Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Rebalancing the BR (v2)
  • Subject: Rebalancing the BR (v2)
Subject: Rebalancing the BR (v2)

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


Posted by: mubox47
$.50 in store credit.

It is important that you read this in the right context. I am not a BR hater demanding its removal. I am not trying to state my opinion as facts. I am just making a suggestion.

This is an improved version of my last thread.

This is not about my skill or the skill required to use a weapon. If you make posts claiming that a weapon is needed or not based on skill, i will probably ignore it.

This was made for the discussion of the alteration or removal of the BR from Halo: Reach and how it would effect game play. Please stay on that topic.


The issues with the Battle Rifle.
The Battle Rifle is a good weapon. In fact, it is a great weapon. That is the very issue. It is a very effective weapon that is almost always available. It was meant to be a mid range weapon, but it can be effectively used at long -and sometimes short- ranges. Because of this, the BR makes all weapons obsolete in most battles. The Battle Rifle seems to be the only weapon that appears in every game. It always appears in Halo 3, and it always does its job.

"Unbalances" with the BR.
On top of my other point about the BR being more useful and often more effective than other weapons, it is one of the few weapons that does not balance itself out. Most weapons have magazines only big enough for two kills. Other weapons are so powerful they are balanced by having only enough ammo for one kill in every magazine. Examples:

AR
-16 shots to kill
-32 bullet magazine
-Close range
The AR balances itself out with a 2 kill per magazine if every single shot hitsand short range.

Needler
-Much more powerful than in other games
-Faster rate of fire
-Magazine size reduced to 19
-Needles only home if reticule is red
-Longer reload
-No longer a dual wield
The needler balanced out it's power with many alterations to decrease its effectiveness.

Brute shot
-4 shot kill
-6 shot magazine
-Slightly more powerful melee
The Bruteshot is a very powerful weapon at close range, because a shot or two and a melee will kill. This is countered by slow moving bullets (not really slow, but slower than most),a one-kill-per-magazine-ratio, and an explosion that will also damage the user at close range.

Rocket
-One shot kill (direct or close hit)
-Splash damage
-Two shot clip
-X2 scope
-Slow moving bullets
-Rockets are visible
-High spawn time
Rockets are very powerful. A direct hit will kill, and the splash damage can cause multi-kills. It is also and anti-vehicle weapon. All its power is balanced my small clips, long reloads, and a high spawn time. The rockets are slow moving and visible, so you can see them and either dodge or exit the vehicle if they are fired from a long distance.

Battle Rifle
-Three body shots and a head shot kill
-Bursts of three
-36 round magazine (12 shots)
-X2 scope
-Low spawn times
-Fast moving bullets
-Bullet spread
-Must lead to hit moving players at distances
The BR, unlike most weapons does not balance itself out. It is rather long range, has a scope, a kill-per mag-ratio of three, and has low spawn times. It also appears on every single map, many times with four or more, and it is a starting weapon.

Sure, you are probably thinking "But the KpM ratio is only three if you get perfect shots ever time!" This is true. However, weapons like the AR require you to make all shots hit to get a KpM of two, and weapons like the M6G and brute shot can only get 1 kill per mag. The Battle Rifle, a precision weapon, allows plenty of room for mistakes. You can miss four shots, and still get two kills. This helps it out very much at long ranges.

The Bullet spread was added to make it less effective at ranges, and it does just that. However, because of the size of the magazine, you can open fire and still get a kill in 6 or 7 shots. The same goes for leading targets. If you miss a shot, you can readjust and get the kill, and still have plenty of ammo left. It was nerfed to be less effective at long range, but the magazine allows for mistakes, which means it just takes more shots at long range.

Other weapons also have a KpM larger than two, but they are balanced by long spawn times, and only being effective in certain ranges (i.e. sniper). the BR and Carbine smiply do not balance themselves out.

How this negatively effects game play.
As i said before, the BR is an always useful weapon that makes other weapons useless in many situations. At rather long ranges (Valhalla: from the front of the waterfall base to the base of the center hill) a BR can do some damage. At a slightly closer range, it can be deadly. At short ranges (Just out of an AR's range, in about the M6G's range) it can be effective against CQB weapons. At any farther distances, the CQC weapons dont stand a chance. It makes other weapons entirely useless at multiple ranges, and is only weak at long ranges and very close ranges.

Overpowering long-ranged weapons.
The Battle Rifle can over power long range weapons. At short-mid range the BR will probably win, and it should because that is the long range weapons weak point, but sometimes at rather far distances the BR can still beat long range weapons. For instance, a sniper rifle. Snipers are made for long-range combat. The have a slow rate of fire, small magazine, and small reticule. They are very accurate, and unless you are a great sniper, only useful at long range.

At a rather far distance, the BR can still land hits on a sniper, forcing the player out of his scope. At this range without a scope, a sniper will have a hard time getting the necessary shots. The sniper needs two body shots or a head shot, the BR needs three body shots, then a head shot or a few more body shots. The BR also has a larger reticule, faster rate of fire, and larger magazine than snipers. The distance would make a four-shot-kill near impossible for the BR, but six or seven shots would not be a problem.

There are countless different scenarios we could bring up, some with the Sniper as the survivor of the battle, others with the BR. The amount of cover, whether team mates can help, if the sniper can escape the BRs line of sight, and countless other variables have to be factored in. The point is that in some situations, the BR will overpower a sniper at a rather long distance, which is supposed to be a sniper's strong point.

BR over powering close range weapons.
The BR will almost always take out a close range weapon from outside its range, but it can also sometimes kill within the CQB weapon's range.This does not happen very often, but it is possible. Lets say an AR user rounds a corner, and sees a BR just outside his range. They rush each other, and open fire. If the BR can land two body shots, it wont be hard to land a third from inside the AR's range and melee. The AR will likely melee as well, resulting in a tie.

