Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Energy Sword: I found a way to make the sword dual weildable
  • Subject: Energy Sword: I found a way to make the sword dual weildable
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • of 4
Subject: Energy Sword: I found a way to make the sword dual weildable

Posted by: Councilor_117H2
In the irst Halo games it wasn't necessary to dual weild the sword because is one hit kill, so it was just too strong.


But what if you would have to fight multiple Elites with swords? I saw that if firefight you can fight many Chieftains like 5 or more...
So if you fight 5 Ulta Elites maybe one sword won't be enough, 2 swords would be useful


this sounds a little crazy I know... xD but It could work...
do you guys think this would work?

example: 5 Ulta Elites come to attack you... you have one sword. You attack one Elite the other 4 attack you = Elites win, dual weild swords would be useful to attack more than one enemy.
Obviously the enemies in Halo Reach will be harder to kill than the previous Halo games, thats why new upgrades like this one will be needed

(NOT FOR CAMPAIGN, FOR FIREFIGHT MODE)

you do realize your mixing the games together right? they are separate.

  • 09.07.2009 5:12 PM PDT

Posted by: z0rgy
I think it'd be fun. or make jacking vehicles QTE... dunno.


Jacking vehicles are technically QTE right now. At least, they would be in a cutscene. However, I would prefer that the game stay the way it is. QTEs aren't much fun IMO, and dual wield swords makes absolutely no sense from a gameplay perspective. It might be cool if you were playing Ninja Gaiden or some RPG, where the attack moves are scripted, but it doesn't work for a game that involves actually aiming and dynamic weapon changes.

  • 09.07.2009 5:15 PM PDT

Posted by: IvI Reaver
Posted by: Councilor_117H2
In the irst Halo games it wasn't necessary to dual weild the sword because is one hit kill, so it was just too strong.


But what if you would have to fight multiple Elites with swords? I saw that if firefight you can fight many Chieftains like 5 or more...
So if you fight 5 Ulta Elites maybe one sword won't be enough, 2 swords would be useful


this sounds a little crazy I know... xD but It could work...
do you guys think this would work?

example: 5 Ulta Elites come to attack you... you have one sword. You attack one Elite the other 4 attack you = Elites win, dual weild swords would be useful to attack more than one enemy.
Obviously the enemies in Halo Reach will be harder to kill than the previous Halo games, thats why new upgrades like this one will be needed

(NOT FOR CAMPAIGN, FOR FIREFIGHT MODE)

you do realize your mixing the games together right? they are separate.



WHAT? you say this because of firefight? Firefight in just a multiplayer mode Halo Reach will have it to

  • 09.07.2009 5:34 PM PDT

Your is not the same as You're

Plunk.

A total FU exception has occurred at your location. All system functionality will be terminated. Press any key to power cycle the system. If system does not restart; scream at top of lungs and pound on keypad. If you need to talk to a programmer press any other key Press any key to continue_

Preliminary operational tests were inconclusive (the damn thing blew up)

This is the Reach forum, while it's likely, Firefight isn't confirmed in Reach (nothing is confirmed in reach yet except that it's before Halo 1)

  • 09.07.2009 5:57 PM PDT

My safe-word is apples

I think you should not just be able to duel wield swords, but quadruple wield them.

Master Chief undergoes surgery to have two extra arms... General Grievous Chief lol.

I still think that the dual wield idea could work. If it was done like it is for every other dual wieldable weapon in the Halo games, then you would use the two triggers to control each sword independently. That might allow you to attack two targets at once IF they were very close to each other. ie: Two elites/ w/e are standing side by side in front of you. If you go after one, the other attacks, you run the risk of dying. However, if you had two swords you could slash both at the same time, perhaps swing them outward and catch them both in the side, or wherever. Thats where I see attacking two enemies with dual swords making the most sense, or for tougher more heavily armored enemies like say a brute chief, in which case you you might be able to block the hammer with one sword (ie sword sparring where you both take equal damage, but don't normally die) and whack him with the other.

[Edited on 09.07.2009 8:36 PM PDT]

  • 09.07.2009 8:29 PM PDT

Posted by: MasterDarkKenobi
I think you should not just be able to duel wield swords, but quadruple wield them.

Master Chief undergoes surgery to have two extra arms... General Grievous Chief lol.

