Support NeoGAF

[Striker]

Yea, and I agree it should be like that but to a certain extent. I think Halo 3, specifically the MLG settings struck a really nice balance between the BR and all the other weapons on the map.

What other weapons?

You'll have to give them the benefit of the doubt until the retail game releases. They admitted the Halo 3 Assault Rifle basically wasn't as good (dated), and will try to improve that in Reach. The DMR, Pistol, and Needler Rifle will be the mid-range like weapons, and each seem to carry their own efficiencies. Same goes for other weapons discussed or that have yet to be revealed. I much prefer it that way than roll with Halo 2/3 weapons where many were nerfed and often carried no strong suits. Remember Halo 2/3 also had dual wielding so they brought down the uniqueness of those certain weapons, or outright released them, from the game.

 

[EazyB]

I liked how it was in Halo CE, the pistol was a 3 shot kill, 2 body or 2 to the head, then 1 to the head, and your shield wasn't completely down after the second shot, there was a little bit left but the third Pistol shot damage exceeded the Shield capacity, then the Headshot modifier would kill the player.

I'm not sure how it will work in Reach, 5 shots seems okay if the rate of fire is faster than the BR but slower than the Carbine. I would like to have it so Headshots to shields did a little more damage than Body shots, then body shots did more than Leg shots. So if you get 2 or 3 headshots to the shield, then the obligatory shot to the head to the unshielded player, you could get a DMR or Magnum 4 shot. This could add even more depth and skill to the Marksman based weapons.

In previous Halo's marksman weapons you always went for the center mass (Torso) to get the shields down as efficiently as possible, then go for the headshot when the shield is down. With this idea, it would emphasize accuracy throughout the entire encounter. This could increase the skill gap, especially in Marksman vs Marksman weapons battles. One player goes for center mass then the headshot (4 body, 1 Head), the other player goes for all headshots , or mostly headshots and gets a 4 shot. The more risky and skilled player is rewarded in this encounter. While the other player has a good chance of winning if the riskier player misses one or more shots completely because he went for more headshots.

I've always wanted this kind of subtle feature in Halo, but it is overly complex and I'm sure plenty of people disagree with it. For me, though it would add another layer of skill and depth to the game.

I've been a big proponent of rewarding shielded headshots and making all weapons do more damage with headshots for quite some time. So I totally agree.

Making a gun great in every situation is the exact opposite outcome a Sandbox designer wants to have happen. Guns should have roles, they exceed in their niche, can compete slightly out of that niche, and are outmatched and not competitive completely outside their role.

I've leaned towards making each weapon more versatile and many would probably disagree with me on that. But there is without a doubt a danger to slotting each weapon into a situational niche. Like one of the Bungie dudes said in thier GDC presentation, rock, papers, scissors doesn't work. It's not fun. And personally I don't think it facilitates a competitive environment. If each gun is limited to being decent in a certain situation encounters turn into whoever has the right weapon for that situation wins. The outcome is set in stone and there's no wiggle room. The more and more versatile the weapons get, while maintaining a degree of situational advantage, the more interesting firefights become. Certainly in a given encounter one gun will be more suitable for than the other, but if the underdog is skilled or creative enough they can come out on top. Of course you can go too far in this direction and make all weapons equally viable in all situations but that destroys the strategic value of picking up a specific weapon to best approach a given player or map location. It's this balance that's vital to keep in mind while slotting individual weapons into roles and deciding their weapon properties.

There's nothing wrong with the BR in Halo 3. It's about as versatile as most guns should be, the problem was almost all the other guns were so situational or just straight up worthless that the BR was the only weapon to turn to. The BR only had a small window at which it was hands down the best weapon to turn to, but it was viable at a broad spectrum of ranges so the player always had a chance even if they were outclasses for a given situation. If there were 3 or 4 weapons with BR-levels of versatility than it wouldn't always been the BR people hung on to. Reach seems to be improving this with both the pistol and DMR occupying a wide array of uses but maintaining their own identity at the same time. Hopefully the other skill-based weapons follow suit and the needle rifle finds a similar home.

 

[Kapura]

I liked how it was in Halo CE, the pistol was a 3 shot kill, 2 body or 2 to the head, then 1 to the head, and your shield wasn't completely down after the second shot, there was a little bit left but the third Pistol shot damage exceeded the Shield capacity, then the Headshot modifier would kill the player.