That would of course be bad tactics. Charging a BR with an AR is a pretty bad idea. There are other situations that this could still happen in though. The AR would have to strafe to evade the BR. This would make the AR close in much slower, as he would be focusing on dodging rather than closing in. Again, the BR only needs a few shots to end up in a melee trade. If the BR gets a few more shots, the AR may die and the BR may win.

Why is this such a big deal?
You are probably wondering why i care so much that the BR can sometimes win at close/long range against weapons suited for those fields. Well, i think it is an issue because it doesn't work to well from the other side. How often will an AR kill a BR at mid to long range? I have never seen it happen without assistance from team mates or equipment? How often does a sniper win against a BR at mid range? Probably less often than a BR wins at a rather long range. Even though a BR winning against other weapons in their specific field doesn't happen often, other weapons defeating the BR at mid ranged combat happens much less often. ARs have the advantage at close range if the BR doesn't hit them first. Snipers have the advantage at ranges outside of the BR's, which is pretty far.

Factoring in equipment.
Many people told me in my last thread that you need to factor equipment into who will win. A BR can be hit by a power drain and be mowed down at a range by an AR. An AR user can throw grenades to drop the BR's shields then kill him with a quick burst. This is very true, but you can not forget that it works both ways. A BR can throw a power drain at close range and kill the AR with a head shot. The player with a BR can land a good grenade and drop someones shields, then kill in a hit or two. A BR can also use a regenerator to set up a good spot to sit at and kill snipers. If the sniper doesn't land a head shot, the BR's shields will regenerate. If a BR is in a regenerator, grenades wont do much. Yes, a sniper can also use a regenerator, but snipers' magazines are much smaller, and they carry much less ammo. An AR cant use a regenerator too well because at AR range the enemy can also get in the regenerator.

The M6D - The Battle Rifle.
Instead of a Battle Rifle, Halo: Combat Evolved's mid-long range weapon was the M6D pistol. It could effectively kill at any distance in about a second. Weapon balance was only maintained by the power of other weapons. They carried much more ammo and many were way more effective. For instance, the MA5B Assault Rifle carried about twice as much ammo as the MA5C we use now. The Plasma Rifle and Pistol did more damage and had a stun effect. The extremely powerful pistol was only balanced by all the other weapons being more powerful than they are now.

Continued. . .

  • 07.31.2009 9:51 AM PDT

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


Posted by: mubox47
$.50 in store credit.

Even with other weapons being powerful, the M6D was still seen as a broken and unbalanced weapon. It was removed from Halo. However, there was -and always will be- a need for a mid ranged weapon to fill the gap between CQB and power weapons. This gap was filled by the BR 55 Battle Rifle. This battle rifle required at least four shots to kill so it was less powerful than the M6D. It also contained only enough ammo for three kills per clip (if all kills were four shots) compared to the M6D's four (if all were three shots). However, the BR was still a very accurate and deadly weapon. This should have maintained balance with all the other weapons. It didn't though, because many weapons were converted into dual-wield weapons, and their effectiveness was reduced. The Battle Rifle was countered by carbines and Sentinel Beams, because they too had good range and accuracy. At close range, the BR often lost to dual wielded weapons, but could defeat single wields. For the most part, balance was kept.


The weapons in Halo 3 were different. To counter the brutal power of dual wielding, weapons had a damage decrease, accuracy decrease, and reload time increase when being dual wielded. To compensate, the BR had bullet spread added. It was now less effective at extreme ranges. The issue came in with the reduction (and complete removal) of the Covenant Carbine and the Sentinel beam in matchmaking. Carbines rarely appear in matchmaking. When they do, there is usually only one or two placed at a base. The Battle Rifle appears way more often than the Carbine. The Sentinel Beams were completely removed, because they have the firepower of "super-accelerated clowns." The BR is now the dominate -and often only- mid to long range weapon in Halo 3. That fact, combined with the toned down close-quarters weapons, makes it more useful than any other weapon. It is more versatile, and often more deadly, then all other weapons.

How replacing or toning down the BR would improve game play.
If the BR was less effective and short and long range, it would only serve one purpose, and that is being the mid range weapon. Because of it's toned down abilities, other weapons would be more useful. People would stop using the always useful BR and use different weapons that fit each scenario better. If there was a map the size of sandbox people would probably still use BRs because it is effective at that range. On maps the size of Assembly other weapons such as plasma rifles and SMGs would become more prominent. It would give the game more variety, because each map would play entirely different.

The issues with removing the BR
The carbine was excluded form the issues because it appears less often. If the BR is replaced with another weapon, the Carbine will probably become much more frequently used. Then it would have all the same issues. I will list possible fixes for it as well.

Another issue with removing the BR is that Dual wields and CQB weapons would be used more often. While the point of removing or altering the BR is to make all weapons useful, combat would become more close quarter based. It would not become entirely CQB based as some people suggested in the old post, as the BR would still work as a mid range weapon if it was tweaked, and if it was removed a different mid range weapon would replace it. However, there is one issue that i could see hurting the game, and that is the beatdown system.

Right now, melees do a lot of damage. Because some people would be using CQB weapons much more, beat downs would likely increase as well. The real issue comes in with melee ties, or "trading." Many times if two AR users melee each other, they both end up dying. This is very annoying to many people because they can strafe and dodge, do more damage to the other AR user, yet they still die because the other player did some damage and used a melee. Many competitive players would not like that, because they are using better tactics yet getting the same result as someone who just rushes and melees. If the BR was replaced or toned down, there would need to be a better melee system to go with it.

Solutions to the BR issue.
There are several possible solutions to this. There is the obvious "Nerf the BR" option, and the "Replace the BR." Many people think that improving all other weapons to the level of the BR is a good idea, but that also has issues. There is another option, which i will get to later.

