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: Foahda
When BB says perfect aim, he means absolutely prefect aim that's single pixel center of the reticle in the pixel perfect center of the head of the opponent. It's essentially impossible to achieve this.


Correct. At 18WUs it is incredibly hard to achieve this. There is a point where you can aim that will give you a 4SK, but the difference between that point and the point where you'll not get a 4SK is incredibly small. Like millimeters small.

I'm glad you understand Foahda. As to your point about wanting something that will allow you to control for bullet spread on the BR like how you can control for the AR is an interesting suggestion. Maybe Bungie will look to implement something like that in their next game if that is plausible. Maybe make it if you fire the BR in quick succession bullet spread starts to increase. So the first couple shots will have less spread, but subsequent shots without a "cool down" would be more likely affected by spread.

Just a quick thought on it.

~B.B.

  • 07.20.2008 7:41 PM PDT

join KOTOR

In 2001, gaming changed forever. The time of Halo.

i love the br

  • 07.20.2008 8:17 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
What you can't seem to accept is that your definition of "aim" is off, by a lot. Where my reticule is, is where I'm "aiming".


My definition of "aim" is just fine. I've run this conversation past a wide variety of people and they all seem to understand exactly what I'm saying and completely agree. It seems to me that your cognitive dissonance and bias is keeping you from understanding. When I talk about aim, there are different types. For example, when you have a sniper rifle and you want to kill in 1 shot (a headshot) you can have "perfect aim" where you fire, hit the head, and receive a kill. "Good aim" is where you fire, miss the head but hit the body, and damage your opponent. "Poor aim" is where you fire, miss your opponent altogether and nothing happens. Say now you take a sniper and put his opponent at a great length away. For example, from the back of one side of Standoff to the other back side of Standoff. At this distance you'll have lead your shot to hit a moving opponent. "Perfect aim" would be the point where you lead your opponent and you hit their head with your shot and you get a headshot. The BR is different as in it obviously have bullet spread. To have "perfect aim" with the BR you have to fire where the reticle is over the head where all bullets will hit even with bullet spread. This is obviously mathematically possible at 18WUs according to what Bungie has said and what others have said that have crunched the numbers. When you are putting your reticle over someone's head at 18WUs and you don't get a 4SK, you have good aim but not perfect aim. There is a perfect place to aim at 18WUs that will get you a 4SK. Just like there is a perfect place to aim to lead a person with the sniper rifle to get a headshot. I hope that you can understand now that even with the sniper rifle that when someone is incredibly far away it is increasingly hard to have perfect aim so that you can get a headshot and not just have good aim and hit your opponent.

Where the bullets fly is supposed to be where I'm aiming.

Obviously that will not happen exactly when you use a weapon with bullet spread.

My aim in a video game cannot be any different than where my on screen reticule is. Like I said if this is the case, and I'm actually aiming somewhere my reticule is not then there's more wrong with this game than I thought. That's why the on screen reticule was invented to show where you are aiming. So I'm failing to see how if my reticule is on target my aim is still off, apart from lag or coding issues.

Yes, your reticle is on target, it's just not on target to get a 4SK. This is the difference between what I call "perfect aim" and "good aim".

And you still can't accept the fact that even though there are variables both in real life and video games this variable is quite a bit bigger than what can be accounted for from medium range. I'd have no problem if this kind of thing could be accounted for from the ranges that we're talking about, but it can't. Is 18 W.U.'s a little too far probably. I think 14 is a better number, and appearently untill I go in game and measure out this distance and test the BR myself people aren't going to believe me that it's not working properly. Any in game variable, at least historically, that is thrown at the player can be accounted for once a greater level of skill is gained. This kind of variable cannot be accounted for no matter how skilled you are. Yes you can get closer, Yes you can spam nades, Yes you can change your strategy of how you use the weapon. This is not what I'm talking about. What I'm talking about is in an empty room with one opponent, both have BR's no cover, no running away, the player who wins is just as likely to be the non-skilled player as it is the skilled player. Given that both players have steady aim. The player who's given the 4sk is determined by a random number, not by how well the weapon was aimed, or how skillfull the player is. If you think this is ok, then you haven't been playing games very long, and honestly you're not the kind of person this concerns. It's the skilled player who looses that battle 2 out of 5 times because the other player got a lucky bullet.

If you really think that if you took any MLG pro and put him even against me that he'd lose a 1v1 BR battle with me then I have great fear for your so-called pros. A skilled player knows that up until 18WUs (that I know of) that the spread can be mitigated by aim. You can aim better than your opponent and even with spread you still can win. After 18WUs, it becomes a gamble because you're operating the weapon outside of it's 4SK effective range. And for the record again 18WUs is a pretty big distance. Who is given the 4SK is still determined by aim still even within 18WUs. Just simply aiming for the head isn't sufficient for aiming in H3. If you want a weapon that never has to worry about a spread, don't use the BR. Use the sniper rifle.

Oh, and I've been playing games since I was 6 with the Atari 2600 and the NES in 1988; so I think I've been "gaming" for longer than you.

