- 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.