Option 1: Alter the Battle Rifle

Battle Rifle
Stats
-Single wield.
-Semi auto.
-X2 Scope.
-4 shot kill.
-36 round magazine
Alterations
-Reduce Damage: Overpowering isn't the exact issue though. The issue is how often it's able to be overpowered.
-Reduce clip size: Battle Rifles last forever, and can get multiple kills before reloading. A 24 round magazine would only allow for 2 kills per reload.
-Increase spread at a a distance: This way, the Battle Rifle would be less powerful at distances, and still operate as it does at medium range.
-Decrease bullet magnetism.

Covenant Carbine
Stats
-Single Wield
-Semi auto
-X2 Scope.
-18 round clip
-6 headshot kill
Alterations
-Clip size reduced to 12
-Decrease bullet magnetism.

Placing all these changes in effect would make the BR rather useless. That is not the point. If it were to be made less effective, but still a good weapon, only a few would be in effect. For example, it would have a smaller clip and less bullet magnetism. Or it could have More spread and less magnetism at long distances, making it more effective at mid range than anything else.

Option 2: Increase other weapon effectiveness.
Issues with Increasing the effectiveness of all other weapons
Every weapon balances with itself at the moment. High power weapons have smaller clips, bullet spread, or some other way to keep them from being overpowered. Making an SMG more accurate would make it incredibly deadly. Giving a Plasma Rifle more power would make it a devastating dual wield weapon.

At some point a balance could be found -though it may take multiple title updates- but still, every weapon would kill more then it does now. People would be dieing constantly. Assault Rifles and dual wields would kill from greater distances at faster rates. It would probably play similar to Halo: Combat Evolved with a different weapon set. Whether that is good or not is up to the players.

Option 3: Replace the Battle Rifle and/or Covenant Carbine.
I have a few new weapon ideas from my old thread. They should fill the gap left by removing the BR without having the issues the BR had.

Spartan Combat Pistol (SCR)
Stats
-Single wield.
-semi auto.
-X1.5 scope (the scope is used more for precision then looking across the map.)
-6 head shot kill : 8 body shots.
-12 round magazine.
This could replace our current pistol. It is basically the same, but more precise because of the scope. It would be effective at mid range, but you would need to be very good to make it effective at any range farther than that.

Scoped MA5C (SMA5C)
Stats
-Single wield.
-Full auto.
-X 1.5 or X2 Scope.
-Same damage and clip size as current Assault Rifle.
-More accurate when shot in bursts.
-When zoomed in, spay-cone becomes larger faster, making a less deadly long range weapon.
-Bullet magnetism reduced when scoped.
This would make the AR more effective at mid range. When scoped it, it would be almost entirely useless unless you fir in bursts. Basically, it takes the "noob" AR and turns it into a more finessed weapon.

Combat Rifle (CR)
Stats
-Single wield.
-Semi auto
-X2 Scope.
-5 Headshot kill : 7-8 body shots.
-15 round magazine.
-Less bullet magnetism at long distances.
This would play much like the Carbine we have now, but with a slower rate of fire (about the BRs). It could fill the gap left if teh BR was removed.

Option 4: Add a new mid range weapon.
Multiple mid range weapons seems to be what kept the balance in Halo 2. In Halo 3 the BR appears to be the only used mid ranged weapon. Adding a new one -as well as increasing the use of the Carbine- could re-balance the weapon. A new mid ranged weapon could be some form of Brute Carbine. It would be armed with a blade/bayonet, and fire spikes. Maybe it could be a full-auto gun similar to the SMA5B i described.

Spike Rifle
-Current spiker stats.
-X2 scope.
-When using the scope, bullet spread increases fast.
-New skin (so it looks more like an actual rifle).
This is basically the SMA5C, but in covie form. It would only be effective at mid range if you scope and fire in bursts, it would be effective at normal spiker range when not scoped.

Posted by: InnerSandman13
Spiker Rifle

Stats
Ammo: 20 bullets
Rate of Fire: Slightly faster than Carbine
Headshots: 8
Scope: x2.5
Body Shots: 12

Thanks to InnerSandman 13 for that gun idea.



Weapon Sets.

Weapon set 1.
-BR (toned down version).
-Carbine (toned down version).
-No other changes.
This would play just like Halo 3, but the BR and Carbine would be less powerful. That would allow CQB weapons more opportunities to be useful.

Weapon set 2.
-SMA5B ~ Replaces AR
-SCP ~ Replaces M6G magnum.
-BR Removed.
-Carbine Removed.
-No other changes
This would play much different than any Halo game so far. The AR would be a utilitarian weapon, and the pistol would be mid ranged. Unlike the BR, however, the AR would only be very effective at close range (i dont mean point blank, but just a little farther than the AR can shoot now). For ti to be effective at mid range, the player wielding it would need to be a great shot.

Continued. . .

  • 07.31.2009 9:51 AM PDT

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


Posted by: mubox47
$.50 in store credit.


Weapon set 3
-SCP ~ Replaces M6G magnum.
-Combat Rifle ~ Replaces Battle Rifle.
-Carbine (toned down version).
-No other changes.
This would function very similarly to Halo 3. The Carbine would still be mid ranged, and the CR would fil the same niche as the BR, without overpowering other weapon. However, the SCP would be a useful mid range weapon, and would balance out the other two.

Weapon set 4
-BR (H3 version)
-Carbine (H3 version)
-Spike Rifle ~ Replaces spikers.
-SCP ~ Replaces M6G.
This would be similar and different to H3 at teh same time. BRs and Carbines would still be very deadly and useful weapons. This wold be balanced out by the addition of another mid ranged weapon. The SCP would also be an effective starting weapon. Because of it's range, it could be used to defend players against the spawn camping which people claim is an issue in non-BR start games. All games could be AR/SCP starts, and BRs, Carbines, and Spike Rifles would be placed on the maps. They would still be effective, but would not be starting weapons and would not overpower people without BRs every time.

Quotes
Posted by: Hylebos
After a lot of thinking, I think I've found the reason why I believe that the BR is much more adaptable at close range than the AR is adaptable to Medium range is because at close range the BR has access to melee and grenades while at medium range the AR has access only to grenades, and it is much harder to chuck a grenade accurately at range than to chuck a grenade accurately up close. Its also difficult since the BR can kill instantly once the shields are down.