~B.B.


I wasn't commenting on your gaming experience, it is funny that you thought I was though. No, rather I was commenting on the 14 year old kids who've never known video games before Xbox 360. I got from you last post that your not young, and I'm sure you can tell that I'm not young either. 22 here, and from what you say I'm going to assume you're around 28.

Now we're getting down to the heart of the issue, and it's really not about opinion. We have different ideas about what "perfect aim" is and what this issue is about. The shake up in the heierarchy of pros is a perfect example of how the variances in this weapon cannot be accounted for. The last two tournaments a team that has been playing sine the HCE days, and has never come in lower than second place in any Halo tournament they've entered, came in 7th and 6th place. Teams that focused more on teamwork, and less on individual skill excelled. The individual skill is the area I'm concerned with. Even with "perfect aim", as you call it, it's still highly likely that you will NOT be awarded a 4sk. This is the point! There is about a 50% chance that you won't recieve the 4sk from medium distance. That's with "perfect aim". The closer you get the greater your chances are because less variables exist where the bullet required for the 4sk will miss. It's random. This is the problem. If it weren't random then even with "good aim" from medium distance you could likely recieve a 4sk. With perfect aim it would be guaranteed, and right now it's not guaranteed. That is the problem that I, and others have.

  • 07.20.2008 8:48 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I simply ply that 4 shots are very irregular outside of close range, or if the target is strafing and dodging at medium/long range.. I mean, the headshot area has changed significantly from halo 2. I'm not talking about BR spread so don't bring that up, I know halo 2 wasn't as specific as 3, but what I'm saying is..centre the head in your reticle, you kill in seven shots; aim general 'chin' area, you get a 4SK. Yet another problem for more 'puritanical' players like myself is the BR in contrast to the AR. BR, with the new lead implementations and so forth, requires a lot more skill to 4SK someone, and all the AR wieder has to do is point and spray until they're close enough to get a melee on the opponent. I guess what I'm saying is, the BR couldn't hurt to be a little more lethal, because you come up against an AR wielder up close you're done for, no matter how much skill you have in comparison. If anyone trys to take that as an insult, just don't. I'm simply saying that BR up close is not as effective as the default weapon for the majority of playlists, and medium/long range firing is..problematic.

  • 07.21.2008 4:34 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
I wasn't commenting on your gaming experience, it is funny that you thought I was though. No, rather I was commenting on the 14 year old kids who've never known video games before Xbox 360. I got from you last post that your not young, and I'm sure you can tell that I'm not young either. 22 here, and from what you say I'm going to assume you're around 28.


I understand that you weren't commenting on how long I've been playing games. You said that if I thought people should lose who are "higher skilled" because of chance then I haven't been playing games for very long. Not to rehash an old argument here, but in games there is always chance/luck/karma whatever you want to call it. What a more "skilled" person will do is realize that there is inherently chance involved, so they try to minimize the impact that chance can play. Do I think the "more skilled" player should win every time? Hell no. Why? Because it would make the game incredibly boring as the outcome would be determined before the game started. Just like I don't want to see the Yankees, Patriots, Chelsea, or Tiger Woods win everything they enter. Likewise, I don't want to see Final Boss, who you talk about here in a second, win everything all the time either.

Now we're getting down to the heart of the issue, and it's really not about opinion.

Actually, I think it is all about opinion.

We have different ideas about what "perfect aim" is and what this issue is about. The shake up in the heierarchy of pros is a perfect example of how the variances in this weapon cannot be accounted for. The last two tournaments a team that has been playing sine the HCE days, and has never come in lower than second place in any Halo tournament they've entered, came in 7th and 6th place. Teams that focused more on teamwork, and less on individual skill excelled.

Yes, Final Boss sucked it up. Yes, they were "de-throned". No, you will never be able to prove a causal relationship between BR spread on Final Boss' losing streak. You can state your opinion about it and how you think it's solely because of the "lower" skill cap of H3 that has lead to the downfall of FB. That's all fine and good. I don't care. So are you saying that it's necessarily a bad thing that less emphasis is being put on individual skill instead of teamwork skill? So that a team with good teamwork can now overcome and beat a team of individuals with good BR skills. To me, I don't see a problem with it. Although at the same time I could not possibly care less, so my opinion on it is slight.

The individual skill is the area I'm concerned with. Even with "perfect aim", as you call it, it's still highly likely that you will NOT be awarded a 4sk. This is the point! There is about a 50% chance that you won't recieve the 4sk from medium distance.

Actually, at 18 WUs, you have a far less than 50% chance to get a 4SK. It's incredibly low near impossible. However, it really comes down to your opinion whether or not 18WUs is what you consider mid-range and if you'd expect a 4SK from that distance. Me personally, no I wouldn't. It's pretty far. So far that I can't even see whether or not the "dot" in the reticle is present when I'm sitting 2 feet away looking at a 21" 1080i LCD TV.

