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

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


Posted by: mubox47
$.50 in store credit.

Posted by: ween14
Posted by: Toa Freak
But in later books, like Contact Harvest, the BR-55 is used by Sgt. Johnson and his militia forces at the time.

Contact Harvest was the first book showing the start of the covenant human war in 2525 so I dont know why you are saying in later books.

Correct me if i'm wrong but im almost certain i'm correct.
Chronologically it comes first, but FoR was published and released first.

  • 07.15.2009 1:55 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

NO the BR is a good weapon and can b countered with a carbine or AR u just prob suk and thats y u complain

  • 07.15.2009 1:56 PM PDT

In the days of old, there were legends of a land long lost to time. This land was known as Ranna'Mor. Ranna'Mor was said to contain in its borders 7 warriors. These warriors had once unleashed a veritable hell upon the ancient world, until they were locked away. My name is Toriad, and I am one of those warriors. Our return is approaching. Do not run away, do not cower in fear; take solace in your final days, for that is all we can do. -Legend of Ranna'Mor

Posted by: ween14
Posted by: Toa Freak
But in later books, like Contact Harvest, the BR-55 is used by Sgt. Johnson and his militia forces at the time.

Contact Harvest was the first book showing the start of the covenant human war in 2525 so I dont know why you are saying in later books.

Correct me if i'm wrong but im almost certain i'm correct.
Well, I was referring to the order in which the books were released. But you are correct in that Contact Harvest was a prequel to the games and other books.

  • 07.15.2009 1:57 PM PDT

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


Posted by: mubox47
$.50 in store credit.

Posted by: Jonny Halo3
NO the BR is a good weapon and can b countered with a carbine or AR u just prob suk and thats y u complain
Once again, thank you for reading the entire thread and contributing to the discussion.

P.S. Work on your grammar a bit.

  • 07.15.2009 1:59 PM PDT

In the days of old, there were legends of a land long lost to time. This land was known as Ranna'Mor. Ranna'Mor was said to contain in its borders 7 warriors. These warriors had once unleashed a veritable hell upon the ancient world, until they were locked away. My name is Toriad, and I am one of those warriors. Our return is approaching. Do not run away, do not cower in fear; take solace in your final days, for that is all we can do. -Legend of Ranna'Mor

Posted by: The EAKLE
Posted by: Toa Freak
Posted by: The EAKLE
Posted by: Misfit197
/facepalm

if they take the br out because you guys QQ..i will quit playing halo.


Okay, I'm sorry, but you sound like an individual that get's BRed in every game he/she plays because you just don't know or don't want to adjust to it.

i read the first sentance of your post and decided that your just an AR lover and have no skill Leave comments like this out of it. This is not a discussion of how good i am, or if you like the BR, it is a discussion about how Removing the BR could effect gameplay and whether or not it belongs in Reach.
Well, I would personally hate the removal of the BR. It's a weapon that has become quite familiar for Halo fans, both in games and in story. The removal of the BR would almost force close encounters and give snipers a huge advantage, even if we got the Halo: CE pistol back
Snipers would be no more powerful than they are now. Not many maps have just one sniper, so yours could counter the enemy's, and if BRs are removed carbines would be seen much more often.
Actually, there are sniper rifles on many of the maps in Halo 3, and why do you have a problem with the BR but not the Carbine. Neither is more powerful than the other. They are essentially the same weapon

  • 07.15.2009 1:59 PM PDT

I think the worst time to have a heart attack is during a game of charades...or a game of fake heart attackPosted by: octoarmtron
have fun i'll be outside ::walks outside:: "its dark out here"

::kryll eat me::

Posted by: Fos Tis Krisis
There are many issues with the Halo 3 AR, yes, and I agree that the BR, Carbine, and M6D (Halo CE) pistol ruined the game.

When there is one weapon that you start with that beats everything else, the game gets bland. It has been a common theme in MANY shooters in the past, to start all players with the weakest weapon in the game. And it was better like that, believe me, MUCH better.


I agree with you. It makes it more challenging. You have to fight with the weaker weapons in order to get to the stronger ones and then use the stronger ones.

