compared to the H3 BR, I'm just saying that the M6D had a lot of the same "problems" the H3 BR has and they "affected" gameplay even back then.

~B.B.

  • 02.21.2009 4:37 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

The br is my favorite weapon, but because I have good days and bad its not always my best weapon.

  • 02.21.2009 7:16 AM PDT

The Chief

In my opinion the Battle Rifle is a decent weapon that has served me well in many situations. I am not so arrogant however to think that it is the only weapon in the game or the only weapon that takes skill. I also don't consider myself invincible while holding one nor do I consider myself "pro". I like to use ALL of the weapons in the game equally and do not believe that any one weapon is superior... I also do not think that playing custom games on foundry canvas is "pro".

  • 02.21.2009 2:55 PM PDT

Honestly, this must be a joke. Child, listen, stop trying to defend yourself because clearly you are incapable of it. The only idiot in this thread is yourself, and trust me, it is obvious. So, how about you do as I asked earlier and log off, mommy and daddy wouldn't want you staying up this late.
-- Direct Control, BAMF

Posted by: Nokterne
They did so, but also decided to throw in a random spread and give each individual bullet in the BR's burst its own data packet (as opposed to each burst getting one data packet, like in Halo 2), something that no doubt contributes to the "bullet refund" registration issues that only exaggerate the issues with the gun.

Really? I would think that since your sending less packets you'd drop less, but when you do you would drop the entire burst, that would ruin pretty much any BR fight you got in (unless it happened to your opponent as well)

  • 02.21.2009 9:33 PM PDT

Posted by: H0gbinlad3n
Really? I would think that since your sending less packets you'd drop less, but when you do you would drop the entire burst, that would ruin pretty much any BR fight you got in (unless it happened to your opponent as well)
The sending of an increased number of packets puts more strain on the connection being used for the game.

Think about it. For the sake of argument, lets say the BR can fire 4 bursts every 4 seconds. If each burst has its own data packet, that's 1 data packet per second, and 4 data packets sent during the battle. If each bullet gets it own data packet, that's 3 bursts per second, and 12 packets sent during a battle.

Now which do you think is more network intensive? Considering that the oversaturation of a network connection is a common cause of packet loss, it's not surprising that some bullets don't register under the current system. Unfortunately, I think that giving each bullet its own data packet is required when you have the game deciding the trajectory of bullets with a random variable.

Now, you can implement systems that check and resend lost data packets, but these systems also add strain to the network, especially when the system has to check an increased number of packets (eg. 12 instead of 4).

  • 02.21.2009 10:56 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Don't change the BR. The degree of randomness is what makes the game more exciting as you don't know whether you will hit dead on or not. Plus the BR needs skill now (and I'm not very good with BR, I prefer the carbine)

  • 02.22.2009 7:17 AM PDT

Posted by: chesney1995
Don't change the BR. The degree of randomness is what makes the game more exciting as you don't know whether you will hit dead on or not. Plus the BR needs skill now (and I'm not very good with BR, I prefer the carbine)
ya I agree oh and btw carbine ftw!!!!!!!!

  • 02.22.2009 7:49 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

My thoughts:

*The BR was designed with strengths and weaknesses.
*The weaknesses were added in to offset the strengths.
*It takes skill to use the BR like JonnyOThan said.
*The BR is as effective as it was designed to be.
*Bungie DOESNT have to fix the BR because it is the way they want it to be.

So, if you don't like the BR there is one real simple solution.......................Don't Use It


bungie ruins there own games and wonder why people goto play gears/cod/ect. cause the br is broke. bullet refund, not registering shots,dub reload, ect. is what ruined this game if they would fix it it wouldnt be a problem.

  • 02.22.2009 8:09 AM PDT

The BR is perfectly fine the way it is..

  • 02.22.2009 7:38 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

i think the spread could use a little work at uber long ranges.

but frankly i love the gun its has good range and versatility, suitable fr mid to long range covie extermination.