That's with "perfect aim". The closer you get the greater your chances are because less variables exist where the bullet required for the 4sk will miss. It's random. This is the problem.

See, I don't see it as a problem. And apparently many others don't as well. If you want a 4SK you have to be within a specific range (around ~15WUs) and have excellent aim. The closer you get, the "sloppier" your aim can be. If you don't expect a 4SK, you can be a whole wide range away from your opponent. And it's really not random. The closer you are to your opponent the more of a chance you have to get a 4SK. The farther you are to your opponent the less of a chance you have to get a 4SK. Seems pretty cut and dry to me.

If it weren't random then even with "good aim" from medium distance you could likely recieve a 4sk. With perfect aim it would be guaranteed, and right now it's not guaranteed. That is the problem that I, and others have.

The farther away you are from your opponent, the increasingly more precise your aim has to be. In H2, you could put the reticle on their head, pull the trigger and it would be a headshot. Because "hitscan" did most of the work for you. In H3, the precision required to get a headshot increases exponentially as you move away from your opponent. So much so that at around 18WUs the difference between a hit or miss is excruciatingly small. However, there still exist an area that will give you that 4SK (mathematically based of course). If you have perfect aim, you have nothing to worry about. You'll get a 4SK every time up until the point where the spread can no longer be mitigated. However, no one here has perfect aim. There are just varying degrees of aim, and still the person with better aim will more than likely be the victor. Which is why the good players are still the good players even in H3. Which is why the H3 BR is working as intended. And why the BR in H3 isn't broken or in need of a fix.

~B.B.

[Edited on 07.21.2008 8:47 AM PDT]

  • 07.21.2008 8:46 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

i for one appreciate the new BR and its redeeming and not so glourious qualities. Its my top tool of destrcution. If you dont like the fact that the BR isnt long enough range for you then pick up a sniper rifle. if its not a well around close range wep then carry an AR. pretty simple. In all actuallty i really do not see much difference between halo2 or halo 3's BR. Its still my top tool from halo2 and is still my top tool in halo 3. either way i look at it i love it. It still has the same amout of rounds as the old one. it makes a fantastic medium range wep and its still fun to use. the only thing that im extremely happy about with the improvements in halo 3 is there is no god for saken noob combo (even though this has nothing to do with the BR it still has alot to do with it). Alot of whiners probably dont realize that they are complaining about the fact that the noob combo isnt as effective as halo 2. they think the br changed between the two games, but really its just the tactics behind the use of the BR. no noob combo = no pwning face easily also = actual use of ones own skill with a BR rather than charging up a plasma pistol locking on, shooting, then switching to BR and "owning someones face"

*steps off soap box*

thats my opinion on the BR in halo 3, like it or love it, bungie isnt going to change a thing bout it unless someone finds a "new" noob combo in which ppl are able to use the BR to a new unfair advantage until then get use to it cause i dont think the halo 2 BR is making a come back anytime soon.

  • 07.21.2008 8:49 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

First of all, I just want to say that I love what Bungie has done with the BR, making it a fair, yet still powerful weapon.

Now that that's done with, I want to address the whiners and complainers about the BR, and give them my opinions, and maybe it will change their thinking a little.

As many people have said before me, the BR was WAY too powerful of a weapon in Halo 2, and I agree completely. Because of the glitch named BXR, and BXB, the BR was the ideal close range, medium range, and long range weapon. It was intended to be a medium, perhaps long range weapon, but people saw around that. In Halo 3 however, not many people can so call "out BR" someone very close range when their opponent is weilding a sword, shotgun, or even AR. If you can, I congradulate you, but back to the matter.

The new and improved BR is fine the way it is. The recoil, and neccessity to "lead" shots from far range makes it a harder weapong to use. However, it also makes it balanced, and realistic. What kind of bullet would hone in on someone's head 200 feet away? Honestly, the Halo 2 BR took relatively low if any skill to use at all, because all you had to do was aim your crosshair at the opponents head, and almost every shot would hit. In Halo 3, you actually have to somewhat use your brain as to how far they are away, and where you should aim.

I applaud Bungie for making the BR a much more balanced weapon, and I also have one final argument. For all the people who say the BR should be Halo 2 style or whatever, I have a news flash for you. Halo 3 IS NOT Halo 2. Plain and simple. It's a new wave of multiplayer action, head to head game, and if you don't like it... well then go play Halo 2.

Thanks for hearing my input :]
Hope it helped

  • 07.21.2008 10:10 AM PDT

I like how the four shot is only guaranteed at closer ranges where it is harder to maintain a consistent aim, instead of further away where the cursor takes up close to the opponents entire body.

  • 07.21.2008 12:00 PM PDT
  • gamertag: U54222
  • user homepage:

Yes, it is difiicult to maintain aim when you're critically damaged. The Battle Rifle is an advantage to take kills which causes people to complain. And mostly people love to "camp". Although many suggest a carbine, but it seems a Battle Rifle is more accurate and has more strength to weaken a shield. If you're tired of getting killed by a Battle Rifle, try closing up to them and shooting them.

