Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Remove the BR from Halo: Reach
  • Subject: Remove the BR from Halo: Reach
Subject: Remove the BR from Halo: Reach

PLEASE DO NOT SEND ME GROUP INVITATIONS

The Halo REACH Script (post thoughts in thread)

Writing Lead of Whisper Studios. Check out Heron!

Look... I'm on bungiepedia!

The BR is just a weapon with a role. Midrange accuracy. In Halo 1, this weapon was the Pistol. In Halo 2 and 3, it was the BR. Also, MLG actively played Halo 1 before Halo 2 came out; they used bungie's default "Pro" settings which spawned you with a Pistol, AR, and grenades.

I don't think that the BR is the problem in H3, I think that its dual wielding (half-gun syndrome) and general poor weapon design (the BR is the only really versatile weapon, unlike in H1 when even the PR was versatile). Though I would like the BR to be removed, a midrange accuracy weapon is still needed for Halo to be... Halo.

I would like the Halo 1 Pistol to replace the BR, identical in every way to the original except it would be a 6 headshot kill instead of a 3 headshot kill (maybe up the magazine from 12 to 14 to keep with bungie's 2 kills/magazine rule).

The Pistol took skill to use, and if its power is nerfed, it will not be as an effective weapon as even the BR... unless, of course, the user wielding it has lots of skill.

[Edited on 07.15.2009 11:13 AM PDT]

  • 07.15.2009 11:11 AM PDT

The Ghosts of Onyx - Retired Staff

Posted by: SierraM187
It wouldn't make sense either because in the cover of Contact Harvest it clearly shows the Sergeant Johnson wielding the Battle Rifle in his tightly gripped, black masculine hands.


1) That was still in prototype stages at the time of Reach.
2) The Spartans didn't recieve the prototypes until after Reach fell.
3) That statement about Johnson's hands was kind of -blam!-, no offense.

  • 07.15.2009 11:12 AM PDT

Check out the group, Planet Reach and talk about Bungie's next game without the annoyance of the public forum. Oh and it's nice there too.

You thought you had lag, it took Jesus 3 days to re-spawn.

Posted by: MLG Cheehwawa
I would like the Halo 1 Pistol to replace the BR, identical in every way to the original except it would be a 6 headshot kill instead of a 3 headshot kill (maybe up the magazine from 12 to 14 to keep with bungie's 2 kills/magazine rule).

The Pistol took skill to use, and if its power is nerfed, it will not be as an effective weapon as even the BR... unless, of course, the user wielding it has lots of skill.


Doesn't the pistol in H3 take 6-7 headshots to kill? I'm probably wrong, but I could've sworn I can kill people fairly quick with it.

  • 07.15.2009 11:14 AM PDT

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


Posted by: mubox47
$.50 in store credit.

Posted by: MLG Cheehwawa
I don't think that the BR is the problem in H3, I think that its dual wielding (half-gun syndrome) and general poor weapon design (the BR is the only really versatile weapon, unlike in H1 when even the PR was versatile). Though I would like the BR to be removed, a midrange accuracy weapon is still needed for Halo to be... Halo.

I would like the Halo 1 Pistol to replace the BR, identical in every way to the original except it would be a 6 headshot kill instead of a 3 headshot kill (maybe up the magazine from 12 to 14 to keep with bungie's 2 kills/magazine rule).

The Pistol took skill to use, and if its power is nerfed, it will not be as an effective weapon as even the BR... unless, of course, the user wielding it has lots of skill.
I like my pistol idea a lot. Same power as the current pistol (i believe six headshots kill), a 1.5X scope (so it isn't deadly at far ranges, but isnt limited to a small area) and 12 clip magazine. It should play like a "fixed" CE pistol.

  • 07.15.2009 11:14 AM PDT

PLEASE DO NOT SEND ME GROUP INVITATIONS

The Halo REACH Script (post thoughts in thread)

Writing Lead of Whisper Studios. Check out Heron!

Look... I'm on bungiepedia!

Posted by: Another one
Posted by: MLG Cheehwawa
I would like the Halo 1 Pistol to replace the BR, identical in every way to the original except it would be a 6 headshot kill instead of a 3 headshot kill (maybe up the magazine from 12 to 14 to keep with bungie's 2 kills/magazine rule).

The Pistol took skill to use, and if its power is nerfed, it will not be as an effective weapon as even the BR... unless, of course, the user wielding it has lots of skill.


