Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: How to make the ideal starting weapon for Halo: Reach's multipl...
  • Subject: How to make the ideal starting weapon for Halo: Reach's multipl...
Subject: How to make the ideal starting weapon for Halo: Reach's multipl...
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

A silenced SMG and pistol. In MLG a Carbine that fires automatic three bullets per pull.

  • 07.08.2009 4:29 PM PDT

Posted by: Dropship dude
No, acnboy. Spartain Ken 15 is a lesser being. Much like the bacteria that lives in your shi­t.
Posted by: mike120593
My shi­t bacteria takes offense to that comparison.

Don't make me lel. You won't like me when I lel.

Posted by: cpt falcon911
Wow blown away by what a great post this is. You haven risen much higher than any other person that complains about the starting weapon and weapon balance.

Not only have you given an idea but you given specific details on how it would work.

You dont get a cookie but a cookie cake.

This thread should be pinned a top forum topic at least.

  • 07.08.2009 4:37 PM PDT
  • gamertag: MibZ x
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Sp4rt4n119
Thank you sir, that was an epic rendition of this topic.


Posted by: Xx KNOX xX
and how!

High Accuracy starting weapons are not good.

They should be effective for about 3/4ths the length of the overshield hallway on The Pit.

That gives you some accuracy, but not as much as the BR. With BR starts everyone is effective at every range instantly and it kills diversity. People either have a BR or a power weapon, which isn't fun.

  • 07.08.2009 4:48 PM PDT

Personally I think that this weapon is a great idea and sorta reminds me of an AR mixed with a BR. Though I do not think that this weapon is overpowered I do think that the rate of fire and volicity of the rounds could be tweaked a little bit.

I like the fact that with the "extreme" speed of the round it can disrupt snipers and such to allow easier flow but I think that the speed should be a tad bit slower with the weapon being so accurate. I think that the weapon should be more faster then the BR but not as fast of the sniper. This point also makes me think that the gun would shoot a little bit better if it was a little bit faster probably being a difference around 10%. Let me know what you think about that.

  • 07.08.2009 5:03 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I think the word "Ideal" is thrown way out of context. There can never be an "Ideal" starting weapon for a game like Halo. There are maps like Valhalla that are so massive that you HAVE to pick up a long range weapon such as the Battle Rifle or Carbine to be successful on the map, and Bungie realizes this. Why do you think there are so many Battle Rifles on the map? Bungie's multiplayer puts the player in so many different scenarios that they have to adjust which weapon they use accordingly. That's the beauty of the game. If I spawned with this "Ideal" weapon i would never put it down.

Bungie's fan base is full of complaints about a game that is so fun that they cannot stop playing either way. The weapon you describe is far too accurate for an automatic weapon. The Battle Rifle was designed to be an anti-sniper weapon. The hypothetical weapon that you designed would be ridiculous for a sniper to try and shoot against. He would constantly get knocked out of his scope and wouldn't be able to snipe at all. (Unless he's a pro no-scoper).

This would totally throw off everything Bungie made the assault rifle for as well. The assault rifle is good at mid range no matter what anyone tries to say. The "Standard Combat Rifle" would destroy an assault rifle in any situation if its that accurate.

Whatever weapon they decide to use for Reach will be good, and the MLG kids will use their precious Battle Rifles anyway so it doesn't even matter.

  • 07.08.2009 6:16 PM PDT

Back.. and to the left.
Back.. and to the left.
Back.. and to the left.
Back.. and to the left.
Back.. and to the left.
Back.. and to the left.
Back.. and to the left.

As long as it works with Reach's time period ill be happy.

  • 07.08.2009 6:28 PM PDT

Verbose, as usual.

I envision extremely low sensitivity breaking the design of the SCR at long ranges. (Ideally, spawning players would appear far enough away from enemies such that a high sensitivity would only be appropriate for players who intentionally move close enough to their foes for such a setting to give them an advantage.) For this to work, BUNGiE would have to lock the sensitivity down, and give each weapon its own unique sensitivity based on the weight of the weapon. (or in the case of dual wielding, the sum of both weapons)

That said, the overall design of this weapon is exactly what we need -should it turn out that the weapon is sufficiently difficult to aim.

  • 07.08.2009 10:12 PM PDT

Verbose, as usual.

Players must first understand that the length of the lines of sight in a given map and the range that they expect to encounter an enemy is what determines their choice of weapon, not the overall size of the map. There are several spaces, even on Sandtrap and Valhalla, where a player can be very effective against oncoming targets without the use of a BR.

