Halo 3 Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: The Only BR Thread
  • Subject: The Only BR Thread
Subject: The Only BR Thread
  •  | 
  • Exalted Heroic Member
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: BerserkerBarage

H2 = not competitive. H3 = not competitive. Why is this still shocking to some people?

~B.B.


Did you just say that?

  • 11.10.2008 8:47 AM PDT

Best Song ever: You Cant Quit Me Baby by Queens of the Stone Age

Also Guns and Roses are the biggest load of pish-posh ever

Posted by: Watts
Posted by: BerserkerBarage

H2 = not competitive. H3 = not competitive. Why is this still shocking to some people?

~B.B.


Did you just say that?


He must be high....or stupid...or a combination of the two.

The BR is fine, its just that it takes a little more skill then before to use it effectively, something which players cant adapt to...sadly.

  • 11.10.2008 8:52 AM PDT

i think the br should be automatic still with its good accuracy that would be a killing machine in team swat

  • 11.10.2008 9:08 AM PDT

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
Wow, this thread has gone to crap while I was gone. Now we have people talking about M16's that obviously don't know the first thing about them. Whoever said that an M16 can place a 3-round burst consistently at 500 meters within a small range of variance I want to NEVER return to this thread. Your stupidity is far too overwhelming for me to even begin to deal with. I don't know who it was and I don't want to know. I just want that person to never return or at least stop talking about things that they have absolutely no idea what they are talking about.
You gave me all sorts of grief a few pages back for doing exactly what you just did with this paragraph. Your paragraph, summarized, basically says that anyone who has used a comparison to a real-life MI6 either for or against the realism argument is stupid. I actually agree with this. However, you added nothing to the discussion, and merely stated your opinion.

Why are we still even discussing this? Halo by default has never been competitive. Stop trying to change it to that by default. HCE = not competitive. H2 = not competitive. H3 = not competitive. Why is this still shocking to some people? Oh, this is priceless.

You do realize that when a player goes into a RANKED playlist, they expect to be placed in a COMPETITIVE environment within which they will COMPETE other players in an attempt win and therefore increase their rank. Why would Bungie even add a ranked set of playlists if default Halo wasn't intended to be competitive?

  • 11.10.2008 9:40 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Nokterne
You do realize that when a player goes into a RANKED playlist, they expect to be placed in a COMPETITIVE environment within which they will COMPETE other players in an attempt win and therefore increase their rank. Why would Bungie even add a ranked set of playlists if default Halo wasn't intended to be competitive?


You do realize that most people don't give a -blam!- about a video game, right?

  • 11.10.2008 10:05 AM PDT

Posted by: Yo Pop Tart
You do realize that most people don't give a -blam!- about a video game, right?
You do realize that some people do care about video games, right?

Seriously, if you don't care, why post?

  • 11.10.2008 10:08 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Nokterne
Posted by: Yo Pop Tart
You do realize that most people don't give a -blam!- about a video game, right?
You do realize that some people do care about video games, right?

Seriously, if you don't care, why post?


I was pointing out that not everyone shares your opinion, but you're so concerned with a graphic weapon you couldn't see that.

  • 11.10.2008 10:10 AM PDT

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
Wow, this thread has gone to crap while I was gone. Now we have people talking about M16's that obviously don't know the first thing about them. Whoever said that an M16 can place a 3-round burst consistently at 500 meters within a small range of variance I want to NEVER return to this thread. Your stupidity is far too overwhelming for me to even begin to deal with. I don't know who it was and I don't want to know. I just want that person to never return or at least stop talking about things that they have absolutely no idea what they are talking about.

Again, a consistent spread can still cost you an encounter just as much as a random spread can. And as I explained having a consistent (static) spread variant can produce just as many problems as you're complaining about.

