Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: The BR is not overpowered or overused.
  • Subject: The BR is not overpowered or overused.
Subject: The BR is not overpowered or overused.

How to spell "space"?

S-P-ACE! SPACE!

Posted by: ooskers
You're right. The BR is not overused or overpowered, ITS OVERESTIMATED!

No, underestimated.


ODST's automag would be far more balanced.

  • 10.27.2009 10:48 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: TW InKoGnIto
The BR has amazing auto-aim, auto-headshot, auto-kill capabilities.
Posted by: goblin95
Posted by: Josephson
A baby turtle born with no limbs could use the BR i say it is over used and too easy to use.
How could this turtle use it?

My friend who never played Halo before, became decent with the BR in about 10 minutes.


These are ludicrious statements. The BR has the second largest skill gap in the game behind the sniper.

Play 1v1 octagon BRs against an MLG 50 you will see there is a giant gap.

Play anything 1v1 with the other weapons is pointless because theres not a big enough skill gap to even decide a victor.

  • 10.27.2009 11:15 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Oreos Are Good
so your saying that bungie should change EVERY single gun besides the br so the game revolves around the br? that would be stupid


No im saying they should change the other weapons so the game doesnt revolve around the BR.

  • 10.27.2009 11:17 PM PDT

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstien

The BR is the one that is out of place, so it should be changed.

  • 10.27.2009 11:24 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: UL7IM4 G33K
The BR is the one that is out of place, so it should be changed.


How is it out of place? Because it has a skill gap? Because people can become good with it and use that to their advantage?

Why is everything that can be used to gain an edge "overpowered"?

You shouldnt nerf something just because there is a discernible skill gap and learning curve. Give other viable options so players have multiple ways to win and succeed in game.

Reach is not halo 3 tweaked, its a whole new game and changing the function of every single weapon is not a stretch.

[Edited on 10.27.2009 11:28 PM PDT]

  • 10.27.2009 11:27 PM PDT

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstien

Posted by: iRun Bnet
How is it out of place? Because it has a skill gap? Because people can become good with it and use that to their advantage?

No, because regardless of how good you are with another weapon, the BR can still kill quicker unless they are using a power weapon at its preferable range. The BR is essentially a power weapon.

Posted by: iRun Bnet
Why is everything that can be used to gain an edge "overpowered"?

If this were the case, I would be saying Grenades and Vehicles are also overpowered, but they're not.

Posted by: iRun Bnet
You shouldnt nerf something just because there is a discernible skill gap and learning curve. Give other viable options so players have multiple ways to win and succeed in game.

What you don't understand is that the weapon needs to be nerfed not because it is hard to used, but because it is too easy to rely on. It can literally do everything fairly well, something the AR was designed for (not the BR). The Br should be a weapon that can pressure at distance, descope snipers and cover friendlies. Instead, it can kill at double the distance of most every other weapon, has a bigger kill potential per clip, and kills faster than most others (including the carbine). It needs to be toned down.

Posted by: iRun Bnet
Reach is not halo 3 tweaked, its a whole new game and changing the function of every single weapon is not a stretch.

True, but removing the BR isn't much of a stretch either. Since they did so in ODST and the BR wasn't around during Reach.

  • 10.27.2009 11:50 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: UL7IM4 G33K
Posted by: iRun Bnet
How is it out of place? Because it has a skill gap? Because people can become good with it and use that to their advantage?

No, because regardless of how good you are with another weapon, the BR can still kill quicker unless they are using a power weapon at its preferable range. The BR is essentially a power weapon.



So make the other weapons a viable option. I still see no valid counter argument to this besides it being too much work.

  • 10.27.2009 11:54 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: UL7IM4 G33K
Posted by: iRun Bnet
You shouldnt nerf something just because there is a discernible skill gap and learning curve. Give other viable options so players have multiple ways to win and succeed in game.

What you don't understand is that the weapon needs to be nerfed not because it is hard to used, but because it is too easy to rely on. It can literally do everything fairly well, something the AR was designed for (not the BR). The Br should be a weapon that can pressure at distance, descope snipers and cover friendlies. Instead, it can kill at double the distance of most every other weapon, has a bigger kill potential per clip, and kills faster than most others (including the carbine). It needs to be toned down.



I hate this logic so much and it is the single greatest issue with the direction halo MP has taken. This whole halo needs to be like every other FPS, every weapon needs a niche logic is RETARDED.