  • 07.15.2009 1:59 PM PDT

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


Posted by: mubox47
$.50 in store credit.

Posted by: Toa Freak
Posted by: The EAKLE
Posted by: Toa Freak
Posted by: The EAKLE
Posted by: Misfit197
/facepalm

if they take the br out because you guys QQ..i will quit playing halo.


Okay, I'm sorry, but you sound like an individual that get's BRed in every game he/she plays because you just don't know or don't want to adjust to it.

i read the first sentance of your post and decided that your just an AR lover and have no skill Leave comments like this out of it. This is not a discussion of how good i am, or if you like the BR, it is a discussion about how Removing the BR could effect gameplay and whether or not it belongs in Reach.
Well, I would personally hate the removal of the BR. It's a weapon that has become quite familiar for Halo fans, both in games and in story. The removal of the BR would almost force close encounters and give snipers a huge advantage, even if we got the Halo: CE pistol back
Snipers would be no more powerful than they are now. Not many maps have just one sniper, so yours could counter the enemy's, and if BRs are removed carbines would be seen much more often.
Actually, there are sniper rifles on many of the maps in Halo 3, and why do you have a problem with the BR but not the Carbine. Neither is more powerful than the other. They are essentially the same weapon
They both serve the purpose of being a mid-long range weapon, but do it in different ways. The carbine seems more balanced to me, because even though it fires faster you have to land more headshots to kill. It's a bit harder to use.

And i meant most maps have two snipers, and only a few have just one. If a map has two snipers, it isn't overpowered because one sniper can take out the other.

  • 07.15.2009 2:03 PM PDT

I'm a lead farmer, mother lover!

Posted by: The EAKLE
They both serve the purpose of being a mid-long range weapon, but do it in different ways. The carbine seems more balanced to me, because even though it fires faster you have to land more headshots to kill. It's a bit harder to use.

And i meant most maps have two snipers, and only a few have just one. If a map has two snipers, it isn't overpowered because one sniper can take out the other.


So, by this logic since there's often more than one BR spawn it isn't overpowered either because one BR user can take out the other. Right? I understand the complaint but its definitely about the over-USE of BR, not the overpower.

Additionally, if the BR was absent something else would just take its place (i.e. Carbine, or something else new that would cover the job it did). And if the argument IS about the over-use, than its a complaint about the people that play this game which, lets face it, you're not going to be changing opinions there anytime fast (No offense meant, just realistically speaking.)

[Edited on 07.15.2009 2:15 PM PDT]

  • 07.15.2009 2:13 PM PDT

In the days of old, there were legends of a land long lost to time. This land was known as Ranna'Mor. Ranna'Mor was said to contain in its borders 7 warriors. These warriors had once unleashed a veritable hell upon the ancient world, until they were locked away. My name is Toriad, and I am one of those warriors. Our return is approaching. Do not run away, do not cower in fear; take solace in your final days, for that is all we can do. -Legend of Ranna'Mor

Posted by: The EAKLE
Posted by: Toa Freak
Posted by: The EAKLE
Posted by: Toa Freak
Well, I would personally hate the removal of the BR. It's a weapon that has become quite familiar for Halo fans, both in games and in story. The removal of the BR would almost force close encounters and give snipers a huge advantage, even if we got the Halo: CE pistol back
Snipers would be no more powerful than they are now. Not many maps have just one sniper, so yours could counter the enemy's, and if BRs are removed carbines would be seen much more often.
Actually, there are sniper rifles on many of the maps in Halo 3, and why do you have a problem with the BR but not the Carbine. Neither is more powerful than the other. They are essentially the same weapon
They both serve the purpose of being a mid-long range weapon, but do it in different ways. The carbine seems more balanced to me, because even though it fires faster you have to land more headshots to kill. It's a bit harder to use.

