Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Single-shot or Burst-fire: Which is the better competitive weapon?
  • Subject: Single-shot or Burst-fire: Which is the better competitive weapon?
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: Single-shot or Burst-fire: Which is the better competitive weapon?

Single shot is better than burst fire. It's more consistent.

  • 03.06.2012 5:20 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Veteran Legendary Member

Always up for REACH customs!

As long as all things are equal as far as hitscan and bloom? The single shot gun is the "better" gun because it's more consistent, but the three shot BR is probably a more skillful tool because landing three out of three shots for each burst is harder on a moving target.

  • 03.06.2012 7:15 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Halo 'till I die!

Spartans HooaH!

The battle rifle is amazing because it is brilliant at all ranges and is very symbolic of halo. It also does only slightly less damage per bullet (not burst) than the DMR. Making it much better and powerful than the DMR. Also it never had bloom like the -blam!- DMR.

  • 03.07.2012 1:10 AM PDT

100% Australian.

My Connection
My House
My Pet


Posted by: Killer VVhale
Single shot is better competitively. I thought that was common sense.


This.

Also, lol @ people who think a non-hitscan BR (Halo 3) is competitive any way over Xbox Live. If I pull host against Americans/anyone outside Australia I simply don't die.

  • 03.07.2012 1:16 AM PDT

Although I feel dirty by saying this, and I'm going to go have a shower after this post, I have to agree with Rofl. Single shot is much more fun, simple and realistic, and better competitively. The 3-hit Br was cool, but if it was implemented in Reach/H4, I'd be seriously mad.

Kgoingtohaveashowernow.

  • 03.07.2012 1:20 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: SouthPoIe
In other words, there wouldn't actually be a spread of bullets. They would all be in the same vector, emulating a single shot.


H2s BR was hitscanned and did this to a small degree.


OP if you want a full explanation post, go to the MLG forums and find it.

[Edited on 03.07.2012 1:40 AM PST]

  • 03.07.2012 1:38 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Intrepid Mythic Member
  • gamertag: P3P5I
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Achronos
It isn't our shiznit anymore.

Posted by: Apocalypse
H2s BR was hitscanned and did this to a small degree.

OP if you want a full explanation post, go to the MLG forums and find it.
Actually, that's where I got the idea for the thread. I've found the consensus on the MLG forums to be that they like the idea of the DMR over the BR, but hate how it was implemented in Reach.

  • 03.07.2012 2:14 AM PDT

Forget it man, and get with the countdown. Shake this square world and blast off for Kicksville.

Reach host ranking algorithm: (a*quit_percentage + b*isMexican + c*(1/KDR) + d*hasGuest) * 100
where a > b = d > c

On the whole, I'd say the arguments for single-shot are a little more compelling (although, if the burst weapon is hit-scan with no spread, then the only functional difference is that you've got a greater chance of hitting your opponent when sweeping across them).

Yet, aesthetically speaking, something about the BR is just so much more fun and satisfying.

  • 03.07.2012 2:16 AM PDT
  • gamertag: Rakive
  • user homepage:

You must confront your inabilities
You must adjust to your capabilities

A burst fire weapon won't have bloom just bullet spread so br.

  • 03.07.2012 2:48 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: mr tee grenade13
The reason everyone is excited about the return of the BR is simple: it takes skill and is balanced. It's also feels immensely better than the DMR


Yeah but to some single shot weapons take more skill. Frank said that there will be some sort of DMR singel shot weapon/s in Halo 4 due to some players like single shot weapons better then burst weapons.

  • 03.07.2012 3:25 AM PDT

A competitive players main goal is to win.
A casuals main goal is to have fun regardless of whether that results in a win or loss.
It has nothing to do with individual skill or knowledge, it has to do with the reason you play.

Single-shot, Burst fire, I'm fine with both as long as they're consistent. So if there's no bloom, I don't really care.

  • 03.07.2012 3:28 AM PDT

Posted by: o S IE C IR E T
The BR is much better for gameplay, overwhelmingly in my experience. It's not twitch shot for just one bullet each time like the DMR, it's twitch, then control, and follow to maintain accuracy. I've found there to be a larger skill gap between BR users than DMR users, even though BTB.net settings tighten the gap.

The burst is also much better for counter-acting snipers at longer ranges. Why relay on one bullet subject to bloom/spread when three can assist mch better in descoping it and allowing for gameplay to move forward.

This.

As long as the burst weapon has a really tight spread and is hitscan, then I'd say it's much better for competitive play. I wouldn't mind a single shot weapon though.