What made HCE so great was how dynamic every weapon was. The niches weapons occupied were very large and it made for varied and interesting gameplay. But for some reason bungie has drifted into the weapon A has to function from 3.48 meters to 8.76 meters and weapon B has to function from 8.76 meters to 10.44 meters logic and now people are using the BR as some kind of scapegoat for the stale gameplay that has resulted when in reality the BR is the only weapon left that is truly haloesque.

  • 10.28.2009 12:00 AM PDT

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstien

Wait... do you understand what I am saying? The Halo weapons have killed in relatively the same time frame and range since the first game. The only guns to break that mold are the Pistol and BR. The BR was a tad toned down from the Pistol, but it lacks the same skill gap and utility the Pistol had due to it being a spray weapon. It is a gun that fakes skill, since the winning blow is determined by how many of your bullets you were lucky enough to have hit. The pistol actually required a degree of concentration and when you shot you hit.

The only problem with the pistol was that it was extremely dominant, just as the BR proved to be despite being toned down as well. So what do we do? Tone it down more. Make the Br 5-6 shot semi-auto rifle that can hit at distance and annoy a player into cover.

  • 10.28.2009 12:01 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: UL7IM4 G33K
The Halo weapons have killed in relatively the same time frame and range since the first game.


That is a flat out lie. Youre trying to say that the H3 plasma rifle is as effective as its HCE counter part?

Also the H3 BR is a 5-6 shot weapon due to its spread.



[Edited on 10.28.2009 12:07 AM PDT]

  • 10.28.2009 12:06 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

well this entire post is assuming that the weapons will be identical to the Halo 3 arsenal.

the problem i had with Halo 3 is there were 2 types of weapons

head shot weapons
and
bludgeoning tools

I am hopeing that in reach the AR, Plasma rifle, and spiker if there is one are made around the primes of shooting your enemy not tickleing there shields and hitting them.

[Edited on 10.28.2009 11:00 PM PDT]

  • 10.28.2009 12:14 AM PDT

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstien

Posted by: iRun Bnet
I hate this logic so much and it is the single greatest issue with the direction halo MP has taken. This whole halo needs to be like every other FPS, every weapon needs a niche logic is RETARDED.


Posted by: iRun Bnet
The niches weapons occupied were very large and it made for varied and interesting gameplay.

A niche can be big or small, but every weapon does HAVE to fit into a slot of use. That is how Halo was made. Why? Cause Halo fundamentally uses the same rules as an RTS - Rock/Paper/Scissors. Traditional shooters (as you pointed out), do not use this forumla. They make every weapon equal and capable of killing the other rather than using a stack like rock/paper/scissors. The problem is there is no rock/paper/scissors for the BR. The BR works against everything save for a power weapon, where that isn't true for the PR, PP, AR, Needler, etc.

PS: Stop double posting.

Posted by: iRun Bnet
That is a flat out lie. Youre trying to say that the H3 plasma rifle is as effective as its HCE counter part?

Kill time =/= effectiveness. I will agree that the plasma weapons were nerfed in terms of health damage, but then again health was drastically decreased. Not to mention the plasma weapons main characteristic still exists: energy shield depletion.

Posted by: iRun Bnet
Also the H3 BR is a 5-6 shot weapon due to its spread.

Yet that can vary between 4-8 shots depending. Good players generally 4-5 shot, but those wins and losses are determined by mere milliseconds (not tactical prowess). Halo is based on the tactical decision made with the strategic elements gathered before the fight. The triangle. The BR destroys that balance.

[Edited on 10.28.2009 12:19 AM PDT]

  • 10.28.2009 12:18 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Czar_CJ_Elm
well this entire post is assmeing thst the weapons will be identical to the Halo 3 arsinal.

the problem i hd with Halo 3 is there were 2 types of weapons

head shot weapons
and
bludgeoning tools

I am hopeing thst in reach the AR, Plamsa rifle, and spiker if there is one are made around the premis of shooting your enemy not tickleing there shields and hitting them.


I agree, too many melee dependent weapons and if its melee dependent its practically useless vs a ranged headshot capable weapon.

  • 10.28.2009 12:20 AM PDT

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstien

Posted by: iRun Bnet
Posted by: Czar_CJ_Elm
I am hopeing thst in reach the AR, Plamsa rifle, and spiker if there is one are made around the premis of shooting your enemy not tickleing there shields and hitting them.


I agree, too many melee dependent weapons and if its melee dependent its practically useless vs a ranged headshot capable weapon.

Only ignorant players "tickle" shields. The AR has a nice feature. When you burst fire it, the spread is extremely small so more shots land. It actually kills faster that way, and relatively the same at distance when you burst fire it. The weapon is extremely versatile. The BR just does that job way too well already.