Doesn't the pistol in H3 take 6-7 headshots to kill? I'm probably wrong, but I could've sworn I can kill people fairly quick with it.
H3 Pistol is a 5 headshot kill, but the range is horrible and the ROF is even slower than the BR. BR shoots 2 shots/second, H1 Pistol shoots 3.3 rounds/second.

  • 07.15.2009 11:17 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: WhatThaSmurf
Posted by: SierraM187
It wouldn't make sense either because in the cover of Contact Harvest it clearly shows the Sergeant Johnson wielding the Battle Rifle in his tightly gripped, black masculine hands.


1) That was still in prototype stages at the time of Reach.
2) The Spartans didn't recieve the prototypes until after Reach fell.
3) That statement about Johnson's hands was kind of -blam!-, no offense.


1. Sorry, I haven't read any of the books yet besides TFoR.
2. Maybe they could give it to them for gameplay purposes.
3. :D He is my favorite character, ya know? :)

  • 07.15.2009 11:20 AM PDT

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


Posted by: mubox47
$.50 in store credit.

Posted by: WhatThaSmurf
Posted by: SierraM187
It wouldn't make sense either because in the cover of Contact Harvest it clearly shows the Sergeant Johnson wielding the Battle Rifle in his tightly gripped, black masculine hands.


1) That was still in prototype stages at the time of Reach.
2) The Spartans didn't recieve the prototypes until after Reach fell.
3) That statement about Johnson's hands was kind of -blam!-, no offense.
Also, in First strike, it seems like the Spartans are new to the weapon. It was in use before Reach, but apparently not by the Spartans.

  • 07.15.2009 11:21 AM PDT

The Ghosts of Onyx - Retired Staff

Posted by: SierraM187
1. Sorry, I haven't read any of the books yet besides TFoR.
2. Maybe they could give it to them for gameplay purposes.
3. :D He is my favorite character, ya know? :)

1) They are all awesome except The Flood IMO. They are all worth reading, but something about the way The Flood is written just didn't feel right.
2) That would be a horrible reason to include something that doesn't fit the timeline.
3) Johnson is amazing, but not enough for me to switch teams.

  • 07.15.2009 11:26 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: WhatThaSmurf
Posted by: SierraM187
1. Sorry, I haven't read any of the books yet besides TFoR.
2. Maybe they could give it to them for gameplay purposes.
3. :D He is my favorite character, ya know? :)

1) They are all awesome except The Flood IMO. They are all worth reading, but something about the way The Flood is written just didn't feel right.
2) That would be a horrible reason to include something that doesn't fit the timeline.
3) Johnson is amazing, but not enough for me to switch teams.


1. HA! Thank you. I skipped it because I knew what was going to happen.
2. :(
3. Rofl! why not both? Can't we all get along:)

  • 07.15.2009 11:28 AM PDT

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


Posted by: mubox47
$.50 in store credit.

Actually, completely scrapping the BR does not leave a huge gap. We'd still have the carbine, and it's a great weapon if you know how to use it. With that and an improved pistol, i cant see too many people freaking out for long.

  • 07.15.2009 11:51 AM PDT

The Ghosts of Onyx - Retired Staff

And honestly if they gave the Assualt Rifle a bit more range and a tighter spread, it could compensate if fired in bursts from medium range, with the spread increasing the longer you hold down the trigger.

  • 07.15.2009 12:24 PM PDT

In my opinion, I shouldnt have any opinion at all. Halo: Reach will be a game designed by Bungie, with the developers doing whatever they can to make the game as enjoyable as possible. Although i am sure Bungie appreciates Player input, they wont leave out an entire aspect of a game because a few players do not like it.

  • 07.15.2009 12:26 PM PDT

The Ghosts of Onyx - Retired Staff

You may be right, but they have a good reason in that they like to stick to their own canon, and the BR simply was not used during the Battle of Reach.

  • 07.15.2009 12:31 PM PDT

My main account.

This is an alt.

I don't think they should remove the BR. But I would much rather they reduce the BR's power. It would be funny to see all the MLG "Pros" go to the AR.

  • 07.15.2009 12:31 PM PDT

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


Posted by: mubox47
$.50 in store credit.

Posted by: The Jury
Posted by: The EAKLE
They dont care about winning and just play for fun. How can you play for fun if a starting weapon dominates everything else? Just screw around. Drive off cliffs, speed around on a mongoose, try to get kills with a pistol, you name it. Any time someone is not trying to play Halo the "right" way, they are a by product of the BR.


