Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

Can we get rid of spartan charge in all playlists

OP Peyote Wizard

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 4
  4. 5
  5. ...
  6. 6
While we're at it, they should remove Sprint and Clamber and give us back the mobility we had in classic Halo games.
I feel like this view is very misguided on its own, and assumes a bunch of things no one ever said. I mean, according to your profile and a different comment you made, you don't even like Spartan Charge and was glad that it was removed from HCS. Why isn't that turning your nose away from innovation right there?

If wanting to remove things is simply driven by nostalgia, can I say that anyone that likes Halo 5's abilities are blinded by a sense of novelty bias? It's not like we haven't removed things before, look at what happened to Loadouts. We got rid of something "new" for equal starts which has been around since Halo CE and for some "weird" reason, most people are okay with that. What happened to innovation there?

No one said they wanted a clone of Halo 2 and Halo 3. Those who are are asking for Halo 2/3 Anniversary, a game designed to be clones of the original. If the abilities are all that makes the difference between "old" Halo and "modern" Halo, I guess those abilities must not be very substantial.

Removing Sprint isn't the same as "slowing Halo down." If you're looking for speed, there are many other ways to recreate that.

Halo 5's very existence as a popular game is due to all the things we removed from Halo 4, things that many people would have considered "innovation" back then and not being like an "old 2000s shooter." So far, removing things that people don't like have shown to work, and Halo 5 is a living example of it.
Yikes. Take it easy, there. I may not have put enough empahsis on it, but I tried to use language that implied there are always exceptions. I wasn't meaning to come off as making all-encompassing blanket statements that I was insisting were fact and not just my opinion. So that's my fault and I'll take it as a lesson about being much more careful with what I say in these forums.

I definitely wasn't trying for an "all-or-nothing," angle. I just felt that the earlier post I quoted about removing sprint and clamber as well was going too far and throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I never said all innovation is always objectively good, and that newer is always better.

What I meant by turning a nose up at innovation was in reference to the negative attitude given to H5 by those who felt that even trying to be new and different was a mistake. So if we're both just going to scrutinize the nuanced details of posts, I also never said that taking things out of the game that end up not working or not being popular with the players goes against the spirit of innovation and change. Your response also makes plenty of its own incorrect assumptions, like bringing in the Anniversary games which I also never said anything about. So, maybe tone it down a little?

Like my intentional exaggeration about a desire for H2/H3 clones. It was an exaggeration and it was intentional in a joking fashion to emphasize how I think removing Sprint and Clamber is going too far and taking too many steps backwards. Those literal, exact words may not have been said in this exact thread, but the sentiment of wanting a returning to classic mobility does exist and can be found among Halos players. I am allowed to disagree with it.

I definitely have worded my earlier post differently if I had known it would be ripped apart under a microscope for the sake of being argumentative. I'll certainly refrain from taking a casual attitude with anything I post on waypoint in the future.
While we're at it, they should remove Sprint and Clamber and give us back the mobility we had in classic Halo games.
I feel like this view is very misguided on its own, and assumes a bunch of things no one ever said. I mean, according to your profile and a different comment you made, you don't even like Spartan Charge and was glad that it was removed from HCS. Why isn't that turning your nose away from innovation right there?

If wanting to remove things is simply driven by nostalgia, can I say that anyone that likes Halo 5's abilities are blinded by a sense of novelty bias? It's not like we haven't removed things before, look at what happened to Loadouts. We got rid of something "new" for equal starts which has been around since Halo CE and for some "weird" reason, most people are okay with that. What happened to innovation there?

No one said they wanted a clone of Halo 2 and Halo 3. Those who are are asking for Halo 2/3 Anniversary, a game designed to be clones of the original. If the abilities are all that makes the difference between "old" Halo and "modern" Halo, I guess those abilities must not be very substantial.

Removing Sprint isn't the same as "slowing Halo down." If you're looking for speed, there are many other ways to recreate that.