And i meant most maps have two snipers, and only a few have just one. If a map has two snipers, it isn't overpowered because one sniper can take out the other.
That's still a sniper rifle, doesn't matter how many there are on a map. And there are no big differences between a carbine and a battle rifle. You may feel that the Carbine is more balanced, but there are not real difference, as a point of fact. The only differences are small ones when firing. In a one on one contest, each weapon would have to same chances of winning.

  • 07.15.2009 2:18 PM PDT

By starting everybody out with an equally powerful weapon, skill decided the outcome, not luck.

  • 07.15.2009 2:24 PM PDT

On Waypoint I'm rocketFox;
http://halo.xbox.com/forums/members/rocketfox/default.aspx

Old GTs; RebelRobot, Flamedude

A balanced all-round mid-range weapon like the BR is necessary. It presents a players with tough decisions as to what weapons to load up with. Sometimes if I have BR and Sniper and encounter a shotgun I can never decided whether to ditch the all-rounder BR for the shotty or stick with it. I like this sort of dilemma, it is a testament to the weapon balance.

BR is a great start weapon. Starting with a sniper would be over the top, starting with a pistol or and SMG would not be enough. BR is right in the middle, you can use it immediately to fairly good effect and you just might keep it alongside a more powerful specialty weapon later. With AR starts I immediately search for a better weapon and ditch the AR as soon as possible.

  • 07.15.2009 2:29 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT


I agree that the BR is not only the weapon of choice in both halo 2 and halo 3 but it also drasticley changed the feel of the halo games. HOWEVER, the BR is now a part of halo whether we like it or not. Bungie knows too many people (who only played halos 1 and 2) will complain if it is removed from their forth game.
Therfore, I predict that they will take the middle road and weaken and/or tweak it so that it makes for more balanced gameplay(ex. remove the scope, semi auto ect.) you might even expect to see changes in the upcoming Halo 3: ODST. Hope this helps!

[Edited on 07.15.2009 2:37 PM PDT]

  • 07.15.2009 2:31 PM PDT

The Ghosts of Onyx - Retired Staff

Well I said this earlier, but apparently this discussion has become too heated for anyone to have picked up on it (I admit I grew frustrated earlier).

Keep the BR, but balance it more. It would not interfere with canon to have the BR in multiplayer if at some point late in the campaign you could find one. Any difference would be covered by the fact that it is still technically a prototype and not standard issue. Alter the AR to have a tighter spread and longer range, but make the spread increase while firing continuously. Bring back the pistol with the scope, make it medium range at best, and make it 4 shot. That way, a pistol would be just as effective a medium range combat as the BR but the BR would still win at longer ranges, the AR would stand a chance at more than just short-med range, and the BR would still counter a Sniper effectively at long range. Also, that would make the AR a more than decent starter for good players with a controlled trigger finger, who could easily defeat "AR noobs" who just spray and pray.

Honestly, I would like to see a BR55C single shot carbine version of the BR. That could be one hell of a weapon at long range that could fire slower than the Covenant Carbine but pack a bigger punch. I would be slightly harder to use without zooming in, but that would simply make the AR equally effective at medium range, but anyone with steady aim could still win with the BR.

As for all of that talk of whether or not the BR would have been used by Spartans during Reach, I know what I know and I don't care what you think. You won't convince me I'm wrong. Also, it's kinf of pathetic, but I have read FoR at least half a dozen times.

  • 07.15.2009 2:35 PM PDT

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


Posted by: mubox47
$.50 in store credit.

Posted by: JurtEJ
Posted by: The EAKLE
They both serve the purpose of being a mid-long range weapon, but do it in different ways. The carbine seems more balanced to me, because even though it fires faster you have to land more headshots to kill. It's a bit harder to use.

And i meant most maps have two snipers, and only a few have just one. If a map has two snipers, it isn't overpowered because one sniper can take out the other.


So, by this logic since there's often more than one BR spawn it isn't overpowered either because one BR user can take out the other. Right? I understand the complaint but its definitely about the over-USE of BR, not the overpower.

