Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Poll [44 votes]: Should we be able to use 3 weapons, or be unarmed?
  • Poll [44 votes]: Should we be able to use 3 weapons, or be unarmed?
Subject: Should we be able to use 3 weapons, or be unarmed?

1.Arkham Asylum, 2.Mass Effect, 3.Halo CE, 4.Mass Effect 2, 5.Halo 2, 6.Splinter Cell Double Agent, 7.Gears of War 2, 8.Medievil, 9.Oblivion, 10.Crash Team Racing

Poll: Should we be able to use 3 weapons, or be unarmed?  [closed]
Yes:  41%
(18 Votes)
Maybe:  23%
(10 Votes)
No:  36%
(16 Votes)
Total Votes: 44

Halo has always had 2 weapons, but what if we could have more, or less? Halo3 gave us support weapons (Missle Pod, Flamethrower) that work a little like it, but things could be expanded. Halo3 also made our weapons on back or hip visible.

1. Who hasn't wanted to fight unarmed? Use your bare fists to beat enemies. Without weapons you could also run a bit faster, jump a bit higher, maybe even grab ledges and pick up objects. Melee would also be more efficient without weapons, especially if the weapons are light and small.

2. Why can we only pick up Turrets and Missle Pods that slow us down as a 3rd weapon? What if you could have any 3 weapons, but it would slow you down etc? You couldn't holster the 3rd weapon because you have no room, you would have to drop it once you don't want to use it anymore.

3. Naturally there would be choices bethween 1. and 2. You could have 1 weapon or 2 weapons. You could freely drop or holster them.

4. For balance and outlooks, not all weapons could be carried like this. You can't carry 2 Rocket Launchers on your back, but you can carry 2 SMGs on your hip (assuming we have dual wielding) and an AR on your back. Perhaps you could have 2 smaller weapons (AR, BR etc.) on your back, but the swap-time would be longer.

5. Controls:
- Pick up weapons with RB and LB
- Drop a weapon with D-Pad down / Pick 3rd weapon if it's near you
- Swap weapons with Y
- Hold Y to put both weapons away

6. Also make grenades visible on the hip or somewhere. And bullets to come out of the weapon instead of above it. And both holstered weapons visible when on vehicles.

7. Sprinting Unarmed you can run really fast for a short time, which makes you tired and:
- Have less accuracy
- Weaker melee
- Slower running and reloading, shorter jumps
- ODST style lack of stamina

Conclusion: Making us able to choose between 0-3 weapons would make the game fresher again. It would allow new story events (start a level with no weapons) and more customization - whether you want to be a heavy gunman or an agile ninja spartan. Things would also become better looking and more believable.







Junks
There could be the sidearms you put on your thigh:
- SMG
- Magnum
- Plasma Rifle
- Plasma Pistol
- Needler
- Mauler
- Spiker
- Energy Sword
If there is duel wielding, you could have 2 of most of these. 1 would hinder your speed and jumping a bit, 2 would hinder a bit more. Using 2 instead of 1 also means longer reloading times, slightly less accuracy, weaker melee, unable to throw grenades etc. suitable negatives.

They could also reduce the amount of maximum grenades you can carry, because most likely your grenades would be on your hip like the secondary weapons.
Something like:
0 thigh weapons = 8 maximum grenades
1 thigh weapon = 4 maximum grenades
2 thigh weapons = 0 grenades


Then there would be the primary weapon, which is placed on your back:
- AR
- BR
- Sniper
- Rockets
- Carbines
...
Now you have up to 2 weapons on your thighs, and 1 weapon on your back. With your free hands you could pick up another weapon, it could be any kind, but to take a weapon from your back or thigh, you have to drop it.

All in all there are more agility/stealth oriented spartans and more strength/weapon oriented spartans. All spartans (and elites) are great in everything, but there are some small differences.


[Edited on 10.23.2009 7:26 AM PDT]

  • 10.13.2009 10:58 AM PDT

The turrets slow you down because it is huge and cumbersome. Find a really big box, the kind that you could crouch inside of, and try to run a mile with it. Very awkward to hold right? Kinda slows you down? Thats the main reason why the support weapons slow you down, not because they are heavier.

Visable grenades are a interesting idea so long as they don't explode when shot.

But as for the three weapons... well, I could carry an AR BR and Sniper with that, right? So right off the bat I can fight in three of the four combat senarios and I don't really need to ever change weapons unless I need to kill a vehicle or I am dealing with a camper.

By carrying only two weapons, you're still versatile, but you aren't invincible.

