lol BigShow, how many times must you explain that? It's like it either doesn't stick with people or they just don't want to believe it.
I've played in hardcore tournaments in Halo 1 Xbox and somehow I'm ignorant?
My bad if I offended you, but was just going off your posts. Also, what tournaments? National ones or local? This could be anything from a couple local tournaments to getting exposure on a nationwide level which is a huge difference. How about XBC? Only asking because you're using that as your experience with the game; how extensive is that experience?
Nah. I'd say it was more the limited talent pool. To play Halo 1 in a hardcore manner, you needed multiple Xboxes, know how to set up a LAN, etc. Halo 2 onwards, you had to play against the rest of the world, and you only needed your own Xbox. I used to think I was hot shit in my area, then Halo 2 came out and I had to play people outside my region that had better opponents to play against. #1 is only as good as #2 will push them. The thing that sucked about it is since I invested more time in playing 2 online, I basically pulled away from local friends who played Halo in skill level, because my skill level got pulled up by having a wider talent pool to play against and get better against.
Additionally, it'd be pretty braindead to not account for megajerks (people exploiting the sandbox/mechanics to the fullest) in your sandbox balance. If your gun can kill in X shots, the balance should account for that.
Finally, the need to run asynchronously means bullet magnetism and rewinding will always be a thing, cleaning up any quirks of being TOO accurate with lockstep (Halo 1's networking model). You can fire the BR in Halo 3 early in double digit frames and still be awarded a hit. This is needed to make the whole asynch puppet show feel like it's real.
What's all this about? My argument was simply that not even pros can land consistent 3sk's on LAN even to this day. Last LAN I went to was Summer 2012 to play with a lot of old school players that wouldn't be as known to anyone here except for DMAQ and Puckett, but no one was consistently landing 3sk's even though these guys played H1 regularly. The competition in that game is still insane, after all these years. I don't see how anyone could agree with what you're saying if they've actually played the game for an extended period of time.
Has nothing to do with the talent pool or anything else. A 3sk is a 3sk and if you've been playing the game for over 10 years but
still can't land a 3sk consistently on LAN, what does that tell you? Not that the person sucks, but that the weapon is difficult to be perfect with.
The average player DID NOT have an average 4-5 shot kill in Halo CE. That's simply wrong. And if we're talking about any Halo game with a 4 shot kill BR, the average player killed in 4-5 shots simply because the weapons were so damn easy to use.
The bottom line is, if you have 2 or more people shooting at you, you are at a severe disadvantage in any Halo game. The difference is that in Halo CE, you actually had a chance to make the other players miss and fight back. If you got the drop on two players in Halo CE you could, with skill, take one of them down before they both had a chance to turn and teamshot you.
^
Halo 2+ killed this with its
requirement to teamshoot often to be an effective team. Dead were the days of a powerful
individual making POWER plays (unless they had a Rocket) to drastically change the flow of a match.
EDIT:
Even if people can't hit 3 shots reliably enough, my points remains: the rest of the game should be balanced as if that weapon is being used perfectly, or else it will fall apart at potentially highest level play.
As others have pointed out, the game should be made and tested as if the biggest, most perfectly playing asshole is playing the game. Or you end up with stuff like the 3x Zoom 85% DMR on big open maps, the Reach/4 Banshee, BXR, or Halo 1's double melee.
And my point is if the OGRES can't land consistent 3sk's, then what
is your point? As BigShow just explained, the 3sk count means nothing without the context of its
surrounding gameplay mechanics.
Also, the double melee in H1 was risk/reward because you needed a Grenade. If you weren't spot on with your placement, you'd die too. This happens a lot in later Halo games (melee/'nade before you die) but the main difference is that it took 3 melee's to kill someone in Halo 1. As a result, I see it as an advanced tactic that worked because of the
surrounding gameplay mechanics.