I still think that the dual wield idea could work. If it was done like it is for every other dual wieldable weapon in the Halo games, then you would use the two triggers to control each sword independently. That might allow you to attack two targets at once IF they were very close to each other. ie: Two elites/ w/e are standing side by side in front of you. If you go after one, the other attacks, you run the risk of dying. However, if you had two swords you could slash both at the same time, perhaps swing them outward and catch them both in the side, or wherever. Thats where I see attacking two enemies with dual swords making the most sense, or for tougher more heavily armored enemies like say a brute chief, in which case you you might be able to block the hammer with one sword (ie sword sparring where you both take equal damage, but don't normally die) and whack him with the other.





you are the first person that uderstand what I'm trying to say, THANK YOU!
we think the same!!! thats what I mean, 2 swords would be very useful against many enemies or a powerful enemy.

[Edited on 09.07.2009 11:55 PM PDT]

  • 09.07.2009 11:53 PM PDT

there are no energy swords in Halo 3 ODST

  • 09.08.2009 12:29 AM PDT

Posted by: Shelomanov
there are no energy swords in Halo 3 ODST




so?? no one sayd "swords in ODST!! LOL" ..............

you should read all the posts if you want to uderstand the last ones, or just somment about the dual weil

  • 09.08.2009 12:32 AM PDT

throwning snowballs at cars is like doing a bell ditch. The end result is basically the same: sprinting away from the large man exiting his car who yells profanities, hiding behind a house, and watching as his car patrols the street, waiting to murder you.

Asking the flood for dating advice is like you going up to a bunch of starving Africans and debating the pros and cons of the bacon roll vs the double cheeseburger.

Some one who stands for nothing shall fall for everything.

ok first dual wilding swords i would love it but not in the way u are talking c'mon and first people want halo to be call duty then gears and now dragona ball z with all ur quick time events wtf and now let this thread be locked by a ninja or be left to die and may shiska chop off your head if u are to talk about a quick time event in halo

[Edited on 09.08.2009 12:55 AM PDT]

  • 09.08.2009 12:51 AM PDT

Just enjoy the damn game!
Who cares about BR vs AR

Posted by: Councilor_117H2
Posted by: NME Overlord
They aren't because there is a slight time gap between Halo 2 and ODST. Brutes have their shiney Halo 3 armour, but Grunts and Jackals are as hard to kill as in Halo 2. Remember you are an ODST as well, so you are not as strong as a Spartan.



is not a slight time gap, Halo 3 ODST takes place during ONE day. in the timeline when ODST finishes the Master Chief was searching for regret in Delta Halo.

the death brutes in High Charity from the level Cortana in Halo 3 don't look like the ones in Halo 2, see? I told you Retroactive continuity.
It doesn't matter that you are a ODST the enemies are harder to kill but MORE harder because they are the same as the ones form Halo 3 so...
Retroactive continuity!!!


I was saying there is a time gap between the Covenant Cruiser jumping out of Mombassa and the start of ODST. How do you know that "in the timeline when ODST finishes the Master Chief was searching for regret in Delta Halo."?

There is a massive time gap between Halo 2 and Halo 3 as well. Plenty of time for a complete reimagining of Brute armour!

As I have said before, Bungie would not make the individual characters harder to kill unless they had new armour. The Elites in Halo CE and Halo 2 are equally hard to kill, its just you have a stronger melee, but the weapons have the same strength and the opponents are the same toughness, so they are exactly the same. Bungie doesn't make the enemies harder, it makes the battles harder!!

[Edited on 09.08.2009 3:48 AM PDT]

  • 09.08.2009 3:45 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Councilor_117H2
example: 5 Ulta Elites come to attack you... you have one sword. You attack one Elite the other 4 attack you = Elites win, dual weild swords would be useful to attack more than one enemy.
Obviously the enemies in Halo Reach will be harder to kill than the previous Halo games, thats why new upgrades like this one will be needed

2=/=5 therefore in a 5 ultras versus you with swords situation you would still die by your logic. Good job contradicting yourself. Also why will the enemies be harder in Reach? Looks like you pulled that info out of your ass. Why don't you take dual wield swords and cut your wrists?

  • 09.08.2009 3:53 AM PDT

Posted by: NME Overlord
Posted by: Councilor_117H2
Posted by: NME Overlord
They aren't because there is a slight time gap between Halo 2 and ODST. Brutes have their shiney Halo 3 armour, but Grunts and Jackals are as hard to kill as in Halo 2. Remember you are an ODST as well, so you are not as strong as a Spartan.



is not a slight time gap, Halo 3 ODST takes place during ONE day. in the timeline when ODST finishes the Master Chief was searching for regret in Delta Halo.

the death brutes in High Charity from the level Cortana in Halo 3 don't look like the ones in Halo 2, see? I told you Retroactive continuity.
It doesn't matter that you are a ODST the enemies are harder to kill but MORE harder because they are the same as the ones form Halo 3 so...
Retroactive continuity!!!