I'm not sure how it will work in Reach, 5 shots seems okay if the rate of fire is faster than the BR but slower than the Carbine. I would like to have it so Headshots to shields did a little more damage than Body shots, then body shots did more than Leg shots. So if you get 2 or 3 headshots to the shield, then the obligatory shot to the head to the unshielded player, you could get a DMR or Magnum 4 shot. This could add even more depth and skill to the Marksman based weapons.

In previous Halo's marksman weapons you always went for the center mass (Torso) to get the shields down as efficiently as possible, then go for the headshot when the shield is down. With this idea, it would emphasize accuracy throughout the entire encounter. This could increase the skill gap, especially in Marksman vs Marksman weapons battles. One player goes for center mass then the headshot (4 body, 1 Head), the other player goes for all headshots , or mostly headshots and gets a 4 shot. The more risky and skilled player is rewarded in this encounter. While the other player has a good chance of winning if the riskier player misses one or more shots completely because he went for more headshots.

I've always wanted this kind of subtle feature in Halo, but it is overly complex and I'm sure plenty of people disagree with it. For me, though it would add another layer of skill and depth to the game.

I like this idea.

I don't. It would create more skill gap, sure, but that's not necessarily a good thing. Let's face it: An average Halo player would have trouble picking off a moving target in the minimum amount of shots as it is. If he's against a really, really good player who can pick him off in the lowest possible shots (1 less than the noob could ever hope to manage if he lands every bullet), it would frustrate him even more. That's what high skill gap does: it frustrates. This person loses the fire fight anyway, but the higher the skill gap, the less it feels like "if I had done one or two things different..." and the more it feels like "I never had a chance." The first creates hope and drive to be better, the latter makes him lose hope of ever being competitive. Skill gap needs to be tuned, not made a cliff.

On the side of fiction, it makes no sense that a round pinging off of a shield would suddenly be doing more damage depending on where it hits. It's not increasing in velocity nor mass when made a headshot, it's not hitting a shield generator, and the shield being "weaker" over the head region makes no damn sense whatsoever. It makes much more sense for unshielded bodies to take differing amounts of damage based on location. A bullet to the brain consistently kills; a bullet to the leg does not consistently kill.

There's nothing wrong with the BR in Halo 3. It's about as versatile as most guns should be, the problem was almost all the other guns were so situational or just straight up worthless that the BR was the only weapon to turn to. The BR only had a small window at which it was hands down the best weapon to turn to, but it was viable at a broad spectrum of ranges so the player always had a chance even if they were outclasses for a given situation. If there were 3 or 4 weapons with BR-levels of versatility than it wouldn't always been the BR people hung on to. Reach seems to be improving this with both the pistol and DMR occupying a wide array of uses but maintaining their own identity at the same time. Hopefully the other skill-based weapons follow suit and the needle rifle finds a similar home.

This I agree completely with. The BR was crazy versatile, but other weapons were much more niche.

 

[dslgunstar]

The BR was crazy versatile, but other weapons were much more niche.

And that looks to be the exact same problem with the pistol, as compared to the DMR and AR. Yes, its not necessarily the absolute BEST option at either close or long range, but you're never very vulnerable at either range and potentially at a huge advantage at the middle-range gap.

The pistol overlaps so many niche roles that, when players are faced with only two weapon slots, they'll likely opt for the weapon that keeps them safe in EVERY situation instead of the weapons that dominate in one situation and are worthless in every other.

10 years later, Bungie is making the same balancing mistakes, and its once again centered around a freaking pistol.

 

[GhaleonEB]

The more and more versatile the weapons get, while maintaining a degree of situational advantage, the more interesting firefights become. Certainly in a given encounter one gun will be more suitable for than the other, but if the underdog is skilled or creative enough they can come out on top.

That seems like what is being done with the Pistol/AR/DMR combination at close to mid range: each weapon has advantages and disadvantages, and each has a shot at taking the other out, depending on skill set and situational variables. It's when the distances really grow that their unique roles are more apparent.

At long range the utility of most weapons dissipates except for those that are designed specifically for it. But at least with Reach, unlike Halo 3, it sounds like there are at least four viable options at medium (ie, BR) range (Needle Rifle, Pistol, DMR, Sniper).

On paper at least, I really like the direction the sandbox is going. Less duplicity, more specialized roles for a large weapon set, and a handful of overlapping but distinct core weapons for medium range combat. It sounds a lot like the Halo 1 weapon set, expanded.

