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

DEEP NNN = Depends

Clan 2old2pwn on 2old2play.

Don't let yesterday use up too much of today.

Posted by: BakedPotatoLive
Bungie have said that the BR is working as intended, so I guess that must mean an inconsistant, random weapon that doesn't perform at its intended range.
I agree with Bungie and not you, again. Imagine that.

[Edited on 07.03.2008 6:52 AM PDT]

  • 07.03.2008 6:38 AM PDT

Posted by: DEEP NNN
Posted by: BakedPotatoLive
Bungie have said that the BR is working as intended, so I guess that must mean an inconsistant, random weapon that doesn't perform at its intended range.
I agree with Bungie and not you, again. Imagine that.


Agreeing with Bungie on this matter is as good as pleading ignorance.

  • 07.03.2008 7:07 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: ST CheezHead
Anybody that wants the AR spread tighter is an idiot. The assault rifle isn't supposed to be a headshot weapon, IT DOESN'T REGISTER HEADSHOTS, therefore by having the spread tighter it would make it even stronger than it is now. If you use it properly, on lan, you can beat a BR at almost any range.

Just look at it, it will beat any weapon at its INTENDED DISTANCE. The battle rifle however, will not beat any weapon at its intended distance due to the spread.

Tightening the spread will not throw off the sandbox, since the AR is already over powered.


Wrong...wrong...and wrong.

The Battle Rifle will not beat any weapon at its intended distance? So you can't beat an AR user with a BR from the distances of Sniper 2 to Top Gold on Guardian?

Wow, that's just sad if that's the case. The problem that is arising here is the difference of opinion of what is the "intended" distance of the weapon. It's hard to say exactly since that information hasn't be released. You can say that the BR is suppose to be a medium to far range weapon and I can say that the AR is suppose to be a close to medium range weapon. It seems to me that each of those work fairly well in their lower range spectrum while losing effectiveness as you move towards the top of their spectrum. The AR loses effectiveness far quicker than the BR, so I don't really see a problem.

People like CheeseHead here find it ludicrous to want to remove/alter the spread of the AR because they feel that by doing so it will make it too powerful of a weapon. The EXACT same sentiment is true when you're talking about the BR. If they removed the spread the weapon would be much more powerful than before to the point where it starts encroaching on the effectiveness of other weapons. I find it rather ironic that people say that "spread/randomness has no place in Halo 3" but at the same time adamantly refuse to talk about removing the spread of the AR. Bullet spread was added to both weapons in order to balance them. Which is why the BR is working as intended and pretty much any argument you can make to want to alter the BR would be pointless because you'd have to make the same argument for strengthening the AR. Hell, even the shotgun too but why complicate things?

RK was correct. This thread is a graveyard because the discussion can never pass your own personal opinion. Like I said, every argument I've seen utilized to try to argue for a stronger BR can be turned back on you by bringing up the AR. Just like I did to Dodgy Hoji. In a short few posts I can make you go from championing the BR to wanting to make the AR the next M6D. And it becomes ridiculous which at the same time makes people see why altering the BR would be ridiculous. I don't want an overpowered AR neither do I want an overpowered BR.

~B.B.

  • 07.03.2008 7:17 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: BakedPotatoLive
Posted by: DEEP NNN
Posted by: BakedPotatoLive
Bungie have said that the BR is working as intended, so I guess that must mean an inconsistant, random weapon that doesn't perform at its intended range.
I agree with Bungie and not you, again. Imagine that.


Agreeing with Bungie on this matter is as good as pleading ignorance.


And arguing in the face of stark counter-evidence is bordering on megalomania. I agree with Bungie on this one too and I'd love for you to try to claim that I'm ignorant.

~B.B.

  • 07.03.2008 7:20 AM PDT

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
Posted by: BakedPotatoLive
Posted by: DEEP NNN
Posted by: BakedPotatoLive
Bungie have said that the BR is working as intended, so I guess that must mean an inconsistant, random weapon that doesn't perform at its intended range.
I agree with Bungie and not you, again. Imagine that.


Agreeing with Bungie on this matter is as good as pleading ignorance.


And arguing in the face of stark counter-evidence is bordering on megalomania. I agree with Bungie on this one too and I'd love for you to try to claim that I'm ignorant.

~B.B.


If you don't believe there is a problem then yes, I am going to claim your ignorance. I have one thing to say -

What counter-evidence?

