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

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: CravenC21h30o2
There it is!!! I was wondering when you were going to slip up and admit that the BR is broken.


Maybe I'm missing it. Maybe the 10 other people I've run that by are missing it as well. No where in anything I've possibly said did I even hint at the fact that I consider the H3 BR "broken". You bias is amazing.

"The math run by Bungie and by other people in the community shows that it is "mathematically" possible to get a consistent 4-shot at 18WUs. Is that practical? Maybe not." Hmm yep sounds like you're basically conceding that the BR is opperating outside of it's intended abillity.

*Sigh*

No, I'm not. From my understanding of how WUs work is that at around 18 WUs is where the BR tops out at for having it "mathematically" possible to get a 4-shot kill. Now, it's "mathematically" possible at that range, but I'd be very very surprised if a human could replicated the necessary precision for that on a still target let alone a moving one. What I did is prove once again is that DanBauer doesn't know what the hell he's talking about and he'll run a failed example and then try to pass it off as truth. I fail to see how me saying that it's mathematically possible to get a 4sk at 18 WUs shows that the BR is operating outside it's intended ability. Hell, I couldn't get a consistent 4sk from OS to Gold 2 on Guardian. Every once and a great while I would, but nothing consistent.

Should it for any reason be able to 4 shot outside of medium range? No, under no circumstances should a weapon operate above it's designed specifics, at the same time we would apreciate it if it didn't operate below it's designed specifics. This is not a matter of opinion. It's simply that the BR is operating outside of what can logically be called "it's intended bounds" weather it be above or below those bounds doesn't matter.[quote]

I'm still failing to see where anyone has been able to 3x4sk at 18WUs. It's mathematically possible at this range, but almost impossible to humanly replicate. So for a human to accurately replicated it they'll have to move a bit closer. Till about 13-15 WUs, which is about the size of the circle in Guardian.

[quote]Simply by eliminating the random spread, and defining the specific mathematics you will have accomplished two things. You've succesfully given the BR it's range, meaning that anything above this range will result in more shots in order to acheive a kill, and you will make it a skill based weapon, meaning the bullet spread can be accounted for. A skilled player, who pays attention to the nuances of his weapon, will be able to tell where the all important third bullet is being placed and will know exactly where the best place is to aim. Right now with a random spread there is no one place to aim.


Again, if you are only saying that the numerical amount for the bullet spread should be a constant you are still missing half of the equation. The spread can move at any degree angle around the center of the reticule. Unless you are asking for a constant numerical number and a constant degree of deviation, it would make little to no difference.

I'd love to go back and talk about why you're wrong with all the posts you did, but I don't have time today. Thanks for calling me a "troll" though, that gave me a good laugh. At least the other guy, Jiggy I think, had the decency to say that even though he's not going to agree with me, to avoid childish memes.

~B.B.

  • 07.18.2008 11:14 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Why does the BR have to be random
it sucks terribly at long range
and its just okay at medium range

  • 07.18.2008 12:30 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: Ninja is Bosss
Why does the BR have to be random
it sucks terribly at long range
and its just okay at medium range

This is because Bungie decided that we should all start out with ARs. Since this is the way they want us to play, BRs would dominate those who spawned up. So the wide spread allows people to take cover and find a weapon before they get gunned down.

The randomness of the spread allows the BR to have a long range killing abiIity, but only if you get lucky. So without the randomness the weapons would still be balanced, but the BR would no longer be able to kill at long range, unless you hit someone 12 times.

All I can say is don't think of the BR as a 4-shot weapon anymore. Think of it as a scoped weapon that has the potential of a 4-shot.

  • 07.18.2008 12:51 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

Halo CE > Halo 3 > Halo 2

Fix the Halo 3 BR spread, plz.

The M6D was INSANELY unbalanced. I've said it. Bungie has said it. I cannot believe this idea is still on the table.
Halo CE and Halo 3 have a completely different balancing theory. In Halo 3, it's about every single weapon having a chance at it's own range, and no dynamic weapons that work at all ranges, making an incredibly linear rock-paper-scissor and stale gameplay. For example, you are pretty much limited to using the BR at mid range. You are limited to use the AR at close range. You are limited to use the shotgun at point blank range. You are limited to use the rocket at Close-Mid range and you are limited to use pretty much all dual wielding guns at close range. Halo CE had a dynamic starting weapon, which worked at all ranges, but didn't dominate any specific range, which a bunch of weapons that dominate at certain ranges (rockets at mid, sniper at long and shotgun/AR/Plasma Rifle at close). This is the theory behind competitive Halo 3, as well, but it doesn't work well since there is no utility weapon. This happens to lesser extent in Halo 2, as well.


So you want an all-around that has no counterpart unless you go within a specific range?

No. We want a utility gun, that works well at most ranges. It does not dominate at any given range, but works well, if you are good with it. At every single range, you have a much better option, but you can still win at any range, if the person is worse than you/is bad with the power weapons. It doesn't have a counterpart at any range because it doesn't dominate any range and the other weapons function completely differently. It just has a bunch of weapons that are better than it at certain ranges, just like in Halo 3, where you have a bunch of weapons that work at certain ranges, except you've got a gun that IF YOU ARE GOOD can beat anything if the user of the power weapon makes a mistake.

Also, power weapons beat the pistol at other ranges than those specified. I'm jsut saying the range that they clearly dominate the pistol. For example, The Rockets beat the pistol at close range, and the sniper beats the pistol at mid range, if you are a good sniper, too, sometimes even close range if you are good at no scoping.

Well that makes it so that weapon encroaches on the roles of all weapons. When I had the pistol in HCE all I had to do was stay outside of 5 ft and within 100 ft and I could win all day long.
If you say you could win all day by just using the pistol, you were playing some really horrible people who didn't know what the rocket, sniper, plasma rifle or shotty were. If you didn't use those weapons, and the other team did, you were dead. Let's compare. Shotty vs. Pistol at close range. 1 shot from shotty > 3 shots from pistol. Rocket vs. Pistol at mid range. 1 shot from rocket > 3 shots from pistol. Sniper vs. Pistol at long range. 1 shot from sniper > 3 shots from pistol. The pistol isn't as all powerful as you think it is.

The M6D could kill in less than 3 seconds, had an ridiculously fast rate of fire, a moderate size reticule, could reload quickly, and could could carry tons of ammo.