What is the 'right' way to play Halo? And in addition to that, you say that the BR causes people to start playing for fun.

Now correct me if I'm wrong, but that sounds like the point of a video game: to have fun. huh...

Plus people chose to play as they do not as the biproduct of the weapons being used against them. They chose to screw around because they just want to enjoy themselves and do not care about the results Because it's fun! Wierd how that one works.

The BR is a perfectly good weapon. You will have an opportunity to witness the game without it in Halo 3: ODST in which they ommitted the BR. From there we can decide whether or not Halo minus the BR is a worthy cause
Im guessing you didnt read this entire thread. I already stated that most of that section was a joke. I put the "right" way because i always see people on these forums whining about a teammate who doesnt play right and jut drives a mongoose. Some people play this game just for the purpose of winning and ranking up. Others just play to play. Thats what i meant by playing just for fun.

Also, ODST has no multiplayer, so we won't learn much about not having a BR from it.

  • 07.15.2009 12:48 PM PDT

I'm a lead farmer, mother lover!

Posted by: WhatThaSmurf
You may be right, but they have a good reason in that they like to stick to their own canon, and the BR simply was not used during the Battle of Reach.


The books have nerfed their own canon too by principle of exclusion. What I mean here is that Fall of Reach should have (technically) included all of the weapons, prototypes, and what have you considering it was such a heavily armed military facility. Therein, Hornets, Mongoose, and other vehicles (such as those in Halo Wars [I know, non-Bungie]) should have been apparent. Not to mention the complete omission of Brutes and Drones for no significant reason.

There's no reason BRs couldn't be included based on this principle. They've f'ed a bit with their canon before.

As for the ACTUAL argument... BRs are a perfect weapon and perhaps they are a LITTLE overpowered but honestly a better player will be able to overcome on three accounts.

1) Being able to get to a BR spawn first
2) Getting to a DIFFERENT BR spawn
3) Being generally better with different weapons (such as grenades or other such forces)

Also really, how many BR spawn campers have you seen unless you're out-manned 4:1, and you're virtually ALLOWING yourself to be BR camped?

  • 07.15.2009 12:48 PM PDT

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


Posted by: mubox47
$.50 in store credit.

Posted by: The Jury
Posted by: WhatThaSmurf
You may be right, but they have a good reason in that they like to stick to their own canon, and the BR simply was not used during the Battle of Reach.


WRONG

The battle of Reach is when the BR was introduced to the Spartans. It came out of the weapons research lab that Dr. Halsey was working in and was given to the Spartans whilst they were attempting to defend the unglassed portion of Reach.

Read a book. It helps
Read the entire thread. Irish has read all the books, he stated that earlier. Also, Halsey gives the surviving Spartans some experimental weapons after nearly everyone is dead. Something tells me this game wont be jt the part where a few Spartans are trying to get a stone off of Reach.

  • 07.15.2009 12:49 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Did any one need all that ammo that was in the Halo 1 AR to kill someone you most be a bad shot and the BR is not OP I kill someny noods with my AR I love the AR the way it is all the guns are good in thare own way if you know how to use the AR you would know what I am saying

  • 07.15.2009 12:52 PM PDT

Posted by: WhatThaSmurf
If Bungie were to stick with their own fiction (which I'm sure they will), this will not even be an issue. The BR did not exist in Halo: CE, therefore how could it possibly exist in a prequel? It wouldn't make any sense at all. "Oh, yeah, it is in the past, but it has weapons from the future..."

No, Bungie is much smarter than that.

And I'm sure someone will be like: "Well, in First Strike the Spartans that survived the Battle of Reach got BRs." And that is the point. The Spartans that made it through the Battle of Reach, the ones that the Master Chief helped rescue, didn't get the BR prototypes until after the story that Halo: Reach will tell, after the Pillar of Autumn arrived at the first Halo, after Reach had already been glassed and the battle lost.

So, for two reasons (other than the very accurate reasons given by the OP) the BR should not be in Reach.
1) It wasn't in Halo: CE.
2) It wasn't in use by the UNSC until after Reach according to the fiction.

If the BR is included in Reach, I will be extremely disappointed.


The BR was around in the fall of reach if you read the book "Halo First Strike" The BR was just back from wepons testing in the ONI Building call CASTLE on page 133. The Team was Still on Reach at the time.

  • 07.15.2009 12:57 PM PDT

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


Posted by: mubox47
$.50 in store credit.