Soome people wonder why can a Battle Rifle hold more ammunition than an Assault Rifle. I'm one of those curious people too. Bungie isn't going to change anything with the Battle Rifle. Despite to all the unanimous who want to keep the Battle Rifle which is more than half of the people.

  • 07.21.2008 12:55 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

Halo CE > Halo 3 > Halo 2

Fix the Halo 3 BR spread, plz.

Yes, Final Boss sucked it up. Yes, they were "de-throned". No, you will never be able to prove a causal relationship between BR spread on Final Boss' losing streak. You can state your opinion about it and how you think it's solely because of the "lower" skill cap of H3 that has lead to the downfall of FB. That's all fine and good. I don't care. So are you saying that it's necessarily a bad thing that less emphasis is being put on individual skill instead of teamwork skill? So that a team with good teamwork can now overcome and beat a team of individuals with good BR skills. To me, I don't see a problem with it. Although at the same time I could not possibly care less, so my opinion on it is slight.

I think the main reason Final Boss is doing "bad" is because their style of play doesn't work as well in Halo 3 and they are slumping a little bit right now.

Skill should be the key factor. In Sports, skill is the main factor and when the better team loses, it's because they make mistakes or the other team takes advantage of something key to victory. Luck is much less constant than in Halo.

  • 07.21.2008 1:18 PM PDT

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

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

I appreciate your opinion.
Posted by: Epic v1
As many people have said before me, the BR was WAY too powerful of a weapon in Halo 2, and I agree completely. Because of the glitch named BXR, and BXB, the BR was the ideal close range, medium range, and long range weapon. It was intended to be a medium, perhaps long range weapon, but people saw around that. In Halo 3 however, not many people can so call "out BR" someone very close range when their opponent is weilding a sword, shotgun, or even AR. If you can, I congradulate you, but back to the matter.

The BR was only overpowered when you compared it to your starting weapon, the SMG, or other dual-wieldable weapons. When dual-wielding at close range (the intended range), BR users could easily be taken out, unless the BR user takes out your shields first. The main reason so many say it was overpowered was because the maps were built for mid-range battles and you started out with a single SMG (which, by the way, was a dumb decision by Bungie). Most people when they play just want to go and fight as soon as they spawn, so killing single SMG wielders made the BR seem very overpowered. Also, the grenade-BR combo made the BR very easy, which hasn't changed with Halo 3. However, dual-wielders (which was Bungie's reason for starting you with an SMG) would dominate BR users at certain ranges.

The new and improved BR is fine the way it is. The recoil, and neccessity to "lead" shots from far range makes it a harder weapong to use. However, it also makes it balanced, and realistic. What kind of bullet would hone in on someone's head 200 feet away? Honestly, the Halo 2 BR took relatively low if any skill to use at all, because all you had to do was aim your crosshair at the opponents head, and almost every shot would hit. In Halo 3, you actually have to somewhat use your brain as to how far they are away, and where you should aim.
Most who, as you put it, "complain" about the BR don't want it to be like Halo 2. It has to do with the fact that a miss or a hit is determined by the randomness of the spread. The fact that sometimes you have a very tight spread and sometimes you have a very wide spread. All this does is allow people to sometimes get away when they don't have a mid-range weapon to fight a BR user. Notice I said sometimes, meaning if the spread is tight they still may get killed. This is why some people really don't understand Bungie's reasoning. My understanding is that Bungie wants us to sometimes be able to get a kill from long range, while not making it consistent. This may work for MM, as people usually run around with ARs, and all the other weapons are random, so why not the BR? However, this is not ideal for competitive gaming, because the winner IS determined by a random value instead of who was on target with their aim.
I applaud Bungie for making the BR a much more balanced weapon, and I also have one final argument. For all the people who say the BR should be Halo 2 style or whatever, I have a news flash for you. Halo 3 IS NOT Halo 2. Plain and simple. It's a new wave of multiplayer action, head to head game, and if you don't like it... well then go play Halo 2.
It isn't more balanced, just balanced differently. Now, the BR has no chance at close range, power weapons dominate more, and vehicles are harder to shoot down. So to you it may be more balanced, but to me it has a different kind of balance that makes for a more frustrating gaming experience.

What made the Halo 2 BR seem easy was that it was a hitscan weapon as you basically stated. Another reason was that it had a spread, so instead of aiming at the head you could sweep your aim across the head assuring you of a headshot. However, this debate is not about the Halo 2 BR versus the Halo 3 BR. It is about the random spread, and that the BR is inconsistent.

Again, I appreciate your opinion, as I do everyone who explains why they like how it currently is (except Berserker's, just kidding).


[Edited on 07.21.2008 2:14 PM PDT]

  • 07.21.2008 2:12 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: Jiggly Luv
(except Berserker's, just kidding).


*frownie face*

that hurts Jiggly...that hurts me deep...

~B.B.

  • 07.21.2008 4:55 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I appreciate the analisys and criticism on my statement...
Thanks Jiggly :]

  • 07.21.2008 5:06 PM PDT

I'm not that one character from that one movie anymore....

couldnt have said it any better...are you a poet?