As a result, I think that the AR should get a slight boost in power to make it better-adaptable to medium range combat.



Posted by: Chief Jaden

I say that two things need to happen. Duals by themselves should by much more accurate and function almost effectively as the AR while serving a different purpose. I have thoroughly tested it and a lone SMG is not as effective as an AR in close quarters. The only advantage that it has is that it can kill two people in one clip while the AR can only kill one. (speaking as if both enemies are not hurt by any other factor)

And the second thing deals with melee. Either melee damage should be toned down so you have to shoot someone more before you can beat them down (that is one of the reasons why melee battles are so unguaranteed) or take of the lunging and make it so you have to be absolute point blank with someone in order to melee. This would allow a greater skill gap because you would have to melee at the exact right moment first.


Posted by: TW InKoGnIto
Why can't you people understand that a game is not about using a specific weapon. It is about using a weapon that you like.

But that cannot happen unless the BR is fixed. You fanboys know that this is true, but don't want to admit it because you like your easy kills.


Posted by: ramenloverninja
Duals should be a more of meelee oriented weapon, without the meelee lunge they be overpowered by people at a distance but if we "nerf" te lunge to 1-1.5m ( that about one stride ) that would be more balanced, also I believe If there was 20-30m ( thats about mid range ) window where the most of the weapons could deal the same amount of damage in the same time frame with the exceptoins being the Rockets, the Snipers, Sword, Hammer, Shotgun, Mauler, and Plasma Pistol, seeing as those weapons damage consentanties and/or ranges are not suited for this, likewise only some weapons should have full access to this window those weapons would have to be theBattle Riffle, the Assault Riffle, Carbine, and the Halo CE Plasma Riffle ( to compete as a Covenant counterpart to the Assault Riffle ), also so fill the niche left by recreated the Plasma Riffle the Halo 2 needler, that seems to be a balanced counterpart to the SMG, and while those four weapons would have the full window to play in the other weapons not mention would fit into certain slots within the window ( still working on what should go where )
Those are some quotes i agree with.

Past arguments.
These are some arguments that came up multiple times in my old thread.

"Without BRs, MLG and SWAT will die!"
Of all people, im sure the real MLG pros (the ones that get paid for winning) would be able to adapt to a adjusted BR or a new weapon.

SWAT would work fine with a new weapon. The ones i suggested are all mid range weapons and most are capable of head shots.

"The BR balances out power weapons like snipers. With a weaker version, sniper will be way too overpowered!"
Snipers are meant to be powerful at long range. A weaker BR could fight it ad mid range -as could any of the weapons i suggested- and close range weapons beat it at close range. It is only powerful at long range, where it is meant to be.

"The BR was nerfed already. We shouldn't nerf it again."
Just because it was altered before does not mean it is perfect now. The changes i suggested will not make the BR useless, they will just make it less effective at long range.

"Halo has always been about mid range combat. Why change it?"
Halo has always been about mid range combat because the mid range weapons were too useful. Making the BR less useful will not destroy game play. People will still be free to fight at mid range if they want, and others can use close range if they want. The changes i suggested are not that big.

"The BR is a favorite. Altering it will make people mad!"
The M6D and the H2 Battle Rifle were also fan favorites. Even though they were nerfed, the gameplay still held. Some people may prefer the old games, others prefer Halo 3. I doubt most people will mind too much if the BR has 4 less shots per magazine or fires single shots instead of bursts.

"If the BR is nefred or removed, some other weapon will take its place."
True, but if the BR is nerfed only slightly as i suggested, people will probably still use it. It will just open opportunities for CQB and long range weapons to be used. If the BR is removed, any of the weapons i suggested could fill the same niche without being a massive utilitarian weapon.

"The sniper is way more overpowered than the BR! In the right hands, it can kill at any range!"
True, but the same can be said for about nearly every weapon. In the right hands, and AR can win. In the right hands, A brute shot can kill at rather far ranges, and at close and mid. In the right hands, the M6G is a dangerous weapon. Also, dont forget that snipers are limited to one or two per map, have long respawn times, slower rate of fire, and limited ammo. They are overpowered in the right hands, which is why they are power weapons.

  • 07.31.2009 9:52 AM PDT

Sorry if you are going to post more, but this is a good thread. I personally think that the carbine is fine the way it is, but other wise, I like what you did with the BR.

I think that the BR should be toned down, and every other weapon should be toned up a little bit.

Also, here is a thread on how to fix duals.

[Edited on 07.31.2009 10:03 AM PDT]

  • 07.31.2009 9:59 AM PDT

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


Posted by: mubox47
$.50 in store credit.

Posted by: TW InKoGnIto
Sorry if you are going to post more, but this is a good thread. I personally think that the carbine is fine the way it is, but other wise, I like what you did with the BR.

I think that the BR should be toned down, and every other weapon should be toned up a little bit.
Nope, that's all of it. Thanks for the input.

  • 07.31.2009 10:00 AM PDT

I hunt for the Prophet of Contentment, the San 'Shyumm that murdered my son, and stole his birthright, his Energy Sword. They call our species Heretics. They claim to all that our tongues sting, our words a vile poison that feeds on the unworthy. I have seen the true face of Heresy. The head of a gallant warrior lay on the ground. His neck scorched and blistered, scarred by his own blade. I shall retrieve the weapon, and drive it through that bastard's heart! Punishment for his sins is nigh.

In a game, like Halo, where all weapons need to find their place in the balance, a weapon like the BR, Carbine, and M6D don't fit. They have been described to me as a "Perfectly Balanced Weapon" By BR fanboys. and Im sorry but a "Perfectly Balanced Weapon" leaves NO ROOM for other weapons. Halo SHOULD consist of a collection of unbalanced weapons, that weigh each other out in their own personal circumstances. Having one weapon fit all needs does NOT fit into a game with more than one weapon in it.