  • 07.03.2008 7:23 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: BakedPotatoLive
If you don't believe there is a problem then yes, I am going to claim your ignorance. I have one thing to say -

What counter-evidence?


And what exactly do you see as a problem? I'd love to just get a simple answer on this one.

  • 07.03.2008 7:26 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

The vast majority of these people that are saying they like the BR as it is probably don't play the game as much as they sit on this forum. They don't enjoy MLG settings because a greater skill and team talk is envolved. They are social gamers, gamers that pick the game up and play for about 4-6hours a week. Sure there is nothing wrong with that, after all they did buy your game and their voice should be heard.

Everyone that I speak to online thinks the BR spread should be tightened.

The thing is say its a short to medium battle when I've been beat in a 1v1 I don't want to think that last shot he got on me on his screen was a miss but because of the horrible spread one of his bullets clipped my head. And where as if I'm aiming at the center of his head I don't want a nasty spread where my bullets go past his ears.

Especially for competitive gaming how is that fair and balanced?

In your update you talked about what has changed from halo 2, I don't see anyone complaining about you having to lead your shots that makes sense. I'm sorry but in your update your chat was like a weasling way out. People don't want a sniper for a BR they just want the gun to work consistently at medium to short range. We're not looking for a 4 shot from Narrows cannon to cannon.

You could meet the fans half way. Make a patch for th BR but only include it in the MLG and SWAT playlist. This wouldn't effect your view of balance for the other gametypes. And a patch that could be turned on for customs.

I don't know how tricky that would actually be but it would shut a lot of people up and move them onto moaning about their feeble beard growth!





[Edited on 07.03.2008 7:32 AM PDT]

  • 07.03.2008 7:30 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: eeblogue
The vast majority of these people that are saying they like the BR as it is probably don't play the game as much as they sit on this forum. They don't enjoy MLG settings because a greater skill and team talk is envolved. They are social gamers, gamers that pick the game up and play for about 4-6hours a week. Sure there is nothing wrong with that, after all they did buy your game and their voice should be heard.


Well in my case that's true. I spend 10 hours a day at work and I have B.net running in the background. I don't spend 10 hours on H3 a day and I'd hope neither do you.

Everyone that I speak to online thinks the BR spread should be tightened.

Weird. Everyone I speak to thinks it is fine the way it is. Yeah for anecdotal fluff.

The thing is say its a short to medium battle when I've been beat in a 1v1 I don't want to think that last shot he got on me on his screen was a miss but because of the horrible spread one of his bullets clipped my head. And where as if I'm aiming at the center of his head I don't want a nasty spread where my bullets go past his ears.

Especially for competitive gaming how is that fair and balanced?


What is it they always liked to say..."if everyone has it, it must be balanced". Well guess what, everyone has the exact same spread possibilities, so it must be balanced.

In your update you talked about what has changed from halo 2, I don't see anyone complaining about you having to lead your shots that makes sense. I'm sorry but in your update your chat was like a weasling way out. People don't want a sniper for a BR they just want the gun to work consistently at medium to short range. We're not looking for a 4 shot from Narrows cannon to cannon.

You could meet the fans half way. Make a patch for th BR but only include it in the MLG and SWAT playlist. This wouldn't effect your view of balance for the other gametypes. And a patch that could be turned on for customs.

I don't know how tricky that would actually be but it would shut a lot of people up and move them onto moaning about their feeble beard growth!


So you think taking the time to alter the weapon, testing, and then put the patch through certification for only 2 playlists is a good use of time? I'd have to disagree.

~B.B.

  • 07.03.2008 7:37 AM PDT

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
Posted by: BakedPotatoLive
If you don't believe there is a problem then yes, I am going to claim your ignorance. I have one thing to say -

What counter-evidence?


And what exactly do you see as a problem? I'd love to just get a simple answer on this one.


Amongst other things, the fact that random values are used. Luck is a poor substitute for skill.

  • 07.03.2008 7:42 AM PDT

go to www.hilessons.proboards42.com

Posted by: eeblogue
The vast majority of these people that are saying they like the BR as it is probably don't play the game as much as they sit on this forum. They don't enjoy MLG settings because a greater skill and team talk is envolved. They are social gamers, gamers that pick the game up and play for about 4-6hours a week. Sure there is nothing wrong with that, after all they did buy your game and their voice should be heard.



I like the BR. however, I'm not part of this vast majority. I love the MLG settings and I really want more emphasis on BR starts in all the gametypes, but both you and I know that isn't going to happen.
Don't judge me by my service record, I only recently discovered the joys of MLG gaming and the challenges it has to offer. The BR has always worked fine for me, and I have no complaints about the way it works.