As for a way to mitigate spread with the BR. There are weapons in which you can mitigate it in Halo 3 and there are those you can't. Do you really want to make the BR spread dependent upon whether or not you're moving or whether or not you're firing in succession? Because I can almost 100% guarantee you that if Bungie were to make the spread dependent on an independent variable they would make it one of those 2. Hell, they'd probably make it a combination of the two. Do you really want your BR spread dependent on the fact that you're either moving or firing it in succession? Do you realize how bad that would make it? Getting a 4sk would be almost impossible if they added the spread mechanic based upon ROF. Which is exactly what they have on the AR, SMG, PR, and Spiker. Do you really want that for the BR? Because that is what it sounds like many of you are suggesting. I serious began laughing hysterically when people wanted a way to mitigate spread on the current BR. You don't know how bad of Pandora's Box you're opening with that one.

Why are we still even discussing this? Halo by default has never been competitive. Stop trying to change it to that by default. HCE = not competitive. H2 = not competitive. H3 = not competitive. Why is this still shocking to some people?

~B.B.


lol what?

Where did ROF and movement come into the argument, recent discussion has been about a consistent spread meaning that the more accurate player will land more shots than the less accurate player everytime.

As to the rifle comment old papa rich stated that the spread was designed to approximate the behaviour of its real life counterpart. Someone else brought up the example of the M16 and said even if that is the reason for spread it is not even close to its real life counterpart. Perhaps the info is not accurate but regardless we all know that the spread is purely there to limit the range of the BR, not for realism.

As to halo not being competitive that ultimately is a matter of opinion as obviously the hundreds of thousands that watch MLG disagree as do Bungie or why would there be ranked playlists, clearly because there is competition.

I fail to understand your argument, if the spread is consistent then aiming at the same point at the same range will lead to the same result everytime. Clearly the players who practice and are more experienced will be better at doing this.

  • 11.10.2008 10:13 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: Nokterne
You gave me all sorts of grief a few pages back for doing exactly what you just did with this paragraph. Your paragraph, summarized, basically says that anyone who has used a comparison to a real-life MI6 either for or against the realism argument is stupid. I actually agree with this. However, you added nothing to the discussion, and merely stated your opinion.


Alright, that's fine. Apparently it was The Big Show that is the complete idiot. I went back and saw that it was he that first brought up the comparison to a real life M16 stating that it has over a 500m effective range. And then was talking about how the weapon can put down a burst fire shot within a small amount of variance. This IS COMPLETE BULL-blam!- and only demonstrates that he doesn't know the first thing about what he is trying to talk about. The current day M16A4 (which is what most armed forces are carrying these days) might have a TOTAL effective range (as determined by muzzle velocity from a 5.56 NATO) of 500m give or take. That doesn't mean that the rifle is 100% effective at anywhere near this range. Not even on a good day in pristine environmental variables would you say that the M16A4 has a 100% effective range of 500m. It just isn't possible. So, to make that comparison to Halo 3, all a person would have to do is be able to hit someone (even with 1 bullet) from 50WUs (what Bungie says is 500m). Now I haven't done the test, but I'd imagine that the H3 BR can do this in a wide open environment.

Oh, and the reason why I didn't explain my opinion in depth is because The Big Show's assertion was soo full of crap that I didn't think it even warranted a rebuttal. Please, do me a favor and don't talk about firearms if you don't know the first thing about them. Don't demonstrate your ignorance and idiocy on a forum when you are essentially making crap up. Now, if anyone wants to see my ballistics-tech certification for the career that I held with the County Crime lab where I worked for the past several years before transferring to my current job I'll be more than happy.

Oh, this is priceless.

You do realize that when a player goes into a RANKED playlist, they expect to be placed in a COMPETITIVE environment within which they will COMPETE other players in an attempt win and therefore increase their rank. Why would Bungie even add a ranked set of playlists if default Halo wasn't intended to be competitive?