 

[A Penguin]

How 'bout we play the Beta first, hmm?

 

[Booshka]

I don't. It would create more skill gap, sure, but that's not necessarily a good thing. Let's face it: An average Halo player would have trouble picking off a moving target in the minimum amount of shots as it is. If he's against a really, really good player who can pick him off in the lowest possible shots (1 less than the noob could ever hope to manage if he lands every bullet), it would frustrate him even more. That's what high skill gap does: it frustrates. This person loses the fire fight anyway, but the higher the skill gap, the less it feels like "if I had done one or two things different..." and the more it feels like "I never had a chance." The first creates hope and drive to be better, the latter makes him lose hope of ever being competitive. Skill gap needs to be tuned, not made a cliff.

On the side of fiction, it makes no sense that a round pinging off of a shield would suddenly be doing more damage depending on where it hits. It's not increasing in velocity nor mass when made a headshot, it's not hitting a shield generator, and the shield being "weaker" over the head region makes no damn sense whatsoever. It makes much more sense for unshielded bodies to take differing amounts of damage based on location. A bullet to the brain consistently kills; a bullet to the leg does not consistently kill.
This I agree completely with. The BR was crazy versatile, but other weapons were much more niche.

Yea, I'm all for making the skill gap bigger, and the learning curve. If Bungie can get their matchmaking down then the noobs won't be getting destroyed for long enough to even know how they are dying so fast. For the Arena mode though, skill gap is paramount to distinguish players, as long as people can succeed at a base level and the experts can beat them with skill and mastery, I don't see a problem. Competitive multiplayer is always frustrating, no one likes losing, but for me, as a competitive player it's necessary for the game. I'm sure Sirlin could explain it better but, I agree with his side of game design and his style of play.

For the fiction side of things, I don't care, realism should never be taken over good game design in my opinion. There are plenty of things in Halo that don't really make sense. If shot placement effecting damage to a contiguous shield doesn't exactly sit well with the fiction, so be it, it's more competitive.

 

[Not a Jellyfish]

And that looks to be the exact same problem with the pistol, as compared to the DMR and AR. Yes, its not necessarily the absolute BEST option at either close or long range, but you're never very vulnerable at either range and potentially at a huge advantage at the middle-range gap.

The pistol overlaps so many niche roles that, when players are faced with only two weapon slots, they'll likely opt for the weapon that keeps them safe in EVERY situation instead of the weapons that dominate in one situation and are worthless in every other.

10 years later, Bungie is making the same balancing mistakes, and its once again centered around a freaking pistol.

Okay, okay lets wait to play the Beta till we make the claim that Bungie is making the same balancing mistakes they made 10 years ago...granted they didn't even make that mistake as it has been stated the pistol of CE had a damage boost due to a bug. :lol

 

[Booshka]

Okay, okay lets wait to play the Beta till we make the claim that Bungie is making the same balancing mistakes they made 10 years ago...granted they didn't even make that mistake as it has been stated the pistol of CE had a damage boost due to a bug. :lol

John Howard said it was intentional

 

[Kapura]

And that looks to be the exact same problem with the pistol, as compared to the DMR and AR. Yes, its not necessarily the absolute BEST option at either close or long range, but you're never very vulnerable at either range and potentially at a huge advantage at the middle-range gap.

The pistol overlaps so many niche roles that, when players are faced with only two weapon slots, they'll likely opt for the weapon that keeps them safe in EVERY situation instead of the weapons that dominate in one situation and are worthless in every other.

10 years later, Bungie is making the same balancing mistakes, and its once again centered around a freaking pistol.

I don't think it's the same mistake; it is, at worst, a different one. My impression from the podcast is that it's not super accurate, while the BR was the most accurate weapon behind the sniper rifle class weapons. The DMR will have a slightly higher zoom, as well as being more accurate. The AR will put more bullets into the air with less aim required; better at close range. Again, this is just assumption and guesswork, but their rebalancing of the sandbox seems very well thought out. We'll see in the beta.

 

[EazyB]

Wow, that sounds really terrible, since it essentially renders the AR worthless. If there's no range or situation in which it excels, then WTF even include it in the damn game? IMO, if a pistol and AR go at it within AR range, assuming every shot lands, then victory should come down to whomever uses grenades or melees most effectively. From what Im reading, the pistol will always have the advantage, making everyone that bothers to use the AR an idiot. Lame.