  • 10.28.2009 12:22 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: UL7IM4 G33K
Posted by: iRun Bnet
I hate this logic so much and it is the single greatest issue with the direction halo MP has taken. This whole halo needs to be like every other FPS, every weapon needs a niche logic is RETARDED.


Posted by: iRun Bnet
The niches weapons occupied were very large and it made for varied and interesting gameplay.

A niche can be big or small, but every weapon does HAVE to fit into a slot of use. That is how Halo was made. Why? Cause Halo fundamentally uses the same rules as an RTS - Rock/Paper/Scissors. Traditional shooters (as you pointed out), do not use this forumla. They make every weapon equal and capable of killing the other rather than using a stack like rock/paper/scissors. The problem is there is no rock/paper/scissors for the BR. The BR works against everything save for a power weapon, where that isn't true for the PR, PP, AR, Needler, etc.

PS: Stop double posting.

Posted by: iRun Bnet
That is a flat out lie. Youre trying to say that the H3 plasma rifle is as effective as its HCE counter part?

Kill time =/= effectiveness. I will agree that the plasma weapons were nerfed in terms of health damage, but then again health was drastically decreased. Not to mention the plasma weapons main characteristic still exists: energy shield depletion.

Posted by: iRun Bnet
Also the H3 BR is a 5-6 shot weapon due to its spread.

Yet that can vary between 4-8 shots depending. Good players generally 4-5 shot, but those wins and losses are determined by mere milliseconds (not tactical prowess). Halo is based on the tactical decision made with the strategic elements gathered before the fight. The triangle. The BR destroys that balance.


I see we disagree on the fundamental basis of the game. Personally I think halo functions best with a circular weapon tree with a utilitarian mid ranged weapon at the center. And really whether you like it or not thats how all 3 halo games have worked. So essentially your ideal rebalance fundamentally changes halo MP gameplay.

  • 10.28.2009 12:24 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: UL7IM4 G33K
Posted by: iRun Bnet
Posted by: Czar_CJ_Elm
I am hopeing thst in reach the AR, Plamsa rifle, and spiker if there is one are made around the premis of shooting your enemy not tickleing there shields and hitting them.


I agree, too many melee dependent weapons and if its melee dependent its practically useless vs a ranged headshot capable weapon.

Only ignorant players "tickle" shields. The AR has a nice feature. When you burst fire it, the spread is extremely small so more shots land. It actually kills faster that way, and relatively the same at distance when you burst fire it. The weapon is extremely versatile. The BR just does that job way too well already.


Please refrain from gameplay tips when you dont have a linked GT. Im just going to assume im a far greater player than you that also understands the intricacies of halo 3 MP gameplay better than you unless you prove youve grasped it better than I.

  • 10.28.2009 12:27 AM PDT

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstien

No it does not. ODST is a perfect example of a low-power, utilitarian mid-range weapon. The pistole in ODST enhances the uses and qualities every other gun by requiring them as a compliment - a true utility weapon. The BR functions without the entire weapon set regardless, which is why most games degrade into BR spam, just like Halo PC degrades constantly into Pistol wars.

The gun is too powerful in comparison to the weapon set. You boost the rest of the weapon set to contend with it you destroy one of the fundamental parts of Halo, and that is CQC. Ever notice that most every Halo CE level without vehicles, or when a vehicle wasn't available, the level tended to lean in favor of CQC? The weapons were tailored toward that mentality. A quality on Halo has in its gameplay. Halo CE's MP was an accident. It wasn't designed like an average shooter and therefore it cannot be viewed as an average shooter. Most of its success was due to the balanced weaponry and that weaponry was balanced based on how the campaign mechanics worked.

So, as an example, can you imagine all of the combat of Halo 3 taking place 5 meters farther apart than it is now? Most guns would need this range boost to contend with the BR properly. Most of the levels in campaign would feel cramped and clunky. Same with the levels of Halo 3. Maps like High Ground, Epitaph and Citadel would be horribly small. Halo 3's weapons shouldn't see the BR as the standard just because the bias is towards it in the competitive arena. I like the BR, but it has grown so stale and tedious to use. It is a gun that requires little to no thought process on my part.

Do I want the rest of the Halo weapon set to follow suit with mindless shooter basics? Hell no.