Halo 5's very existence as a popular game is due to all the things we removed from Halo 4, things that many people would have considered "innovation" back then and not being like an "old 2000s shooter." So far, removing things that people don't like have shown to work, and Halo 5 is a living example of it.
Yikes. Take it easy, there. I may not have put enough empahsis on it, but I tried to use language that implied there are always exceptions. I wasn't meaning to come off as making all-encompassing blanket statements that I was insisting were fact and not just my opinion. So that's my fault and I'll take it as a lesson about being much more careful with what I say in these forums.

I definitely wasn't trying for an "all-or-nothing," angle. I just felt that the earlier post I quoted about removing sprint and clamber as well was going too far and throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I never said all innovation is always objectively good, and that newer is always better.

What I meant by turning a nose up at innovation was in reference to the negative attitude given to H5 by those who felt that even trying to be new and different was a mistake. So if we're both just going to scrutinize the nuanced details of posts, I also never said that taking things out of the game that end up not working or not being popular with the players goes against the spirit of innovation and change. Your response also makes plenty of its own incorrect assumptions, like bringing in the Anniversary games which I also never said anything about. So, maybe tone it down a little?

Like my intentional exaggeration about a desire for H2/H3 clones. It was an exaggeration and it was intentional in a joking fashion to emphasize how I think removing Sprint and Clamber is going too far and taking too many steps backwards. Those literal, exact words may not have been said in this exact thread, but the sentiment of wanting a returning to classic mobility does exist and can be found among Halos players. I am allowed to disagree with it.

I definitely have worded my earlier post differently if I had known it would be ripped apart under a microscope for the sake of being argumentative. I'll certainly refrain from taking a casual attitude with anything I post on waypoint in the future.
I'm actually in a pretty content and "neutral" mood, and was in no way trying to be hostile. What I did was ask a number of questions and said that most people aren't saying the things you claimed they said.

It's okay to disagree with "classic" Halo and you're more than welcome to do so; however, you go on to call that view "autistic screeching." I fail to see a lot of room to imply sarcasm and jokes under a sweeping generalization like that.

I don't see removing Sprint and Clamber as throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Using that analogy, I actually consider them to be the "bathwater," getting rid of them for similar reasons as people wanting to get rid of Spartan Charge right now.
This post reminds me of something, fellow classic fans lets go back to 2012:

Classic fans: Remove loadouts, killcams, bring back equal starts. This is not Halo...

Halo 4 fans: ADAPT HATER! THIS IS HALO NOW! LOAOUTS AND KILLCAMS ARE HERE TO STAY!!!! GO PLAY HALO 3!

343 on Halo 5: We are removing loadouts, killcams, and bringing back equal starts.

Halo 4 fans: SEE HATERS? 343 LISTENS TO THEIR COMMUNITY! I CANT WAIT FOR HALO 5!!

Classic fans: ...........

Caps used to emphasise the number of people that would descend on you when you *dared* to ask for the removal of loadouts/killcams, and now the removal of sprint/spartan charge etc.

It would not be far fetched to assume sprint and spartan charge are next in the bin. I would guarantee if 343 removes these and these fans actually gave that game a go they would like it....You all did not listen when we said equal starts are better, but then when they did it with Halo 5 it was unanimous praise for 343....
It's not Halo's go to weapon though, especially when you are trying to counter close quarters attacks.
Utility weapon or "go-to weapon" doesn't mean it's a weapon that counters every situation or something that works perfectly in all situations. If anything, it's closer to "Jack of all trades, master of none" (though recent history shows Halo's utility weapons tend to excel in mid range, so more like "master of one"). The utility weapon is again, the weapon the sandbox revolves around, and the weapon most people tend to use in average situations. The niche weapons are used for their specific roles, which is why they are not go-to weapons.

You don't see anyone upset that the Pistol can't beat the Sniper Rifle, because it isn't meant for long range. But you could probably hit someone with it one time if you're good enough. Get into mid-range distance, and the Pistol fares much better.

You don't see anyone upset that the Pistol can't beat the Shotgun, because it's not as good in close range. But you might be able to hit someone or melee someone instead. Back up into mid-range distance, and again the Pistol dominates.