That's not how I was using the term "competitive". Any game is competitive in so far as it has rules and typically has 1 winner and 1 loser (unless a tie occurs). I'm using the term "competitive" as I've been using the term in this thread (since I've already had this EXACT conversation once this thread). The term "competitive" is being used as it has become to be misnamed. "Competitive" is the on the opposite end of the spectrum of "noob friendly" or "watered-down" or hell even "dumbed down" as some so eloquently like to put it. So since you seem to be hung up on semantics, I'll merely give you the negative inverse of what I just said.

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
HCE was designed to be "noob friendly". Halo 2 was designed to be "noob friendly". Halo 3 was/is designed to be "noob friendly". I cannot (and I still cannot) understand why people are so shocked by this.


Team Slayer in HCE didn't start you with the M6D except on a couple levels. A couple levels (like Prisoner) didn't even have the M6D. In addition, Team Slayer had a built-in "kill penalty" that made you physically slower the more people you killed. It had a built-in mechanic that physically punished the 'better players' while the 'noobs' were able to run faster and strafe easier. And everyone do me a favor and don't mention "Team Slayer Pro" because that gametype doesn't exist. HCE shipped with 1 Team Slayer variant so even if you can't agree with me on the definition of "default" (which if you can't by now you're an idiot) it makes no difference in this argument.

Halo 2 is essentially the same way. Halo 3 is essentially the same way.

Halo from the very beginning has been about leveling the playing field for all those involved. It wasn't about the "uber-competitive" way that many people seem to think it was. So why are people shocked that Bungie would make something in their game that is what many people would consider "noob-friendly"? They've been doing it since HCE (and even before that in Marathon).

~B.B.

[Edited on 11.10.2008 10:29 AM PST]

  • 11.10.2008 10:25 AM PDT

It is not never falling that makes us strong,
It is rising every time we fall.

- Ghandi

IF YOU SEND ME A GROUP INVITE I WILL BLOCK YOU

Posted by: Prodigy117
I fail to understand your argument, if the spread is consistent then aiming at the same point at the same range will lead to the same result everytime. Clearly the players who practice and are more experienced will be better at doing this.


The spread is limited to a set of values, if you open up the .map file in particular programs (I'm sorry but I might get banned if I name any of them) you'll see a set of numbers that each bullet is limited to deviating off to. Each bullet after the first is affected by the kickback produced by the previous one. In addition each shot fired too frequently afterwards will be warped further. I've stated this before but if you look at the files you'll see that the statistics for the Halo 3 BR and the Halo 2 BR are very similar. I'll post them from my previous thread:

I posted before:
Halo 2 Battle Rifle Statistics

Muzzle Climb: 3
Minimum Spread: 0.005235988
Maximum Spread: 0.01047198
Auto-Aim (Deviation) Angle: 0.05235988
Magnetism (Deviation) Angle: 0.1047198
Auto-Aim Range: 17
Magnetism Range: 21
Aquire Target Distance: 17

Halo 3 Battle Rifle Statistics

Muzzle Climb: ???
Minimum Spread: 0.002617994
Maximum Spread: 0.008726646
Auto-Aim (Deviation) Angle: 0.05235988
Magnetism (Deviation) Angle: 0.1047198
Auto-Aim Range: 17
Magnetism Range: 21
Aquire Target Distance: 13


Ironically there is less spread on the H3 BR and thus I can conclude that the Muzzle Climb I couldn't find is the different between the two games, as well as the aquire target distance being shorter. I remember on Halo 2 when the Sniper Rifle was powerless to the BR due to it's range, Bungie dropped the range to give the Sniper back it's edge. And as for all weapons in Halo, there is a little bit of randomness to the spread but you must realise that the Battle Rifle is not a Sniper Rifle.

I swear if MLG had their way we'd all be playing with Battle Rifle rifle sized Snipers...

  • 11.10.2008 10:37 AM PDT

Posted by: Yo Pop Tart
I was pointing out that not everyone shares your opinion, but you're so concerned with a graphic weapon you couldn't see that.
'Sigh'

I don't need you to explain that others have differing opinions then my own. And yes, I am concerned with a 'graphic' weapon. What's your point? Why are you even posting?