Because the pistol is only better if you're really good at landing precision shots and with toned down auto-aim it'll be harder to do that than ever. If I had my way there wouldn't be any spray and pray weapons in Halo. Then again, if I had my way my girlfriend and the millions of other casual Halo players would get extremely frustrated at how hard it is to take someone down with the pistol.

With a AR that is almost always worse than the pistol it's like they're effectively taking it out of highly competitive gameplay. I get what I want. But to the million that wouldn't be able to take down someone as fast with the pistol, they can spray away with the AR and if MM is doing its job than the people they're playing against are also spraying away with their ARs until they meet in a glorious simultaneous beatdown.

They get their approachable, noob-friendly gameplay, and I don't have to worry about something being rewarded for spraying like a madman while I'm laying down skillfully placed bullets from my magnum.

Again, lame. Why the hell would I put forth the effort of grabbing the DMR if the pistol I spawn with is more effective at mid-range and only slightly less effective at mid-long range. The accuracy of the pistol better drop like a rock the instant the projectile exits mid-range, otherwise it will simultaneously render the DMR and the AR less useful in their respective roles then they ought to be. That sounds like poor weapon balance to me, every weapon should have a clearly designed role.

As I see it, having not touched either weapon, they occupy about the same range of versatility. The pistol is the most versatile weapon from close-mid and the DMR is more versatile from mid to long. At mid range it'll be a toss up and really up to how the player performs to see which one will win out. The pistol will have the disadvantage of missing shots at this range while the DMR will fire at a slower rate so they kinda balance out at midrange. On smaller maps where CQC occures most often, you'll probably want to be carrying a pistol and maybe a DMR if you can't find a better long range weapon for those relatively rare moments the opponent is far away and you have a long line of sight on them. On bigger maps you'll want the DMR as it'll prove more useful. Just be glad the BR doesn't occupy both of these roles as it did in 2 and 3. Maybe the needle rifle will slot in as the most versatile close/mid to mid/long range weapon, throwing a little more flavor in there.

Of course each of these versatile weapons are complimented by strong, situational weapons like the shotgun and sniper which'll always have their uses. The rest of your post is dumb or I already touch up on it in my other post on this page.

 

[Blueblur1]

What I found slightly interesting was the name of the "shield" Armour Ability - Armour Lock.

Makes sense really. If you remember the opening cinematic of Halo 3 when the Chief is being recovered from atmospheric re-entry, it's mentioned that the outer gel layer of his armour harden in order to protect from the powerful impact as he landed.

Nice little consistency between the games. If the Chief can survive the fall, you should be able to survive a vehicular impact. Might explain the flash of light and the explosion of the Ghost in the trailer. If the suit locks into position, you essentially become a brick wall and whilst your shield is blown away by the impact, you'll be safe and sound.

The vehicle blowing up makes sense too, not many vehicles are designed to boost straight into a wall. It explodes from the impact rather than some kind of power drain/EMP effect.

Sorry if this brought up before, I'm just shocked I didn't make the connection earlier without the name.

Awesome!

 

[Tashi]

I've leaned towards making each weapon more versatile and many would probably disagree with me on that. But there is without a doubt a danger to slotting each weapon into a situational niche. Like one of the Bungie dudes said in thier GDC presentation, rock, papers, scissors doesn't work. It's not fun. And personally I don't think it facilitates a competitive environment. If each gun is limited to being decent in a certain situation encounters turn into whoever has the right weapon for that situation wins. The outcome is set in stone and there's no wiggle room. The more and more versatile the weapons get, while maintaining a degree of situational advantage, the more interesting firefights become. Certainly in a given encounter one gun will be more suitable for than the other, but if the underdog is skilled or creative enough they can come out on top. Of course you can go too far in this direction and make all weapons equally viable in all situations but that destroys the strategic value of picking up a specific weapon to best approach a given player or map location. It's this balance that's vital to keep in mind while slotting individual weapons into roles and deciding their weapon properties.

There's nothing wrong with the BR in Halo 3. It's about as versatile as most guns should be, the problem was almost all the other guns were so situational or just straight up worthless that the BR was the only weapon to turn to. The BR only had a small window at which it was hands down the best weapon to turn to, but it was viable at a broad spectrum of ranges so the player always had a chance even if they were outclasses for a given situation. If there were 3 or 4 weapons with BR-levels of versatility than it wouldn't always been the BR people hung on to. Reach seems to be improving this with both the pistol and DMR occupying a wide array of uses but maintaining their own identity at the same time. Hopefully the other skill-based weapons follow suit and the needle rifle finds a similar home.