As for unarmed fighting... thats not really spartan style, and besides, you get more force when you melee with a gun because it acts like a third class lever.

Imagine that you are swinging a baseball bat at a vase. What will do more damage? Hitting the vase with the tip of the bat or hitting the vase with your hands that are holding on to the grip of the bat?

Also, my legs are independent of my arms, so just because I'm not holding a gun I shouldn't be able to jump higher or run faster. Except unless I'm carrying a cumbersome object like a machine gun turret which really wasn't designed to be ripped off and carried.

[Edited on 10.13.2009 11:08 AM PDT]

  • 10.13.2009 11:07 AM PDT

http://www.halo-forum.com

I have often thought about this. A gun as small as a pistol shouldnt be that much of an inconvenience to a 7 foot tall Spartan. I think that pistols should be considered a side arm and you could still carry two main weapons. Then you could use the d-pad for selecting weapons.

  • 10.13.2009 11:09 AM PDT

1.Arkham Asylum, 2.Mass Effect, 3.Halo CE, 4.Mass Effect 2, 5.Halo 2, 6.Splinter Cell Double Agent, 7.Gears of War 2, 8.Medievil, 9.Oblivion, 10.Crash Team Racing

Posted by: Hylebos
But as for the three weapons... well, I could carry an AR BR and Sniper with that, right? So right off the bat I can fight in three of the four combat senarios and I don't really need to ever change weapons unless I need to kill a vehicle or I am dealing with a camper.


Well all those go to the back so I'm not sure you could do that. I was thinking more like 1 back weapon + 1 hip weapon. Atleast with those there could be a longer switch-time. Taking a weapon from your back, with another one right next to it will take a bit longer.

Lets say you have the Sniper as 3rd weapon, that means you have to drop it to use the AR or BR. You can't switch weapon when your hands are full. It makes you vulnerable and usually you can't win fights by standing still.

For melee I wasn't talking just about force. Unnarmed you can do different kinds of "combos and throws", even grab ledges. Hitting with a Plasma Rifle won't be as efficient. Rocket Launcher might be different, but swinging with it is slow.

Why is Flamethrower so cumbersome? Because it was designed to be so? Any weapon could be like that. Especially when you pile 3 of them on you. All the current weapons have some speed pros or cons although a Spartan should have none of those.

The difference bethween speeds and strenghts shouldn't be much. Like +-10%. When you change those settings for Halo3 it's pretty unnoticeable.

Give Usain Bolt an assault rifle and tell him to break the world record... Sometimes that 1MPH makes the difference when catching a flag carrier.

A game is a mix of innovation, balance and realism. 0-3 weapons would have all 3.

  • 10.13.2009 11:34 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

the only idea i picked up from this is the ability to holster duel wielded weapons. Many times in halo 2 campaign and halo 3 MM i've wanted to carry my duel plasma rifles and at the same time snipe. This way i can do serious damage up close and afar. But what i'd really like to see is weapons being able to stay on the ground longer

  • 10.13.2009 6:08 PM PDT

-I was here

this is a rip off. i'm not going to say of what but it rhymes with "derfect park"

  • 10.13.2009 6:14 PM PDT

1.Arkham Asylum, 2.Mass Effect, 3.Halo CE, 4.Mass Effect 2, 5.Halo 2, 6.Splinter Cell Double Agent, 7.Gears of War 2, 8.Medievil, 9.Oblivion, 10.Crash Team Racing

Posted by: goatman327
this is a rip off. i'm not going to say of what but it rhymes with "derfect park"


A good rip off. Halo is already a rip off because it's a shooter game. Halo would naturally do it better. You can't even carry a 3rd extra weapon in Perfect Dark, and the unarmed mode is useless.

It would be new, allow more freedom and customization and it could be balanced. You wouldn't always have to carry exactly 2 weapons.

A picture tells a thousand words. How could you be invincible when you can't store 3 weapons? The 3rd weapon would be temporary like the support weapons are.

  • 10.14.2009 5:42 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

unarmed would be greet for machinima and would make infected matchs more thrilling "Spawn with no weapon everyone runs for the only gun a pistol" Lol would be fun

  • 10.14.2009 8:08 AM PDT

This body holding me reminds me of my own mortality.
Embrace this moment. Remember. We are eternal.
All this pain is an illusion.