  • 03.07.2012 5:46 AM PDT

BR has a much better feel to it, i really feel like i can run around the map and kill anyone who does not have as good as aim as i do. However with the DMR if i must challenge anyone then i pray the bloom does not -blam!- up


  • 03.07.2012 6:12 AM PDT


Posted by: ICanHasRofl

Posted by: Killer VVhale
Single shot is better competitively. I thought that was common sense.


This.

Also, lol @ people who think a non-hitscan BR (Halo 3) is competitive any way over Xbox Live. If I pull host against Americans/anyone outside Australia I simply don't die.


If i pull host over an Ausi in a Reach 1v1 i might as well play blindfolded.

  • 03.07.2012 6:14 AM PDT

PSR = (((K+A)/D)*Win%)*120
The average player's PSR = 100


BigTeamBattle.net


Posted by: SouthPoIe
Single shot, but that doesn't mean we want the DMR. A BR with purely aesthetic burst would be amazing.

This.

  • 03.07.2012 7:29 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

my gt :terry 309
http://www.bungie.net/Stats/Reach/Default.aspx?player=terry+3 09&sg=0

burst fire because you have to control your shots and make sure every -blam!- hits

  • 03.07.2012 8:04 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Intrepid Mythic Member
  • gamertag: P3P5I
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Achronos
It isn't our shiznit anymore.

Posted by: Terry 369
burst fire because you have to control your shots and make sure every -blam!- hits
Shameless rip from MLG forums:
Posted by: -NaStY-
The absolute most skillful weapon of this sort would be some kind of hybrid gun that has a secondary fire, sort of like most weapons in UT.

Consider:

1. Burst fire weapons (like the BR) or continuous fire weapons (Lightning gun in Quake, Pulse Rifle in UT) take more skill to track the enemy, since you have to follow their every little movement over an extended period of time, rather than just catch them at 1 instant.

2. The more continuous the stream of fire, the easier it is to get your stream of bullets momentarily over their head. So headshots are easier with the BR or any continuous fire weapon.



If you had a gun that had lightning-gun style continuous stream as primary, and then a single-shot mode that didn't do much damage but killed on unshielded headshots, you have the best of both worlds. Now you force players to perfectly track over 1 or 2 seconds, but then they still have to switch modes and hit the headshot perfectly, as you would with a pistol.

But that's just within the world of hitscan weapons. You could make something with yet greater skill requirements by using slow-moving projectiles that require leading and prediction. Even better, you could introduce projectiles that bend their trajectory based on how the player is moving their reticle, allowing you to "put some english" on your shots. If you made weapons with this level of depth, a basic firefight would become an artform. Every player would have a different style and feel to their engagements.


...I really need to go become a game developer.


TL; DR: Pistol.
Though we'd probably need dedicated servers for the not-hitscan part, still good ideas.

  • 03.07.2012 8:38 AM PDT

I think h4 should have both to fill in the gap between br and sniper.

[Edited on 03.07.2012 8:58 AM PST]

  • 03.07.2012 8:56 AM PDT

Forget it man, and get with the countdown. Shake this square world and blast off for Kicksville.

Reach host ranking algorithm: (a*quit_percentage + b*isMexican + c*(1/KDR) + d*hasGuest) * 100
where a > b = d > c

Posted by: P3P5I
Shameless rip from MLG forums:

The ideas are good; my reservation is that I do think there's such a thing as a weapon requiring too much skill.

After all, that's the reason why in a fast-paced Arena-style game like Halo, we have aim-assist. I know some people who would rather the gameplay look like retarded monkeys flailing at each other want it to be removed, but practically speaking that's not going to happen, because you'd destroy the consistency and pace of the game.

When the primary weapon becomes too difficult to use, individual skill begins to trump everything. You'll inevitably reach a point where that guy with born with freakish synaptic ability will win every engagement, no matter how superior your positioning and teamwork.

Of course there needs to be room for players who are good at aiming to beat players who are bad at aiming, and randomising the outcome like Reach's bloom implementation did is the worst possible treatment. I'd rather see a simple, consistent utility weapon that has a skill gap, but one that average players with superior positioning and awareness can still feasibly execute with.

  • 03.07.2012 12:18 PM PDT

WALL OF SHAME-Posting stupidity since 2010
__________________
Posted by: Maximus Decimus
Agreed. All the changes are good and add variety. Do we really want another Halo 3? Just running around with one gun and no armor abilities? It's good that 343 wants to try something new. Do we really want the same thing for three more games?

Hitscan burst fire.
BR had, and needed a lot less auto-aim.

  • 03.07.2012 1:34 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2