Wow, I love you EazyB. You've said almost exactly what I wanted to say but I couldn't word it properly.

I'm giving Bungie the benefit of the doubt and I hope they can bring me back to the Halo player I was while playing Halo 2 and the start of Halo 3.

And that looks to be the exact same problem with the pistol, as compared to the DMR and AR. Yes, its not necessarily the absolute BEST option at either close or long range, but you're never very vulnerable at either range and potentially at a huge advantage at the middle-range gap.

The pistol overlaps so many niche roles that, when players are faced with only two weapon slots, they'll likely opt for the weapon that keeps them safe in EVERY situation instead of the weapons that dominate in one situation and are worthless in every other.

10 years later, Bungie is making the same balancing mistakes, and its once again centered around a freaking pistol.

I don't get this vibe at all. I don't think the magnum is the new BR but I don't think the DMR is the new BR either. I think the key is to have both.

 

[Teknoman]

Im still looking forward to the game, I just really hope that the AR, pistol, DMR all have separate, useful roles.

Agreed. Really dont like when MP in a shooter just comes down to using 2-3 different weapons.

EDIT: Well EazyB knows how the weapons should work.

 

[dslgunstar]

Because the pistol is only better if you're really good at landing precision shots and with toned down auto-aim it'll be harder to do that than ever. If I had my way there wouldn't be any spray and pray weapons in Halo. Then again, if I had my way my girlfriend and the millions of other casual Halo players would get extremely frustrated at how hard it is to take someone down with the pistol.

With a AR that is almost always worse than the pistol it's like they're effectively taking it out of highly competitive gameplay. I get what I want. But to the million that wouldn't be able to take down someone as fast with the pistol, they can spray away with the AR and if MM is doing its job than the people they're playing against are also spraying away with their ARs until they meet in a glorious simultaneous beatdown.

They get their approachable, noob-friendly gameplay, and I don't have to worry about something being rewarded for spraying like a madman while I'm laying down skillfully placed bullets from my magnum.



As I see it, having not touched either weapon, they occupy about the same range of versatility. The pistol is the most versatile weapon from close-mid and the DMR is more versatile from mid to long. At mid range it'll be a toss up and really up to how the player performs to see which one will win out. The pistol will have the disadvantage of missing shots at this range while the DMR will fire at a slower rate so they kinda balance out at midrange. On smaller maps where CQC occures most often, you'll probably want to be carrying a pistol and maybe a DMR if you can't find a better long range weapon for those relatively rare moments the opponent is far away and you have a long line of sight on them. On bigger maps you'll want the DMR as it'll prove more useful. Just be glad the BR doesn't occupy both of these roles as it did in 2 and 3. Maybe the needle rifle will slot in as the most versatile close/mid to mid/long range weapon, throwing a little more flavor in there.

Of course each of these versatile weapons are complimented by strong, situational weapons like the shotgun and sniper which'll always have their uses. The rest of your post is dumb or I already touch up on it in my other post on this page.

Thanks for that.

Id say my fears for the pistol are valid since they are the same mistakes that Bungie made with the pistol in Halo: CE, and then the BR in Halo 3. Every single Halo game has been dominated by a go-too weapon that is more versatile than any other weapon in the game (except for Halo 2, which had the BR, dual-wielding and the sniper all vying to top honors as the most broken weapon in the game). In a game that limits players to two weapons, players will ALWAYS go for the weapon that makes them less vulnerable in more situations than a weapon that excels in only one.

 

[JaggedSac]

I am liking the fact that encounters take longer to resolve. Much more interesting combat.

Everything is sounding really good at this point.

 

[neoism]

Sooo!? Are we going all out for H2 April 10th! Gaf customs for halo 2!??

 

[Ramirez]

Wow, that sounds really terrible, since it essentially renders the AR worthless. If there's no range or situation in which it excels, then WTF even include it in the damn game? IMO, if a pistol and AR go at it within AR range, assuming every shot lands, then victory should come down to whomever uses grenades or melees most effectively. From what Im reading, the pistol will always have the advantage, making everyone that bothers to use the AR an idiot. Lame.