  • 07.31.2009 10:03 AM PDT

Exactly. But at the same time, one weapon should be able to counter another, so the wielder of say an SMG, is not helpless against a sniper.

Posted by: Fos Tis Krisis
In a game, like Halo, where all weapons need to find their place in the balance, a weapon like the BR, Carbine, and M6D don't fit. They have been described to me as a "Perfectly Balanced Weapon" By BR fanboys. and Im sorry but a "Perfectly Balanced Weapon" leaves NO ROOM for other weapons. Halo SHOULD consist of a collection of unbalanced weapons, that weigh each other out in their own personal circumstances. Having one weapon fit all needs does NOT fit into a game with more than one weapon in it.

  • 07.31.2009 10:07 AM PDT

I hunt for the Prophet of Contentment, the San 'Shyumm that murdered my son, and stole his birthright, his Energy Sword. They call our species Heretics. They claim to all that our tongues sting, our words a vile poison that feeds on the unworthy. I have seen the true face of Heresy. The head of a gallant warrior lay on the ground. His neck scorched and blistered, scarred by his own blade. I shall retrieve the weapon, and drive it through that bastard's heart! Punishment for his sins is nigh.

So long as the SMGs are in THEIR element or course. The sniper in his element should be nearly untouchable, this is why you force the sniper out of HIS element by sneaking in close with Active Camo. Not too hard to do. (The BR being able to take out Snipers, is such a LAZY way to compensate for lack of player skill.)

  • 07.31.2009 10:10 AM PDT

although I only read the first part so far, I just have to say that I completely agree with you!!! (so far)

I'll be reading the other part for the upcoming minutes :P

  • 07.31.2009 10:18 AM PDT

brute won't show up most probably in halo reach, so I don't think they'll expand the brute sandbox. I think the BR needs to be toned down (Carbine aswell to keep it balanced) place less BR's on every map and slightly more Carbines. just make sure those two won't be the mayorly used weapon in every match!

other than that I'd like to see the Spartan laser to be toned down, it's not possible to fly or drive around anymore with that thing being wielded!

good thread

  • 07.31.2009 10:37 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Though I agree with certain standpoints, Bungie has already balanced it out enough to make it more 'fair' gameplay.

The Halo 3 Beta, as many are aware, had the Carbine way overpowered in comparison to the BR. Simply altering the BR will make players more partial to the Carbine, so that scratches a 'only BR rebalance'. It's current status still gives the BR a slight advantage, staying true to Halo 2 players.

Halo 2 alpha-build contained a slightly different BR. Everything seemed to work the same, except for when you zoom in. Scoping with the BR changed the firing selection from 3-round bursts to single shots. Headshots are easier, albeit longer than before. This made it an effective counter-sniping weapon. If the BR is to be modified, it should be modified to this.


---

A counterpoint to this rebalancing effect is that the BR is supposed to dominate mid-range battle. The shotgun we know of today has a lesser range, but still does the job.

If someone is to charge a BR player at close range, it normally tips in favor of the BR. I'd say about 60-40 to the BR player. Dual wielding however, does make it more equal in the fact that the player takes slightly more damage with two weapons. However, using different combinations of weapons may change the balance. PR-SMG combo, or Spiker-PR combo works well to the non-BR player.

The main issue I'm trying to point out is that there are too many close range weapons. With the Sniper and Spartan Laser (yes, I'm including it) dominating long-range, one weapon to cover mid-range makes it the all-purpose weapon. The close range weapons are excellent in doing damage in close range, the sniper doing the same with far range. Going so far as to modify the BR changes flow drastically as the player will constantly get frustrated in getting killed at close, mid, and long range.

Should you modify the BR, the game changes. I'd rather point push the point in saying that the other weapons should up the ante. The BR still dominates midrange, but the CQB weapons work better dual wielded and doing slightly more damage per hit.

Assault Rifle
10-bullet kill instead of 16
Change the spread to be accurate with the first few bullets before spreading too far.

Plasma Rifle
Plasma travels much faster than before
Accuracy decreased slightly to compensate for firing rate, fits the entirety of the reticule
Does more damage to shields, lacking power in health

Etcetera.

With that said, the BR should still be able to dominate and keep the signature "4 shot kill", while the other weapons still have a chance. The BR and Carbine still dominate mid range, close range is modified to be better, and long range stays the same.


[Edited on 07.31.2009 11:41 AM PDT]

  • 07.31.2009 11:38 AM PDT

Andrew Murray
Map:Aztec-Keep
Screenshot:ghosts
Video:32/0 Perfection

ya but everbody uses controller mods for there AR and end up killing people far away anyways.I would never use a controller mod because they are for cheap losers who can't use the BR correctly.

  • 07.31.2009 11:57 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

The problem is that all the other weapons are not versatile. The BR is great in many situation and it can easily adapt with the use of grenades and sometimes melee. Most other weapons have one use, melee range combat. Bungie needs to make all weapons useful again. Don't blame the BR for poor weapon balance. The M6D was way more powerful, killing in under a second but the game was balanced due to the other weapons being useful as well.

  • 07.31.2009 12:01 PM PDT

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


Posted by: mubox47
$.50 in store credit.

Posted by: Bullet _ Sponge
The problem is that all the other weapons are not versatile. The BR is great in many situation and it can easily adapt with the use of grenades and sometimes melee. Most other weapons have one use, melee range combat. Bungie needs to make all weapons useful again. Don't blame the BR for poor weapon balance. The M6D was way more powerful, killing in under a second but the game was balanced due to the other weapons being useful as well.
Buy dont forget that Halo CE and Halo 3 have major differences. There is dual wielding, more weapons, and more equipment to think about. Like i said in the OP, if SMGs get increased accuracy, they could become death machines. If plasma rifles get their stun back they would be the ultimate weapon with any UNSC weapon in a Dual Wield combo. If the AR gets too much more range it could easily kill with the help of a grenade or power drain much farther then it can now. It would take a lot of tweaking to find this balance, but i trust Bungie.