The thing is say its a short to medium battle when I've been beat in a 1v1 I don't want to think that last shot he got on me on his screen was a miss but because of the horrible spread one of his bullets clipped my head. And where as if I'm aiming at the center of his head I don't want a nasty spread where my bullets go past his ears.


If I remember correctly, in a short to mid range BR battle (meaning snipe 2 to under glass, about that range being mid) the weekly update states that at that range or shorter, your bullets can only have a maximum margin of error than less than one foot, meaning that if you are leading shots correctly or aiming at the center of your opponent's head while both of you are stationary, the BR WILL kill your opponent with four headshots, every single time. The first bullet in the packet is enough to kill your opponent. therefore, as long as your aim is true, you won't have a terrible spread that will make bullets fly past ears. all your bullets will connect



In your update you talked about what has changed from halo 2, I don't see anyone complaining about you having to lead your shots that makes sense. I'm sorry but in your update your chat was like a weasling way out. People don't want a sniper for a BR they just want the gun to work consistently at medium to short range. We're not looking for a 4 shot from Narrows cannon to cannon.

You could meet the fans half way. Make a patch for th BR but only include it in the MLG and SWAT playlist. This wouldn't effect your view of balance for the other gametypes. And a patch that could be turned on for customs.


your solution is a lot simpler than my projected one. To do this to the BR, bungie programmers would have to make the BR packet spread reasonably tight to mid range, and than make it spread randomly after [x] amount of world units. [x] being anything more than however many world units are considered mid range. if that doesn't make sense to you, i can explain it a little more in a PM or something. this is basically saying that up to mid range, the BR will be pretty darn accurate. anything after that, the bullets start to fly crazily. talk about programming complications. This would allow the BR to function nicely at mid range or shorter, but there is no way it could be used as a sniper.

Personally, though, i see no problems with the BR when i play MLG...But thats just my take on it.

DAMN that was long. hahaha.

AND YES, DON'T FORGET!!!

personal opinion plays a big part on whether or not you say you like the BR.

[Edited on 07.03.2008 7:56 AM PDT]

  • 07.03.2008 7:53 AM PDT

Posted by: Ryuzaki6
your solution is a lot simpler than my projected one. To do this to the BR, bungie programmers would have to make the BR packet spread reasonably tight to mid range, and than make it spread randomly after [x] amount of world units. [x] being anything more than however many world units are considered mid range.

Now, that would fit perfectly with bungie's given reasons for the way the BR operates, while also delivering the consistency people are after.

It wouldn't create any problems for anyone. The BR is still in it's intended range. But now it will take a more uniform number of shots to kill within that range.

But, they don't consider it enough of an issue to make any changes I am sure.

  • 07.03.2008 8:05 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: BakedPotatoLive
Posted by: BerserkerBarage
Posted by: BakedPotatoLive
If you don't believe there is a problem then yes, I am going to claim your ignorance. I have one thing to say -

What counter-evidence?


And what exactly do you see as a problem? I'd love to just get a simple answer on this one.


Amongst other things, the fact that random values are used. Luck is a poor substitute for skill.


Then again you'd obviously be in favor of removing the bullet spread from the Assault Rifle making it so that if I have a red reticule then every bullet I fire will hit the target. So that the Assault Rifle would be the short to medium range weapon it's suppose to be.

So...I'll ask plainly are you in favor of strengthening the Assault Rifle so that it can kill quicker, with better range and with better accuracy?

~B.B.

  • 07.03.2008 8:08 AM PDT

go to www.hilessons.proboards42.com

Posted by: RhythmKiller
Posted by: Ryuzaki6
your solution is a lot simpler than my projected one. To do this to the BR, bungie programmers would have to make the BR packet spread reasonably tight to mid range, and than make it spread randomly after [x] amount of world units. [x] being anything more than however many world units are considered mid range.

Now, that would fit perfectly with bungie's given reasons for the way the BR operates, while also delivering the consistency people are after.

It wouldn't create any problems for anyone. The BR is still in it's intended range. But now it will take a more uniform number of shots to kill within that range.

But, they don't consider it enough of an issue to make any changes I am sure.


Thanks! Glad you like it, honest. I was worried I'd get flamed to hell after that. hehe.
I personally don't see a problem with the BR's spread, but that's just me...we all have different concerns and opinions here.
That solution would quiet alot of people...but would be extremely hard to program. I think a lot of the "BR NEEDS FIXING" people would like this one, though.