I was saying there is a time gap between the Covenant Cruiser jumping out of Mombassa and the start of ODST. How do you know that "in the timeline when ODST finishes the Master Chief was searching for regret in Delta Halo."?

There is a massive time gap between Halo 2 and Halo 3 as well. Plenty of time for a complete reimagining of Brute armour!

As I have said before, Bungie would not make the individual characters harder to kill unless they had new armour. The Elites in Halo CE and Halo 2 are equally hard to kill, its just you have a stronger melee, but the weapons have the same strength and the opponents are the same toughness, so they are exactly the same. Bungie doesn't make the enemies harder, it makes the battles harder!!




OMG!!!!!! you don't remember Halo 2 at all don't you??

"Plenty of time for a complete reimagining of Brute armour! " WTF is that?!?!?!? if the brutes would have armour at that moment like you sayd then the brutes at the end of Halo 2 MUST have armour. they don't!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Retroactive continuity, If the brutes in High Charity in the level Cortana Have armour, then Bungie now "deleted" the old brutes, and consider that this are the "true" brutes, High Charity was destroyed at the end of Halo 2, the death brutes can't have armour, bugie won't loose time making the old brutes of Halo 2 just for that level.

that why the enemies of Halo Reach WILL be upgraded with better AI with some luck better weapons... (that is likely, you can see a new weapon in the banner).

[Edited on 09.08.2009 12:59 PM PDT]

  • 09.08.2009 12:52 PM PDT

Posted by: Lunatic__Brandon
Posted by: Councilor_117H2
example: 5 Ulta Elites come to attack you... you have one sword. You attack one Elite the other 4 attack you = Elites win, dual weild swords would be useful to attack more than one enemy.
Obviously the enemies in Halo Reach will be harder to kill than the previous Halo games, thats why new upgrades like this one will be needed

2=/=5 therefore in a 5 ultras versus you with swords situation you would still die by your logic. Good job contradicting yourself. Also why will the enemies be harder in Reach? Looks like you pulled that info out of your ass. Why don't you take dual wield swords and cut your wrists?



you never played Halo 2 nor Halo CE, if you fight with many elites with swords and you have a sword you can live, If you are a good player, but If that happens to you you will die. You don't think.

  • 09.08.2009 12:57 PM PDT

I could say so much on how this is wrong but I'm just going to leave it at No

  • 09.08.2009 1:02 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Dual swords work work better if there were two separated reticles on opposite sides of the screen. When I say it would work better, I've dual wielded swords in Halo 2. Link to video of it

  • 09.08.2009 1:30 PM PDT

Posted by: Master Megatron
Councilor, you keep saying "Oh, you can just attack multiple enemies with two swords! SWORD CHUCKS YO!" It doesn't work like that. Even dual wielding will only let you attack one target at a time.

Let's take your example in gameplay terms. Five Ultra Sangheili attack you at once, you have two swords. Were this God of War, you could take them. You could kick them clean into next year in tiny pieces. As an FPS, there is no way to attack two enemies at once with the current layout. You would kill that one Ultra, yes, but the remaining four would still carve you like holiday ham.

Now, let's work out a control scheme for two reticules at once. one control stick would have to control one sword. You would be trying to maneuver one reticule over one charging Ultra AND put another over another Ultra. This would take time you don't have. By the time you get it, you're shish kebab because of the other three. And since the sword has the lunge, unless those two Ultras are right next to each other, you won't be able to lunge in two directions. Physics says if you tried, you'd fail or tear yourself in two.

So there goes the lunge. That leaves default melee. Pulling the triggers would perform this in dual wield mode, and against Ultras, tough as they are, would be worthless. You'd knock them back or block, but there's your other three behind you turning you into bouillon cubes to stick in a buddy's showerhead (cookie if you get the reference).

So no matter what, those five Sangheili get credit for killing a Demon. It's just an unwinnable fight.

And for MatchMaking, it's more than useless outside of a Swords match, which you never find outside of social playlists and even then, it's rare. And how often do you see more than one sword in a standard map? Never?

Firefight? Let's assume only two Ultras are here. With backup dropping in all over the place, trying to slice two targets at once would be suicide. Your buddies would have to cover you every time you want to look cool. And even if it is literally just the two Ultras, your buddies could finish them off before you got locked on properly, and you'd owe them for the help.