Another thing I read all the time in these forums is a comment such as...
Posted by: MuffinMan116
I think the word "Ideal" is thrown way out of context. There can never be an "Ideal" starting weapon for a game like Halo. There are maps like Valhalla that are so massive that you HAVE to pick up a long range weapon such as the Battle Rifle or Carbine to be successful on the map, and Bungie realizes this. Why do you think there are so many Battle Rifles on the map? Bungie's multiplayer puts the player in so many different scenarios that they have to adjust which weapon they use accordingly. That's the beauty of the game. If I spawned with this "Ideal" weapon i would never put it down.


Thinking along this line is somewhat accurate. IF you started with the ideal weapon, you'd never put it down, thereby nullifying the need for any other weapon. As such, "Ideal Weapon" in a game like Halo translates to..broken.

"Ideal Starting Weapon", on the other hand is something like what Feign describes in his opining post -that which is essentially a more socially acceptable sentinel beam.

So, while we're gonna see tons of comments in this thread pointing out the necessity for and the abundance of BRs on many of the maps, almost most nobody will point out that there are maps so tight that you HAVE to pick up an SMG -because there aren't any. The purpose of this weapon is to serve as a base platform to service players who are going to spawn back into the middle of a match. Since spawn points are somewhat random, its unfair to respawning players and to established players when the developer assumes one engagement range or the other. So, unless the player is spawning back into a match designed around a specific starting weapon, they must return to the fight with the median weapon.

I imagine mow much more depth would be added into the game if players started with something like what Feign proposes!
*A gun which is a straight expression of skill in a battle against an opposing player similarly armed with something like the SCR.
*A gun one who's absolute maximum effectiveness is balanced against other weapons such that any other weapon used has a greater margin of error when compared to the SCR .
*A gun which has the potential to satisfy the needs of the entire community
*A gun which will simply encourage, not force, competitive play as a starting weapon. Matches where players could upgrade to a BR for a boost to their long range effectiveness, or if they're looking to get up close, upgrade to an SMG for greater rate of fire, or upgrade to an AR for a stronger, more versatile weapon.

To me, this weapon seems like it should address the most common complaints regarding the AR as a starting weapon: its initial No0bish stigma as a spray and pray weapon, its lack of noticeable long range effectiveness, and its overpowering close quarters ability.

  • 07.08.2009 11:04 PM PDT

Posted by: StormyHeart
I envision extremely low sensitivity breaking the design of the SCR at long ranges.

Not necessarily. If the weapon is "very accurate" and there isn't a scope, there's no reticle magnetism (don't know the proper term) at most ranges, and there's no spread to make your poorly aimed shots hit. If the weapon's aim is fine enough (and maps are designed with it in mind, so that lines of sight are properly tuned), the slightest change in elevation etc. can cause your bullets to miss due to the accuracy, and, conceivably, there not being any bullet magnetism at such ranges. Combine that with the lack of reticle magnetism when your reticle isn't red (which, without a scope, will be quite often at range), and I don't think it's overpowered at long range at all.

More off-topic, I think someone should test a single-shot weapon similar to the Shadowrun rifle that does headshot damage ALL the time. I don't know about range issues and balancing it past this, but a single-shot weapon (say, the Carbine) that does headshot damage at all times, and, say, downs shields in 7 bodyshots, but does enough damage to the shields in 4 HEADshots to kill in a 5th headshot (again numbers are just off the top off my head, no real thought put in) could potentially create a shooting skill gap beyond people's wildest dreams.

[Edited on 07.08.2009 11:33 PM PDT]

  • 07.08.2009 11:30 PM PDT

I reckon that to find the most ideal starting weapon in Halo multiplayer, we don't need to come up with something completely new. We just revise the Assault Rifle, along with a couple of the other weapons in the game. Like this...

Battle Rifle
Magazine size - 30 rounds (Debatable)
Fire mode - semi automatic
Rate of fire - slightly faster than Halo 1 pistol
Range - mid to semi-long range
Headshots - yes

Assault Rifle
Magazine size - 33 rounds
Fire mode - three round burst
Rate of fire - slightly faster than BR
Range - mid range (Less effective at close range than current version and inneffective at long range)
Headshots - no

SMG
Magazine size - 60 rounds
Fire mode - fully automatic
Rate of fire - same as Halo 1 AR
Range - close range
Headshots - no


So you see, the Assault Rifle would ideally be suited for mid range combat, with the burst fire mode making it innacurate at longer ranges and limited at close range compared to purpose built close range weapons (Though it shouldn't be impossible to kill with at close range, just more difficult than the current version). The Battle Rifle would be more dominant at longer ranges with its scope, but would ideally be even more limited at close range than the Assault Rifle. The SMG would complete the triangle, being dominant at close range but very limited at anything longer than semi-mid range. The power of all weapons would be decided by Bungie. So basically, BR = dominant mid range weapon, SMG = dominant close range weapon, and Assault Rifle = dominant at neither, suitable for both. This would repeat with every other weapon in the game.