  • 07.03.2008 8:09 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: Ryuzaki6
Posted by: RhythmKiller
Posted by: Ryuzaki6
your solution is a lot simpler than my projected one. To do this to the BR, bungie programmers would have to make the BR packet spread reasonably tight to mid range, and than make it spread randomly after [x] amount of world units. [x] being anything more than however many world units are considered mid range.

Now, that would fit perfectly with bungie's given reasons for the way the BR operates, while also delivering the consistency people are after.

It wouldn't create any problems for anyone. The BR is still in it's intended range. But now it will take a more uniform number of shots to kill within that range.

But, they don't consider it enough of an issue to make any changes I am sure.


Thanks! Glad you like it, honest. I was worried I'd get flamed to hell after that. hehe.
I personally don't see a problem with the BR's spread, but that's just me...we all have different concerns and opinions here.
That solution would quiet alot of people...but would be extremely hard to program. I think a lot of the "BR NEEDS FIXING" people would like this one, though.


Your suggestion is nice but not plausible from my understanding of it. You're asking bullets to change properties in the middle of their trajectory with no outside input other than distance. I think that would be pretty hard if not impossible to calculate and program. But then again, I'm not a programmer so I can't absolutely say it's totally out of the question.

But even after that the problem would be player's perception of what they consider "mid-range" and what Bungie programs as "mid-range". IMO, this subjective term is really the root of most of the problems regarding this discussion.

~B.B.

  • 07.03.2008 8:16 AM PDT

go to www.hilessons.proboards42.com


Your suggestion is nice but not plausible from my understanding of it. You're asking bullets to change properties in the middle of their trajectory with no outside input other than distance. I think that would be pretty hard if not impossible to calculate and program. But then again, I'm not a programmer so I can't absolutely say it's totally out of the question.

But even after that the problem would be player's perception of what they consider "mid-range" and what Bungie programs as "mid-range". IMO, this subjective term is really the root of most of the problems regarding this discussion.

~B.B.


plausible. NOT possible. Looking at it, it would be virtually impossible to program.
The calculations would have to be done on how much the bullet can spray, ect. ect. impossible. too many logistics and complications. And yes, I am saying that for this to work, the bullet would have to change trajectory mid-flight. thats the whole reason it's not happening.

I think most people, meaning the vast majorities with only a few in disagreement can say "mid range can be about 9-10 world units, or about from snipe 2 to under glass, on guardian. you are right, people will fight about what is mid-range, but i think we can all agree on around that distance mid-range.

I'd have the bullet change trajectory after about 11 or 12 world units, if that were even a possibility.

BTW I appreciate the civilized way you said that. I know a whole lot of people could have flamed me right there. =P

[Edited on 07.03.2008 8:24 AM PDT]

  • 07.03.2008 8:23 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I think the idea of a patched BR purely for MLG and SWAT would be great. However I don't think the spread should be tightened I think it should be eliminated so that all the bullets follow the same trajectory therefore removing randomness and luck from the equation and emphasising skill. This change would increase the skill gap in MLG and SWAT.

  • 07.03.2008 8:32 AM PDT

Yeah, it's an odd thing but more realistic ballistics cap player potential (in fairness, not something I need to worry about... hehe) whereas simple arcade-like ones don't.

  • 07.03.2008 8:37 AM PDT

go to www.hilessons.proboards42.com

Posted by: I Cloud007 I
I think the idea of a patched BR purely for MLG and SWAT would be great. However I don't think the spread should be tightened I think it should be eliminated so that all the bullets follow the same trajectory therefore removing randomness and luck from the equation and emphasising skill. This change would increase the skill gap in MLG and SWAT.


Basically, what you're saying is that the BR will function like a sniper rifle. I could headshot you across the map on narrows in SWAT and create a spawn kill you over and over and over. now does anyone really want that?

  • 07.03.2008 8:38 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: Ryuzaki6

Your suggestion is nice but not plausible from my understanding of it. You're asking bullets to change properties in the middle of their trajectory with no outside input other than distance. I think that would be pretty hard if not impossible to calculate and program. But then again, I'm not a programmer so I can't absolutely say it's totally out of the question.

But even after that the problem would be player's perception of what they consider "mid-range" and what Bungie programs as "mid-range". IMO, this subjective term is really the root of most of the problems regarding this discussion.