I wouldn't mind being unarmed, it would be awesome if they put in a combat knife to go with that option. Kinda pointless when compared to say the energy sword, but I like the novelty of the idea

  • 10.14.2009 8:18 AM PDT

unarmed fighting would be awesome, i think there should be grapple fights aswell, if you and your enemy strike at the same time while unarmed, a grapple sequence would initiate.

by this i mean, you have to press buttons at the right time to win, simular to a Resident Evil cutscene.

EDIT: i also think you should be able to disarm enemies if you are close enough.

[Edited on 10.14.2009 8:26 AM PDT]

  • 10.14.2009 8:21 AM PDT

Rock + Metal = Life
Simple math

I like the ideas of having visiable granades, droping or pick up weapons as you wish, and having an unarmed mode. If you would be in the unarmed mode and just stand still I think that you should either stand with your arms down or with your arms in a combat posision (like you do in e.g. boxing and karate). I also think that when you pick up an item you should se when you do it like in Far Cry 2. I also think that you should see your arms when having unarmed mode!

  • 10.14.2009 8:21 AM PDT

This body holding me reminds me of my own mortality.
Embrace this moment. Remember. We are eternal.
All this pain is an illusion.

Posted by: Spartan R76
unarmed fighting would be awesome, i think there should be grapple fights aswell, if you and your enemy strike at the same time while unarmed, a grapple sequence would initiate.

by this i mean, you have to press buttons at the right time to win, simular to a Resident Evil cutscene.

I really like this idea, but in Halo you're facing several enemies shooting at you, it would be dangerous to grapple in that situation, well unless you could grab one and turn him into a shield that is

  • 10.14.2009 8:24 AM PDT

1.Arkham Asylum, 2.Mass Effect, 3.Halo CE, 4.Mass Effect 2, 5.Halo 2, 6.Splinter Cell Double Agent, 7.Gears of War 2, 8.Medievil, 9.Oblivion, 10.Crash Team Racing

Well you probably wouldn't want to be unarmed, but sometimes you could be forced to begin a level without weapon. Use stealth to kill a Jackal perhaps? Or drop that Sniper and beat the enemy right in front of you with hands. Multiplayer could also use it, like when you want to be just a bit faster to reach the flag carrier or during infection games.


To tweak the idea a bit: There could be the sidearms you put on your thigh:
- SMG
- Magnum
- Plasma Rifle
- Plasma Pistol
- Needler
- Mauler
- Spiker
- Sword
If there is duel wielding, you could have 2 of most of these. 1 would hinder your speed and jumping a bit, 2 would hinder a bit more. It isn't about weight, try to tape a couple of milk cartons on your thighs and try to run - won't be as good as without.
Using 2 instead of 1 also means longer reloading times, slightly less accuracy, weaker melee, unable to throw grenades etc. suitable negatives. Maybe the 2nd weapon would even mean you can't carry as many grenades, as you probably carry your grenades on your hip.

Then there would be the primary weapon, which is placed on your back:
- AR
- BR
- Sniper
- Rockets
- Carbines
...
Now you have up to 2 weapons on your thighs, and 1 weapon on your back. With your free hands you could pick up another weapon, it could be any kind, but to take a weapon from your back or thigh, you have to drop it.

All in all there are more agility/stealth oriented spartans and more strength/weapon oriented spartans. All spartans (and elites) are great in everything, but there are some small differences.

We've seen 2 weapons and constantly equal gameplay to the death

  • 10.15.2009 12:34 PM PDT

i kinda dislike the idea, because what if i had a rocket a shotgun and are temporarily holding a sniper you'd be pretty invincible.

i could see this working with dual wields, instead of dropping one when you switch weapons you could just switch both at the same time, then youd have two dual wieldable weapons on your thighs and be holding one non dual wieldable weapon.

  • 10.15.2009 12:54 PM PDT

1.Arkham Asylum, 2.Mass Effect, 3.Halo CE, 4.Mass Effect 2, 5.Halo 2, 6.Splinter Cell Double Agent, 7.Gears of War 2, 8.Medievil, 9.Oblivion, 10.Crash Team Racing

Well you couldn't hold a shotgun and rockets because there's no room for both of them on your back. Basically you couldn't even "have" the sniper because you'd have to drop it to pick another weapon from your back. Probably you'd lose it quite soon.

Temporary weapons would work more like Support weapons. It would slow you down and be more of a quick use instead of constant.

With dual wields, they could also reduce the amount of maximum grenades you can carry, because most likely your grenades would be on your hip like the secondary weapons.
Something like:
0 thigh weapons = 8 maximum grenades
1 thigh weapon = 4 maximum grenades
2 thigh weapons = 0 grenades

  • 10.16.2009 9:19 AM PDT