  • 07.21.2008 5:41 PM PDT

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
I understand that you weren't commenting on how long I've been playing games. You said that if I thought people should lose who are "higher skilled" because of chance then I haven't been playing games for very long. Not to rehash an old argument here, but in games there is always chance/luck/karma whatever you want to call it. What a more "skilled" person will do is realize that there is inherently chance involved, so they try to minimize the impact that chance can play. Do I think the "more skilled" player should win every time? Hell no. Why? Because it would make the game incredibly boring as the outcome would be determined before the game started. Just like I don't want to see the Yankees, Patriots, Chelsea, or Tiger Woods win everything they enter. Likewise, I don't want to see Final Boss, who you talk about here in a second, win everything all the time either.


So your argument against the "more skilled" player winning every time is that it would be boring? You have to be joking. In an equally fair environment with no variation in its properties, you want the winner to be determined by chance? By luck? I, and many others have said this time and time again, but your ignorance and bias covers your eyes as well as your brain: luck is no substitute for skill. Intentionally implementing elements of chance into a competitive shooter just to make the game less boring is balancing; it's madness.

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
Actually, I think it is all about opinion.


Well then stop trying to belitte and condescend other members opinions.

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
Actually, at 18 WUs, you have a far less than 50% chance to get a 4SK. It's incredibly low near impossible. However, it really comes down to your opinion whether or not 18WUs is what you consider mid-range and if you'd expect a 4SK from that distance.


Yes, I would.

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
Me personally, no I wouldn't. It's pretty far. So far that I can't even see whether or not the "dot" in the reticle is present when I'm sitting 2 feet away looking at a 21" 1080i LCD TV.


That's nice to know.

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
See, I don't see it as a problem. And apparently many others don't as well.


And apparently many others do aswell.

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
If you want a 4SK you have to be within a specific range (around ~15WUs) and have excellent aim. The closer you get, the "sloppier" your aim can be. If you don't expect a 4SK, you can be a whole wide range away from your opponent. And it's really not random. The closer you are to your opponent the more of a chance you have to get a 4SK.


Really? The closer you are, the easier it is to aim and hit your target? What a shocking revelation Berserka.

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
The farther you are to your opponent the less of a chance you have to get a 4SK. Seems pretty cut and dry to me.


Holy crap, I think he's onto something.

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
The farther away you are from your opponent, the increasingly more precise your aim has to be.


What is with all the obvious statements?

Posted by: BerserkerBarageIn H3, the precision required to get a headshot increases exponentially as you move away from your opponent.

:O

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
So much so that at around 18WUs the difference between a hit or miss is excruciatingly small. However, there still exist an area that will give you that 4SK (mathematically based of course). If you have perfect aim, you have nothing to worry about. You'll get a 4SK every time up until the point where the spread can no longer be mitigated.


Which should be at medium range, or 18WU's. That is currently not the case.

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
However, no one here has perfect aim. There are just varying degrees of aim, and still the person with better aim will more than likely be the victor.


If the target is stationary, I fail to see how this perfect aim argument applies. If the medium ranged target is standing still, the reticle is fairly simple to line up, and it should yield a 4SK every time. This is currently not the case.

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
Which is why the good players are still the good players even in H3. Which is why the H3 BR is working as intended. And why the BR in H3 isn't broken or in need of a fix.


So because the good players are still good players, you derive that the BR is working as intended? What a great conclusion to come to, BB.

I have been banned for the last two weeks, and I come back to see that you are still posting your self-righteous, arrogant dribble. You constantly belittle other members opinions and views, labelling them as "wrong". I wouldn't expect someone that undermines others opinions to say something along the lines of -

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
Actually, I think it is all about opinion.


Please, do us all a favor and step off your elitist chair for a while. I have never met such a persistant person, then when faced with such potent evidence continues to debate and discuss. I don't know how you have survived, but it may have something to do with how you pick and choose which points and arguments to rebut. But on the other hand, never have I met such an arrogant person who believes that those opinions disputing his are null and void. Your anti-MLG bias is ridiculous, and down right shameful.

You have been weighed, you have been measured, and you have been found wanting.





[Edited on 07.21.2008 11:03 PM PDT]

  • 07.21.2008 11:00 PM PDT
  • gamertag: s0uI
  • user homepage:

Get owned

Man the br is useless to me. I can show you a thousand vids where the dude I'm shooting is no shield and the ridicule is red with the dot in the center at close range and does not die shot after shot. It's still useful none the less but a lot less reliable in h2 when I'd have a br i said to my self "I'm pretty much unstoppable" now It's like i hope this gun works in this battle.

  • 07.22.2008 12:27 AM PDT

Posted by: FaJiTa TuEsDaY
only eat one small snack a week to save money on food and just have water toilet and lights to save money thats my plan

Though the Earth is dying we must enrich her body, for the ground we tread is hφly.

I'm a lion in a world where everybody's content with being cats.