If you could get consistent 3 shots, the pistol could kill in about 1.5 seconds. The thing is, all the other weapons had really fast rates of fire(except rocket, which didn't need it since it was so powerful), and killed faster than the pistol at it's given range and sometimes even outside it's range, like the sniper at mid range or the rocket at close range depending on the skill of the player.


You know what. I'm not going to explain it. I don't need to. It has constantly been shown and said to be unbalanced. No need to rehash it.

Just because Bungie thought it was unbalanced doesn't mean it necessarily was. Bungie's idea of balance is what I've said earlier. All guns have specific roles and can beat any other gun at it's own specific range and not outside of it. In Halo CE, balance was this, plus a weapon that required skill to beat these power weapons at any range, though was still outclassed. They are different types of balance, my friend, and IMHO, the dynamic balance of Halo CE works much better than Halo 3's linear balance.


And I understand that you want an unbalanced weapon in H3. A lot of people have been saying that. They don't like the fact that the weapon has become balanced and that is essentially what the spread has done to the BR. And that's exactly why they are complaining.


No. We don't want an unbalanced weapon. We want the tradition Halo style of balance that was present in Halo CE. Others just want a gun that works consistently and not randomly within it's range. The BR doesn't do either of these at this given moment.


Also, the Rockets don't work best in Mid-Close. The rockets work best at mid-range. In Halo CE, the rockets move about 3-4x as fast as in Halo 3 and have like 5x as much splash damage. Also, you couldn't jump as high in Halo CE, making the rockets an instant kill if you shoot at someone's feet or at a wall near them at pretty much any range.

Also, the Plasma Rifle didn't just work if the person hasn't seen you. If you could use the PR, you'd see that you couldn't outstrafe it because the freeze effect kicked in, making it impossible to move fast enough to outstrafe a competent PR user. Also, you couldn't 3sk him because your aim was slowed down to a halt as well, meaning that if he strafes, you can't hit him. The PR was one of the most useful weapons as a team and individually in Halo CE because of this.

When you are saying that there is no other "utilty gun" that doesn't mean that all the guns have as specific ranges as Halo 3. AS I've stated before, the Sniper is superior to the Pistol at mid range, since it kills faster, and is superior at close range if you are good at no scoping. The rockets are superior at close range as well. All the guns are effective at any range lower than their max ranges, as long as you know how to use the guns properly.

[Edited on 07.18.2008 1:34 PM PDT]

  • 07.18.2008 1:10 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

br is my buddy in combat

  • 07.18.2008 1:17 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

Halo CE > Halo 3 > Halo 2

Fix the Halo 3 BR spread, plz.

I don't know why I'm getting into this, and I doubt you really want to argue, but...

BerserkerBarage...

These are the weapons that were in Halo:CE
- M6D, Sniper, Rockets, AR, Plasma Rifle, Plasma Pistol, Needler, and Shotgun
Hope I didn't miss any.

Anyway, how was it not balanced. If the M6D was not able to shoot at range, then the Snipers would just sit back and have their way. The Rockets were pretty powerful. The Plasma guns were pretty much the same as they are now, except could kill easier, but they are intended to take out shields anyway. The needler was pretty close to how it is now, except was maybe a little weaker. The Shotgun was a good camp weapon just like how it is now. The only weapon that you could really argue would be the AR, because of its range, but at close range the M6D was hard to shoot so it was a good close range weapon. The AR now is a good close range weapon with a little more range.

So you had a close range power weapon, you had a midrange power weapon, and you had a long range power weapon. Then you had the M6D, which could defend against all power weapons. Then you had the AR and Plasma weapons, which were beatdown weapons. Also, don't forget that vehicles could be taken out easier by shooting at them and flipping them with grenades, so they couldn't rule the maps.

These are the only real differences I'm seeing between the 2 games. The power weapons and vehicles can dominate more, so controlling them is crucial. Long range shooting is almost pointless unless you have a Sniper or Laser. People who don't aim or aren't aiming good can run away keeping you from getting the kill that you deserved. The BR/Carbine with skill can't kill at close range, unless the shields were taken out. Grenades dominate more, since you can't just 3-shot someone before they finish you. Outsmarting opponents is more important than outshooting. I'm sure there are many more, but this is all I came up with.

I know BerserkerB will reply and come up with some well, thought-out, explanation as to why I am wrong, but this is only from what I have experienced and are only opinions. I know many have said the M6D was overpowered, but I thought it did exactly what it needed to. It could take out Snipers, it could take out vehicles, and it could take out Rockets. What other weapon do you think would be able to do one of those things. Halo:CE was a game where you went and fought right away, and you either get a kill or you die. There was no running away just because you didn't aim very well.

I think I'll end this discussion right here, and most likely won't reply to you BerserkerB unless for some reason I agree with something you said. No hard feelings though.


I love you.

  • 07.18.2008 1:24 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

WOOT WOOT KEEP THE BR THE SAME GO BUNGIE!!!



  • 07.18.2008 3:10 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I don't understand why so many people complain about the Battle Rifle. The BR spread is fine. I can't find a problem with it at all. I personally think the people that complain are people that want everything in Halo 3 to be exactly like Halo 2 besides graphics wise.

  • 07.18.2008 4:54 PM PDT

Im The Animal

Lol pretty soon there are going to be other threads like this...
BR is pritty good if you keeping getting there head :P and if used enough they die even if they still have shields left, i call it the BR effect :P

  • 07.18.2008 5:19 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: Foahda
Halo CE and Halo 3 have a completely different balancing theory. In Halo 3, it's about every single weapon having a chance at it's own range, and no dynamic weapons that work at all ranges, making an incredibly linear rock-paper-scissor and stale gameplay.


You see it as "rock, paper, scissors" and I see it as each weapon having pros and cons to them. Each weapon having a defined role that you have to decide what weapon is right to be carrying when. You have to realize that you can't rely upon your old "crutch" of the M6D or unbalanced BR to cover all areas except up close and completely far away. You're right, Halo 3's weapon balance is about absolutely NOT having a weapon that is good in all range. The existence of a weapon that is an "utility" weapon is unbalanced. Which is why Bungie has moved away from it in HCE and even farther away from it in H2. Part of Halo is making the tough decision of what 2 weapons you carry because there isn't some magical utility weapon that will cover your ass in a variety of situations.