Anyone agree? Disagree?

  • 07.08.2009 11:36 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: x MibZ x
High Accuracy starting weapons are not good.

They should be effective for about 3/4ths the length of the overshield hallway on The Pit.

That gives you some accuracy, but not as much as the BR. With BR starts everyone is effective at every range instantly and it kills diversity. People either have a BR or a power weapon, which isn't fun.

Please explain why accurate starting weapons are bad for gameplay. They allow for much wider skill gaps to develop, and go a long way toward alleviating the problem of spawn-killing. The diversity is maintained with the SCR because of its relative weakness compared to every other weapon on the map. People would always want to pick up another weapon and eventually swap out their SCR for a BR, Carbine, or whatever else they feel like.

Posted by: monpe45
Personally I think that this weapon is a great idea and sorta reminds me of an AR mixed with a BR. Though I do not think that this weapon is overpowered I do think that the rate of fire and volicity of the rounds could be tweaked a little bit.

I like the fact that with the "extreme" speed of the round it can disrupt snipers and such to allow easier flow but I think that the speed should be a tad bit slower with the weapon being so accurate. I think that the weapon should be more faster then the BR but not as fast of the sniper. This point also makes me think that the gun would shoot a little bit better if it was a little bit faster probably being a difference around 10%. Let me know what you think about that.


While I agree the SCR is a mixture of the AR and BR, this actually is half-coincidence. I thought up the SCR based on what I think the core design principles of a starting weapon should be it wasn't as simple as just picking the two favourite starting weapons and shoving them together. It just turns out to be a good compromise between AR and BR starts.

I have only detailed what I think would work well. I don't have the luxury of testing anything out, but it may well be a better idea to do exactly what you've described with the bullet velocity. Only playtesting could find the answer. So long as respawning players are able to deal some damage and annoy distant Snipers and BRs without threatening them too much off-spawn, then that's great.

Posted by: MuffinMan116
I think the word "Ideal" is thrown way out of context. There can never be an "Ideal" starting weapon for a game like Halo. There are maps like Valhalla that are so massive that you HAVE to pick up a long range weapon such as the Battle Rifle or Carbine to be successful on the map, and Bungie realizes this. Why do you think there are so many Battle Rifles on the map? Bungie's multiplayer puts the player in so many different scenarios that they have to adjust which weapon they use accordingly. That's the beauty of the game. If I spawned with this "Ideal" weapon i would never put it down.

Bungie's fan base is full of complaints about a game that is so fun that they cannot stop playing either way. The weapon you describe is far too accurate for an automatic weapon. The Battle Rifle was designed to be an anti-sniper weapon. The hypothetical weapon that you designed would be ridiculous for a sniper to try and shoot against. He would constantly get knocked out of his scope and wouldn't be able to snipe at all. (Unless he's a pro no-scoper).

This would totally throw off everything Bungie made the assault rifle for as well. The assault rifle is good at mid range no matter what anyone tries to say. The "Standard Combat Rifle" would destroy an assault rifle in any situation if its that accurate.

Whatever weapon they decide to use for Reach will be good, and the MLG kids will use their precious Battle Rifles anyway so it doesn't even matter.


"Ideal" starting weapon =/= ideal weapon. This thread is about the ideal weapon for players to respawn with, not the ideal weapon to kill everything, that you never have to put down. It is intentional that you would want to pick other weapons up. It seems you have misunderstood the concept of "starting weapon". StormyHeart explains it better...

Regarding Snipers and their scopes, the SCR would not be any more effective than the BR at removing them given that it has no scope. Do you really want Snipers to be able to stand in the same spot spawn-killing you when you spawn with your AR? They should get their scopes knocked off plenty if they aren't smart enough to move around into different positions. It's not like Sniper Rifles would be rendered useless with an SCR starting weapon. Just look at BR starts. Snipers get most of their kills on players who aren't looking at them.

Please look at the minimum kill times for the SCR and the AR. You'll see the AR is more effective than the SCR when used at its optimum range.