As for the ACTUAL argument... BRs are a perfect weapon and perhaps they are a LITTLE overpowered but honestly a better player will be able to overcome on three accounts.

1) Being able to get to a BR spawn first
2) Getting to a DIFFERENT BR spawn
3) Being generally better with different weapons (such as grenades or other such forces)

Also really, how many BR spawn campers have you seen unless you're out-manned 4:1, and you're virtually ALLOWING yourself to be BR camped?
Yes, that's my point. BRs are the perfect weapon in most scenarios. Why use anything else? Two of your three solutions included BRs, supporting my argument that BRs are only balanced by more BRs. There is no point for ARs, Spikers, pistols, or SMGs if you cant kill the guy with the BR.

AS for the spawn camp thing, i was taking that form the many "BR ONLY STARTS NOW!!!" threads in Optimatch. Out of nearly all of them i have seen, everyone has used the argument "If i grab a BR, then die, i have no BRs and i get spawn killed by the other team's BRs!" There are several reasons why that is a bad argument, but i took it because it shows BR lovers the flaw with the BR they already know. Their solution? "MORE BRS!"

  • 07.15.2009 12:57 PM PDT

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


Posted by: mubox47
$.50 in store credit.

Posted by: Scatcycle
i read the first sentance of your post and decided that your just an AR lover and have no skill.
Wow. Really? Thank you for contributing so much to this discussion!


With no BRs, we would not have BR lovers who do stuff like this.

  • 07.15.2009 1:00 PM PDT

Okay, now that I've had more time to read you post...


Posted by: The EAKLE
BRs are a major flaw in Halo 3's design. It is a starting weapon that literally anyone can kill with from pretty far distances. Because of it's range and accuracy, it makes all dual wieldable weapons and ARs almost entirely useless. Because it out ranges power weapons like swords and shotguns, the only effective way to use them is camp. Thus, the BR promotes camping.

I'd disagree with this. I'm an avid user of the AR and the dual wieldables, and if you know what you are doing at close range, the BR user doesn't stand a chance. Its simply because the radius between you and your opponent is short, so your angular velocity as you strafe is much higher than far away, so it is harder to lead your shots so all of them hit you. This isn't a problem for the AR or the other dual wieldables as they are constantly firing bullets, but the battle rifle fires in bursts so it can't be as efficient as possible. As long as you can manuever and they don't get you with a grenade or melee headshot you, you have the advantage.


People claim that teh BR is a needed weapon. That is flat out wrong. Halo: Combat Evolved was a fantastic game and it had no BR. It is often said that flag games become annoying with ARs because you cant kill the carrier from a distance, but none of these claims were made in Halo Combat Evolved because we didnt know of an unbalanced starting weapon, besides the pistol. We did just fine with our ARs up until Halo 2.

Its not so much the fact that the BR is a needed weapon, but there needs to be medium ranged weapons. Other than the awkwardness of balancing a medium ranged scoped pistol, there is no reason why the pistol couldn't replace the BR in this game. The only time I would say one would need a BR is in many of the BTB maps where the environment is very open and very supportive of medium ranged combat, and spawning with a close range weapon when there aren't as many "close range areas" puts you at a large disadvantage. Most the people who say you need to have a BR for flag games just haven't thought of using a grenade and then burst firing their AR.

In Halo 2, the AR was removed for the SMG, and the Battle Rifle was added. Because the SMGs were dual wieldable and functioned different from an AR, it seemed to be an entire different weapon instead of a new Assault Rifle. With the AR out of the way the BR had a chance at being the new main weapon. It did a decent job because we could not see it's devastating onslaught of other weapons compared to the AR functioning well with them.

With Halo 2 came Halo's introduction to MLG. Without the Assault Rifle, the only main weapon to have was the BR, so it became MLG's main weapon. Halo 2 quickly became incredibly popular, and the BR came with it.

Now in Halo 3 MLG has a giant fanbase, and many believe the BR to be the "PRO" weapon over the Asault Rifle, when the truth is the AR never had a chance to shine. The AR returned from Halo CE, but with less ammo. The BR came back with a slight spread. The now weakened AR was slaughtered by the BR in almost every battle, leading people to believe that the AR was bad, instead of the truth that the BR is greatly overpowered. The BR is a favorite of many players because they live under the stereotype that it means they are "good" or "pro", when really it is an easy way to rack up kills.