For example, you are pretty much limited to using the BR at mid range. You are limited to use the AR at close range. You are limited to use the shotgun at point blank range. You are limited to use the rocket at Close-Mid range and you are limited to use pretty much all dual wielding guns at close range.

You aren't limited to using those weapons only at those ranges. You're limited by the fact that those weapons aren't nearly as effective if you chose to operate them outside of those ranges. Those weapons (thankfully) aren't like the M6D; they don't make your game easier by allowing you to better other weapons by it's very nature. You can chose to use the BR at close range, but chances are you'll lose. As you should! You made a poor decision about what type of weaponry to carry and to use. M6D can bail your ass out because it's effective everywhere! You could 2shot and beatdown, hell, getting a TSK or a FSK wasn't exactly hard with the size of the reticule on the M6D at close distance. You can FSK in under 3 seconds.

Halo CE had a dynamic starting weapon, which worked at all ranges, but didn't dominate any specific range, which a bunch of weapons that dominate at certain ranges (rockets at mid, sniper at long and shotgun/AR/Plasma Rifle at close).

Uh, no it didn't. The M6D was only that constantly starting weapon under the use of Slayer Pro or if you made Team Slayer Pro. Both of those happen to be considered "custom gametypes". You started with the M6D on only a few maps. So to say that HCE had a dynamic starting weapon is the same as saying H3 has a dynamic starting weapon because you spawn with the Sniper rifle. However, the starting weapon in HCE was dynamic. So you get half credit for that. The starting weapon on Default Team Slayer (you know the only Team Slayer gametype they shipped with the game) changed considering which map you played on. It wasn't until someone made the gametype Team Slayer Pro that you spawned with a M6D always.

No. We want a utility gun, that works well at most ranges. It does not dominate at any given range, but works well, if you are good with it. At every single range, you have a much better option, but you can still win at any range, if the person is worse than you/is bad with the power weapons. It doesn't have a counterpart at any range because it doesn't dominate any range and the other weapons function completely differently.

The M6D does dominate a range. It dominates mid-range. Let's do a hypothetical. 2 people are standing on separate sides of the middle "trench" on HEH. One has the M6D and the other has rockets. Who wins more times? If you say rockets, you must be going up against the worst pistol user on the face of the planet. Now say you give the guy that had rockets a sniper rifle. Who wins more times? If you say sniper that person must be the god of no-scope kills because his scope is useless at that distance. Even with how fast the rockets moved in HCE and the amount of splash damage unless you were in a confined area, the M6D will consistently beat the rockets at a mid-range distance (around 45-50 meters on the sniper scope).

Now we can have a difference of opinion here on what constitutes "mid-range" and that's probably where this is going to end up. At the same time that is the very nature of the problem with H3 and it's BR, people have a difference of opinion at what "mid-range" should be and how well the BR should work at that range.

Also, power weapons beat the pistol at other ranges than those specified. I'm jsut saying the range that they clearly dominate the pistol. For example, The Rockets beat the pistol at close range, and the sniper beats the pistol at mid range, if you are a good sniper, too, sometimes even close range if you are good at no scoping.

If you say you could win all day by just using the pistol, you were playing some really horrible people who didn't know what the rocket, sniper, plasma rifle or shotty were. If you didn't use those weapons, and the other team did, you were dead. Let's compare. Shotty vs. Pistol at close range. 1 shot from shotty > 3 shots from pistol. Rocket vs. Pistol at mid range. 1 shot from rocket > 3 shots from pistol. Sniper vs. Pistol at long range. 1 shot from sniper > 3 shots from pistol. The pistol isn't as all powerful as you think it is.

The pistol is just as powerful as I think. There is no way in hell that you are killing a pistol user with 1 rocket at mid range. Or at least you aren't doing it consistently. I understand that the shotgun beats the pistol in less than 5 meters. And I understand that the sniper beats the pistol in anything past about 75 meters. However, in that huge 70 meter range is where the pistol dominates. And dominate it did.

[snip]


Just because Bungie thought it was unbalanced doesn't mean it necessarily was.


Apparently it was/is because they have constantly said that the M6D was unbalanced. They've called it a horrible, unbalanced weapon. They've said that it completely unbalanced weapons and they've done everything they've could to move away from it. They speak on what is "balanced" in Halo. Not you. Not me. In your own little world where you think a weapon that can operate in all ranges while all other weapons can't operate in all ranges equals balance than yeah, maybe. Unfortunately for you...that world isn't Halo and it never will be.

Bungie's idea of balance is what I've said earlier. All guns have specific roles and can beat any other gun at it's own specific range and not outside of it. In Halo CE, balance was this, plus a weapon that required skill to beat these power weapons at any range, though was still outclassed. They are different types of balance, my friend, and IMHO, the dynamic balance of Halo CE works much better than Halo 3's linear balance.

You're right in part. HaloCE's and Halo 3's weapons balance are pretty much identical EXCEPT for one glaring problem: The M6D. Balance in HCE was where all weapons had a defined role and 1 weapon had a clearly undefined role and clearly encroached upon the roles of other weaponry. There are clearly different views of balance, mine and Bungie's are in stark contrast to yours.


No. We don't want an unbalanced weapon. We want the tradition Halo style of balance that was present in Halo CE. Others just want a gun that works consistently and not randomly within it's range. The BR doesn't do either of these at this given moment.


Yes, you clearly do want an unbalanced weapon. You plainly just said exactly how Bungie sees balance in H3. You are asking for a weapon that quite obviously goes against that balance. A weapon that obviously goes against the balance is called what? An unbalanced weapon.


Also, the Rockets don't work best in Mid-Close. The rockets work best at mid-range. In Halo CE, the rockets move about 3-4x as fast as in Halo 3 and have like 5x as much splash damage. Also, you couldn't jump as high in Halo CE, making the rockets an instant kill if you shoot at someone's feet or at a wall near them at pretty much any range.


It's becoming quite evident that we have different ideas of what is "mid range" and what isn't. We could argue this all day and I doubt we'd get anywhere.

In my opinion of what mid range in HCE was, there is nothing that consistently beats a pistol.

~B.B.

[Edited on 07.18.2008 5:58 PM PDT]

  • 07.18.2008 5:58 PM PDT

join Elites of War
SANGHEILI FOREVER!!!
(:}{

the BR is fine the way it is.But it still isnt better then the carbine.