PS: Gamertag is Emn1ty. It isn't linked because my account had to be recovered after being stolen by a fisher site. I'm checking your stats right now and it seems to me I'm the more seasoned Halo player. I've been playing Halo since it came out in 2001. I have played every Halo game with the exception of Halo 2 Vista. I spent 5 years of my life on Halo2sucks.com arguing with other fairly smart people about what made Halo 2 so much worse than the first Halo. One of the main things we understood was that the Pistol in Halo CE and the BR were OVERPOWERED. The only difference between the two guns was that the Pistol was at least balanced among the weapons, while the BR was not. Please do not make assumptions just because you want to act big.

PSS: I was right about you being ignorant with the AR. 50% of your kills are BR (12,000+). A grand total of 300 kills with AR. You drop it like its hot... *ugh, bad pun*

[Edited on 10.28.2009 12:43 AM PDT]

  • 10.28.2009 12:33 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: UL7IM4 G33K
No it does not. ODST is a perfect example of a low-power, utilitarian mid-range weapon. The pistole in ODST enhances the uses and qualities every other gun by requiring them as a compliment - a true utility weapon. The BR functions without the entire weapon set regardless, which is why most games degrade into BR spam, just like Halo PC degrades constantly into Pistol wars.

The gun is too powerful in comparison to the weapon set. You boost the rest of the weapon set to contend with it you destroy one of the fundamental parts of Halo, and that is CQC. Ever notice that most every Halo CE level without vehicles, or when a vehicle wasn't available, the level tended to lean in favor of CQC? The weapons were tailored toward that mentality. A quality on Halo has in its gameplay. Halo CE's MP was an accident. It wasn't designed like an average shooter and therefore it cannot be viewed as an average shooter. Most of its success was due to the balanced weaponry and that weaponry was balanced based on how the campaign mechanics worked.

So, as an example, can you imagine all of the combat of Halo 3 taking place 5 meters farther apart than it is now? Most guns would need this range boost to contend with the BR properly. Most of the levels in campaign would feel cramped and clunky. Same with the levels of Halo 3. Maps like High Ground, Epitaph and Citadel would be horribly small. Halo 3's weapons shouldn't see the BR as the standard just because the bias is towards it in the competitive arena. I like the BR, but it has grown so stale and tedious to use. It is a gun that requires little to no thought process on my part.

Do I want the rest of the Halo weapon set to follow suit with mindless shooter basics? Hell no.

PS: Gamertag is Emn1ty. It isn't linked because my account had to be recovered after being stolen by a fisher site. I'm checking your stats right now and it seems to me I'm the more seasoned Halo player.


ODST has no MP so its about as relevant as halo wars in this discussion.

You mean just like HCE was pistol wars and H2 was BR wars, ya thats all the halo games. When all the games are the same way, thats what the game is.

The biggest thing im saying is fix melee. Its too powerful and too easy to use. Its 2 hit and near impossible to miss with. This negates any skill gap in that area and forces anyone with half a brain to avoid it at all costs.

  • 10.28.2009 12:43 AM PDT

Its a trap!!!

Posted by: iRun Bnet
Posted by: TW InKoGnIto
The BR has amazing auto-aim, auto-headshot, auto-kill capabilities.
Posted by: goblin95
Posted by: Josephson
A baby turtle born with no limbs could use the BR i say it is over used and too easy to use.
How could this turtle use it?

My friend who never played Halo before, became decent with the BR in about 10 minutes.


These are ludicrious statements. The BR has the second largest skill gap in the game behind the sniper.

Play 1v1 octagon BRs against an MLG 50 you will see there is a giant gap.

Play anything 1v1 with the other weapons is pointless because theres not a big enough skill gap to even decide a victor.


Agreed. Everyone wants to take the skill gap away because they don't do as well as they would like in a game

I want Halo to remain competative. I think its stupid that people say the BR is a spammy headshot weapon. The real spam is the full autos.

And its really rediculous that people are even suggesting giving a full auto weapon like the AR a headshot capability. Yeah real skill in getting head shots is blasting 30 bullets in one second. I am sure no real aim would be required and you would only need to aim it in the general direction

the BR goes and lets say there is carbines on gaurdian for example... people will complain of that to once its used more and will say down with the carbine.