Posted by: StormyHeart
I envision extremely low sensitivity breaking the design of the SCR at long ranges. (Ideally, spawning players would appear far enough away from enemies such that a high sensitivity would only be appropriate for players who intentionally move close enough to their foes for such a setting to give them an advantage.) For this to work, BUNGiE would have to lock the sensitivity down, and give each weapon its own unique sensitivity based on the weight of the weapon. (or in the case of dual wielding, the sum of both weapons)

That said, the overall design of this weapon is exactly what we need -should it turn out that the weapon is sufficiently difficult to aim.


You make a good point. The weapon would have to be sufficiently difficult to aim, though. If it were too easy with the specs I've described, then they could be tweaked slightly until it worked as intended. I don't really think it would be a problem as-is though. Whilst the bullet spread is minimal, it would still be present, perhaps even as much as the BR of Halo 3, but I would only think about increasing the bullet spread as a last resort to result in the ideal effectiveness of the weapon at longer ranges. Otherwise, the slight recoil of the weapon and the inaccuracy of aim of the players should help to limit its effectiveness.

  • 07.09.2009 3:38 PM PDT

Character Artist -- Electronic Arts

:) Cute.
Telling Bungie how to design a game.

I'm not going to back the AR or BR.

But try to keep in mind that the goal of weapons is to have advantages and disadvantages.
A weapon that can do the range of the BR, with the CQC nature of the AR sort of defeats the purpose of both of those weapons.

  • 07.09.2009 3:44 PM PDT

i no which gun
the gun they use in the ghost of onyx a cut down assult riffle also on cover of the book

  • 07.09.2009 3:53 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: SS_Crow
:) Cute.
Telling Bungie how to design a game.

I'm not going to back the AR or BR.

But try to keep in mind that the goal of weapons is to have advantages and disadvantages.
A weapon that can do the range of the BR, with the CQC nature of the AR sort of defeats the purpose of both of those weapons.

Why do you fail to see the disadvantages of the SCR? It is weaker than all other weapons when the other weapons are used at their optimum range. Therefore, the purpose of the other weapons remains completely relevant as players seek to improve their arsenal.


Posted by: D0nald Duck
This seems like the worst weapon in the game. It really doesn't have any advantages. If they are going to add this weapon though they should take out the AR.
So, one guy sees only advantages, and the other, only the disadvantages...

The starting weapon should be the weakest weapon in the game. That's what makes it a good starting weapon. Players respawn with a versatile base-weapon to maintain gameplay depth whilst not leaving players at too sever disadvantages at the extreme ranges (long and immediate).

[Edited on 07.09.2009 4:32 PM PDT]

  • 07.09.2009 4:31 PM PDT

Challenge me to a Hawaiian Punch chugging contest. I dare you.


Posted by: mubox47
$.50 in store credit.

Posted by: TheFeiGnTreiGn
Posted by: General Xylon
I too think the weapon is overpowered. I think the problem to be fixed is the high fire fate; I think we could be looking for something more along the lines of a long-range Halo 1 pistol (maybe a little weaker than the H1 pistol). Not weak, but it doesn't make for quick kills against Elites and stronger-than-Elites.

Posted by: The EAKLE
It seems too powerful. Just spray until the enemy's shields are down (at longer range than the AR), then put one shot in their head. Sure, it's great for beginers, but anyone half decent player owuld likely be able to use this and kill any other weapons.

Still, you did a fantastic job putting this together.

The way i see it, the BR is much more powerful than the SCR (is there any other way to see it?) so at least if you're not a fan of the BR because you think that is much too overpowered, the SCR would be a good step away from this starting weapon (which makes up a whole chunk of MM at the moment). I think it is a good compromise between the ineffectiveness of the AR (at long ranges) and the all-round over-effectiveness of the BR.

Can i just clarify that you obviously think the BR is really overpowered as well?

The SCR, with the numbers i've given, would be the least powerful weapon in the game. Whilst it would be more effective at longer ranges than the AR, it would be similarly less effective at these ranges than the BR. We aren't talking about some kind of godly super weapon, it would fit nicely within the weapon line-up we have now and would act as a compromise between the two starting weapon goliaths that are the AR and BR.
The BR is not overpowered. My issue with this is it has an AR sized clip, reloads faster, and is way more accurate, but only takes .4 more seconds to kill, bout ,2 more than the batte rifle. With this would kill like an AR, but at greater distances. When fired in bursts it would be like a BR but a little weaker. So less powerful than BR at long distances, but almost as dealy as an AR at mid range?