  • 11.10.2008 10:40 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: Prodigy117
lol what?


lol read?

Where did ROF and movement come into the argument, recent discussion has been about a consistent spread meaning that the more accurate player will land more shots than the less accurate player everytime.

First, Jiggy and Breezy were talking about how there are certain weapons in H3 that you can mitigate bullet spread by controlling for ROF. The SMG, PR, Spiker, AR, etc. I was commenting on do they really want that same type of variable introduced to the BR? Do you really want the BR spread mechanic to be based upon ROF? Because if it were, it would (IMO) make the weapon even less effective (especially at range) than it already is now. Maybe now you can keep up with the discussion?

Consistent spread doesn't mean more consistent results. That's a very bad non sequitur logic line. You're still failing to realize that the spread mechanic is a vector and not a scalar entity. I've grown tired of explaining it. A "static" spread (ie one that does not change [ie the opposite of how it is now]) does not mean you'll get any more reliable results. Like I explained earlier if the BR spread always has bullet 3 going .3WUs at 225 degrees variance I'll just make sure I strafe from right to left from now on (because I'd be strafing away from the direction bullet 3 is deviating).

The difference between a consistent spread and a "random" spread is next to nothing. Except with a "random" spread I can't 'game the system'.

As to the rifle comment old papa rich stated that the spread was designed to approximate the behaviour of its real life counterpart. Someone else brought up the example of the M16 and said even if that is the reason for spread it is not even close to its real life counterpart. Perhaps the info is not accurate but regardless we all know that the spread is purely there to limit the range of the BR, not for realism.

And here's a shock! Old Papa Rich is correct!!! Holy crap Batman. Bullet spread, weapons overheating, recoil, all that stuff in Halo is placed there to approximate the behavior of real life counterparts. However, they are included in the game because Bungie feels that they help balance the weapon (be it range or another variable). And back to the whole M16 thing. As I've already explained the effective range of a current-day M16 is not anywhere near 500m. That's probably close to it's total effective range (ie the furthest distance in which the gun can fire). I'd venture to guess that the H3 BR is actually pretty close to this however. That it probably can shoot someone at 50WUs at least with a few rounds or two. Is it 100% effective? Of course not. It's not suppose to be nor is a common day M16A4 suppose to be 100% effective at 500meters.

As to halo not being competitive that ultimately is a matter of opinion as obviously the hundreds of thousands that watch MLG disagree as do Bungie or why would there be ranked playlists, clearly because there is competition.

Competition on it's base isn't the problem or even what I'm talking about. The problem lies with people misnaming something as "competitive" and something as "casual". That's how I'm using the term and how I've been using the term for 90+ pages.

I fail to understand your argument, if the spread is consistent then aiming at the same point at the same range will lead to the same result everytime. Clearly the players who practice and are more experienced will be better at doing this.

Maybe on a player that is standing still. However that doesn't happen (pretty much ever) in the actual game. Having a consistent ("static") spread will not absolutely produce less battles being determined solely by bullet spread. It just doesn't work that way.

~B.B.

  • 11.10.2008 10:45 AM PDT

Posted by: Air Sparrow
I swear if MLG had their way we'd all be playing with Battle Rifle rifle sized Snipers...
How so? The range in which the Battle Rifle auto-aim and magnetism starts to take affect is much shorter then the average range a sniper is usually engaging from. If you can keep a non-assisted reticle on a strafing opponent consistently (ie. the time it takes to fire 4 shots) from sniper distance, you sure as hell deserve the kill.

  • 11.10.2008 10:49 AM PDT

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
Maybe on a player that is standing still. However that doesn't happen (pretty much ever) in the actual game. Having a consistent ("static") spread will not absolutely produce less battles being determined solely by bullet spread. It just doesn't work that way.
OK, if you could clarify.