  • 07.31.2009 12:25 PM PDT

Posted by: Nerd Boi
Posted by: DAMNU
Apparently your reading comprehension is not all there, I didn't say that it necessarily irritates me. It's just annoying.

*Head explodes*

Well, since the BR was in prototype in 2524, we could use that weapon like the BR Johnson uses. A 60-round clip could pose a problem :S I don't know but maybe Bungie could make some sort of story about the UNSC experimenting with the weapon by altering damage, clip size, rate of fire, etc. Other than that, good idea. Just alter the BR, and don't alter any other weapon (well maybe the Plasma Pistol).

[Edited on 07.31.2009 12:28 PM PDT]

  • 07.31.2009 12:27 PM PDT

My honor student can beat up your honor student.

Posted by: GunM3Tal
Though I agree with certain standpoints, Bungie has already balanced it out enough to make it more 'fair' gameplay.

The Halo 3 Beta, as many are aware, had the Carbine way overpowered in comparison to the BR. Simply altering the BR will make players more partial to the Carbine, so that scratches a 'only BR rebalance'. It's current status still gives the BR a slight advantage, staying true to Halo 2 players.

Halo 2 alpha-build contained a slightly different BR. Everything seemed to work the same, except for when you zoom in. Scoping with the BR changed the firing selection from 3-round bursts to single shots. Headshots are easier, albeit longer than before. This made it an effective counter-sniping weapon. If the BR is to be modified, it should be modified to this.


---

A counterpoint to this rebalancing effect is that the BR is supposed to dominate mid-range battle. The shotgun we know of today has a lesser range, but still does the job.

If someone is to charge a BR player at close range, it normally tips in favor of the BR. I'd say about 60-40 to the BR player. Dual wielding however, does make it more equal in the fact that the player takes slightly more damage with two weapons. However, using different combinations of weapons may change the balance. PR-SMG combo, or Spiker-PR combo works well to the non-BR player.

The main issue I'm trying to point out is that there are too many close range weapons. With the Sniper and Spartan Laser (yes, I'm including it) dominating long-range, one weapon to cover mid-range makes it the all-purpose weapon. The close range weapons are excellent in doing damage in close range, the sniper doing the same with far range. Going so far as to modify the BR changes flow drastically as the player will constantly get frustrated in getting killed at close, mid, and long range.

Should you modify the BR, the game changes. I'd rather point push the point in saying that the other weapons should up the ante. The BR still dominates midrange, but the CQB weapons work better dual wielded and doing slightly more damage per hit.

Assault Rifle
10-bullet kill instead of 16
Change the spread to be accurate with the first few bullets before spreading too far.

Plasma Rifle
Plasma travels much faster than before
Accuracy decreased slightly to compensate for firing rate, fits the entirety of the reticule
Does more damage to shields, lacking power in health

Etcetera.

With that said, the BR should still be able to dominate and keep the signature "4 shot kill", while the other weapons still have a chance. The BR and Carbine still dominate mid range, close range is modified to be better, and long range stays the same.


I completely agree with this man. Same with the OP. If the 1 shot scope was introduced, I would be a happy man :)

arachnid223

ya but everbody uses controller mods for there AR and end up killing people far away anyways.I would never use a controller mod because they are for cheap losers who can't use the BR correctly.


I use the AR if I have to. I don't use controller mods. Therefore, not all AR users use controller mods. That's a fallacy!!

  • 07.31.2009 12:32 PM PDT

Doc: "i'm a pacifist"
Caboose: "your a thing that babies suck on?"
Tucker: "no dude, that's a pedephile"
Church: "tucker, i think he means a pacifier"

A good writeup, but one thing that many forget when talking about weapon balance is map design. The way a map is designed has huge impact on the weapons effectiveness in combat. For example a ranged weapon will only benefit (in typical scenario's) if there are decent firing lanes, and open spaces. Add a ton of obstructions and you have lessened the weapons effectiveness.

This has a huge impact on BR gameplay, and adds to the benefit of using a BR. The only time I wouldn't use a BR is if I was coming around a corner or waiting for someone to do the same. In nearly any other instance I will have my BR out. A good example of what i'm saying is to compare the BR's functionality on The Pit against it's functionality on Gaurdian, it's a pretty big difference. Though there are many that don't like to acknowledge something like this, it plays into the balance of a weapon.

  • 07.31.2009 12:50 PM PDT

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


Posted by: mubox47
$.50 in store credit.

Posted by: SweetTRIX
A good writeup, but one thing that many forget when talking about weapon balance is map design. The way a map is designed has huge impact on the weapons effectiveness in combat. For example a ranged weapon will only benefit (in typical scenario's) if there are decent firing lanes, and open spaces. Add a ton of obstructions and you have lessened the weapons effectiveness.

This has a huge impact on BR gameplay, and adds to the benefit of using a BR. The only time I wouldn't use a BR is if I was coming around a corner or waiting for someone to do the same. In nearly any other instance I will have my BR out. A good example of what i'm saying is to compare the BR's functionality on The Pit against it's functionality on Gaurdian, it's a pretty big difference. Though there are many that don't like to acknowledge something like this, it plays into the balance of a weapon.
Very true, but this would also effect every other weapon. If the BR was to be made less effective by reducing lines of sight, snipers rockets, and magnums would too. That would create a dramatic rise in CQB weapon use and opportunities to use them effectively.

Your example of Pit vs Guardian is good. On the pit there are many more long lines of sight and raised areas for the BR to be useful. In Guardian there are still opportunities to use a BR, but it is much different than on the pit. However, a BR is still effective on both maps. A BR can kill from one base to the other on Guardian. It can kill a person who is in top mid from the sniper tower, blue room, the tree stump, either base, and the lift near invis.