It seems overpowered. You could kill an AR out of it's range, and kill a BR (shot a bit and melee) at close range. It would make nearly everything but Snipers and rockets obsolete.

  • 07.09.2009 4:38 PM PDT

Character Artist -- Electronic Arts

Posted by: TheFeiGnTreiGn
Posted by: SS_Crow
:) Cute.
Telling Bungie how to design a game.

I'm not going to back the AR or BR.

But try to keep in mind that the goal of weapons is to have advantages and disadvantages.
A weapon that can do the range of the BR, with the CQC nature of the AR sort of defeats the purpose of both of those weapons.

Why do you fail to see the disadvantages of the SCR? It is weaker than all other weapons when the other weapons are used at their optimum range. Therefore, the purpose of the other weapons remains completely relevant as players seek to improve their arsenal.


Posted by: D0nald Duck
This seems like the worst weapon in the game. It really doesn't have any advantages. If they are going to add this weapon though they should take out the AR.
So, one guy sees only advantages, and the other, only the disadvantages...

The starting weapon should be the weakest weapon in the game. That's what makes it a good starting weapon. Players respawn with a versatile base-weapon to maintain gameplay depth whilst not leaving players at too sever disadvantages at the extreme ranges (long and immediate).

So if I spawn with the Worst Acronym weapon, and I am going at it with a long range BR, I will lose. Because the BR is 4 shot, and I can't do as much damage. This is just straight comparison, not talking about cover. So my weapon would suck against the BR because of damage output. But I can do headshots.

So I spawn again, there is a guy with an AR, I go up against him and lose. Becasue it is 5 rounds + beat down to kill.

Basically you are telling me to spawn with an SMG that does headshots, that can't be dual wielded.

That sounds great. How about this. You spawn with a slightly adjusted AR that is more accurate and does headshots, as well as the BR. Which has a slightly slower firing rate so that It has a slightly greater disadvantage at close range.

AR BR CR.
SCR is just bleh.

[Edited on 07.09.2009 5:01 PM PDT]

  • 07.09.2009 4:55 PM PDT

BR-55 rifle would be an ideal starting weapon for halo reach and the SMG as the primary and the BR as the secondary

  • 07.09.2009 5:27 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: The EAKLE
The BR is not overpowered. My issue with this is it has an AR sized clip, reloads faster, and is way more accurate, but only takes .4 more seconds to kill, bout ,2 more than the batte rifle. With this would kill like an AR, but at greater distances. When fired in bursts it would be like a BR but a little weaker. So less powerful than BR at long distances, but almost as dealy as an AR at mid range?

It seems overpowered. You could kill an AR out of it's range, and kill a BR (shot a bit and melee) at close range. It would make nearly everything but Snipers and rockets obsolete.

Are you really saying that the SCR is overpowered yet the BR is not? - When the BR is unquestionably more powerful than the SCR? I can't really see where you're coming from here because this simply makes zero sense. 0.4 seconds is a LOT in an FPS like Halo. How on Earth would anything else be obsolete when everything else is more powerful?


Posted by: SS_Crow
So if I spawn with the Worst Acronym weapon, and I am going at it with a long range BR, I will lose. Because the BR is 4 shot, and I can't do as much damage. This is just straight comparison, not talking about cover. So my weapon would suck against the BR because of damage output. But I can do headshots.

So I spawn again, there is a guy with an AR, I go up against him and lose. Becasue it is 5 rounds + beat down to kill.

Basically you are telling me to spawn with an SMG that does headshots, that can't be dual wielded.

Just to show you how ridiculous what you're saying is, here i can replace some words for you:

"So if I spawn with the AR, and I am going at it with a long range BR, I will lose. Because the BR is 4 shot, and I can't do as much damage. This is just straight comparison, not talking about cover. So my weapon would suck against the BR because of damage output. But I cannot do headshots.

So I spawn again, there is a guy with a Shotgun, I go up against him and lose. Becasue it is instant kill."

These are ridiculous statements because quite clearly you aren't going to lose every battle and get zero kills with a weapon just because it is worse than your oppnents' weapons. Otherwise, every game of Halo would be a whitewash as players pick up better weapons and "therefore win 100% of the time".

The SCR is absolutely nothing like the SMG. The slightest of changes to weapons make monumental differences. Look at the BR and Magnum in Halo 3. I would never say "well the Magnum is just a BR without a scope that kills a little slower". They are completely different weapons which is why everyone swaps their Magnum for a BR given the chance.