  • 07.18.2008 5:59 PM PDT

*Looking up in the sky* "What's that grampa John?"*The blue blob sticks to the girl and begins to sizzle.*

"No comment" is a comment- George Carlin

Posted by: mooshmoossh
I like the BR just the way it is.

I really don't see what's wrong with it.


That is because you're blind and can't see the bullets going haywire and hitting a target five feet away from the red indicator.

  • 07.18.2008 7:06 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

Halo CE > Halo 3 > Halo 2

Fix the Halo 3 BR spread, plz.

You see it as "rock, paper, scissors" and I see it as each weapon having pros and cons to them. Each weapon having a defined role that you have to decide what weapon is right to be carrying when. You have to realize that you can't rely upon your old "crutch" of the M6D or unbalanced BR to cover all areas except up close and completely far away. You're right, Halo 3's weapon balance is about absolutely NOT having a weapon that is good in all range. The existence of a weapon that is an "utility" weapon is unbalanced. Which is why Bungie has moved away from it in HCE and even farther away from it in H2. Part of Halo is making the tough decision of what 2 weapons you carry because there isn't some magical utility weapon that will cover your ass in a variety of situations.
It is rock paper scissors. Shotgun beats everything up close. AR beats everything mid-close. BR beats everything mid range. Sniper and Laser dominate everything far away. It provides for stale gameplay, since you can't beat those guns without having one of your own.

You aren't limited to using those weapons only at those ranges. You're limited by the fact that those weapons aren't nearly as effective if you chose to operate them outside of those ranges. If by not nearly effective, you mean useless.
Those weapons (thankfully) aren't like the M6D; they don't make your game easier by allowing you to better other weapons by it's very nature. You can chose to use the BR at close range, but chances are you'll lose. As you should! You made a poor decision about what type of weaponry to carry and to use. M6D can bail your ass out because it's effective everywhere! You could 2shot and beatdown, hell, getting a TSK or a FSK wasn't exactly hard with the size of the reticule on the M6D at close distance. You can FSK in under 3 seconds. Wow. Saying the Pistol makes the game easier is the most ignorant thing I've ever heard on these forums. Tell me how a gun that is harder to use than any gun in Halo 3 makes the game easier? You're making it sound like the gun had massive auto-aim and aim-assist and that it was a 3SK every time, which is a completely false statement. The Pistol had a reticle smaller than that of the BR, if not the same size, so I don't see how it's easier to use at close range either. 4SK still weren't too common. Pistol battles usually ended in 5 or 6 shot kills with 2 strafing opponents. It was much easier to miss because there was less magnetism. Really, if you think the Pistol was way too powerful, you're just overjudging it's potential ability, and playing the game on paper. In actual gameplay, it's impossible to get consistent 3 shots.


The M6D does dominate a range. It dominates mid-range. Let's do a hypothetical. 2 people are standing on separate sides of the middle "trench" on HEH. One has the M6D and the other has rockets. Who wins more times? If you say rockets, you must be going up against the worst pistol user on the face of the planet. Now say you give the guy that had rockets a sniper rifle. Who wins more times? If you say sniper that person must be the god of no-scope kills because his scope is useless at that distance. Even with how fast the rockets moved in HCE and the amount of splash damage unless you were in a confined area, the M6D will consistently beat the rockets at a mid-range distance (around 45-50 meters on the sniper scope).


That is a perfect example of the rockets perfect range. The rockets work incredibly effectively there. You just jump and shoot at the guys feet and they are instantly dead. I think < 1 second is a much shorter kill time than abotu 1.5 seconds (at the least for a pistol). The sniper at that range, is a joke, but that isn't even mid range, in my honest opinion, as it's even closer than From BR spawn on the Pit to Green Box, so it really isn't effective, unless the player is a god at no-scoping, and at that case, he deserves the kill.

Now we can have a difference of opinion here on what constitutes "mid-range" and that's probably where this is going to end up. At the same time that is the very nature of the problem with H3 and it's BR, people have a difference of opinion at what "mid-range" should be and how well the BR should work at that range. I don't know how you think the rockets would not beat a Pistol user that close.

Exactly. The rocket guy would easily beat the pistol guy at that range.

The pistol is just as powerful as I think. There is no way in hell that you are killing a pistol user with 1 rocket at mid range. Or at least you aren't doing it consistently. I understand that the shotgun beats the pistol in less than 5 meters. And I understand that the sniper beats the pistol in anything past about 75 meters. However, in that huge 70 meter range is where the pistol dominates. And dominate it did.
On paper, it is, but during gameplay, it is not. The potential power of a weapon of this kind is completely different depending on the skill level of the player. Even the Halo CE pros did not 3 shot all the time, or even 4 shot all the time. I don't understand how your idea of mid range is even closer than mine and the rockets are effective in my mid-range. Do you know the range of the shotgun in Halo CE? You can kill a person in 2 or 3 shots from the pink room on Chilly to the pink teleporter. The Shotgun had a huge effective range. The sniper beats the pistol depending on how good the sniper is. A good sniper will kill a good pistol at mid-long range.

Apparently it was/is because they have constantly said that the M6D was unbalanced. They've called it a horrible, unbalanced weapon. They've said that it completely unbalanced weapons and they've done everything they've could to move away from it. They speak on what is "balanced" in Halo. Not you. Not me. In your own little world where you think a weapon that can operate in all ranges while all other weapons can't operate in all ranges equals balance than yeah, maybe. Unfortunately for you...that world isn't Halo and it never will be.

Bungie's opinion is not exactly fact. Bungie's vision for the gameplay is different than how it was in Halo CE, which wasn't necessarily a bad thing. As you could see, the more they try to move away from it, the more the gameplay suffers. At least in my opinion and most competitive players opinion who have been around since Halo CE. Halo CE's balance worked perfectly fine, so I don't see how it was unbalanced. It was just balanced in a different way. It's you who seems to think the only way to balance the weapons is by making them all essentially equal in a certain situation, which is untrue. Halo 3 is balanced, just like Halo CE was balanced, but Halo CE was just balanced better, in my opinion, since it created more skilled and competitively gameplay.