Additionally, if the BR was absent something else would just take its place (i.e. Carbine, or something else new that would cover the job it did). And if the argument IS about the over-use, than its a complaint about the people that play this game which, lets face it, you're not going to be changing opinions there anytime fast (No offense meant, just realistically speaking.)
A BR is not a sniper. Two snipers balance out because one team is not overpowering the other. The snipers kill short range weapons and handle each other. A Br kills anything. Short range are easy targets for it, and long range can be beaten by it, and it has a much larger clip than a sniper, and there are often more BRs than snipers.

  • 07.15.2009 2:37 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: WhatThaSmurf
Well I said this earlier, but apparently this discussion has become too heated for anyone to have picked up on it (I admit I grew frustrated earlier).

Keep the BR, but balance it more. It would not interfere with canon to have the BR in multiplayer if at some point late in the campaign you could find one. Any difference would be covered by the fact that it is still technically a prototype and not standard issue. Alter the AR to have a tighter spread and longer range, but make the spread increase while firing continuously. Bring back the pistol with the scope, make it medium range at best, and make it 4 shot. That way, a pistol would be just as effective a medium range combat as the BR but the BR would still win at longer ranges, the AR would stand a chance at more than just short-med range, and the BR would still counter a Sniper effectively at long range. Also, that would make the AR a more than decent starter for good players with a controlled trigger finger, who could easily defeat "AR noobs" who just spray and pray.

Honestly, I would like to see a BR55C single shot carbine version of the BR. That could be one hell of a weapon at long range that could fire slower than the Covenant Carbine but pack a bigger punch. I would be slightly harder to use without zooming in, but that would simply make the AR equally effective at medium range, but anyone with steady aim could still win with the BR.

As for all of that talk of whether or not the BR would have been used by Spartans during Reach, I know what I know and I don't care what you think. You won't convince me I'm wrong. Also, it's kinf of pathetic, but I have read FoR at least half a dozen times.


Exactly, and I'm sure bungie will find a way of working some form of the BR into Halo: Reach

  • 07.15.2009 2:41 PM PDT

Die, just die

You do make some very valid points. I think they should keep it, but make it less accurate. i like the br, and i have to somewhat disagree.

  • 07.15.2009 2:42 PM PDT

lucky member no.999 of SAS Halo3

Posted by: The EAKLE
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.

with out people who cantr use any other weapon besides a power wepon we wouldent have posts like this and i just want to get this out but we have a three shot weapon today its called an m16 a br is just one with a computer on it to tell how many bullets are left

  • 07.15.2009 2:43 PM PDT

In the days of old, there were legends of a land long lost to time. This land was known as Ranna'Mor. Ranna'Mor was said to contain in its borders 7 warriors. These warriors had once unleashed a veritable hell upon the ancient world, until they were locked away. My name is Toriad, and I am one of those warriors. Our return is approaching. Do not run away, do not cower in fear; take solace in your final days, for that is all we can do. -Legend of Ranna'Mor

Posted by: The EAKLE
Posted by: JurtEJ
Posted by: The EAKLE
They both serve the purpose of being a mid-long range weapon, but do it in different ways. The carbine seems more balanced to me, because even though it fires faster you have to land more headshots to kill. It's a bit harder to use.

And i meant most maps have two snipers, and only a few have just one. If a map has two snipers, it isn't overpowered because one sniper can take out the other.


So, by this logic since there's often more than one BR spawn it isn't overpowered either because one BR user can take out the other. Right? I understand the complaint but its definitely about the over-USE of BR, not the overpower.

Additionally, if the BR was absent something else would just take its place (i.e. Carbine, or something else new that would cover the job it did). And if the argument IS about the over-use, than its a complaint about the people that play this game which, lets face it, you're not going to be changing opinions there anytime fast (No offense meant, just realistically speaking.)
A BR is not a sniper. Two snipers balance out because one team is not overpowering the other. The snipers kill short range weapons and handle each other. A Br kills anything. Short range are easy targets for it, and long range can be beaten by it, and it has a much larger clip than a sniper, and there are often more BRs than snipers.
You're talking about balance, but whenever a BR or Carbine in on a map, there are an even number of them for either team ot claim. In a BR specific slayer match, everyone starts with a BR. You're argument is a contradiction of itself.