  • 02.23.2009 7:58 AM PDT

Bungie spent a long time balancing the weapons for Halo 3, the BR is fine.
Anyone remember when there were threads everywhere saying "The BR should do more damage then the AR"?
It was ridiculous, those threads didn't care about how balanced the game was, they just wanted an Uber potent weapon, useful and deadly in all ranges.

Before you complain, ask yourself these questions:
1. Can you get kills with it?
2. Is it useful?
3. Do the bullets hit where you point, within the weapon's intended range?

If the spread was reduced, even a little bit, the effective range of the BR would be increased.
Increased BR range = longer range fights
Longer range fights = Less use of CQB weapons/ Easier spawn killing
-Less use of CQB weapons = Shotgun/ Sword become the only useful Close-range weapons
--Sword/ Shotgun become dominant CQB weapons = Players using these camp in small rooms, to avoid BR burst
---Players camp to avoid BR burst = Game degrades into long range BR battles and Shotty/ Sword campers
-Easier Spawn killing = BR possession determines who wins
--BR possession determines who wins =BR becomes a power weapon
---BR becomes a power weapon = Game degrades into almost BR only

Got it? Good

  • 02.23.2009 10:31 AM PDT

Posted by: Quetzocoetl
Before you complain, ask yourself these questions:
1. Can you get kills with it?
Yes.2. Is it useful? Yes.3. Do the bullets hit where you point, within the weapon's intended range? Well they obviously hit at Bungies intended range, but they definitely don't at the range I think they logically should. When you look at maps as large as The Pit, it doesn't make sense to limit the BR's range to such a ridiculously short distance.

If the spread was reduced, even a little bit, the effective range of the BR would be increased.
Increased BR range = longer range fights
Longer range fights = Less use of CQB weapons/ Easier spawn killing
-Less use of CQB weapons = Shotgun/ Sword become the only useful Close-range weapons
--Sword/ Shotgun become dominant CQB weapons = Players using these camp in small rooms, to avoid BR burst
---Players camp to avoid BR burst = Game degrades into long range BR battles and Shotty/ Sword campers
-Easier Spawn killing = BR possession determines who wins
--BR possession determines who wins =BR becomes a power weapon
---BR becomes a power weapon = Game degrades into almost BR only

Got it? Good
It's interesting how many of the problems you say will form if the BR spread is reduced are already very much present within the game.

  • 02.23.2009 11:10 AM PDT

My roflcopter goes put put put put... BOOM

yah i agree with D3athSfriend the BR takes skill to use keep it the way it is bungie. but... if u dont like the BR dont use it, if u think its random dont use it, if u think its a bad wpn dont use it. There is one simple answer if u dont like the way the BR works or looks Dont use it. and thats my opinion

  • 02.23.2009 11:29 AM PDT

The BR is fine, in my opinion the best weapon in the game.

  • 02.23.2009 12:15 PM PDT

Posted by: Quetzocoetl
If the spread was reduced, even a little bit, the effective range of the BR would be increased.
Increased BR range = longer range fights


Whats wrong with longer range fights? Currently, there aren't any long range fights at all, save for sniper vs. sniper. Most of the time its one guy with a sniper shooting at a bunch of other guys who have no realistic means of fighting back.

Posted by: Quetzocoetl
Longer range fights = Less use of CQB weapons/ Easier spawn killing


No. CQB occur due to the map structure. CQ weapons would be just as effective as they are now. The BR already has a longer range than any CQ weapon, and CQ weapons are still effective in CQ situations. If a BR user engages someone with a close range weapon outside of that weapons range, of course the BR will beat it. Increasing the BR's range won't affect that.

Currently, the maps of Halo 3 have a large variety of areas, from wide open spaces and long lines of sight, to tight bunkers and hallways. Unfortunately, we are only given weapons that function in the close quarters areas. I wish we could have a wider variety of battles across all maps, but only giving the BR longer range will allow that.