You're right in part. HaloCE's and Halo 3's weapons balance are pretty much identical EXCEPT for one glaring problem: The M6D. Balance in HCE was where all weapons had a defined role and 1 weapon had a clearly undefined role and clearly encroached upon the roles of other weaponry.
That "glaring problem" created better, more fasted paced and competitive gameplay. I don't see how something that worked so well could've be a glaring problem except for people who weren't as good, who just complained because people were better with the weapon than they were. The Pistol had a defined role. A reliable gun that gave you a shot in any situation, but not a definite win.

There are clearly different views of balance, mine and Bungie's are in stark contrast to yours.
Exactly. I prefer the balance that Bungie put in Halo CE, rather than the rock paper scissors balance in Halo 3. The balance of Halo 3 is more based on using a bunch of different weapons. The Halo CE balance is more about creating a competitive environment, that focuses more on gameplay than using a bunch of weapons. In my opinion, variety is not automatically good. Competitive variety is good, but just throwing a bunch of weapons in a game is not competitive variety. I guess you're just one of those people who things that any kind of variety is automatically awesome.

Yes, you clearly do want an unbalanced weapon. You plainly just said exactly how Bungie sees balance in H3. You are asking for a weapon that quite obviously goes against that balance. A weapon that obviously goes against the balance is called what? An unbalanced weapon.
You say that I want an unbalanced weapon, but you previously said people have different views of balance. With the Halo 3 BR, I never stated that I want it to be a pistol. I just want it to work better consistently at mid range, so it can be attempted to be used as a competitive utility gun. Again, just because Bungie feels something is balanced, doesn't mean a lot of people do. Somethings that are unbalanced to me are balanced to you. I think equipment is idiotic, slows the game down and helps people who make mistakes. I feel it's incredibly unbalanced, but that doesn't mean that you do, or Bungie does, since they added it to the game. I have the idea of a competitive balance, whilst you have the Bungie idea of balance.

It's becoming quite evident that we have different ideas of what is "mid range" and what isn't. We could argue this all day and I doubt we'd get anywhere.

In my opinion of what mid range in HCE was, there is nothing that consistently beats a pistol.

Which is quite odd since my idea of mid range is farther than your idea of it.

[Edited on 07.18.2008 8:20 PM PDT]

  • 07.18.2008 8:20 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

[SuSCo]

On top of the net coding of the game being a main reason the BR is so bad, I do not believe a weapon like the BR should have a spread as large as it currently is. A scoped weapon like the BR should be accurate, since it has a scope. The BR is a weapon that takes much skill to use, and skill should not be determined by randomness. I would like to see bungie fix this problem of refunding bullets due to them disappearing into nowhere and have them tighten the spread just a bit. The BR would be a great weapon if this were to happen. Believe it or not too people, I've been refunded rockets too, it just happened to me in doubles. i shot a rocket, and nothing came out. No i was not dying at the same time i was shooting the rocket, I was standing in the open where my rocket disappeared. When i shot the rocket, it disappeared in my clip, i switched to my BR and pulled out my rockets again, and of course, my rocket was back in my clip.

  • 07.18.2008 9:02 PM PDT

I carve a notch in my wall for every stall,
every fifth mark slants diagonal to symbolize your downfall...-AR

Ah, another thread for people to deficate there ideas into, nothing's been said about fixing the BR spread so what's the point of people posting in this thread saying it should be fixed if your not going to listen?

  • 07.18.2008 9:32 PM PDT

If you're interested in recruiting (or being recruited), for matchmaking or gamebattles, please join my group. If you do decide to join please tell all your friends. Thanks in advance.
Greatest game ever.
Ranked Perfection

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
Posted by: CravenC21h30o2
There it is!!! I was wondering when you were going to slip up and admit that the BR is broken.


Maybe I'm missing it. Maybe the 10 other people I've run that by are missing it as well. No where in anything I've possibly said did I even hint at the fact that I consider the H3 BR "broken". You bias is amazing.

"The math run by Bungie and by other people in the community shows that it is "mathematically" possible to get a consistent 4-shot at 18WUs. Is that practical? Maybe not." Hmm yep sounds like you're basically conceding that the BR is opperating outside of it's intended abillity.

*Sigh*

No, I'm not. From my understanding of how WUs work is that at around 18 WUs is where the BR tops out at for having it "mathematically" possible to get a 4-shot kill. Now, it's "mathematically" possible at that range, but I'd be very very surprised if a human could replicated the necessary precision for that on a still target let alone a moving one. What I did is prove once again is that DanBauer doesn't know what the hell he's talking about and he'll run a failed example and then try to pass it off as truth. I fail to see how me saying that it's mathematically possible to get a 4sk at 18 WUs shows that the BR is operating outside it's intended ability. Hell, I couldn't get a consistent 4sk from OS to Gold 2 on Guardian. Every once and a great while I would, but nothing consistent.

Should it for any reason be able to 4 shot outside of medium range? No, under no circumstances should a weapon operate above it's designed specifics, at the same time we would apreciate it if it didn't operate below it's designed specifics. This is not a matter of opinion. It's simply that the BR is operating outside of what can logically be called "it's intended bounds" weather it be above or below those bounds doesn't matter.[quote]

I'm still failing to see where anyone has been able to 3x4sk at 18WUs. It's mathematically possible at this range, but almost impossible to humanly replicate. So for a human to accurately replicated it they'll have to move a bit closer. Till about 13-15 WUs, which is about the size of the circle in Guardian.

[quote]Simply by eliminating the random spread, and defining the specific mathematics you will have accomplished two things. You've succesfully given the BR it's range, meaning that anything above this range will result in more shots in order to acheive a kill, and you will make it a skill based weapon, meaning the bullet spread can be accounted for. A skilled player, who pays attention to the nuances of his weapon, will be able to tell where the all important third bullet is being placed and will know exactly where the best place is to aim. Right now with a random spread there is no one place to aim.


Again, if you are only saying that the numerical amount for the bullet spread should be a constant you are still missing half of the equation. The spread can move at any degree angle around the center of the reticule. Unless you are asking for a constant numerical number and a constant degree of deviation, it would make little to no difference.

I'd love to go back and talk about why you're wrong with all the posts you did, but I don't have time today. Thanks for calling me a "troll" though, that gave me a good laugh. At least the other guy, Jiggy I think, had the decency to say that even though he's not going to agree with me, to avoid childish memes.

~B.B.