But as I said in previous post lets take out the one weapon that really balances the sniper. Yeah lets transform the entire community into campers because you can't check the sniper from a distance. Lets turn what is a slect group of people, into the whole community and force everyone to play that way because in other peoples eyes it would be balanced

People say the Automag would be good at checking the sniper. Currently there are two problems with this weapon. It virtually does no damage and the rate of fire is as fast as you can pull the trigger ( i smell modded controller)

I like some of the people who say down with BR bring back CE pistol...me personally I love the CE pistol. But in CE the pistol was so dominant and the rest of the community would complain more then ever. They will say that its unfair that its a 3 shot and i dont care about the skill gap lets make the AR much better and be able to work in all ranges

One thing i do agree on is that the AR should have a larger clip like the SMG. This is has nothing to do with the BR but its a must to balance short range a bit

I honestly like that I can aim a BR well and outshoot a lot of people I come across. This is a result at giving effort in trying to be good at something. I think spammy AR melee is the most monotinous random thing in halo. The random part being as to who gets the kill. Sometimes i feel like I AR the guy much more then he did me but he wins the melee. I like that when I win BR battles its because 90 percent of the times my aim was better then theirs

don't take away midrange and slow the game up. If this happens the only way to speed things up is to change the game to Unreal Tournament style and make everyone uber fast and spawn right in front of each other a system that realy has no thought put into it and that has no skill gap what so ever

  • 10.28.2009 12:45 AM PDT

I highly doubt the BR will be in Reach! Its all bout the AR -blam!-es!!!

  • 10.28.2009 12:50 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Shotbear1710
I highly doubt the BR will be in Reach! Its all bout the AR -blam!-es!!!


Bungie would be fools to change the basic structure of the gameplay.

  • 10.28.2009 12:54 AM PDT

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstien

Posted by: iRun Bnet
ODST has no MP so its about as relevant as halo wars in this discussion.

Except Halo MP combat was directly related to campaign elements in EVERY game. So it has all the relevance.

Posted by: iRun Bnet
You mean just like HCE was pistol wars and H2 was BR wars, ya thats all the halo games. When all the games are the same way, thats what the game is.

But then Dual Wielding makes Halo 2 and Halo 3 not halo. Which I do personally agree with, but then again there alot of things in Halo that have changed. Unpleasant weapon fests that are monotonous are not things I want "preserved" in a game. Try playing a few Halo CE LAN games with the Pistol excluded. The game doesn't break down in the slightest.

Posted by: iRun Bnet
The biggest thing im saying is fix melee. Its too powerful and too easy to use. Its 2 hit and near impossible to miss with. This negates any skill gap in that area and forces anyone with half a brain to avoid it at all costs.

Agreed. The lunge in Halo has always been a bad idea. It causes more hitting than shooter. Two hits is fine, just remove or drastically reduce the lunge so that melee is only practical when you are actually in melee distance.

Posted by: Madara Umezawa
Agreed. Everyone wants to take the skill gap away because they don't do as well as they would like in a game.

No. I think it has to do with the fact that while the BR takes skill, it is brainless. Anyone who plays shooters can aim the BR and strafe properly. That tactic is employed over many shooters (UT, Quake, Tribes, etc). But Halo isn't like other shooters. The game is about how to use the strategic elements you have brought to a fight tactically. Rock/paper/scissors with benefits you could say.

Posted by: Madara Umezawa
I want Halo to remain competative. I think its stupid that people say the BR is a spammy headshot weapon. The real spam is the full autos.

Most weapons in Halo are spammy, the skill is to understand there is uses beyond that. Most people don't, which one of the reasons the BR is the weapon of choice.

Posted by: Madara Umezawa
And its really rediculous that people are even suggesting giving a full auto weapon like the AR a headshot capability. Yeah real skill in getting head shots is blasting 30 bullets in one second. I am sure no real aim would be required and you would only need to aim it in the general direction

Entirely correct.

Posted by: Madara Umezawa
the BR goes and lets say there is carbines on gaurdian for example... people will complain of that to once its used more and will say down with the carbine.

Well, technically the carbine shouldn't even exist IMO. It is the most oddball of all the Covenant weaponry. At the time of Halo 2 it was the only true Covenant weapon that was a projectile. The Beam doesn't even shoot bullets.

Posted by: Madara Umezawa
But as I said in previous post lets take out the one weapon that really balances the sniper. Yeah lets transform the entire community into campers because you can't check the sniper from a distance. Lets turn what is a slect group of people, into the whole community and force everyone to play that way because in other peoples eyes it would be balanced

People say the Automag would be good at checking the sniper. Currently there are two problems with this weapon. It virtually does no damage and the rate of fire is as fast as you can pull the trigger ( i smell modded controller)


The sniper isn't so overpowered. This also comes to the idea that a map shouldn't be designed beyond the game's mechanics. So another reason the BR dominates is map design, lending itself to semi-long range fights and alot of range spam. Ever wonder why most of the favorite maps in Halo 3 are maps with alot of things blocking your view of the entire map (Avalanche, Valhalla, Citadel, Heretic, The Pit, etc)? Halo 2 was similar, but the larger maps did that on a more subtle scale which is why they were great maps.