  • 07.31.2009 1:00 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

There are three problems with this thread. The first is that it is a duplicate of another thread (against the rules). The second is that because you are talking about specifically the BR this should go into the only BR thread on the Halo 3 forum. So now that I have shown you that you have clearly broken forum rules I will proceed to tell you my third reason why there is a problem with your idea.

Many people have played Halo 2 and Halo 3 and what you are proposing completely goes against many Halo players wants. Yes, you could try and claim that people who enjoy BR starts are in the minority (I doubt that is really true), but there will always be a significant demographic of the Halo community that enjoys the Battle Rifle. With that being said it is self evident that this thread is utterly selfish. It promotes the wishes of one group while neglecting the other. Why not advocate an idea that promotes everyone's wishes?

It is because of these reasons that I propose that Bungie could give us the option in custom games to make the BR more accurate, change fire rate, and reduce bullet spread. This would be great for hardcore and competitive players and would not hurt the average Joe who just wants to drive a warthog. If this was done Bungie could severely weaken, put less weight on, or remove the BR altogether from matchmaking and it would not matter to commpetitive players because they can create their own settings. MLG players were perfectly content to play custom games for the first few months of Halo 3 because they disliked Bungie's playlists.

I don't understand why you are being so selfish and not thinking of the Big picture. There are people who like the BR. No matter how much you think that it hurts your idea of what gameplay should be like this will always be true. Bungie knows that there are people that enjoy the BR and I doubt they would ever remove it. They will likely just implement more settings so that everyone is happy. More options broadens a games audience and creates more sales. Its common sense. Also if the BR is removed what will the anti sniper weapon be? Next I suppose you will want the sniper to be removed on the grounds that nothing can compete with it at long range. So it encourages camping etc.

I am not promoting only more options for competitive type settings I am advocating more settings for every style of play. This would make the game more accessible for any interest or idea of what gameplay should be (ex) griftball, zombies, rocket race, MLG, swatt. All of those gametypes are a spawn of Bungie giving more options to players thus promoting a wider fan base and equality. Your ideas are in direct contradiction of this.

  • 07.31.2009 1:08 PM PDT

solotion do nothing the br is fine :P

  • 07.31.2009 1:11 PM PDT

Doc: "i'm a pacifist"
Caboose: "your a thing that babies suck on?"
Tucker: "no dude, that's a pedephile"
Church: "tucker, i think he means a pacifier"

Posted by: The EAKLE
Posted by: SweetTRIX
A good writeup, but one thing that many forget when talking about weapon balance is map design. The way a map is designed has huge impact on the weapons effectiveness in combat. For example a ranged weapon will only benefit (in typical scenario's) if there are decent firing lanes, and open spaces. Add a ton of obstructions and you have lessened the weapons effectiveness.

This has a huge impact on BR gameplay, and adds to the benefit of using a BR. The only time I wouldn't use a BR is if I was coming around a corner or waiting for someone to do the same. In nearly any other instance I will have my BR out. A good example of what i'm saying is to compare the BR's functionality on The Pit against it's functionality on Gaurdian, it's a pretty big difference. Though there are many that don't like to acknowledge something like this, it plays into the balance of a weapon.
Very true, but this would also effect every other weapon. If the BR was to be made less effective by reducing lines of sight, snipers rockets, and magnums would too. That would create a dramatic rise in CQB weapon use and opportunities to use them effectively.

Your example of Pit vs Guardian is good. On the pit there are many more long lines of sight and raised areas for the BR to be useful. In Guardian there are still opportunities to use a BR, but it is much different than on the pit. However, a BR is still effective on both maps. A BR can kill from one base to the other on Guardian. It can kill a person who is in top mid from the sniper tower, blue room, the tree stump, either base, and the lift near invis.


I agree, which is why I also agree that the BR is too effective. I just wanted to point out that a weapons effect is based not only on it's initial stats, but also the environment that it is used in. If they were to get a little more creative with the map design and not keep things so "open" they would remove the BR's advantage, and therefore it's draw.

Personally I want Bungie to start from a fresh canvas, and build the MP from the ground up and monitor closely how things will effect eachother. I'm talking weapons, maps, equipment, vehicles, the whole nine. They need to really take some time and see how things play off of each other, and after all this time they should be farely capable to assume how people will use the impliments once it's released into the market.

If Reach ends up being another BR dominated experiance then my MP run will be even more short lived then my Halo3 MP run. I hate being bored, and playing Halo3: BR is not my idea of diversified gameplay, even though there are several that will swear it's the most competitive way to play.

  • 07.31.2009 1:12 PM PDT

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


Posted by: mubox47
$.50 in store credit.

Posted by: I UnSe3N I
There are three problems with this thread. The first is that it is a duplicate of another thread (against the rules). The second is that because you are talking about specifically the BR this should go into the only BR thread on the Halo 3 forum. So now that I have shown you that you have clearly broken forum rules I will proceed to tell you my third reason why there is a problem with your idea.
I asked a Ninja to lock the old one so i could post the new one. If a Ninja allows it, i don thin kit's against the rules. Also, it is not a duplicate, it is entirely different although the purpose is the same.

This is about Halo: Reach, not Halo 3. Why post it in the Halo 3 forum? Again, if a ninja allowed this i doubt it is breaking rules.

Making a suggestion is selfish? Wouldnt that make your suggestion selfish too, because you are asking for more? No, a suggestion is not selfish. If i said "The BR is stupid and bad, remove it" I would be selfish. Im just suggesting what i think will make the game better.