Your confidence in the face of stacks of empirical evidence is what's amazing here. You also comment on my bias when your's is just as radical? I think you should take a good hard look in the mirror. It's ok to admit that you've lost. Well it's not really losing though, it's gaining a greater knowledge. When I started in this debate my post was nothing more than "The BR is fine shut up you whiners". Since then, however, I've studied, and watched, and learned, and with the evidence stacked the way it is I don't see how you can continue in the way you are. Especially insulting the majority of the people who post anything contrary to your haughty beliefs.

If you read my other posts, at least (i really don't care if you reply), you'll read the part with the exerpt from the weekly update that you're using in the example of 18 WU's accross guardian. It says it SHOULD yield a kill, not that it "might" yield a kill. From my understanding of semantics this means that Bungie expects this to be within the capabilities of the BR to 4 shot consistently. Which only leads me to my next point. You've successfully proven that the BR is "broken" by the end of your first paragraph, and I quote, "Hell, I couldn't get a consistent 4sk from OS to Gold 2 on Guardian. Every once and a great while I would, but nothing consistent." Having taken into consideration what bungie has previously stated about this being, not only possible, but expected, this is the basic ideal of the current indictment of the BR.

Ok let me make myself a little more clear on the spread issue. The BR is a precision weapon, and with such should be precision aiming. In it's current state there is little you can do to account for the 3rd bullet randomly missing your opponent. Knowing that the Master Chief's head is round, and the reticule of the BR is also round, then we should be able to, with proper aim, hit a 4sk from medium range consistently, meaning 98% of the time. Leave that two percent to whatever other issue you want, but this kind of consistency can be replicated by human hands, and is often expected of soldiers going into the battle field. With that said the "degree of deviation" has little to do with accuracy when you're aiming at a round target. If I were to perfectly aim an M-16 down range at a round target, I would expect that 98%-100% of the bullets fired will stay within the same circular area. That is "perfectly aimed", I say this because I am not trained, and therefore cannot replicate this feat myself. This is with today's technology, and with today's training, therefore it doesn't matter what kind of reality argument you want to use.

I'm sure you'd love to go back and pointlessly amble on about how you're always right and everyone else is a straw headed moron, but don't bother you're really not worth the time. Just go away. You're poluting this forum with mounds of false information. The posts you decided to ignore include articles and examples of why everything you've previously said is absolutely and entirely unfounded, and in many cases absolutely wrong. Go back and learn, expand your worldly experience, come down off your high horse, and grow the hell up. BTW JIggy luv is on your side. Your the only one in this forum acting childish. Your constant provocation is not needed and is quite immature. It does elude to the idea that you are simply a forum troll. Don't lecture me ever, especially on not being childish, when you yourself can't seem to hold back the *sigh*'s and strawmen comments long enough to post a non-provocative reply. Also look up the definition of meme. Better yet since I went and did the legwork on the rest of the evidence as to why you're wrong, here's something extra...

Simple definition:
meme- (mēm)
n. A unit of cultural information, such as a cultural practice or idea, that is transmitted verbally or by repeated action from one mind to another.

Or the Wikipedia article that explains it fully.

I can say that we can agree to disagree all day, but most everything you've said has been answered in full by evidintial articles, or other posts explaining the mathematics and tested theorems. It's not about what I think about the BR. Personally I think it's fine, and I don't mind shooting another round to gain the kill. This, however, does not mean that there's nothing wrong with it, and it certainly doesn't mean that this should be ignored. There is plenty of evidence to back up the claim that the BR is currently not performing the way it was intended to. Why should we simply accept that that this game that we all, obviously, are so passionate about is flawed? Why in the world would we not want to point this out so that in the future the same mistakes are not rehashed?

  • 07.19.2008 12:46 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

Halo CE > Halo 3 > Halo 2

Fix the Halo 3 BR spread, plz.

Great post, Craven. I would +rep you if I could.

  • 07.19.2008 2:18 AM PDT

If you're interested in recruiting (or being recruited), for matchmaking or gamebattles, please join my group. If you do decide to join please tell all your friends. Thanks in advance.
Greatest game ever.
Ranked Perfection

Posted by: Foahda
Great post, Craven. I would +rep you if I could.


The vote of confidence is more than enough. Your contribution has been excelent as well.

  • 07.19.2008 2:43 AM PDT

If you're interested in recruiting (or being recruited), for matchmaking or gamebattles, please join my group. If you do decide to join please tell all your friends. Thanks in advance.
Greatest game ever.
Ranked Perfection

Posted by: CravenC21h30o2
Posted by: BerserkerBarage
If you really think that the H3 BR and the M6D are anywhere near the same level of unbalance, I can't talk to you. You compared the H2 BR with the addition of cheating. I can say that the H3 BR is unbalanced when I use auto-aim mods. Both forms of cheating, and both the reasons why balance is broken. Granted the H2 BR was bad without glitches/cheating, it was a whole new monster with them.

The M6D was the worst in regards to balance. The H2 BR with the use of cheating/glitches wasn't far off. So they balanced the weapon again in H3 controlling it's balance issues by adding a random bullet spread. Just like they had done to other weapons throughout Halo. Honestly if you got killed by an AR when you had the M6D in HCE consistently I would doubt that you played the game all that much. The Plasma Rifle and shotgun are better weapons in close range, the AR was easily beaten.

~B.B.


And just so we're clear on this HCE/H2/H3 balanced debate, Here is a fairly relevant article by an industry expert, someone qualified by experience/time spent with insiders/time spent inside the gaming industry, critiquing Halo2 and the ways it can be fixed. Strange... I wonder what the writers would say today, not assuming anything.


Also this is the one post that I really don't want ignored from the barrage I posted. It's an, arguably, scathing article written by an Electronic Gaming Monthly staff writer criticising Halo 2, and detailing why Halo C.E. was more "balanced". I think Fohada, and his view of balance, have just as much relevance in the side debate as B.B. and Bungie. I would like to take that one step further and say that the balance EGM and fohada would like to see lean more towards skill balance than gameplay balance. The mastery of the game, and it's weapons in a combat simulator should promote skill.

Sorry for spelling your name wrong foahda.

[Edited on 07.19.2008 4:07 AM PDT]

  • 07.19.2008 2:53 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: CravenC21h30o2
Posted by: CravenC21h30o2
Posted by: BerserkerBarage
If you really think that the H3 BR and the M6D are anywhere near the same level of unbalance, I can't talk to you. You compared the H2 BR with the addition of cheating. I can say that the H3 BR is unbalanced when I use auto-aim mods. Both forms of cheating, and both the reasons why balance is broken. Granted the H2 BR was bad without glitches/cheating, it was a whole new monster with them.