Posted by: OnsIaught
Man the br is useless to me. I can show you a thousand vids where the dude I'm shooting is no shield and the ridicule is red with the dot in the center at close range and does not die shot after shot. It's still useful none the less but a lot less reliable in h2 when I'd have a br i said to my self "I'm pretty much unstoppable" now It's like i hope this gun works in this battle.
So is it useless or useful?

  • 07.22.2008 2:21 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I've had no spread, I can own againts AR.

  • 07.22.2008 2:30 AM PDT

"Don't take life too seriously, nobody gets out alive anyway." Goes for anything I say; anything I do, doubly so.

Need assistance with anything? Shoot me a PM. Duardo's FAQ on User Titles. | A word from 54.

Forgive me if this has been posted previously in the thread, but it's a long thread and it's late.

THIS IS NOT JUST A WALL. IT IS A FULL-ON EPIC SIZED THESIS. A SUMMARY IS LOCATED NEAR THE BOTTOM.

The real roots of this discussion are what "mid-to-long" are and whether or not a little luck (intentionally programmed) should also influence outcomes of encounters. I myself feel that it shouldn't, and that the BR's current state is an absolute buzzkill on Halo Three's experience.

Yes, Halo Three is competitive, and this statement does not just apply to Major League Gaming or any other specific subset of this community. The utter proof of H3's competitiveness lies in the fact that ranked playlists have far and away the highest average UU's (save double XP weekends.) Not only that, we forget that this is a competition: there is a winner, and there is a loser. Now, there may be people that enjoy the game and don't give a hoot as to whether they win or lose. I would imagine these people play mostly Social matches. Since there seems to be many more people in ranked than social lists of similar variants, I would venture that the majority favors a competitive edge to some point.

However, all games of skill do take a piece of luck at some point: in Blackjack and Texas Hold 'Em, there is still the matter of what cards you are given. However, in head-to-head card battles, pure skill with wagering and so on will overturn blind luck over the long run. Halo's luck relies on its spawning system, and moreso on latency. A good player can overturn these (within reason; 600 mS latency or spawning five feet in front of someone holding a Shotty are quite arduous to deal with.) However, the tools the players have are always the same. For example, in Blackjack, you do not receive a reduced payout from the dealer if you have a red card, or double for a black, etc. In H3, a tool used by different players can have highly different outcomes (assuming similar skill/latency/situation.) All BR's are not created equal, not by any means.

MY SOLUTION.
Make the H3 BR function similar to the Halo:CE pistol. Reduce the spread (to perhaps .1º for all bullets,) but in turn make the gun require headshots for more damage, ideally three consecutive headshots for a kill, versus the current six bodyshots or three bodyshots and a headshot. This will keep the gun being used for its intended purposes (mid-to-long range combat,) and will keep it from dominating other ranges (hard for close range, as it requires three headshots, which takes time and skill; and at long range, shots would still need to be led and in order to hit for a 3SK, hit a very small target that gets even smaller at range.)

Now: may I address some common complaints facing this issue.

The BR is fine.
Hmm. If you call a kill versus a death being decided on LAN by something neither player can control 'fine,' then yes, it is. But I disagree (and so do others.)

If you want a Halo Two BR/Halo:CE Magnum, go back to H2/H1.
This is inane. The H3 BR (even with changes) is so different from the other games' guns, it's not really a valid comparison. Yes, there are similarities, but things like range, necessity to hit shots, hitbox size, and firing rate still distinguish it from other variants. This on top of different scenarios and geometry, etc.

Changing the BR would overpower it.
Not necessarily. Perhaps you're still apprehensive of the Halo Two reaping machine known as the BR. The H3 variant fires slower, has more of an upward recoil, and has less auto-aim and other in-game mechanics assisting aim. Not to mention a lack of instant-kill animation glitches.

The BR is working as designed.
I'll admit this: it's true. The BR is 100% functioning as designed by Bungie. However, we think that the design needs a tweak, merely for the fact that fights can be decided by something other than skill, aim, teamwork, cunning, etc., when the skill levels dictate a fight should end otherwise. No, I am not suggesting that the BR caused Final Boss to suck, or what have you. I am suggesting that it disrupts fair, balanced gameplay; with its effects being amplified on highly skilled, competitive games.

The BR is the same for everyone... your opponent has the same problems as you.
This is illogical. The spread is random, it does not follow logically that the spread would be the same for two different firings. If I get smaller numbers than my opponent and I get a kill that I shouldn't have (because I fired second,) then I don't deserve that kill. Conversely, if my aim is true and I fired first, but I am unlucky and draw a mammoth spread that causes my shot to miss and lead to my death, that's not fair either.
While according to the Law of Large Numbers, these instances should cancel out eventually, may I suggest a superfluous answer: why bother with balancing over time? Just cut the shenanigans, so an outcome based more on skill is achieved more often.

Changing the BR would reduce the realism.
Well, sure, I guess it would. But then again, this is fantasy. We're on artificial worlds, capable of eradicating all sentient life. The first and foremost concern with Halo Three needs to be its gameplay and how fun it is, not how realistic it is.

