Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Reach MP - This is what NEEDs to happen
  • Subject: Reach MP - This is what NEEDs to happen
Subject: Reach MP - This is what NEEDs to happen

Posted by: All of humanity
Posted by: TheBigShow
Increasing the weapon range would open up the gameplay more and allow players to utilize the maps in unique ways. Usually what dictates a players use of a weapon in the map geometry. In close quarters parts of the map, close range weaponry is generally used. When the map is more open, longer range weapon is used. However, in Halo 3, the weapon ranges, aside from the sniper rifle, are laughably short. You can't effectively use any of the common weapons, BR more specifically, on many parts of the map. You are forced to engage at close range because thats the only time you can be effective.

I want the game to allow players to use skill and be able to effectively engage enemies from more parts of the map and force players to think more about their exposure and movement. I'm not asking that it be super easy to kill enemies from far away - it should be very hard to do so, but it should be limited by the players ability, not some arbitrary spread of the weaponry.


So what you're saying is that's it not necessarily the range of the weapon but the size and how the map is configured? Though I partially agree about the lack of range.


Sort of; the range is the issue, but the map plays a large role in how it all comes together.

When I ask for longer ranges on the weapons, most people immediately think that the BR (or other mid-range weapon) will be used everywhere and that no other weapons will be used. Thats not the case. The map and how its configured plays a large role in which weapon is the best to use.

In Halo 3, most of the maps are quite diverse in their geometry. They all feature small, tight areas and they all feature areas of long sight lines and good angles. Logic would dicate that in the smaller, tight areas, close range weapons should be used and in the more open areas, longer range weapons would be used. However, Halo 3 doesn't provide players with a common (meaning readily available) weapon that allows them to take advantage of the longer sight lines and more open spaces. Instead, we're given a huge amount of spamming close range weapons, and a few "mid range" weapons that can't even effectively use the open spaces on the smallest maps in the game.

If the every weapon were given a range increase, some more so than others, then the maps would become much more accomodating. Rather than players being forced to play a close range game because the game doesn't give them anything to use a mid to long range, players could choose their engagements. They could still play a close range game, by using the close range areas and intelligently moving about the map, but they could also engage in long range battles in the more open areas of the map. It would create a much more diverse gameplay that accomodates all play-styles rather than forcing players into close range encounters.

[Edited on 09.10.2009 9:48 AM PDT]

  • 09.10.2009 9:48 AM PDT

Character Artist -- Electronic Arts

Posted by: TheBigShow
Posted by: All of humanity
Posted by: TheBigShow
Increasing the weapon range would open up the gameplay more and allow players to utilize the maps in unique ways. Usually what dictates a players use of a weapon in the map geometry. In close quarters parts of the map, close range weaponry is generally used. When the map is more open, longer range weapon is used. However, in Halo 3, the weapon ranges, aside from the sniper rifle, are laughably short. You can't effectively use any of the common weapons, BR more specifically, on many parts of the map. You are forced to engage at close range because thats the only time you can be effective.

I want the game to allow players to use skill and be able to effectively engage enemies from more parts of the map and force players to think more about their exposure and movement. I'm not asking that it be super easy to kill enemies from far away - it should be very hard to do so, but it should be limited by the players ability, not some arbitrary spread of the weaponry.


So what you're saying is that's it not necessarily the range of the weapon but the size and how the map is configured? Though I partially agree about the lack of range.


Sort of; the range is the issue, but the map plays a large role in how it all comes together.

When I ask for longer ranges on the weapons, most people immediately think that the BR (or other mid-range weapon) will be used everywhere and that no other weapons will be used. Thats not the case. The map and how its configured plays a large role in which weapon is the best to use.

In Halo 3, most of the maps are quite diverse in their geometry. They all feature small, tight areas and they all feature areas of long sight lines and good angles. Logic would dicate that in the smaller, tight areas, close range weapons should be used and in the more open areas, longer range weapons would be used. However, Halo 3 doesn't provide players with a common (meaning readily available) weapon that allows them to take advantage of the longer sight lines and more open spaces. Instead, we're given a huge amount of spamming close range weapons, and a few "mid range" weapons that can't even effectively use the open spaces on the smallest maps in the game.