Posted by: Quetzocoetl
-Less use of CQB weapons = Shotgun/ Sword become the only useful Close-range weapons


This doesn't make any sense. We're not asking for the BR's power to be increased, just its range and the spread be tightened. All CQ weapons will remain the same. Within their ranges, they would still kill a BR user.

Posted by: Quetzocoetl
--Sword/ Shotgun become dominant CQB weapons = Players using these camp in small rooms, to avoid BR burst

They already do that.


Posted by: Quetzocoetl
---Players camp to avoid BR burst = Game degrades into long range BR battles and Shotty/ Sword campers


No, players would just have to actually think about their movements more. They wouldn't be able to freely run around in the open without fear of being hit.

Posted by: Quetzocoetl
-Easier Spawn killing = BR possession determines who wins


Most spawns are in protected areas that wouldn't be affected by an increased BR range.

Posted by: Quetzocoetl
--BR possession determines who wins =BR becomes a power weapon

In an AR start gametype, its already like this.

Posted by: Quetzocoetl
---BR becomes a power weapon = Game degrades into almost BR only


It already is due to Bungie's failed weapon balance. Might as well make the BR fights more skill-based and varied.

  • 02.23.2009 1:59 PM PDT

Okay this is how i feel about the br. I like it its a good gun i like the assault rifle and smg more cause i like the closer fighting in the game. The only complaint i have is how just about every game starts you off with a battle rifle and thats all anyone uses. i figured thats what mlg and swat were for. But thats only my opinion. :)

  • 02.23.2009 2:17 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

The BR is the assault rifle, but made for longer ranges, but not as long as the siper rifle, which should suit most people just fine because Bungie made the BR this way to balance it out.

  • 02.23.2009 4:25 PM PDT

Multiplayer Gameplay
Halo:CE------------------Reach--------Halo2-----------------H alo3
Campaign Experience
Reach----Halo:CE-----------------ODST-----Halo2---------Halo3

Glad that Halo 3 garbage is dead, thanks to Reach.
Unfreakenbelievable!!

I know this has been chimed on a few times, but I also had to make a few points regarding this post from this very opinionated "BR is fine" person...

Posted by: Quetzocoetl
Bungie spent a long time balancing the weapons for Halo 3, the BR is fine.
Most of their balancing was already in place from their previous games. I would say they spent way more time designing ways of balancing Vehicles. I suppose if you include all the years of work on Halo, they have spent a long time. But, even now, Halo is still poorly balanced.

Anyway, why are you satisfied with the BR being fine? Although that's pretty much the entire Halo community's and Bungie's attitude toward the game, seeing as how the only things that will ever get patched are supposed "broken" things (well, as long as it was unintended to be "broken").

Anyone remember when there were threads everywhere saying "The BR should do more damage then the AR"?
It was ridiculous, those threads didn't care about how balanced the game was, they just wanted an Uber potent weapon, useful and deadly in all ranges.
To be honest, if the BR was a 3sk and was the primary starting weapon, then Halo 3 would be much, more balanced. The game would be more enjoyable. With Halo 2, the 4sk BR (and it as a burst-fire weapon) turned what used to be a game about always having the ability to fight no matter what disadvantage one may have (as in Halo:CE) to a game about running for cover and winning based solely on advantage. However, since AR starts are to be the "way" for Halo, a weapon with M6D similar powers would be considered overpowered (as if Rockets and Snipers aren't).

Many of the "competitive"-type gamers are quite content with the BR losing damage power. They would just prefer that it lose its randomness and/or become a single-shot. The current spread eliminates much of the ability to fight back after being shot first. Right now, it is usually about who shoots who first wins in a 1v1. Believe it or not, but it wasn't always like this.

Before you complain, ask yourself these questions:
1. Can you get kills with it?
2. Is it useful?
Yes and Yes. I could say Yes for every single weapon including the Plasma Pistol.
3. Do the bullets hit where you point, within the weapon's intended range?I'm not exactly sure what the Bungie's intended ranges of the weapons are. But, I'm willing to bet the intended range is different from effective range. The intended range for the BR would probably be anything outside of where the AR can beat a BR 4sk and to the point of where the BR is about a 8sk, while its long range intentions are to ping a Sniper so you can run. The effective range of the BR would be where a 4sk or a 5sk can occur consistently.