No, no burst weapon will ever fire the same way twice, nor will the three bullets ever take the same path. However, no weapon will have a tenth of a second delay of firing, nor will a weapon make contact with someone's head by being shot six inches to the right of the target. This is a video game, allowances need to be made. Much to Bungie's credit, they made this game quite realistic, however, this is one instance where realism needs to take a backseat to (IMO) fun and fair gameplay.

Halo's success is from its niche: polishing many different aspect of FPS's and combing them for the genre-redefining 'medium-paced' FPS. Realism is a nice bonus, but fun gameplay got the Halo series to where it is.

j00 suxx0rs balz wit da BR!!!!1!!one! (or some other asinine L337speak answer insulting skill level)
Really. This isn't my only account. And I get plenty of kills with a BR.
I know how to use it, I know how to lead my shots, I know how to aim at the neck, etc. I'd just prefer I didn't have to use tricks and still be at the whim of the RNG in the BR's caprice. I can also assure you this holds true for many other players who'd love to see a design change.

IN SUMMATION:
Changing the BR to be a headshot-sensitive weapon for shields as well as health, combined with increasing headshot damage and reducing spread will behoove Halo Three's multiplayer experience. The BR will function as the in-between weapon it was conceived as, but there will not be an artificial cap on its range or effectiveness, nor will there be unpredictible factors further influencing an outcome. A weapon like an Assault Rifle or Shotgun will still be dominant as a close-range weapon, mainly due to increased damage and reduced time to kill at point-blank to close range. But yet, the Sniper and Laser are still dominant at long range due to faster arrival time and fewer shots required for a kill, as well as better sights for ease of shooting.

Notes: A Mr. Tyson Green once said in a weekly update a bit about randomness in gameplay and its evidence in shoddiness of programming. However, as I don't want to be accused of misconstruing his words, I won't. I'd just like to see how this is any different than the situation Mr. Green was referring to (pre-patch Halo Three mélêe.) The beat-down system was not intentionally random. The BR bullets are. So shouldn't a fix be applied by the same logic?

The Halo Two BR was patched from a rifle like H3's to the one that is in use today. Apparently it was thought that decreasing randomness was a good idea then. Why not now? The flaws in the H2 design have been fixed (glitches and auto-aim namely;) so that it [the H2 design] is much more viable.

[/thesis]

Thanks for reading, you've earned a cookie. Rather, you've earned a box of them.

*prepares for the inferno of flamers*

EDIT: Various syntax and grammar errata.

[Edited on 07.22.2008 3:00 AM PDT]

  • 07.22.2008 2:58 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

im better with bR then T² lo1, i out br that kid any day

  • 07.22.2008 4:25 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

is this for school or something....?
Posted by: TehAttak
Forgive me if this has been posted previously in the thread, but it's a long thread and it's late.

THIS IS NOT JUST A WALL. IT IS A FULL-ON EPIC SIZED THESIS. A SUMMARY IS LOCATED NEAR THE BOTTOM.

The real roots of this discussion are what "mid-to-long" are and whether or not a little luck (intentionally programmed) should also influence outcomes of encounters. I myself feel that it shouldn't, and that the BR's current state is an absolute buzzkill on Halo Three's experience.

Yes, Halo Three is competitive, and this statement does not just apply to Major League Gaming or any other specific subset of this community. The utter proof of H3's competitiveness lies in the fact that ranked playlists have far and away the highest average UU's (save double XP weekends.) Not only that, we forget that this is a competition: there is a winner, and there is a loser. Now, there may be people that enjoy the game and don't give a hoot as to whether they win or lose. I would imagine these people play mostly Social matches. Since there seems to be many more people in ranked than social lists of similar variants, I would venture that the majority favors a competitive edge to some point.

However, all games of skill do take a piece of luck at some point: in Blackjack and Texas Hold 'Em, there is still the matter of what cards you are given. However, in head-to-head card battles, pure skill with wagering and so on will overturn blind luck over the long run. Halo's luck relies on its spawning system, and moreso on latency. A good player can overturn these (within reason; 600 mS latency or spawning five feet in front of someone holding a Shotty are quite arduous to deal with.) However, the tools the players have are always the same. For example, in Blackjack, you do not receive a reduced payout from the dealer if you have a red card, or double for a black, etc. In H3, a tool used by different players can have highly different outcomes (assuming similar skill/latency/situation.) All BR's are not created equal, not by any means.

MY SOLUTION.
Make the H3 BR function similar to the Halo:CE pistol. Reduce the spread (to perhaps .1º for all bullets,) but in turn make the gun require headshots for more damage, ideally three consecutive headshots for a kill, versus the current six bodyshots or three bodyshots and a headshot. This will keep the gun being used for its intended purposes (mid-to-long range combat,) and will keep it from dominating other ranges (hard for close range, as it requires three headshots, which takes time and skill; and at long range, shots would still need to be led and in order to hit for a 3SK, hit a very small target that gets even smaller at range.)