If the every weapon were given a range increase, some more so than others, then the maps would become much more accomodating. Rather than players being forced to play a close range game because the game doesn't give them anything to use a mid to long range, players could choose their engagements. They could still play a close range game, by using the close range areas and intelligently moving about the map, but they could also engage in long range battles in the more open areas of the map. It would create a much more diverse gameplay that accomodates all play-styles rather than forcing players into close range encounters.

Your definition of Long Range is pretty dramatic.
Why don't you provide some specific sight lines on a specific map.
Because I consider the BR to be Mid-long range.
As far as providing the player with weapons to engage with at long distances, thats up to the gametype. The only thing they would need to change is a reduction in the Carbine's Rate of Fire, increase its damage per round, and give it a higher zoom of 8x or something.

But speculation only goes so far. A change like weapon range across the board would be impossible to truly evaluate without testing extensively with a diverse population of players and player types.

  • 09.10.2009 12:41 PM PDT

Posted by: SS_Crow
Your definition of Long Range is pretty dramatic.
Why don't you provide some specific sight lines on a specific map.
Because I consider the BR to be Mid-long range.


Alright, fair enough.

In general, my range definitions are based on the relative size of the biggest and smallest level in the game. If there are some huge maps, "mid range" should be a pretty good distance. On the biggest level, say Avalanche for example, "long range" would be from one base to the middle of the map. That defines "long range" for the game, in my opinion.

In Halo 3, you cannot consistantly use the battle rifle from top sniper on to top gold lift on Guardian, even with perfect aim on a stationary target. Thats on the lower fringe of mid-range. That is unacceptable. If you are required to have one of a very limited number of power weapons to even pose a threat at mid to long range, thats ridiculous. Thats a blatant bias towards close range combat, which in Halo 3 is the most spam-filled, skill-less range.

Take another example; The Pit - a "mid" sized map. You can't consistantly score a 4 shot kill on a stationary opponent from top sniper to needles - thats roughly half the distance from one wall to another on a "mid" sized map. Thats a joke. Thats bad for gameplay.

Posted by: SS_Crow
As far as providing the player with weapons to engage with at long distances, thats up to the gametype. The only thing they would need to change is a reduction in the Carbine's Rate of Fire, increase its damage per round, and give it a higher zoom of 8x or something.


None of the common weapons can be used as more than a nuisance at even the higher levels of "mid range."

Posted by: SS_Crow
But speculation only goes so far. A change like weapon range across the board would be impossible to truly evaluate without testing extensively with a diverse population of players and player types.


No, it would not be impossible to truly evaluate. Plus, it was extensively tested - Halo CE (which is consistantly rated the "best" Halo by Halo players across the internet). I am confidant enough in my analysis of weapon balance that I can comfortably say that longer ranges in a Halo game would work better, for everyone, than Halo 3's current ranges.

Of course, weapon range is only one piece of the balance puzzle. Don't take my above statement to mean "increase the range and change nothing else and everything will be golden." Obviously various tweaks would be required (such as making the weapons more accurate), but thats a very, very long conversation.

[Edited on 09.11.2009 10:28 AM PDT]

  • 09.10.2009 1:27 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

one of the MOST important parts of a game is the learning curve. If Bungie were to do it the way you want then they would have to be satisfied with anywhere from 50% to 10% of the people who normally play the game. that is NOT the way to keep from going bankrupt or make a good game. your ideas basically alienate all of the people who haven't played Halo before and any who have but aren't generals.

basically, you want Bungie to make Reach a game that will flop and put their hard working employees on the streets....bravo, im sure they will love your ideas and put every detail in Halo Reach.

it NEEDs to happen huh? ya right...