And for the record, the BR is not very good with short range. That's what ARs and SMGs are for.

  • 07.15.2009 2:49 PM PDT

You know you are running a hard course when your ears pop during the meet.-me

wrong. just wrong. The AR slaughters the BR at close range. Even the unskilled player can spray an AR and kill a BR user at close range. Yes the BR dominates mid to long range and that's the point.

This is why we have matchmaking. BR haters can play team slayer whereas AR haters play MLG or swat. Dont ruin this game by nerfing a central point of the game to me and my friends.

JUST Stop complaining and veto team BR'S

  • 07.15.2009 2:50 PM PDT

Posted by: WhatThaSmurf
"The Battle Rifle was first used canonically in Halo: Contact Harvest as a prototype, and is first introduced to the Spartans during Halo: First Strike in the tunnels beneath Reach, but it was introduced to gamers in Halo 2."
-from Halopedia

The BR was never used during the actual Battle of Reach.


Cool. That is a possible reason why the Battle rifle wouldn't be in the campaign.

Give me a reason why it won't be in the multiplayer.

I'd also like to see a quote from the Fall of Reach book that said that the spartans didn't use any battle rifles. The book really doesn't go into detail about what exactly happened to half the spartans on the ground. Who is to say that they didn't get some battle rifles there? There are easy ways of working around the canon people.

[Edited on 07.15.2009 2:53 PM PDT]

  • 07.15.2009 2:51 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

BR > AR

  • 07.15.2009 2:52 PM PDT

The Ghosts of Onyx - Retired Staff

Posted by: Defiant Assasin
i just want to get this out but we have a three shot weapon today its called an m16 a br is just one with a computer on it to tell how many bullets are left


First off, punctuation and capitalization make people respect you thoughts more.
Secondly, we have a lot of burst fire weapons today. Nearly every submachine gun and assualt rifle made today comes with select fire of semiautomatic, burst (either 2 or 3 shots), and full auto.
Thirdly, while I do enjoy correcting people who obviously know less than they think they know, what did the fact that an M16 has burst fire mode have to do with this discussion?

  • 07.15.2009 2:53 PM PDT

lucky member no.999 of SAS Halo3

what the smurf...

Nothing just that in five hundred year you dont think we can a -Blam!- computer to it and make a br?
Any way just no if bungie wants to take it away they will if they dont they wont.

[Edited on 07.15.2009 2:58 PM PDT]

  • 07.15.2009 2:58 PM PDT

The Ghosts of Onyx - Retired Staff

Posted by: Hylebos
Posted by: WhatThaSmurf
"The Battle Rifle was first used canonically in Halo: Contact Harvest as a prototype, and is first introduced to the Spartans during Halo: First Strike in the tunnels beneath Reach, but it was introduced to gamers in Halo 2."
-from Halopedia

The BR was never used during the actual Battle of Reach.


Cool. That is a possible reason why the Battle rifle wouldn't be in the campaign.

Give me a reason why it won't be in the multiplayer.

I'd also like to see a quote from the Fall of Reach book that said that the spartans didn't use any battle rifles. The book really doesn't go into detail about what exactly happened to half the spartans on the ground. Who is to say that they didn't get some battle rifles there? There are easy ways of working around the canon people.

I actually just talked about how that problem could be solved without destroying canon. Here, let me fetch it for you.

Posted by: WhatThaSmurf
It would not interfere with canon to have the BR in multiplayer if at some point late in the campaign you could find one.

  • 07.15.2009 2:58 PM PDT

Posted by: McChimpy
By starting everybody out with an equally powerful weapon, skill decided the outcome, not luck.

So in Reach we should all spawn with plasma pistols? They are equally powerful weapons, so skill decides the outcome, not luck.

That is the type of Logic MLG uses to justify their use of the battle rifle, and it doesn't fool everyone.

But this is a bit off topic, because we are talking about whether or not the battle rifle should be in Reach or not, or if it should be replaced by a pistol or what-not.

  • 07.15.2009 2:59 PM PDT