This is more of a social problem than an actual game problem. If you read the reason why MLG uses the BR and not the AR, anyone that is good at close range combat can completely see through the lies, as you can flip the arguement around to support the AR instantly. The reason MLG uses the BR because its much easier to see the "skill" that it takes to use the BR than the "skill" that it takes to use the AR. Much easier to see narrow precise BR shots than to imagine a cone of spread with the AR and efficiency and whatnot. Both take skill to use, and anyone who says otherwise hasn't used the weapons to their top potential.

From looking at nearly anyone's service record you can see the BR as the Tool of Destruction. Why is this? Because if anyone comes up with a close range weapon they are killed before they get the chance to fight. Everyone get's kills with the Bettle Rifle because they can. Some great AR user can try to attack, but will get mowed down by a BR "noob" in almost any situation. The only way to counter the BR is to get close. But the BR is still powerful at that range. Three quick bursts then a melee put's the opposing player down. Even though the AR is meant for close range it often ends up "trading" with the BR. Because of this the only logical thing to do is get a more powerful weapon than the BR.

Again, see earlier arguement, if you know what you are doing, the BR is at a disadvantage at close range. There are several big reasons that the BR is the TOD of most people, even people who also use the AR.

1) If you like swat, its your major weapon, and thats a ton of ranked kills going to that weapon.
2) If you like BTB, most the fighting occurs over medium range, the BR is a medium ranged weapon, so you end up using it a lot more than you would use the AR.
3) The kills from the AR are almost evenly split between actual AR, Melee, and Grenade Kills. The BR on the other hand has most it's kills coming from headshots, so its a bit unbalanced with regards to kill tracking.

Your weapon choices are now Rocket, Sniper, Sword or Shotgun. People claim Rocket's are for noobs because anyone can kill with them and shotguns and swords are for noobs because of camping. The truth is that players turn to these weapons because the BR practically forces them to. Basically, if you are not good with a BR or sniper you are killed a lot or considered a noob.

There is no noob weapon, each weapon takes skill to use the weapon to their fullest abillity.

Obviously, the BR is the root of all Halo's evil. I have shown you already that it promotes camping and "noob" weapons, but that's not all. When players are not good at the game what do they do? They dont care about winning and jut play for fun. How can you play for fun if a starting weapon dominates everything else? Just screw around. Drive off cliffs, speed around on a mongoose, try to get kills with a pistol, you name it. Any time someone is not trying to play Halo the "right" way, they are a by product of the BR. Any time you see someone killed repeatedly and hae an awful K/D ratio, think to yourself "What weapon was used to kill them so many times?" The BR is likely the answer.

So, the BR has reduced Halo to Brs, snipers, and "noobs." Is that a Halo we want to play? I dont think so. But what can fix this terrible world the BR has made? The answer seems obvious. The AR. It is the perfect starting weapon. It get's the job done without being the main weapon of the game. By scrapping both the BR and the MA5C (Our current Assault Rifle), then bringing back the MA5B (CE's Assault Rifle) Halo would be restored to it's former glory.

But we need a new mid-long range weapon, right? I mean, the BR did have a purpose. . .

Wrong. The BR's range was one of the main reasons it destroyed our beloved game. Another mid-long range weapon would likey also ruin it. To fill the gap left in all the "pro" players' hearts, we do need a new mid range balanced weapon. A new and improved pistol will do just fine.

Take the Halo 3 pistol and slightly improve it. "But that pistol is bad!" Not true. The weapon is good if you know how to use it. Get in range, aim for the head, and fire while strafing away from the enemy's fire. Sounds a lot like a BR right? The only difference is that the pistol did not ruin Halo. The only issue with the pistol is that it's magazine does not hold enough ammo for multiple kills. By increasing the pistols clip size and adding a 1.5X scope, we wouls have a great new mid ranged weapon.

With our MA5Bs and new pistols set to starting weapons, Halo would return to the once great game it was meant to be.

Again, it sounds more like a social issue that you have than an actual gameplay issue. People are going to be jerks online, it doesn't matter what weapon they use.

I really think that the BR is coming back simply because dual wielding will be coming back as well, and its hard to balance a medium ranged pistol that could possibly also be dual wielded. Hopefully they nerf it a bit more, if it does less damage per shot, it still has the medium ranged advantage over close range weapons yet it is much less effective up close.

Just kinda random stream of consciousness answer, if you want clarification on anything I said, let me know.

[Edited on 07.15.2009 1:01 PM PDT]

  • 07.15.2009 1:00 PM PDT