~B.B.


plausible. NOT possible. Looking at it, it would be virtually impossible to program.
The calculations would have to be done on how much the bullet can spray, ect. ect. impossible. too many logistics and complications. And yes, I am saying that for this to work, the bullet would have to change trajectory mid-flight. thats the whole reason it's not happening.

I think most people, meaning the vast majorities with only a few in disagreement can say "mid range can be about 9-10 world units, or about from snipe 2 to under glass, on guardian. you are right, people will fight about what is mid-range, but i think we can all agree on around that distance mid-range.

I'd have the bullet change trajectory after about 11 or 12 world units, if that were even a possibility.

BTW I appreciate the civilized way you said that. I know a whole lot of people could have flamed me right there. =P


Contrary to popular belief...I don't flame everyone.

I agree though. Your suggestion sounds like it could be a possible solution. However it seems like it would be inherently hard to program and even if they did it could prove to be pretty complicated when trying to implement. The way the system is now (from my understanding) is when you pull the trigger the game engine assigns the mathematics to each bullet in the spread. Pretty straight forward. From the point of firing, the spread has already been determined. It just manifests itself differently/more depending on how far it takes the bullets to arrive at their target.

I will say this though, even though I goes "against" my previous contention. There *is* a weapon in H3 that *can* have it's weapon's fire altered after it has been fired. The Rocket can and does have it's trajectory changed by outside variables. You can deflect a rocket off-course by the use of a grenade or other explosion. So...maybe something could be done like you suggested. I dunno. Although it sounds like it would be pretty much a complete overhaul of the BR mechanics.

~B.B.

  • 07.03.2008 8:48 AM PDT

go to www.hilessons.proboards42.com


Contrary to popular belief...I don't flame everyone.

I agree though. Your suggestion sounds like it could be a possible solution. However it seems like it would be inherently hard to program and even if they did it could prove to be pretty complicated when trying to implement. The way the system is now (from my understanding) is when you pull the trigger the game engine assigns the mathematics to each bullet in the spread. Pretty straight forward. From the point of firing, the spread has already been determined. It just manifests itself differently/more depending on how far it takes the bullets to arrive at their target.

I will say this though, even though I goes "against" my previous contention. There *is* a weapon in H3 that *can* have it's weapon's fire altered after it has been fired. The Rocket can and does have it's trajectory changed by outside variables. You can deflect a rocket off-course by the use of a grenade or other explosion. So...maybe something could be done like you suggested. I dunno. Although it sounds like it would be pretty much a complete overhaul of the BR mechanics.

~B.B.


Yeah. That's pretty much why the whole thing is pretty darn near impossible.

The rockets can be affected by an outside variable, yes, but my idea would be to have the BR's flightpath after [x] be predetermined the moment you pull the trigger. that makes it even harder to program it in. It would take more than an overhaul of the BR mechanics to integrate that.

I also read your earlier posts about using the AR to turn around an argument on why the BR packet should be tightened or why the spread should be take away...GOOD POINT! hey, you know, if the BR spread is taken away, why not take away the AR spread too? just think, an automatic sniper! HAH! good one!

  • 07.03.2008 9:00 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: Ryuzaki6
Yeah. That's pretty much why the whole thing is pretty darn near impossible.

The rockets can be affected by an outside variable, yes, but my idea would be to have the BR's flightpath after [x] be predetermined the moment you pull the trigger. that makes it even harder to program it in. It would take more than an overhaul of the BR mechanics to integrate that.

I also read your earlier posts about using the AR to turn around an argument on why the BR packet should be tightened or why the spread should be take away...GOOD POINT! hey, you know, if the BR spread is taken away, why not take away the AR spread too? just think, an automatic sniper! HAH! good one!


Again, I think you're idea is a good one but since I'm well outside my knowledge base on how hard/easy it would be to program it into a game engine I can't really say more than "sounds sweet!".

And most people don't realize that when they are talking about the BR spread. Bungie introduced the spread on both the AR and BR in order to help balance the weapons against each other and the other weapons in H3. When people make the argument "well they should remove the spread because it promotes randomness (diminishes "skill")" but at the same time refuse to consider that if they want to make that argument Bungie should then also remove the bullet spread on the AR. Then you have people who say "oh well the AR should have spread because it's a full auto weapon" which you can retort with "well the BR should have spread because it's a burst fire weapon". And when they get around to well the BR should hit the target when it has a red reticule. Would you really want an AR that hit every bullet fired when it has a red reticule? You're right, if you removed all the things people want removed from the BR from the AR as well, the AR would easily overpower the BR in pretty much all circumstances except on the medium to medium-far ranges.