  • 07.09.2009 5:50 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Two starting weapons are needed. On thats good at close to medium range(probably a modified AR) and one that is good medium to long range(probably a modified BR or pistol). At medium range they would be equals and skill would decide the winner and preference would choose which one you use. The close to medium range weapon would require burst fire to be effective at the peak of its range. The medium to long range weapon would need to be absolutely useless at close range in order to keep the game balanced. Other close/long range weapons would be unique giving you a reason to pick them up. For example the plasma rifle would have its freeze feature from Halo CE.

[Edited on 07.09.2009 6:07 PM PDT]

  • 07.09.2009 6:06 PM PDT

SB-117

Well thought out.

  • 07.12.2009 6:21 AM PDT
Subject: SCR. The solution to the Halo franchise's starting weapon woes.
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

I am the hand of fate!

Bravo, that is pretty much exactly what I was thinking of, except I didn't go as deep with the idea, or into the logistics, and I had a few small differences (Mine had a scope, and did not feature a headshot bonus). My original idea was to either use a slightly modified Silenced SMG (the one featured in ODST), or use it as a template, a idea which I explored in this thread http://www.bungie.net/Forums/posts.aspx?postID=33837307. All ideas you touched on (for the most part) are exactly what I have been thinking of. I hope Bungie sees this, and even if they don't they are making a starting weapon like this that works well in its role. My definition would be this: A starting weapon that is automatic, effective but not powerful at close-medium range while still being able to hit targets at long range, and has a scope.

[Edited on 07.12.2009 9:21 AM PDT]

  • 07.12.2009 8:55 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

I am the hand of fate!

The problem I think people are having when picturing this weapon is that they think it would be dominant (overpowered). This is exactly the opposite of the truth. You see, in my opinion a good (ideal) starting weapon should feature several key traits. 1. It should be accessible to ALL players. This means it must have ease of use (henceforth it is automatic) while still providing traits that allow more skilled players to use it better (accuracy). 2. It should have only a small zone where it is truly better suited to be used (if one at all) and in all other cases should be at a disadvantage against all other weapons (I.E, it would lose against a AR at close range, and lose against a Sniper or BR at long range). So, it is not overpowered.

3. It is effective at nearly every range, specifically anywhere from close to medium range, and then begins to become less effective at longer ranges, but is still able to disrupt snipers and hit BR....ers. This allows it to have a fighting chance against nearly everything, but makes it only evenly or worsely matched against all other weapons. SO, if you want to fight in a sort of range style (Close, Long) you would have to drop it in favor of said specialty weapons. The thing the weapon the OP describes would do would give you a good fighting chance at all times, and then would usually be replaced for more specialty weapons. I.E, you spawn, find what range weapon you prefer, and drop the starting weapon. Also, I do think that this weapon would need a decent melee lunge, better than the BRs but worse than the ARs. I hope this gun exists. At least in some form.

  • 07.12.2009 9:43 AM PDT

Verbose, as usual.

Not melee lunge... I find it to be such an irritating trait players have. I know its to help disguise the discrepancy between clients and the host in the match, and its necessary. But the worst thing we could do is add another latency dependent variable like melee lunge to the game. IF something is to be done regarding melee (and I'm slightly disappointed they didn't do this for Halo 3) would be to give each weapon a unique set of melee traits.
Ex.)
*Time between when a player throws the melee and when it connects with their target.
*Amount of damage the melee actually inflicts.
*Time between when the melee connects and when the player can shoot, reload, or throw another melee.

More on topic...
The starting weapon cannot give respawning players too much of an edge. How lame is it when you're on the cusp of some crazy Killwhatever, and the enemy team begins spawning near the last guy you're trying to kill? While BUNGiE does need to ensure that spawning players have a chance, we don't want them to hand too much leverage to a weaker team. Skillful, calculated recovery from my mistakes is far more rewarding to me personally as a player than when I change the tide of a battle simply because I spawned near an established player who wasn't looking. I'd rather teamwork and communication change the tide of a battle, not a fortunate respawn combined with an overpowered starting weapon.

  • 07.13.2009 5:09 AM PDT

Good job!
Bungie should take a look, of course if Bungie did make it they would have to put a bolt on the side for reloading. Every UNSC magazine-fed weapon has a bolt on the side, the BR, the AR (when I first saw it in CE I thought it was a thumb going through the gun), the Sniper Rifle and the SMG (not sure if it's every SMG or just the ODST one).
Bungie, I know they can look cool but dont go overboard! ;-P
Anyway, nice work.

  • 07.13.2009 5:34 AM PDT