You have two players, each firing weapons with same spread. How is that less fair then two players firing weapons with different spreads?

  • 11.10.2008 10:57 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: Nokterne
Posted by: BerserkerBarage
Maybe on a player that is standing still. However that doesn't happen (pretty much ever) in the actual game. Having a consistent ("static") spread will not absolutely produce less battles being determined solely by bullet spread. It just doesn't work that way.
OK, if you could clarify.

You have two players, each firing weapons with same spread. How is that less fair then two players firing weapons with different spreads?


Because Halo isn't NASCAR where I don't want to be making "LEFT TURNs" all day. Say you have two players, each firing weapons of static bullet spread. One player can strafe left to right and the other cannot (map variables or what have you). The player that can strafe from one direction to the other has an advantage over the person that cannot because he can strafe away from the spread while the other can't. Right now, the players have no idea how the bullet spread will go. They have to aim accordingly.

A static spread cannot be completely controlled by the player firing the weapon in the existence of a dynamic opponent.

~B.B.

  • 11.10.2008 11:11 AM PDT

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
Alright, that's fine. Apparently it was The Big Show that is the complete idiot. I went back and saw that it was he that first brought up the comparison to a real life M16 stating that it has over a 500m effective range. And then was talking about how the weapon can put down a burst fire shot within a small amount of variance. This IS COMPLETE BULL-blam!- and only demonstrates that he doesn't know the first thing about what he is trying to talk about. The current day M16A4 (which is what most armed forces are carrying these days) might have a TOTAL effective range (as determined by muzzle velocity from a 5.56 NATO) of 500m give or take. That doesn't mean that the rifle is 100% effective at anywhere near this range. Not even on a good day in pristine environmental variables would you say that the M16A4 has a 100% effective range of 500m. It just isn't possible. So, to make that comparison to Halo 3, all a person would have to do is be able to hit someone (even with 1 bullet) from 50WUs (what Bungie says is 500m). Now I haven't done the test, but I'd imagine that the H3 BR can do this in a wide open environment.

Oh, and the reason why I didn't explain my opinion in depth is because The Big Show's assertion was soo full of crap that I didn't think it even warranted a rebuttal. Please, do me a favor and don't talk about firearms if you don't know the first thing about them. Don't demonstrate your ignorance and idiocy on a forum when you are essentially making crap up. Now, if anyone wants to see my ballistics-tech certification for the career that I held with the County Crime lab where I worked for the past several years before transferring to my current job I'll be more than happy.


Posted by: BerserkerBarage
And back to the whole M16 thing. As I've already explained the effective range of a current-day M16 is not anywhere near 500m. That's probably close to it's total effective range (ie the furthest distance in which the gun can fire). I'd venture to guess that the H3 BR is actually pretty close to this however. That it probably can shoot someone at 50WUs at least with a few rounds or two. Is it 100% effective? Of course not. It's not suppose to be nor is a common day M16A4 suppose to be 100% effective at 500meters.

~B.B.


============================================================= =========
http://www.armystudyguide.com/content/army_board_study_guide_ topics/m16a2/m16a2-study-guide.shtml

"What is the definition of Maximum Effective Range?
The greatest distance at which a soldier may be expected to deliver a target hit."

"Describe the ranges for the M16/A2 Rifle.

Maximum Range - 3,600 meters
Max Effective Range for a Point Target - 550 meters
Max Effective Range for an Area Target - 800 meters "



http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_is_the_maximum_effective_range _of_a_M16

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/m16.htm

"Maximum range :3,600 meters Maximum effective range:
Area target: 2,624.8 feet (800 meters)
Point target: 1,804.5 feet (550 meters)"

============================================================= ==========

DER DE DERPEDY DERP EE DERP
~ B.B.

EFFECTIVE RANGE: The greatest distance at which a soldier may be expected to deliver a target hit

Expected: To consider likely or certain

So, you can consider it likely or certain that you will deliver a hit on a point target at 550m.


