- BerserkerBarage
- |
- Exalted Mythic Member
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: TehAttak
All right, BB. I do this in the spirit of friendly debate.
I'm game if you are...
[wall approaches]
Hello wall, prepare to meet other wall.
To begin, I'd like to question your theory that Halo is not a 'competitive shooter.' Perhaps you're equating 'competitive shooter' with MLG or some other subset of this community or that verbiage with being ultra-refined, but Halo is competitive, even on a non-professional level. There is, and (almost) always will be a winner, and a loser. There are rankings, ratings, levels; people off all skills strive to win and be the best. We've all seen the shenanigans people will do to win, level up, XP boost, etc. Perhaps some of us will never be professional-level, but that doesn't mean I don't like or want to win. This can be assumed for other people as well.
Here's why I don't consider Halo to be a "competitive" shooter. You're correct, the term competitive is a very vague often misused term. Especially in regards to Halo. So when I say that I don't consider Halo or HaloCE to be "competitive" I mean it in the sense that MLG tries to use the word. Any game is at it's heart "competitive" in the basic form of the word. It has rules and guidelines and when these are typically followed they provide for a winner and a loser or a draw. Which in breeds competition. That I'll accept. Halo by its base nature is competitive because it is a game. Meaning there are typically winners and losers. However, when many people are talking about Halo or HaloCE as being competitive, they are no longer referring to the base nature of being a game, but abstract characteristics that they are assigning to it. One example of such characteristics is the gameplay offered by MLG. When I say that Halo has never been competitive, this is what I'm referring to. HaloCE by default had a weapon spawn with a weapon that was incapable of headshots except on a few maps where you spawned with both the AR and the M6D. In addition, the only "Team Slayer" variant (which I consider to be the 'default' variant) had additional things that where meant to balance good players against bad players. The more people you killed, the slower you moved. Making it harder to strafe, dodge, and reach med-kits. Dying on the other hand made you faster. Which made it easier to strafe, dodge, etc.. Halo has the ability to become that abstract notion of what people consider "competitive" however it is not originally made that way. While the game is competitive on the very nature it's a game, the Halo series has never been "competitive" in the MLG-esque vantage of the game.
On to your point of spread being a factor in other weapons, yes, this is 100% true.
Wait for it...
I AGREE WITH THE BR HAVING A SPREAD AND FURTHER, THE SPREAD BEING A NECESSITY. I just don't think the spread on the BR needs to be this big. At 18 WU, it is NOT theoretically possible to get a four-shot kill every time, even with pixel-perfect, dead-accurate aim.
FINALLY. I was hoping that someone would finally do the math. You would think with how many times I said, "do the math yourself" that someone would actually do the math themselves. You're correct. Something I have been saying isn't completely true. I implied that at 18WUs with "perfect aim" you could get a 4SK consistently. Which you can. However, at 18WUs, even with "perfect aim" you can occasionally *not* get a 4SK. So you are definitely correct. At 18WUs there is a chance that even with pixel-perfect aim you could end up not getting a 4SK. Can you still get a 4SK at 18 WUs consistently. Yes. Is it 100% guaranteed? No.
If y=dtan(x), where d is the distance between target and gun in WU, and (x) is the deviation in degrees off the vector the gun was fired on, then we see that...
y=18tan(.38º) for the outlier on the third bullet.
.1194=18tan(.38º). The Spartan model's headbox is .094 WU across. Therefore, it is not 100% consistent, even on LAN. In fact, the spread cannot be greater than .295º to theoretically work every time (at 180 ft, 18 WU.) On top of that, a Bungie employee has stated that the BR shouldn't be used for ranges over 30 WU. One can infer from that remark that the BR is designed to be used inside of 30 WU. (Source, Luke M. Smith and Tyson Green, June 20, 2008. It should also be noted that the formula for bullet margin of error here has been proved wrong, confirmed by JonnyOThan.)