Now: may I address some common complaints facing this issue.

The BR is fine.
Hmm. If you call a kill versus a death being decided on LAN by something neither player can control 'fine,' then yes, it is. But I disagree (and so do others.)

If you want a Halo Two BR/Halo:CE Magnum, go back to H2/H1.
This is inane. The H3 BR (even with changes) is so different from the other games' guns, it's not really a valid comparison. Yes, there are similarities, but things like range, necessity to hit shots, hitbox size, and firing rate still distinguish it from other variants. This on top of different scenarios and geometry, etc.

Changing the BR would overpower it.
Not necessarily. Perhaps you're still apprehensive of the Halo Two reaping machine known as the BR. The H3 variant fires slower, has more of an upward recoil, and has less auto-aim and other in-game mechanics assisting aim. Not to mention a lack of instant-kill animation glitches.

The BR is working as designed.
I'll admit this: it's true. The BR is 100% functioning as designed by Bungie. However, we think that the design needs a tweak, merely for the fact that fights can be decided by something other than skill, aim, teamwork, cunning, etc., when the skill levels dictate a fight should end otherwise. No, I am not suggesting that the BR caused Final Boss to suck, or what have you. I am suggesting that it disrupts fair, balanced gameplay; with its effects being amplified on highly skilled, competitive games.

The BR is the same for everyone... your opponent has the same problems as you.
This is illogical. The spread is random, it does not follow logically that the spread would be the same for two different firings. If I get smaller numbers than my opponent and I get a kill that I shouldn't have (because I fired second,) then I don't deserve that kill. Conversely, if my aim is true and I fired first, but I am unlucky and draw a mammoth spread that causes my shot to miss and lead to my death, that's not fair either.
While according to the Law of Large Numbers, these instances should cancel out eventually, may I suggest a superfluous answer: why bother with balancing over time? Just cut the shenanigans, so an outcome based more on skill is achieved more often.

Changing the BR would reduce the realism.
Well, sure, I guess it would. But then again, this is fantasy. We're on artificial worlds, capable of eradicating all sentient life. The first and foremost concern with Halo Three needs to be its gameplay and how fun it is, not how realistic it is.

No, no burst weapon will ever fire the same way twice, nor will the three bullets ever take the same path. However, no weapon will have a tenth of a second delay of firing, nor will a weapon make contact with someone's head by being shot six inches to the right of the target. This is a video game, allowances need to be made. Much to Bungie's credit, they made this game quite realistic, however, this is one instance where realism needs to take a backseat to (IMO) fun and fair gameplay.

Halo's success is from its niche: polishing many different aspect of FPS's and combing them for the genre-redefining 'medium-paced' FPS. Realism is a nice bonus, but fun gameplay got the Halo series to where it is.

j00 suxx0rs balz wit da BR!!!!1!!one! (or some other asinine L337speak answer insulting skill level)
Really. This isn't my only account. And I get plenty of kills with a BR.
I know how to use it, I know how to lead my shots, I know how to aim at the neck, etc. I'd just prefer I didn't have to use tricks and still be at the whim of the RNG in the BR's caprice. I can also assure you this holds true for many other players who'd love to see a design change.

IN SUMMATION:
Changing the BR to be a headshot-sensitive weapon for shields as well as health, combined with increasing headshot damage and reducing spread will behoove Halo Three's multiplayer experience. The BR will function as the in-between weapon it was conceived as, but there will not be an artificial cap on its range or effectiveness, nor will there be unpredictible factors further influencing an outcome. A weapon like an Assault Rifle or Shotgun will still be dominant as a close-range weapon, mainly due to increased damage and reduced time to kill at point-blank to close range. But yet, the Sniper and Laser are still dominant at long range due to faster arrival time and fewer shots required for a kill, as well as better sights for ease of shooting.

Notes: A Mr. Tyson Green once said in a weekly update a bit about randomness in gameplay and its evidence in shoddiness of programming. However, as I don't want to be accused of misconstruing his words, I won't. I'd just like to see how this is any different than the situation Mr. Green was referring to (pre-patch Halo Three mélêe.) The beat-down system was not intentionally random. The BR bullets are. So shouldn't a fix be applied by the same logic?

The Halo Two BR was patched from a rifle like H3's to the one that is in use today. Apparently it was thought that decreasing randomness was a good idea then. Why not now? The flaws in the H2 design have been fixed (glitches and auto-aim namely;) so that it [the H2 design] is much more viable.

[/thesis]

Thanks for reading, you've earned a cookie. Rather, you've earned a box of them.

*prepares for the inferno of flamers*

EDIT: Various syntax and grammar errata.

  • 07.22.2008 4:26 AM PDT

OMG WTF BBQ

Posted by: TyEbOi777
I don't see why people complain about the BR when it is their own fault for lack of skill.


i couldnt have said it better myself

  • 07.22.2008 6:07 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Can i hear a hallelujah for the BR

  • 07.22.2008 6:26 AM PDT