  • 09.12.2009 4:58 AM PDT

ok dude really...kill speed needs to be faster....ITS NOT LIKE WERE SHOOTING MARINES WERE -blam!- SHOOTING ARMORED SPARTANS WITH SHIELDS!!!!! in my opinion it should be slower (i wouldn't like it but it would be more realistic) and NO DUAL WIELDING!!!!!!!! WTF?!?!?!?!? and really........fall damage........u suck

  • 09.12.2009 5:33 AM PDT

I really agree with b a weapon with perfect accuracy like the sniper, but weaker and only has 2 or 3x zoom, 2 headshots to kill, but a ton of body to kill, to make it very diffucult without skill

  • 09.12.2009 7:26 AM PDT

wow so basically what your saying is you want to make the game completely terrible. good job though im sure bungie will take your suggestions verry seriously

  • 09.12.2009 7:32 AM PDT

Clearly because the desktop uses a 3 prong plug and a laptop uses a 2 prong plug, the microwave will fill your car with tostitos better

Posted by: Wazup970
ok dude really...kill speed needs to be faster....ITS NOT LIKE WERE SHOOTING MARINES WERE -blam!- SHOOTING ARMORED SPARTANS WITH SHIELDS!!!!! in my opinion it should be slower (i wouldn't like it but it would be more realistic) and NO DUAL WIELDING!!!!!!!! WTF?!?!?!?!? and really........fall damage........u suck


Posted by: Qwerty polopus
wow so basically what your saying is you want to make the game completely terrible. good job though im sure bungie will take your suggestions verry seriously


I'm not sure whether I pity or envy people who have only played one game of the Halo series. Ignorance is bliss I guess.

  • 09.12.2009 8:51 AM PDT

More Ranked BTB playlists to encourage teamwork.

New Ranks and EXP system. Also make the best rank harder to achieve.

New Armor for multiplayer.

32 or 64 multiplayer.

Balance weapons more, preferably end the BR vs AR feud.

  • 09.12.2009 11:40 AM PDT

Auto Aim - Keep it for campaign. For multiplayer automatically disable it or tone it done to a level more consistent with tother games.

Melee - I'd like to see this play a lesser part in the game. Reduce the degree of heat seeking and the lunge.

Fall Damage - I lke the freedom to be able to jump off the top of Construct say.

Wider FOV. That would be nice. Take those blinkers off.

Grenades - Too many.

Power ups - Too many.

AR - This was a big turn off for me when I first played campaign. A primary weapon needs more accuracy and a bit more range. Games with good weapons are more fun.

  • 09.12.2009 12:09 PM PDT

faster kill speed would not fit for halo imo, it works better for like call of duty

  • 09.12.2009 3:23 PM PDT

Posted by: alan brum uk
AR - This was a big turn off for me when I first played campaign. A primary weapon needs more accuracy and a bit more range. Games with good weapons are more fun.


The AR is rediculously accurate, even at semi-long range if you burst it well and don't just spray-'n-pray.

  • 09.12.2009 3:40 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I agree, the game is focused too much on less skilled players.

  • 09.12.2009 3:53 PM PDT

Fear my Pink Mist...

cookie for first post.

  • 09.12.2009 3:54 PM PDT

And though you fight to stay alive
Your body starts to shiver
For no mere mortal can resist
The evil of the thriller

I agree with most of these suggestions, especially the faster strafing speed, less auto aim, and plasma stun. The only thing I really don't want is forced fall damage. There should be an option whether to put it in or not. There should also be bigger options for custom game rules, such as multiple different kinds of alpha zombies in infection game modes, and other things.

  • 09.12.2009 4:14 PM PDT
  • gamertag: L0RCH
  • user homepage:

I do agree with every point, totally you got my support here.

The only problem is what you discribe is a game that is not a game bungie would produce. ever sine h2 bungie wanted to appeal more to the casual gamer, the one that appreciated aim assist and weapons that are horribly easy to use and a close combat that requires not much more than to press the melee button. And that's the way bungie makes money, that's the reason around 50%, if not more, of the people that still play h3 play it, because no matter how bad you are, getting a few kills is always possible.

I like what you want, and I want it, too, but Bungie will go into the direction they want with in halo 3, and maybe it get's even worth. But hope never dies...

  • 09.12.2009 4:16 PM PDT

______ ____(˜˜˜||˜˜˜˜||˜˜˜˜˜)_∏______
--------____.`=====.-.~:________\___|================[oo]
|_|||___/___/_/~```|_|_|_|``(o)----------<)

Posted by: Rockeraven
Except, not everyone is a halo pro here. All of this is just going too far.