Then again, your comment on the automag being useless becuase it doesn't do enough damage is moot. A sniper-counter shouldn't kill the sniper, just pressure him into cover. The BR does this, and so does the Pistol. The problem lies in the fact that they can kill the sniper before he gets to cover. That transfers over to weapon that can't keep up with the BR's range. The BR can kill almost every other gun before it gets to it, and therefore it is very overpowered. The gun should have a weakness of a slightly longer kill time in favor of range. Especially with its current clip size.

  • 10.28.2009 1:03 AM PDT

Its a trap!!!

Also I notice a lot of people say oh you want the BR gone because you are a n00b. I am generaly not one to accuse or to use such an idiotic explanation of things, but I will bring an interesting point to light.

I havent met anyone who is actually good with the BR say it should be removed. Or at least anyone who is legetamtely in my skill level. I am not saying oh I am the greatest but I have played some pros and semi pros and my BR can keep up with them at times.

You can say well if your good at the BR then of course you would want to keep it in the game. All intelligent other reasons for both arguments aside in retrospect people who arent as good have no bases for an argument either

Some people can BR n00bs and think they are good at it but still lose to better teams. So in turn they say they are good with it but down with it. If this is you and your sol reason then keep quiet.

So in the end wether BR stays or goes I really value team shooting. This is the most fun i get out of halo team BR from strategical map positions so your team wins the game

I just dont see very much team shooting from full autos. The only teamwork I see out of full autos is a person taking each corner of the room ready for some camping ambush. Utilizing not their map awareness but to rely on that red dot on their radar to tell them when they are close. Or second option everyone charges in the middle for a big AR slaughter fest but that would be the number 1 n00b thing to do

  • 10.28.2009 1:04 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: UL7IM4 G33K
Posted by: iRun Bnet
Posted by: Czar_CJ_Elm
I am hopeing thst in reach the AR, Plamsa rifle, and spiker if there is one are made around the premis of shooting your enemy not tickleing there shields and hitting them.


I agree, too many melee dependent weapons and if its melee dependent its practically useless vs a ranged headshot capable weapon.

Only ignorant players "tickle" shields. The AR has a nice feature. When you burst fire it, the spread is extremely small so more shots land. It actually kills faster that way, and relatively the same at distance when you burst fire it. The weapon is extremely versatile. The BR just does that job way too well already.


The MA5 is my favorit weapon in the Halo universe, ever since halo CE bungie emphaized short controlled burst I know this, but in Halo 3 bungie figuerd it would be a good idea to emphasize melee use by reducing the armor damage and incresing the sheild damage. so any weapon with "HEAD
SHOT ABILITY" will bet the AR in a shooting mathch

I consitntly get kills at max range with the AR which BTW is only 120m, but thats long rnge in halo.

and BTW "Only ignorant players" only use there guns, a good player will use grenades to drop the sheild then proceed with shooting. weather it be a BR or BB gun

[Edited on 10.28.2009 1:08 AM PDT]

  • 10.28.2009 1:07 AM PDT

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstien

It isn't about removing it necessarily. It is about balancing it. Most people from the Halo 2 era, especial MLG, loved the BR. But speaking with some of the top-tier players in MLG at the time, many of those high rankers actually HATED it. The only reason they used it was to keep up with the competition. This goes the same for the Halo CE pistol and the Halo 3 BR. The BR is a great gun, but it also isn't really much of a Halo gun. Halo 3 made it far more manageable, but it still dominates.

I personally preferred the Carbine in the Beta. While it was extremely overpowered in the beta, at least I killed what I shot at. The BR is more an exercise in faith, and the carbine has become one as well with its increased randomness in firing pattern. The mid-range weapon shouldn't be about killing quickly but be about aiming. It should be about placing rounds exactly where you want them (the BR is poor at this while the pistol wasn't and the Automag isn't either). This is why I love the automag so much. It is a perfect example of a mid-range weapon that has the potential to pressure an enemy but not overwhelm the rest of the guns.

Now I'm not saying the BR should be replaced by the automag. But I think that the gun proves that a mid-range gun doesn't need to be powerful to be effective.

[Edited on 10.28.2009 1:14 AM PDT]

  • 10.28.2009 1:12 AM PDT