The M6D was the worst in regards to balance. The H2 BR with the use of cheating/glitches wasn't far off. So they balanced the weapon again in H3 controlling it's balance issues by adding a random bullet spread. Just like they had done to other weapons throughout Halo. Honestly if you got killed by an AR when you had the M6D in HCE consistently I would doubt that you played the game all that much. The Plasma Rifle and shotgun are better weapons in close range, the AR was easily beaten.

~B.B.


And just so we're clear on this HCE/H2/H3 balanced debate, Here is a fairly relevant article by an industry expert, someone qualified by experience/time spent with insiders/time spent inside the gaming industry, critiquing Halo2 and the ways it can be fixed. Strange... I wonder what the writers would say today, not assuming anything.


Also this is the one post that I really don't want ignored from the barrage I posted. It's an, arguably, scathing article written by an Electronic Gaming Monthly staff writer criticising Halo 2, and detailing why Halo C.E. was more "balanced". I think Fohada, and his view of balance, have just as much relevance in the side debate as B.B. and Bungie. I would like to take that one step further and say that the balance EGM and fohada would like to see lean more towards skill balance than gameplay balance. The mastery of the game, and it's weapons in a combat simulator should promote skill.
You know what's ironic about that article? Lukems wrote that back when he was with 1up.

  • 07.19.2008 3:03 AM PDT

If you're interested in recruiting (or being recruited), for matchmaking or gamebattles, please join my group. If you do decide to join please tell all your friends. Thanks in advance.
Greatest game ever.
Ranked Perfection

Posted by: AK 47625714
Posted by: CravenC21h30o2
Posted by: CravenC21h30o2
Posted by: BerserkerBarage
If you really think that the H3 BR and the M6D are anywhere near the same level of unbalance, I can't talk to you. You compared the H2 BR with the addition of cheating. I can say that the H3 BR is unbalanced when I use auto-aim mods. Both forms of cheating, and both the reasons why balance is broken. Granted the H2 BR was bad without glitches/cheating, it was a whole new monster with them.

The M6D was the worst in regards to balance. The H2 BR with the use of cheating/glitches wasn't far off. So they balanced the weapon again in H3 controlling it's balance issues by adding a random bullet spread. Just like they had done to other weapons throughout Halo. Honestly if you got killed by an AR when you had the M6D in HCE consistently I would doubt that you played the game all that much. The Plasma Rifle and shotgun are better weapons in close range, the AR was easily beaten.

~B.B.


And just so we're clear on this HCE/H2/H3 balanced debate, Here is a fairly relevant article by an industry expert, someone qualified by experience/time spent with insiders/time spent inside the gaming industry, critiquing Halo2 and the ways it can be fixed. Strange... I wonder what the writers would say today, not assuming anything.


Also this is the one post that I really don't want ignored from the barrage I posted. It's an, arguably, scathing article written by an Electronic Gaming Monthly staff writer criticising Halo 2, and detailing why Halo C.E. was more "balanced". I think Fohada, and his view of balance, have just as much relevance in the side debate as B.B. and Bungie. I would like to take that one step further and say that the balance EGM and fohada would like to see lean more towards skill balance than gameplay balance. The mastery of the game, and it's weapons in a combat simulator should promote skill.
You know what's ironic about that article? Lukems wrote that back when he was with 1up.


WOW 0_0 I just saw that, "by L.M. Smith", at the top. That is extremely ironic.

  • 07.19.2008 3:55 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

the battile rifle is great the way it is

  • 07.19.2008 7:28 AM PDT
  • gamertag: ACL711
  • user homepage:

Teabag me once and I will personally kill you in the Halo match for most of the time...depending on what map

I would say the BR is great and sucky depending on the situation, map and connection. I mean you could constantly shoot the person in the head, but if your connection sucks then you would easily die first by say a AR. If your connection is great, maybe the map is what causes the disadvantage such as Cold Storage which requires an amount of time to shoot while trying to gather distance. Otherwise if your on a map thats semi-big or huge, then it would be fine, unless some guy has a close range weapon that could easily kill you and all you have is long range weapons. But if you don't like it, then stop complaining and grow some balls, maybe its just you suck at using it and you should just practice. After all practice makes perfect.

  • 07.19.2008 9:55 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: CravenC21h30o2
Your confidence in the face of stacks of empirical evidence is what's amazing here. You also comment on my bias when your's is just as radical? I think you should take a good hard look in the mirror. It's ok to admit that you've lost.


I'll admit I lost when you actually have a legitimate claim. So far...nope. So far you've been weighed, you've been measured, and you've been found wanting.

Well it's not really losing though, it's gaining a greater knowledge. When I started in this debate my post was nothing more than "The BR is fine shut up you whiners". Since then, however, I've studied, and watched, and learned, and with the evidence stacked the way it is I don't see how you can continue in the way you are. Especially insulting the majority of the people who post anything contrary to your haughty beliefs.

And yet you're the one who is constantly making things personal. I point out strawmen and other illogical fallacies because that's exactly what they are. And you just made another one here in your reply, so I'll get to that in a second. I'll give you a hint, you are making the same mistake that DanBauer is.

If you read my other posts, at least (i really don't care if you reply), you'll read the part with the exerpt from the weekly update that you're using in the example of 18 WU's accross guardian. It says it SHOULD yield a kill, not that it "might" yield a kill.

Ahhh, the time has arrived. You are missing quite a big quantifier there chief. You are taking that quote out of context and without the full quote. Tsk tsk. They said that at 18 WUs (which is roughly from Sniper 2 to Gold 2) WITH PERFECT AIM, it should yield a kill. I'll say that again since you've seemed to miss it the past couple times. WITH PERFECT AIM. I don't have perfect aim. Neither does DanBauer. Neither do you. Bungie and the math nerds already have proven that it is mathematically possible to get a consistent 4-shot kill at this distance. That's empirical, not like you know what that means since you've been misusing it thus far. Until you understand that you don't have perfect aim at this distance and pretty much no one ever will, you'll never realize why you're wrong.

From my understanding of semantics this means that Bungie expects this to be within the capabilities of the BR to 4 shot consistently.