Awesome.

 

[Not a Jellyfish]

John Howard said it was intentional

Well then someone on recent podcast is lying. :lol

 

[neoism]

Except it really doesn't.
Trueskill in Halo 3 is at its best and most accurate in Free For All, otherwise there are all kinds of other variables (like your teammates) that are contributing to your Rank going up or down. That it positively reinforced your beliefs that you were improving is by design - because we decelerated Trueskill in H3 to artificially introduce a progression. It's not you manipulating Trueskill, it's really the other way around.

Additionally, (in H3) there's all kinds of other factors that result in people getting carried to particular ranks by players. Winning as a Team in the Arena will be important, but we're not submitting your team results to Trueskill, we're submitting yours.

 

[dslgunstar]

Awesome.

How is it awesome to make a weapon worthless? Or were you a fan of the Spiker in Halo 3?

 

[neoism]

Last night's HaloGAF Customs contained a slight surprise for me. Apparently Bagel and my girlfriend worked together for this:



There's a short video on the site (without audio, thankfully or you'd hear me swearing at Bagel a lot!).

Spoiler

I said yes, as the folks earlier gave away. =P

So thanks everyone that showed last night, thanks Bagel

Spoiler

FUCK YOU=p

, thanks to the wonderful love of my life (who actually posted in this thread last night, hah!) and everyone else for a great time last night!

damn congrats!

 

[RebornYeti]

Whoa... Grenade Launcher has detonation. That's so cool!

 

[feel]

How 'bout we play the Beta first, hmm?

NO!!!!!!

5 or 6 more pages of wall of text arguments from people without any hands on experience, please.

 

[Booshka]

Well then someone on recent podcast is lying. :lol

Yea I heard that, I was like, I dont remember it being an accident. There was a transcript of an interview where someone asked if the Halo 1 Pistol's damage was a mistake, and he said, No.

 

[neoism]

Except the magnum has a zoom.

Good to hear that a ViDoc is coming this month.

1. The FOV is 78 degrees in Reach, Halo 3 was about 60 degrees.
2. At the base level, you move slower than the Chief (not including sprint).
3. Jump heights are "a little more realistic." It's a little more grounded.
4. Lunge range is shorter than it was in Halo 3, but it's not really noticeable.
5. It takes two melees to kill a player: one to take down the shields, the other to kill.
6. You aren't invulnerable when carrying out an assassination animation - you can still be killed.
7. Five headshots to kill someone with the DMR, five headshots to kill someone with the magnum. Differences between the guns are mainly rate of fire, accuracy, and range. The DMR fires more slowly but it can reach you from farther away. The range of the magnum "plays ideally right outside AR range": a very skilled magnum user can take down a guy with an AR.
8. Frags are more dangerous in Reach; they're more sparse on the map. Less grenade spam than in Halo 3. Larger blast radius.
9. As others have mentioned, you can shoot grenades.
10. The grenade arc in Reach is different from Halo 3. It's not that much of a difference, but "you're going to have to relearn some stuff." If you're sprinting and you throw a grenade, you'll throw it farther.
11. Secondary fire on the grenade launcher
12. You "gotta be trying to hurt yourself" to receive fall damage in Reach. The stun is back if you hit the ground hard.
13. For health and shields, it'll take a longer time than in Halo 3 for them to recharge. Health also recharges, but it recharges "at thresholds." If you're about to die, your health is going to regenerate so that a single scratch isn't going to kill you, but you'll still have to go out and search for health packs.
14. Health and shields on Elites and Spartans are different. Elites are larger, so they have more health and more shields. The time it takes to kill an Elite with the AR on the open battlefield is very close to that of a Spartan. It takes 6 DMR headshots to kill an Elite.
15. The beta will only feature Spartan on Spartan whereas the final product may feature Elite on Elite as well.
16. Player encounters in Reach will be longer than it was in halo 3.
17. Almost everything that is coming back from Halo 3 has been tweaked in some way.
18. There have been changes made to the sword combat.
19. In regards to sandbox changes, there is no "uber weapon." There is no particular loadout that dominates all the rest.
20. As I suspected, there are no spikers or SMGs in Reach.
21. Aim assist is on a "per weapon setting."
22. Sniper is "even more of a weapon for adults."