So to answer this question, No. In the BR's intended range, bullets will not always hit. The only time the bullets always hit are in the 4sk range, but that isn't the intended range nor the effective range. This would be a No for most weapons within their ranges. Oh, and let's not forget that most weapons can also hit outside of its intended and effective range due to randomness (plus, the BR is very effective at close-range).

If the spread was reduced, even a little bit, the effective range of the BR would be increased.That range would increase, but it would also become more defined and less random.
Increased BR range = longer range fightsAnd that's a bad thing? It only happens on long ranged maps, and it's one of the reasons why Blood Gulch was so popular. People enjoy medium and long-ranged combat. Close-range battles are when people start complaining about dieing from "noobs." People like Sniping because they are able to fight when they see someone, instead of having to run across the map to only just get camped to death.
Longer range fights = Less use of CQB weapons/ Easier spawn killingActually, close-ranged weapons would have a role as a close-ranged weapon, instead of just something to use. And, the only time spawn killing would be easier than it already is now, would be on long-ranged maps with AR starts.
-Less use of CQB weapons = Shotgun/ Sword become the only useful Close-range weaponsCompletely false. Nothing else to say.
--Sword/ Shotgun become dominant CQB weapons = Players using these camp in small rooms, to avoid BR burstThe funny thing with this statement is that, with the BR as a burst-fire weapon, campers are extremely easy to kill. I cannot count the number of times I have aggressively charged a Sword camper in the Sword room with a Grenade and a Spray to the face to come out on top. So they can camp, but the won't win against a smart BR-wielder.
---Players camp to avoid BR burst = Game degrades into long range BR battles and Shotty/ Sword campersThe only time I camp to avoid a BR-wielder is in AR starts. It already happens. And, again, long-range BR battles would only happen on long-ranged maps, and shotty/sword campers would only happen in AR starts. Either way, this sounds a lot like Halo:CE. I'm all for it.
-Easier Spawn killing = BR possession determines who winsAlready happens. This actually supports BR starts. Usually, from my experience of AR starts, the team that uses the most headshot capable weapons wins.
--BR possession determines who wins =BR becomes a power weapon
---BR becomes a power weapon = Game degrades into almost BR only
Sword=1sk, Shotgun=1sk, Sniper=1sk, Rocket=1sk,...BR=4sk and =1sk iff against an unshielded opponent. Power Weapons are 1sk weapons. The only time the BR is a 1sk is against an unshielded opponent and that is the same for the M6G and Carbine. So I guess the M6G and Carbine would also be Power Weapons?

My question is would you share the same opinions if the people wanted the M6G's and Carbine's spread reduced?


Many of the issues you find with a tightening of the BR spread is something that already happens quite frequently in AR starts. You should be more concerned with the design and layout of the maps and the vast number of BRs on these maps. If it is close-range battles that you and Bungie strive for then the maps should be designed around it. Most maps are designed around mid-range and are open. Also, the BR should be just another weapon on the map to use, like the Needler or Brute Shot. Right now, there are a plethora of BRs on the maps just so anyone who wants to use it can. All that does is support team spawn-killing.

My opinion is that fights should be fought mostly at mid to midlong-range with some weapons to be used at close-range. Luckily, the M6G starts somewhat give me that. But, tightening the spread would only make my range preference more enjoyable.

To me, "overpowered" is not an excuse to tighten the spread. The Sniper and Rocket are overpowered (of course, BR starts balance them better) so why not implement randomness to those weapons. Although, lag already naturally does that. Oh, and if both people start with the weapon, then it is not overpowered.

[/wall]

[Edited on 02.23.2009 7:35 PM PST]

  • 02.23.2009 7:22 PM PDT