Forums / Games / Halo Infinite

Duel Wielding Energy Swords

OP LordGH03

Something in Infinite that would be extremely cool would be duel wielding, however, not just normal duel wielding, something new to spice things up. What if you could duel wield energy swords!?! I know it sounds unbalanced, but I have a solution. You can only lunge while using both of them at the same time, and when you lunge with both of them you do a swiping motion with both of your arms in an "X" like formation. Also, in between both the swords is a sort of magnetic field, that occasionally has little lightning strikes between the swords, resembling that they are connected. So when you use one energy sword and 10 points of ammo is used up, some of the other sword is used up too, using 5 points. This would be not only a cool feature, but a useful and balanced one.
So to recap:
-Holding R2 and L2 raises the swords up, and if an enemy is in range you can lunge.
-When using both swords to lunge you swipe in an X like formation with your arms
-When in idle, occasional lightning strikes between the swords occur and a slight blue mist connects them
-If you use one sword and not the other, they both still use energy(10pts for main sword, and 5pts for the other)
[BONUS]
If there are multiple variations of an energy sword like in Halo 5, maybe they could have different effects when combined
I would love to see the idea implemented for screenshots and machinma purposes. For gameplay I dont think it would work on your traditional Halo maps that typically feature one energy sword for the whole map.
I can already imagine a halo adaptation of sword art online and a spartan version of Kirito dual wielding some long energy swords.
Energy Swords already delete any adversary with one swipe. There is foreseeable need for two, especially at additional energy expenditure.
I'm in the unpopular camp of opinion that dual wielding shouldn't return at all, so I'm not in favor. Even if it does, I don't see much point in dual wielding energy swords- they're already practically single-hit melee weapons, so it's hard to imagine their utility switching up much with two as opposed to one.
I don’t really see the need or the point...UNLESS you did a specific game mode called “sword fight” or something where the crossing the swords like you mentioned is effectively a “block” mechanic. Now that would be pretty cool. Also the idle occasional lightning animation sounds pretty cool.
I don't think this would work well with Halo's map design. Most 4v4 maps with energy swords only feature one, and often have a shotgun or two as a countermeasure. Doubling the number of swords would have the potential to make maps close-quarter nightmares. Assault rifles and magnums can only counter an energy sword at medium range, and would become useless in a match where everyone is lunging at each other.
What about dual wielding an energy sword and an "energy shield"?
For Castle Wars purposes obviously!
this appears to me like a cheap and rather useless gimmick.
What about dual wielding an energy sword and an "energy shield"?
For Castle Wars purposes obviously!
Technically you're already doing that. Every Spartan has energy shields.
But sure, that'd be cool if there was a gamemode where you wielded both an energy sword and energy shield gauntlet (AKA Jackal shield).
I don't think this would work well with Halo's map design. Most 4v4 maps with energy swords only feature one, and often have a shotgun or two as a countermeasure. Doubling the number of swords would have the potential to make maps close-quarter nightmares. Assault rifles and magnums can only counter an energy sword at medium range, and would become useless in a match where everyone is lunging at each other.
Not necessary needs to be like that.
Just need to reduce the energy he can carry, increase more time to respawn the map and done.
And I am deducing this in competitive terms only. There is campaign, and social modes that's not require competitive skills to play: only for entereteinament.
I remember a vidoc from halo 2 where an elite was dual wielding, it looks sick but when pressed on it Bungie said there would be no need, I think 343 is sticking to that philosophy
Say you have a jackal shield in your off hand and a sword that would be sick
While dual-wielding 2 Energy Swords is badass and all, in gameplay, it's actually more harmful and helpful.
  1. Just having 1 sword blinding one side of the screen is enough, but having 2 in each side means you have a discount blind skull.
  2. By "Holding LT and RT will raise the swords" I think you just want a mechanic that allows you to deflect bullets and everything with the swords. It's a cool mechanic, and very useful, but given the Spartan's unnatural reactions, only 1 sword is enough. Remember Halo Legends: The Package? (I'm not against the idea).
  3. Doing the actions myself, attacking with 2x T1 Energy Swords in an X formation feels and looks off. The move could only work in an uppercut and it'd still leave you VERY open (your chest and below would be wide open), which is definitely not how a Spartan would do it.
    When using a weapon (let's use the traditional Human sword for reference), you want to make sure your moves can strike the opponents while staying in a defensible position (in other words, attacking while remaining with as few openings as possible). Given how maneuverable the swords are, you have many possibilities to attack while remaining defensive, potentially surprising the opponent with one of your moves which could allow you to strike a hit.
    The Energy Sword doesn't even come close to a traditional sword. While it's light, it's not nearly as maneuverable, the weapon's fatal flaw. Having 2 Energy Swords compensate this immensely, as anyone can suddenly strike while using the other for defense. But using both your swords offensively in an X formation would leave you equally open as you'd be with just 1, effectively meaning that using both swords has no advantage whatsoever and is an inferior tactic, strengthening the point that dual-wielding Energy Swords only looks cool but is more detrimental in gameplay.
  4. Quote:
    -If you use one sword and not the other, they both still use energy(10pts for main sword, and 5pts for the other)
    Honestly, that wouldn't make sense. Adding that mechanic further proves that dual-wielding swords sucks
I'm up for dual-wielding to return, even if it means we'd have a separate weapons for that (like the SMGs in Spartan Assault and Strike), but dual-wielding Energy Sword is naturally a flawed concept in a gameplay perspective.
I feel like this would be a problem and seem hard to do. People would complain because the sword alone is op. Dual wielding is over for now. I don’t see it coming back anytime but if they do it should only be for the smg.
I feel like this would be a problem and seem hard to do. People would complain because the sword alone is op. Dual wielding is over for now. I don’t see it coming back anytime but if they do it should only be for the smg.
dude. what about the other dual wieldable weapons? I understand the energy sword not being dual wieldable but what about plasma rifles, pistols, needlers, spikers, and many other small arms that could be dual wielded? I kinda miss the dual wield function a bit. It was great being able to fire my left weapon while reloading my right weapon and vice versa.
xeosax wrote:
I feel like this would be a problem and seem hard to do. People would complain because the sword alone is op. Dual wielding is over for now. I don’t see it coming back anytime but if they do it should only be for the smg.
dude. what about the other dual wieldable weapons? I understand the energy sword not being dual wieldable but what about plasma rifles, pistols, needlers, spikers, and many other small arms that could be dual wielded? I kinda miss the dual wield function a bit. It was great being able to fire my left weapon while reloading my right weapon and vice versa.
It’s just a thing of the past. Kind of made the weapons op. Maybe it could be an ability or something. Just my opinion on this matter.
I've suggested this idea before, sadly the majority of responses say it's a bad idea overall. Oh well. Can't please them all.