I got about as much out of this podcast as I was expecting (which was a lot and that's what I got). Everything I'm hearing sounds good, and it looks like I'll be using the sniper even less than I did in Halo 3 (though that's probably for the best). I'm really glad to hear that there isn't one loadout of weapons that'll dominate all the others.

I hope to see Elite on Elite in the final product because that's something you'll find me, I think, playing quite consistently.

It's good to hear that your health doesn't regenerate back to full, and that it also doesn't leave you in the position where a single bullet to anywhere in the body will kill you (which would've been really annoying). I'm glad to hear confirmation that the FOV has been increased.

As far as fall damage is concerned, even though it's in there, it sounds like it only affects you extreme circumstances, so I'm alright with it. I'm really looking forward to feeling the differences between how and an Elite and a Spartan plays.

I would have loved to have heard about some of the changes to the vehicles as well as what some of the tweaks to the AR are, but I guess that'll be further down the line.

Props to Urk, Luke, and the rest of the podcast crew. Thank you!

 

[advent29]

Sooo!? Are we going all out for H2 April 10th! Gaf customs for halo 2!??

That sounds like win.

 

[Kapura]

Yea I heard that, I was like, I dont remember it being an accident. There was a transcript of an interview where someone asked if the Halo 1 Pistol's damage was a mistake, and he said, No.

My understanding is the damage was doubled to change something in campaign, but it unexpectedly also carried over to multiplayer. So it was an intentional change, but bugged MP.

 

[Sai-kun]

Sooo!? Are we going all out for H2 April 10th! Gaf customs for halo 2!??

Oh shit that's in like 2 weeks.

God damn.

 

[Trasher]

nm

 

[Thagomizer]

My understanding is the damage was doubled to change something in campaign, but it unexpectedly also carried over to multiplayer. So it was an intentional change, but bugged MP.

That's not a bug. That's just bad balancing.

 

[Deputy Moonman]

I deleted this post to avoid problems.

 

[KidA Seven]

Regarding the CE pistol, I'm pretty sure Howard did say the pistol damage was intentional despite some Bungie staff saying it was by accident. I believe the interview took place when he was working on Shadowrun? Maybe on their forums?

Oh and Luke is awesome... makes the podcast entertaining.

 

[LAUGHTREY]

I don't think I talked to anyone who enjoys Luke Smith on the podcast.

 

[Booshka]

Regarding the CE pistol, I'm pretty sure Howard did say the pistol damage was intentional despite some Bungie staff saying it was by accident. I believe the interview took place when he was working on Shadowrun?

That's exactly what I remember, I think it was an IGN interview. I know there were FASA development blogs on that site, so I think he was interviewed by them a few times and they asked him about the CE Pistol.

 

[Not a Jellyfish]

That's exactly what I remember, I think it was an IGN interview. I know there were FASA development blogs on that site, so I think he was interviewed by them a few times and they asked him about the CE Pistol.

Just weird to have conflicting things come out, recent podcast they have talked about it getting a damage boost due to a bug that popped up right before it ship. Just interesting to see a conspiracy around one of the greatest video game weapons of all time.

 

[Apath]

I swear, some of you just want the DMR and Sniper to be the only weapons in the game.

EDIT: And pistol too =P

 

[Sai-kun]

I don't think I talked to anyone who enjoys Luke Smith on the podcast.

Talking to yourself doesn't count!

 

[Tashi]

Damn, talk about slumps. I'm rocking a sick 48 in MLG right now lol. Losing 19 out of the last 24 games will do that to ya. On the brightside, the awesome winning streak I'll need to get my 50 back will indeed be awesome.

 

[Nutter]

Damn, talk about slumps. I'm rocking a sick 48 in MLG right now lol. Losing 19 out of the last 24 games will do that to ya. On the brightside, the awesome winning streak I'll need to get my 50 back will indeed be awesome.

Poor Tashi.. getting old is going to do that to you.

Next Year you wont even get to a lvl 45 equivalent in Reach.

Spoiler

Ill be surprised if I reach that high myself, getting old!, besides I never got my 50 playing with gaffers anyway, it was on my own

In other news, not a single game lagged tonight. [Most games I had host too]

 

[Thermite]

How is it awesome to make a weapon worthless? Or were you a fan of the Spiker in Halo 3?

I'm really not seeing how it makes one or the other completely worthless. For those who like to just spray-n-pray, the AR is there for you. For those who like to use the weapons that require much more skill to pull off a kill, there's the much improved pistol.