Which is why saying that they should remove it from the BR and it not significantly changing weapons balance is very short-sighted in my opinion. I'd love to see exactly how dominating the AR would be with absolutely no bullet spread and 100% accuracy when fired "red reticule". It would be essentially a full-aut sniper.

~B.B.

  • 07.03.2008 9:16 AM PDT

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
Then again you'd obviously be in favor of removing the bullet spread from the Assault Rifle making it so that if I have a red reticule then every bullet I fire will hit the target. So that the Assault Rifle would be the short to medium range weapon it's suppose to be.

So...I'll ask plainly are you in favor of strengthening the Assault Rifle so that it can kill quicker, with better range and with better accuracy?

~B.B.


Let me show you something I posted a bit earlier...

Posted by: BakedPotatoLive
The AR is intended to work best at a short range, the BR at a mid/long range and the Sniper at a long/extreme long range. Fully tightening the BR spread would make it perform like a Sniper Rifle, albeit a little weaker. Fully tightening the AR spread would make it perform like a Sniper Rifle also, albeit a little weaker then if the BR was tightened. I for one do not want the BR to perform like a Sniper Rifle. I would welcome it, but all I want is for the BR to work at its intended range, which is mid/long range. As of now, the spread of the AR suits short range perfectly, the spread of the Sniper Rifle suits long/extreme long range perfectly, but the BR is not as effective at mid/long range as a sniper is at long/extreme long range, which is the cause of the problem. I don't want a spread like we see in the Sniper Rifle, that's ludicrous. The BR would just become a four shot Sniper Rifle. No, what I would prefer is to see the BR spread tightened just enough so that it works properly at its intended range, which as of now, it doesn't.

  • 07.03.2008 9:20 AM PDT

stosh | Master Forum Ninja |
PECAN PIE FTW. PUMPKIN PIE CAN SUCK IT.

Wow

I like the BR the way it is. Back in H2 it was a third sniper and i didnt really like to go out into the open.

[Edited on 07.03.2008 9:22 AM PDT]

  • 07.03.2008 9:21 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: BakedPotatoLive

Let me show you something I posted a bit earlier...

Posted by: BakedPotatoLive
The AR is intended to work best at a short range, the BR at a mid/long range and the Sniper at a long/extreme long range. Fully tightening the BR spread would make it perform like a Sniper Rifle, albeit a little weaker. Fully tightening the AR spread would make it perform like a Sniper Rifle also, albeit a little weaker then if the BR was tightened. I for one do not want the BR to perform like a Sniper Rifle. I would welcome it, but all I want is for the BR to work at its intended range, which is mid/long range. As of now, the spread of the AR suits short range perfectly, the spread of the Sniper Rifle suits long/extreme long range perfectly, but the BR is not as effective at mid/long range as a sniper is at long/extreme long range, which is the cause of the problem. I don't want a spread like we see in the Sniper Rifle, that's ludicrous. The BR would just become a four shot Sniper Rifle. No, what I would prefer is to see the BR spread tightened just enough so that it works properly at its intended range, which as of now, it doesn't.


No, you are fundamentally flawed. The BR is intended to operate at medium range. The AR lists its range as "short to medium " while the BR lists its range as "medium to far". However to say that the intended range of the BR is to include "far" is wrong. Just like it would be wrong of me to say that the AR's intended range is "medium". That's clearly not the case in either of those weapons. As far as I'm concerned the BR works perfectly inside it's intended range, which according to Bungie is 18-20WUs. You seem to think that the intended range of the BR is something else entirely. As such the weapon is working fine you are just "doing it wrong" or at least having the wrong expectations of the outcome. If you are operating the BR outside of 18-20WUs away and expecting a consistent 4-shot your expectations are wrong based upon the fact that you're using the weapon outside it's intended range.

I don't know if I can explain it any more clearly without simply repeating myself over and over again. The BR is not broken as you seem to think it is. It might be "broken" when compared to your preconceived notion of how the weapon should operate but then the problem lays squarely with you and none with the weapon. If I were to think that the ARs intended range was medium range because it's listed as such, I'd think it was horribly broken as well. It's not because I realize that the intended range of the AR is far closer than that.

I'm sorry BakedPotato, the weapon isn't broken, your perceptions are.

~B.B.

  • 07.03.2008 9:50 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I like the BR.

  • 07.03.2008 10:03 AM PDT