Excactly why this should happen. people don't get better by running ramped with a shotgun, and a hammer.

  • 09.12.2009 4:16 PM PDT

Don't fear the Reaper!

only one thing i want for a halo Game... sprint... or run... because i hate walking long distances

  • 09.12.2009 4:19 PM PDT
  • gamertag: L0RCH
  • user homepage:

*sigh* as you see people start to get that this would mean that good players would have an advantage over bad players, which would be bad for them.
I mean seriously look at the halo sales, h3 didn't sale that much more than h2, this doesn't make that much new players. Right now, two years into the game, we have only a quite high percentage of new players, because many old players just quit, because halo 3 and mainly the way weapons are all balanced around cqb, like op said, just blows. Onestly I hate starting with the AR.
When I watched the MP ViDoc, and one dude was like "bob doyle said we should bring back the ar from halo:ce", I was like cool. Bring back the AR and with it the Pistol and we got the same sweet combo to spawn with that we got in h:ce (atleast when you played with people that didn't felt like spawning with the plasma pistol). But the H3 came out and after around two months bungie gave us team brs and I was so happy. It's not that I love the br or anything, but I can't stand spawning and seeing the ar that tells me "pray and spray", I have never seen a more useless weapon in a videogame. Seriously it's k at close range, but at everything else it sucks. Why do we spawn with a weapon that is useless at 2/3 of the ranges?
I don't even want to start about the br and it's spread...

  • 09.12.2009 4:27 PM PDT

Clearly because the desktop uses a 3 prong plug and a laptop uses a 2 prong plug, the microwave will fill your car with tostitos better

Posted by: Rakata
*sigh* as you see people start to get that this would mean that good players would have an advantage over bad players, which would be bad for them.


This is the thing I don't get. We wouldn't have any new advantages over worse players... because we are already better. The reason players like us dislike games like Halo 3 is that they tend to blur the line and give lesser skilled players the illusion of not being at a disadvantage.

If you create a game that doesn't give lesser skilled players the illusion, you aren't putting better players at an advantage. Your are just finely defining the lines of skill, which Halo 3 has not done.

Posted by: Po0f MoNk3y
Posted by: alan brum uk
AR - This was a big turn off for me when I first played campaign. A primary weapon needs more accuracy and a bit more range. Games with good weapons are more fun.


The AR is rediculously accurate, even at semi-long range if you burst it well and don't just spray-'n-pray.


No... I wouldn't call a bullet hose accurate, ever. Go back 2 1/2 years ago people were saying the same things about pulse firing the SMG. The truth is that neither hold up at mid range and are gimp starting weapons. Some people prefer to pick up more versatile weapons along the way though, which I don't understand.

  • 09.12.2009 9:16 PM PDT

A) Only on headshottable weapons
B) Decrease spread and auto aim but leave it burst shot and leave the bullet speed alone. Also improve the acuracy, bullet speed, and firing rate of the carbine but all at a very small amount.
C) pretty much
D) return of button combos (BLB, BXB, BXR, BYB), but give each its own advantages and disadvantages, and yes to decreased lunge and melee AA.
E) Very small increments. Like 1/4 sheilds at the most. Reason being is it is a detriment to gameplay when there is too much(H:CE). But is a helpful feature when use very moderately.
F) Only on the Pistol and Carbine, everything else is just fine.
G) Customizeable
H&I) Customizeable, as in have options: Toggle on/off dual weilding, Raise/Lower Plasma Stun. There should be very little stun effect on the plasma weapons so they can still support dual weilding. Or make it to where dual weilding disables Plasma Stun.
J) No its fine as is
K) nailed it on that one.

  • 09.12.2009 10:34 PM PDT

Holla bip bip!!

this is way too in depth. i doubt one person's ideas can make Halo better than ever. Some ideas sound like they would be great, but there are others i dislike. So whats the pointing of having so many changes?

at first I thought the point of this post was to tell bungie to stop adding s#$t like equipment to the game because it was good as is from the get-go. instead of adding weapons, just try to perfect what they already have on the table. new things should be added if there's a major problem, and the new addition can fix it. no fall damage doesn't seem to be a major problem but having fall damage can creat problems with live and it's popularity.