You'll have to excuse the fact that I've only been using the formula as provided in the WWUD for my calculations. I was unaware that Jon Cable had said there was a different formula. But here's what I'm looking at so we can compare notes. To me, I wanted to know at what distance can you completely mitigate bullet spread so that with 100% pixel-perfect aim you can *always* get a 4SK. Not consistently. Always. So, to arrive at what distance you'll always receive a 4SK with perfect aim, I had to figure out exactly how much the maximum vector deviation would be for that all-important 3rd shot on the 4th burst. Since the worst case scenario (WCS) of the 3rd bullet of the burst has a maximum mathematical deviation of .38; I needed to figure what that maximum deviation would be at the various WUs. So here's the math I ran based off of the WWUD (we're assuming that the person firing has pixel-perfect aim):
MC's head is .094
sin(.38)*18= .119. Which means at 18 WUs it the WCS a third bullet can miss.
sin(.38)*17=.112. Which means at 17 WUs in the WCS a third bullet can miss.
sin(.38)*16=.106. Which means at 16 WUs in the WCS a third bullet can miss.
sin(.38)*15=.099. Which means at 15 WUs in the WCS a third bullet can miss.
sin(.38)*14=.092. Which means at 14 WUs in the WCS a third bullet cannot miss when aimed correctly.
Even assuming the WCS if aimed perfectly at 14WUs the spread of the third bullet can be mitigated. So at 14WUs with perfect aim you can *always* get a 4SK.
I should note that I am very very rusty when doing most of these types of computations. I make no promises that my math is 100% accurate. Now onto something that I do know a little more about.
So right about now, all the nay-sayers that I've been dealing with are about to go hog-wild because they think someone has proven me wrong. You might have if I ever said that at 18 WUs you will *always* get a 4SK. I tried to be mindful of how I worded things, but I might have slipped up a time or two. What I was intending to say is that at 18WUs with perfect aim you can get a 4SK (which is obvious) and you can consistently get a 4SK with perfect aim. I've already shown that during a WCS a 3rd bullet could miss which would prevent you from getting that 4SK. However, when I said that you could consistently get a 4SK with "perfect aim" at 18WUs I was not lying.
Now here's how I figure that and I'll grant that it presupposes a few things. The third bullet of the BR spread was said to have a mathematical deviation range of .00 to .38 in the WWUD. I'm going to look at the probability that under a Gaussian Distribution, how likely it would be to get .38 at any consistency. That's the assumption, and I fully accept it. I'm assuming that the bullet spread is determined using a Gaussian Distribution. If it's not, I could be wrong. Let's continue assuming that I'm correct (humor me). Utilizing the "empirical rule" I wanted to find at what standard deviation would include/exclude .38 as the worst case scenario. So, still assuming that bullet spread follows a Gaussian Distribution, that would make Mu equal to .19. Following the "empirical rule" it would make when Sigma equals 1 the possible range would be .06 to .32. So under 1 standard deviation the maximum your spread could be is .32. Under 2 standard deviations the maximum your spread could be is .37. So you have less than a 5% chance of ever hitting a .38 spread bullet. So if bullet spread operates under a Gaussian Distribution, you have less than a 5% chance of getting the WCS. Which leads me to believe that you could with "perfect aim" consistently get a 4SK at 18WUs. Is it very likely since none of us have pixel perfect aim? No, not really.
Now onto the 30WUs stage. I would imagine that at 30WUs is pretty much the max range the BR can even be considered "effective" let alone way outside of it's "intended" range. 30WUs is equivalent to 300 feet. That's a football field. However, even at this distance using your math down below here, the margin of error is .078. Which means that even at the WCS for the 1st bullet it would still hit the target assuming you have perfect aim.
Right now, even the first bullet is iffy at 30 WU (assuming .15º spread, the margin for error is .078 WU.) Needless to say, aim (especially on a pixel-precise basis,) is way too finicky for Live play. Even if both players have picture-perfect aim, the host's shot would register dead-center, while a client with the exact same aim would miss due to the inescapable latency.
Latency is always going to be a problem. When Bungie tried to do something that would do away and completely mitigate latency, the BR became a "hitscan" weapon. Not something that is really desired, at least not IMO. However, at the range you are talking about above (30WUs) I doubt anyone could be that finicky that they'd be pissed because latency could have cost them a kill. You are obviously operating the BR outside of it's "intended" range and barely within it's "effective" range.
[continues]