So yeah, your dual-wield sword idea is so worthless and stupid it's not funny. This is a bad idea, this is a bad thread, and you should feel bad, OP.



oh, I feel bad for you... you say my own idea would make me feel bad??? thats crazy.

If I say that 4 or 5 chieftains fight a ODST you would say that it wouldn't work, and that ODST can't weild hammer because they are retarded...

NO the ODST have 2 hands.. so they can weil the Hammer (that myth is over the humans can weil a hammer) and in firefight you WILL fight many chieftains and you CAN win...

the Ulta elites are by far les dangerous than a Chieftain, and you with 2 swords would be able to win.

If you can fight many Chieftains you can fight many Ultas....

[Edited on 09.08.2009 1:37 PM PDT]

  • 09.08.2009 1:31 PM PDT

Posted by: SigglesMaster
Dual swords work work better if there were two separated reticles on opposite sides of the screen. When I say it would work better, I've dual wielded swords in Halo 2. Link to video of it



I forgot to say thatm it would work with separate reticles...
thanks for the vid

  • 09.08.2009 1:34 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Councilor_117H2
Posted by: SigglesMaster
Dual swords work work better if there were two separated reticles on opposite sides of the screen. When I say it would work better, I've dual wielded swords in Halo 2. Link to video of it



I forgot to say thatm it would work with separate reticles...
thanks for the vid


Thats not technically duel wielding, if it were, then the left sword would be a mirror image of the right sword.

Anyway, im sticking to my idea, that duel wielding swords would only let you kill one very tough enemy in one hit, as opposed to trying to fight multiple enemies.

  • 09.08.2009 1:46 PM PDT

Posted by: Master Megatron
Posted by: Councilor_117H2

oh, I feel bad for you... you say my own idea would make me feel bad??? thats crazy.

If I say that 4 or 5 chieftains fight a ODST you would say that it wouldn't work, and that ODST can't weild hammer because they are retarded...

NO the ODST have 2 hands.. so they can weil the Hammer (that myth is over the humans can weil a hammer) and in firefight you WILL fight many chieftains and you CAN win...

the Ulta elites are by far les dangerous than a Chieftain, and you with 2 swords would be able to win.

If you can fight many Chieftains you can fight many Ultas....


Do you... actually LISTEN to yourself talk, or do you find you fade in and out?

Could one human take on five Ultras? Yes, given he knows what he's doing. Guerrilla tactics come to mind. Could one ODST take on five Chieftains? Yes, given he knows what he's doing. Going after five anything with two swords would be suicide, especially in Firefight. Swords in those two situations would be stupid rather than helpful. After all, the best way to counter a melee weapon is not to be in melee range, which is what guns are for.

Oh, and if a human is strong enough, they probably could wield a Grav Hammer. Effectively? Not so much (Not even Spartans are stronger than Jiralhanae).




ok, lets say you have a battle rifle, you shoot th face of an ultra, if you are a god playing halo you may kill 1 fas enough but the otherones will chace you with the sword and you will die, the sword is really powerful, the other weapons are not as effective as the sword, even if a chieftain attack you with a fuel rod gun you can survive. Play halo 2 again on heroic or legendary then we can talk.
If you can kill many Chieftain as an ODST... than as a Spartan you will be able to kill many Ultras.. is not that hard... but 2 swords are better than one.. then WHY NOT 2 SWORDS!! it only can help you.

[Edited on 09.08.2009 2:17 PM PDT]

  • 09.08.2009 2:11 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

The thing about Ultra's, is that they are not deadly all around, they must either, be duel wielding, (which is incredibly rare in halo 2) or already wielding a sword to be very deadly.

If you go up to a Ultra on any difficulty , while it single wields a projectile weapon, it will drop it, and roar/scream for three seconds, before drawing a sword, giving you plenty of time to break its spine with a good melee attack.

However, if an Ultra elite is duel wielding, and you manage to somehow get close to it, it will drop its weapons, and simultaneosly draw and slash the sword at you, most likely killing you, unless your careful enough to evade the attack.

Anyway, the best way to kill an Ultra elite on Legendary, is to kill it with a sniper rifle, giving that all sniper rifle rounds can stun it, or simply go with the noob combo, at the cost of being exposed to long distance snipers. (Ultra elites can take a sticky grenade, and live, on legendary difficulty, how would duel wielding two swords give you the capability to take on multiple Ultras at once?)

  • 09.08.2009 2:21 PM PDT

gamerscore.

  • 09.08.2009 2:53 PM PDT

Three-time legendary member on a single account

Bnet: Where hilarious happens.

  • 09.08.2009 3:09 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • of 4