  • 09.12.2009 11:17 PM PDT

Clearly because the desktop uses a 3 prong plug and a laptop uses a 2 prong plug, the microwave will fill your car with tostitos better

Posted by: ACE bipbip 171
new things should be added if there's a major problem, and the new addition can fix it.


Just mindlessly adding things to a game only causes problems or clutter. Rather than "OMG NEW THIS NEW THAT" why not just perfect what is already in the game or add a few new things here and there.

Nothing here is really a new concept. Most of this stuff was a part of the first two games in the Halo series. Pretty much anything posted here was already in Halo and taken out, or is a good concept used in other video games.

These changes really aren't that drastic in retrospect. Look at the changes from each Halo to the next one.

  • 09.12.2009 11:27 PM PDT

A) Longer range on all weapons
Yes, either this or faster bullet/plasma travel time.
On the subject of bullet-travel, I believe it's ridiculous to have a .30something caliber (or more?) sniper rifle that has a longer bullet-travel time than modern day bolt action rifles.

B) A Mid-Range Weapon
I'd hope for the Plasma Rifle to be transformed into such a weapon, as the battle rifle and carbine would most likely remain as the mid-range to long-range dominant weapons.

C) Less Aim Assist
With the discontinuation of projectile bursts on the battle rifle and spartan laser, definitely.

D) Fixed Melee
Yep, straight up.

E) Fall Damage
Agreed, mild fall damage would bring a downside to great sniping posts. It would bring an end to the entire "I just sniped that guy. I am now safe to jump 30 yards straight down from this tower and grab the flag with no repercussions at all" mentality.

F) Faster Kill Speed
The only one I don't really agree with, as hopefully Bungie really IS going back somewhat and partially or fully replacing energy shields with permanent and regenerative health.

G) Faster Strafe Speed
Not quite sure about this one; if there are no burst weapons in Reach (Including the Spartan Laser, as it has a small burst as well) then it would definitely add more punch to multi-player.

H) No Dual Wielding
Couldn't agree more, that's one of the only reasons I want to purchase ODST.
Dual wielding is not practical at all, and is quite possibly one of the biggest gimmicks in modern gaming (aside from Desert Eagles, jet packs, and parachutes)

I) Return of Plasma Freeze
With the addition of either this, or faster plasma-blob traveling, covenant weapons would once again be a force to be reckoned with. Even a covenant fish-eye style scope could be built into the Plasma rifle, with the weapon itself taking more of an elongated shape.
It would remain fairly inaccurate, however.

J) Wider FOV
Yes, I loved CE's FoV. Having a square field of vision rather than a sort of widescreen setup. Visors magnify your FoV slightly, in a spartan helmet you would still have about 85% of your previous field of view visible, the main deduction would be sight on the top and bottom.

K) Balanced Vehicles
Fully agree, there could even be a quick-eject option for some vehicles.
We all know that when you're piloting a banshee in a cramped area, and you hear the beeping of a tracking missile, simply exiting the vehicle is not going to save you at all.
It would be a neat feature to add, and would bring with it a pseudo-dive-bomb sort of factor for the flying vehicles.

I also recommend better names for all or most weapons.
The Carbine is a carbine rifle. Battle rifle is a rifle used in battle. They are just uninteresting names.

I remember when the Spartan Laser was called the Galileo on the side, and I loved it. Too bad that name has been long forgotten.

Just my two cents. :)

[Edited on 09.13.2009 12:16 AM PDT]

  • 09.13.2009 12:15 AM PDT

Posted by: JackMmos
faster kill speed would not fit for halo imo, it works better for like call of duty


Not really. I'm not asking for one shot kills with everything here, I'm just asking for a little bit more killing speed with some weapons. However, you would need perfect aim to kill someone as quickly as possible, and with a decrease in aim assist and faster strafe speed, this would be quite difficult.

  • 09.14.2009 1:45 PM PDT