With this setup Bungie really is appealing to both crowds, which is why I'm so hopeful we'll always spawn with a pistol as our secondary during AR start gametypes.

In other news, not a single game lagged tonight. [Most games I had host too]

Yep, tonight's matchmaking games were pretty awesome.

 

[Tashi]

Poor Tashi.. getting old is going to do that to you.

Next Year you wont even get to a lvl 45 equivalent in Reach.

Spoiler

Ill be surprised if I reach that high myself, getting old!, besides I never got my 50 playing with gaffers anyway, it was on my own

In other news, not a single game lagged tonight. [Most games I had host too]

:lol :lol

 

[GhaleonEB]

The podcast was both informative and really entertaining. They're always the latter, but it's nice we're at the point where they can be both. Don't get the Luke hate; the entire show was pretty hilarious, and he helped move it along. The life advice budding up through it was pretty funny.

 

[Shake Appeal]

I mostly agree with what Eazy is saying*, but I would say there is something wrong with the BR in Halo 2 (and Halo 3, to a slightly lesser degree): it's overpowered. Don't get me wrong, I love it to death, it's my favourite gun in a game ever (seriously), but it is too flexible, and too powerful, and it dominates the sandbox. What Ghaleon described about the sphere of usefulness within which the AR/Mag/DMR are all viable -- in different situations, in the hands of different players -- sounds far more nuanced and potentially rewarding than always having to scurry around to find a BR because I'm at a disadvantage without, at almost any range.

I suspect that once we get over our collective BR dependence and play in a more balanced sandbox, we may even grow to like AR starts, because we won't feel so gimped when we spawn.

*This is a great post.

 

[Domino Theory]

I suspect that once we get over our collective BR dependence and play in a more balanced sandbox, we may even grow to like AR starts, because we won't feel so gimped when we spawn.

lolno.

 

[Shake Appeal]

Hey, I hate it too, but I think turning the BR into the slower (but more precise, and more tuned to mid-range) DMR means the AR will become much more useful as a result, at least at short to mid-range, and especially among players who don't have the skill to consistently land magnum shots at the fringes of its effective range. The AR is still going to be a weapon I dump in favour of something single-shot, but at least you aren't going to get donged on at almost every range if you are carrying one.

If anything, Bungie are raising the skill bar for people too dependent on the BR. Mastering precise, rhythmic pumps of the DMR or skirting the range at which magnum headshots become viable is going to be a fun time. MLG dudez get their hitscan weapons, but now they have to be sharper shots than ever.

 

[Domino Theory]

 

[Nutter]

If anything needed a skill bar raise, it was the AR.. any 5 year old can use the AR to its full purpose. Shoot run melee.. It is a very user friendly weapon. So what is this talk about the BR being in the need to have its skill bar raised? Im happy with the DMR AND the pistol, but making them harder to use and to get a kill is something I dont agree with. Just ask the many people in this thread who come to the customs, there is a clear skill gap with the BR within the players. Same goes with sniping. But with that said if the pistol is available along side the AR at spawn, I will never be using the AR.

With melee being changed up the way it is. I am going to enjoy taking down the AR runners in Reach. No longer can they shoot 6 bullets into someone, melee and get a kill.

 

[von zipp]

soooo looking forward to this game.

great podcast too

 

[Shake Appeal]

If anything needed a skill bar raise, it was the AR.. any 5 year old can use the AR to its full purpose. Shoot run melee.. It is a very user friendly weapon. So what is this talk about the BR being in the need to have its skill bar raised?

From the sounds of it, because of hitscan and decreased autoaim (and rhythmic single-shot firing, rather than the BRs burst), there are going to be fewer excuses for missing than before. The bar has been raised both in terms of aiming and firing weapons like the magnum and DMR, but also in terms of knowing when to use which, or to switch to something else entirely. Ideally, everything is going to be more situational and nuanced, and you can't just easily default to your BR/DMR... which also means you won't be at such a disadvantage when you don't have one.

People who meet that bar are probably going to end up schooling the guys spraying and praying with the AR, but they're going to have to learn some new (situational) skills, and they'll have fewer reasons to bitch when the AR guy wins out. Meanwhile, those spray and pray AR users are going to have a better time of it generally when matched up against "good" players (like me!), but not great ones (like you).

Then again, we haven't heard very much about the AR yet, so it's difficult to speculate.