WITH PERFECT AIM...

Which only leads me to my next point. You've successfully proven that the BR is "broken" by the end of your first paragraph, and I quote, "Hell, I couldn't get a consistent 4sk from OS to Gold 2 on Guardian. Every once and a great while I would, but nothing consistent." Having taken into consideration what bungie has previously stated about this being, not only possible, but expected, this is the basic ideal of the current indictment of the BR.

Ahhh the strawman. It's sooo fun when I get to point them out. I have successfully proven that I don't have perfect aim, not that the BR is broken. Trying to suggest otherwise is illogical. And that would be bordering on a non sequitur.

Ok let me make myself a little more clear on the spread issue. The BR is a precision weapon, and with such should be precision aiming. In it's current state there is little you can do to account for the 3rd bullet randomly missing your opponent. Knowing that the Master Chief's head is round, and the reticule of the BR is also round, then we should be able to, with proper aim, hit a 4sk from medium range consistently, meaning 98% of the time. Leave that two percent to whatever other issue you want,

Yep, you can. With my "proper aim" and not "PERFECT AIM" I could get a 3x4SK from what I believe to be around 15 WUs (the size of the circle in Guardian). I still consider this mid range. I'd imagine Bungie still considers this mid range. I'd imagine most people would consider this mid range. So, guess what, at mid-range with "proper aim" you can get a consistent 4-shot kill. Thanks for proving that the BR isn't broken and is absolutely working at it's intended range.

but this kind of consistency can be replicated by human hands, and is often expected of soldiers going into the battle field. With that said the "degree of deviation" has little to do with accuracy when you're aiming at a round target.

Actually, degrees of deviation have a lot to do with firing at a round target. It means that the shots will be divergent from the center and that they will not land near each other. When dead-center will yield a kill, missing around that area has everything to do with accuracy.

If I were to perfectly aim an M-16 down range at a round target, I would expect that 98%-100% of the bullets fired will stay within the same circular area. That is "perfectly aimed", I say this because I am not trained, and therefore cannot replicate this feat myself. This is with today's technology, and with today's training, therefore it doesn't matter what kind of reality argument you want to use.

You, personally, cannot "perfectly aim" a M-16 or M-4 downrange without the aid of other things. Namely things that control for recoil, air speed, and barometric pressure. Even when controlling for those things you cannot aim a M-16 or M-4 so that all shots fired will hit the same area (ie where it's aimed) all the time. That's today's technology, and I don't write Science Fiction so I'll let Bungie do what happens 500 years from now.

I'm sure you'd love to go back and pointlessly amble on about how you're always right and everyone else is a straw headed moron, but don't bother you're really not worth the time. Just go away. You're poluting this forum with mounds of false information. The posts you decided to ignore include articles and examples of why everything you've previously said is absolutely and entirely unfounded, and in many cases absolutely wrong. Go back and learn, expand your worldly experience, come down off your high horse, and grow the hell up. BTW JIggy luv is on your side. Your the only one in this forum acting childish. Your constant provocation is not needed and is quite immature. It does elude to the idea that you are simply a forum troll. Don't lecture me ever, especially on not being childish, when you yourself can't seem to hold back the *sigh*'s and strawmen comments long enough to post a non-provocative reply. Also look up the definition of meme. Better yet since I went and did the legwork on the rest of the evidence as to why you're wrong, here's something extra...


Ugh, the word "troll" as you're using it; is a "meme". I'm the one acting childish? You can't help but try to call me a troll and at the same time make completely illogical arguments. You are the one taking things out of context by both me and Bungie and then are trying to warp them to your viewpoint. Sadly for you, that won't work with me. I'll be here to constantly point out every logical abortion you make.

I can say that we can agree to disagree all day, but most everything you've said has been answered in full by evidintial articles, or other posts explaining the mathematics and tested theorems. It's not about what I think about the BR. Personally I think it's fine, and I don't mind shooting another round to gain the kill. This, however, does not mean that there's nothing wrong with it, and it certainly doesn't mean that this should be ignored. There is plenty of evidence to back up the claim that the BR is currently not performing the way it was intended to. Why should we simply accept that that this game that we all, obviously, are so passionate about is flawed? Why in the world would we not want to point this out so that in the future the same mistakes are not rehashed?


Yep, the BR is NOT broken. You can absolutely get a 4SK at 18WUs WITH PERFECT AIM! However if you don't have perfect aim, and that would be everyone, you'll have to move closer to get a consistent 4SK. However, this is still at what I would consider mid-range, and I'd imagine many others would consider mid-range. Your so-called "empirical" evidence is based upon your faulty following of an out of context quote.

WITH PERFECT AIM...that is all.

Oh, and the reason why I didn't respond to your link about Luke's article is because it was "nuked" for me when I clicked on it. But you want me to respond to the opinions of Luke Smith with my opinions? Wow, how incredibly interesting and worthwhile that would be. If you have a problem with Luke Smith's opinions or want a discussion about them, here's a suggestion. Go talk to LUKE SMITH. I'm not going to defend or elaborate upon Luke's opinion.

~B.B.

[Edited on 07.19.2008 10:32 AM PDT]

  • 07.19.2008 10:31 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

Halo CE > Halo 3 > Halo 2

Fix the Halo 3 BR spread, plz.

Ahhh, the time has arrived. You are missing quite a big quantifier there chief. You are taking that quote out of context and without the full quote. Tsk tsk. They said that at 18 WUs (which is roughly from Sniper 2 to Gold 2) WITH PERFECT AIM, it should yield a kill. I'll say that again since you've seemed to miss it the past couple times. WITH PERFECT AIM. I don't have perfect aim. Neither does DanBauer. Neither do you. Bungie and the math nerds already have proven that it is mathematically possible to get a consistent 4-shot kill at this distance. That's empirical, not like you know what that means since you've been misusing it thus far. Until you understand that you don't have perfect aim at this distance and pretty much no one ever will, you'll never realize why you're wrong.

The problem is, that consistent 4 shot is hindered by hit detection that plagues every burst fire or automatic gun in the game. The netcode needs to definitely be looked at for the next patch to prevent this kind of garbage.
In Halo 2, you like never got dropped shots, and even in Halo CE online, though you needed to compensate for any latency, you didn't get nearly as many dropped shots as in Halo 3. It's just ridiculous.

  • 07.19.2008 11:17 AM PDT