Regardless, your pathetic tirade against me is irrelevant, as my assertion was merely an illustrative point: the BR is in no way realistic.



A player should be limited by their ability, not the game.

[Edited on 11.10.2008 11:16 AM PST]

  • 11.10.2008 11:12 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: TheBigShow
So, you can consider it likely or certain that you will deliver a hit on a point target at 550m.


And...like...OMG...you totally can expect to hit a target with the H3 BR at the equivalent of 550m in Halo 3.

*EDIT*

Oh, and you might want to check your sources and stop demonstrating that you DO NOT KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. From your FAS link, I quote:

The M16 was to have had the same effective range as the M14 rifle it replaced, but it was most effective at a range of 215 yards (200m) or less.

OH EM GEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!

Regardless, your pathetic tirade against me is irrelevant, as my assertion was merely an illustrative point: the BR is in no way realistic.

A player should be limited by their ability, not the game.


The BR is stylized. It always has been. But there are certainly things in it that are meant to resemble realism.

And apparently you aren't playing the same game of Halo that I am because they have always had instances of the game limiting the player because of mechanics. Actually, pretty much every FPS that I can think of does this. Welcome to reality.

~B.B.

[Edited on 11.10.2008 11:28 AM PST]

  • 11.10.2008 11:22 AM PDT

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
And...like...OMG...you totally can expect to hit a target with the H3 BR at the equivalent of 550m in Halo 3.


Denial usually isn't an effective argument. Fail.


Posted by: BerserkerBarage

The BR is stylized. It always has been. But there are certainly things in it that are meant to resemble realism.

And apparently you aren't playing the same game of Halo that I am because they have always had instances of the game limiting the player because of mechanics. Actually, pretty much every FPS that I can think of does this. Welcome to reality.

~B.B.


Yes, every game limits the player in some degree via the mechanics. Some are acceptable forms of limitation, like gravity and physical properties and yes, even spread. Some are unnaceptable, like overusing spread to the point that a player cannot in any manner, with any amount of skill, overcome it.

Players controlling the outcomes is what I'm after, not the respective weapons each player has controlling them.

[Edited on 11.10.2008 11:29 AM PST]

  • 11.10.2008 11:26 AM PDT

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
And apparently you aren't playing the same game of Halo that I am because they have always had instances of the game limiting the player because of mechanics. Actually, pretty much every FPS that I can think of does this. Welcome to reality.
Yes, all FPS have limiting mechanics. In good FPS's, however, these mechanics force the player to use advanced tactics and strategy in order to overcome these mechanics. Halo 3 offers no way to counteract the BR spread effectively other then to get ridiculously close to your opponent.

  • 11.10.2008 11:29 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: TheBigShow


Read my edit dumbass. Actually, I'll save you the time:

The M16 was to have had the same effective range as the M14 rifle it replaced, but it was most effective at a range of 215 yards (200m) or less.

Don't talk about guns when you know nothing about them. Especially not to me.

Just admit that you don't know what you're talking about. You're trying to go through random websites to only further prove you don't know what you're talking about. Christ, you're stupidity is actually starting to piss me off because I KNOW you're wrong on this one.

~B.B.

  • 11.10.2008 11:31 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: Nokterne
Posted by: BerserkerBarage
And apparently you aren't playing the same game of Halo that I am because they have always had instances of the game limiting the player because of mechanics. Actually, pretty much every FPS that I can think of does this. Welcome to reality.
Yes, all FPS have limiting mechanics. In good FPS's, however, these mechanics force the player to use advanced tactics and strategy in order to overcome these mechanics. Halo 3 offers no way to counteract the BR spread effectively other then to get ridiculously close to your opponent.


No, it offers no way to mitigate the spread for 100% effectiveness other than to move closer (assuming you're a certain distance away already). It's the same way for the shotgun. And if you want to talk about "advanced tactics" I'd consider NOT going into a battle where I know the spread could possibly be the determining factor without a way of tipping the scales in my favor as a pretty advanced tactic.