I don't understand why you are being so selfish and not thinking of the Big picture. There are people who like the BR. No matter how much you think that it hurts your idea of what gameplay should be like this will always be true. Bungie knows that there are people that enjoy the BR and I doubt they would ever remove it. They will likely just implement more settings so that everyone is happy. More options broadens a games audience and creates more sales. Its common sense. Also if the BR is removed what will the anti sniper weapon be? Next I suppose you will want the sniper to be removed on the grounds that nothing can compete with it at long range. So it encourages camping etc.
That almost makes me think you didnt read the OP. The point is not removing the BR, it is re-balancing it. That may involve replacing it with another weapon. However, all the weapon sets i suggested have a mid range weapon, which would fill this gap you are talking about.
I am not promoting only more options for competitive type settings I am advocating more settings for every style of play. This would make the game more accessible for any interest or idea of what gameplay should be (ex) griftball, zombies, rocket race, MLG, swatt. All of those gametypes are a spawn of Bungie giving more options to players thus promoting a wider fan base and equality. Your ideas are in direct contradiction of this. You make it sound like i am trying to ruin Halo. Everyone can have his own ideas on what should happen. Im not trying to put down yours, so why try to put down mine?

  • 07.31.2009 1:24 PM PDT

Voilà!In view,a humble vaudevillian veteran,cast vicariously as both victim and villain by the vicissitudes of Fate.This visage, no mere veneer of vanity,is a vestige of the vox populi,now vacant, vanished.However,this valorous visitation of a by-gone vexation,stands vivified and has vowed to vanquish these venal and virulent vermin van-guarding vice and vouchsafing the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition.

Posted by: GunM3Tal
Though I agree with certain standpoints, Bungie has already balanced it out enough to make it more 'fair' gameplay.

The Halo 3 Beta, as many are aware, had the Carbine way overpowered in comparison to the BR. Simply altering the BR will make players more partial to the Carbine, so that scratches a 'only BR rebalance'. It's current status still gives the BR a slight advantage, staying true to Halo 2 players.

Halo 2 alpha-build contained a slightly different BR. Everything seemed to work the same, except for when you zoom in. Scoping with the BR changed the firing selection from 3-round bursts to single shots. Headshots are easier, albeit longer than before. This made it an effective counter-sniping weapon. If the BR is to be modified, it should be modified to this.



I would like to see a Battle Riffle that fires single shots all the time not just when I'm scoped. To simply put it, I believe that the main reason for the BR effectiveness is the spread, in many situations I find the spread giving me headshots on opponents when my accuracy is a little off to the side, also at a range outside of the BR's I find the spread increasing the chances of me hitting my target while I may not be using my scope. and if he only has a AR his only options are to fight and die or take cover behind a rock while I reload and get into BR range and then kill him. If the BR was A single shot weapon like the Magnum in Halo CE it would require more skill and accuracy on my part to get the closer range kills, and would force me to scope for the long range kills, which would leave me vulnerable to anyone who isn't within my line of sight

also Eakle this post was very well thought out, I liked all the parts with me in them. : )

Posted by: jonesy90000
solotion do nothing the br is fine :P


The solution is spell check, and take a English grammar class.

thank you for your time.

[Edited on 07.31.2009 2:05 PM PDT]

  • 07.31.2009 1:56 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: The EAKLE
Posted by: I UnSe3N I
There are three problems with this thread. The first is that it is a duplicate of another thread (against the rules). The second is that because you are talking about specifically the BR this should go into the only BR thread on the Halo 3 forum. So now that I have shown you that you have clearly broken forum rules I will proceed to tell you my third reason why there is a problem with your idea.
I asked a Ninja to lock the old one so i could post the new one. If a Ninja allows it, i don thin kit's against the rules. Also, it is not a duplicate, it is entirely different although the purpose is the same.

This is about Halo: Reach, not Halo 3. Why post it in the Halo 3 forum? Again, if a ninja allowed this i doubt it is breaking rules.

Making a suggestion is selfish? Wouldnt that make your suggestion selfish too, because you are asking for more? No, a suggestion is not selfish. If i said "The BR is stupid and bad, remove it" I would be selfish. Im just suggesting what i think will make the game better.

My suggestions are not selfish because I am promoting more for everyone not an individual point of view. Yes, you are pretty much saying that the BR is stupid and bad. The only difference is that you attempt to use arguments to support this notion instead of saying it outright. What you think will make the game better is not what everyone thinks will make the game better thats why your idea is flawed.

I don't understand why you are being so selfish and not thinking of the Big picture. There are people who like the BR. No matter how much you think that it hurts your idea of what gameplay should be like this will always be true. Bungie knows that there are people that enjoy the BR and I doubt they would ever remove it. They will likely just implement more settings so that everyone is happy. More options broadens a games audience and creates more sales. Its common sense. Also if the BR is removed what will the anti sniper weapon be? Next I suppose you will want the sniper to be removed on the grounds that nothing can compete with it at long range. So it encourages camping etc.
That almost makes me think you didnt read the OP. The point is not removing the BR, it is re-balancing it. That may involve replacing it with another weapon. However, all the weapon sets i suggested have a mid range weapon, which would fill this gap you are talking about.

The statement in Bold is in direct contradiction. If you replace the BR with another weapon is it not removed?
I am not promoting only more options for competitive type settings I am advocating more settings for every style of play. This would make the game more accessible for any interest or idea of what gameplay should be (ex) griftball, zombies, rocket race, MLG, swatt. All of those gametypes are a spawn of Bungie giving more options to players thus promoting a wider fan base and equality. Your ideas are in direct contradiction of this. You make it sound like i am trying to ruin Halo. Everyone can have his own ideas on what should happen. Im not trying to put down yours, so why try to put down mine?


I am just stating that what you advocate would impose your idea of what gameplay should be like on everyone. Not ever person agrees on how Halo should be played so therein lies the problem with imposing one type of gameplay on everyone. That is why simply giving players the freedom to play as they see fit is a better solution to this dilemma.

  • 07.31.2009 2:02 PM PDT

i just relised what you really want isnt for the br to dissaper anymore but to make so weak bungie will have to change it to stop being a starting wepon and what will you then start.

then you will start the omgz thank you bungies nowzz make the stating wepon a roket lucher pleazzzz

  • 07.31.2009 2:06 PM PDT