Why am I wasting so much time on you guys? I'm sooo tired of this.

~B.B.

  • 11.10.2008 11:36 AM PDT

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
Read my edit dumbass. Actually, I'll save you the time:

The M16 was to have had the same effective range as the M14 rifle it replaced, but it was most effective at a range of 215 yards (200m) or less.


Yes, that is most likely based on field data, incorporating user error. Of course not everyone is going to be able to deliver a hit at 550 meters, just like not everyone is going to be able to keep the reticle on someone from across the map. However, the weapon should be able to do it if the user has perfect aim; the M16 can do it, the BR cannot, regardless of skill. Just because the BR has a range of 500 meters doesn't mean everyone is going to be four-shotting at 500 meters.

Posted by: BerserkerBarage
Don't talk about guns when you know nothing about them. Especially not to me.


Oh, don't talk guns with mister bigshot B.B.

Fine, I won't talk about guns if you stop trying to talk about game balance; our ignorance of the respective subjects is equally apparent.


Posted by: BerserkerBarage
I'd consider NOT going into a battle where I know the spread could possibly be the determining factor without a way of tipping the scales in my favor as a pretty advanced tactic

~B.B.


I'm sure you would consider basic recognition of a weapons ability to be a "pretty advanced tactic." However, skilled, competetive-minded players are looking for something more advanced than that. We want the weapon to facilitate our tactics, not dictate them.


[Edited on 11.10.2008 11:39 AM PST]

  • 11.10.2008 11:37 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.

Oh....so you were wrong Big Show. How quaint. So it's your mistake. How nice. Talking about the total effective range of a weapon is pretty much useless information. Nothing in the real world gets anywhere near it.

~B.B.


[Edited on 11.10.2008 11:43 AM PST]

  • 11.10.2008 11:41 AM PDT

Best Song ever: You Cant Quit Me Baby by Queens of the Stone Age

Also Guns and Roses are the biggest load of pish-posh ever

Why have you turned this thread (aptly named 'The Only BR Thread') into a debate about M16 rifles?

  • 11.10.2008 11:48 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: TheBigShow
Yes, that is most likely based on field data, incorporating user error. Of course not everyone is going to be able to deliver a hit at 550 meters, just like not everyone is going to be able to keep the reticle on someone from across the map. However, the weapon should be able to do it if the user has perfect aim; the M16 can do it, the BR cannot, regardless of skill. Just because the BR has a range of 500 meters doesn't mean everyone is going to be four-shotting at 500 meters.


Ohhh, so now it's incorporating user error as part of the problem. Saying that when someone is actually controlling the weapon (sorta like Halo 3) that the effective range is less than half of what they've previously stated for the weapon. Hmmm, this sounds very familiar to something someone else was saying in this thread before...if only I could place where I remember hearing it from...


Oh, don't talk guns with mister bigshot B.B.

Fine, I won't talk about guns if you stop trying to talk about game balance; our ignorance of the respective subjects is equally apparent.


Actually, it's not exactly the same. See when I talk about firearms I actually have personal experience with dealing with them pretty much on a daily basis. I speak on most of them as having experienced fact. You and I talk about weapons balance out of our opinions. Neither one of us have made a game that requires weapons balance. So neither one of us have anything to relate to other than our own personal opinions. That's an awfully big difference BigShow and someone as supposedly intelligent as you are should know that.



I'm sure you would consider basic recognition of a weapons ability to be a "pretty advanced tactic." However, skilled, competetive-minded players are looking for something more advanced than that. We want the weapon to facilitate our tactics, not dictate them.


If you want to try to say that Bungie should be giving you the options for this in custom games that's a different argument. The point is and forever will be that the Halo that is produced by default for wide-public consumption has NEVER and probably will NEVER be all that "skilled, competitive".

~B.B.

  • 11.10.2008 11:52 AM PDT