"Part of the reason you're here is because the magnum doesn't counter spartan charge so well." - I've said nothing of the sort. No one here did.

You're the one that made the assumption that because I use the Pistol a lot, I "obviously" over-rely on it and therefore tried to use it on a Spartan Charge and it failed. You assume that I'm here because Spartan Charge keeps killing me, when I haven't said that either. You've actually been prone to making a lot of assumptions here beyond the fact that maybe some people just don't like Spartan Charge and find it a bad game mechanic.

I could just as easily call you over-reliant on the Battle Rifle due to the fact that you have more kills with that over the Assault Rifle.

I still use the Assault Rifle when the situation calls for it, including Spartan Charge. I still have kills under it. I just am placed in more situations where the Pistol is just as useful, if not more useful, than using the Assault Rifle. I don't have a lot of melee kills either, implying that I don't always spend my time trying to get into close range if I don't have to. Someone a few pages back said it best: Once you eliminate/dodge Spartan charge, it doesn't really matter what weapon you have whether it's an automatic weapon or the Pistol. I have often punished Spartan Charge with the Pistol.

"You can try to characterize mid range support as "hiding from spartan charge," but that doesn't cheapen a good counter, especially coming from someone who just admitted immediately after that they play against the AI so much because game mechanics like spartan charge frustrate them." - I didn't say it wasn't a good counter. I said it didn't solve the problem.

Also, it wasn't just Spartan Charge, or even Spartan Abilities. I said "a good number of mechanics and sections of game design frustrate me when used against other players." There are things with Firefight that frustrate me as well, and I did say that it wasn't entirely relevant to this thread. So don't draw so much of a conclusion from it.

"Any problems with the sniper rifle at launch don't make a bit of difference either. Countering enemies with longer ranged weapons by avoiding open areas is something that has been omnipresent in the Halo franchise and pretty much all FPS games." - And yet, just going "avoid open areas" wasn't enough. The sniper rifle still got an update due to its bullet magnetism. So clearly even 343i had some belief that it was a problem that deserved fixing.

"And there are tons of reliable counters using automatics and CQC power weapons irregardless of your willingness to use them." - I have never once said that I was unwilling to use a weapon.

"Overall it's a great feature that punishes people who let you get close and do not use the proper weapons to counter your attack." - In other words, a melee? Something we already have?
Yeah right dude. You hardly ever use the assault rifle in spite of ALWAYS spawning with it. You have like 10x the magnum and BR kills as you do with the AR in Arena. Now lets look at how "over reliant" I am: If you combine my BR and magnum kills in Arena it's not even 2x as many as my AR kills. So yeah, you're obviously heavily reliant on the precision weapons and you probably aren't using the AR when the situation calls for it. If you were, spartan charge wouldn't be nearly as much of an issue for you. You're also unwilling to admit that spartan charge and melee are different, and yet we're only seeing you complain about one. Obviously you know they're different. Then there's the assertion that it's nearly unstoppable and few weapons can stop it, when in reality you spawn with a weapon capable of stopping it, there are a host of power and automatic weapons that are very good at countering it, and you don't use hardly any of them save for the gravity hammer. For you, this is about making the game easier for yourself. Just go play the gametypes without it.
Utility weapon or "go-to weapon" doesn't mean it's a weapon that counters every situation or something that works perfectly in all situations. If anything, it's closer to "Jack of all trades, master of none" (though recent history shows Halo's utility weapons tend to excel in mid range, so more like "master of one"). The utility weapon is again, the weapon the sandbox revolves around, and the weapon most people tend to use in average situations. The niche weapons are used for their specific roles, which is why they are not go-to weapons.

You don't see anyone upset that the Pistol can't beat the Sniper Rifle, because it isn't meant for long range. But you could probably hit someone with it one time if you're good enough. Get into mid-range distance, and the Pistol fares much better.

You don't see anyone upset that the Pistol can't beat the Shotgun, because it's not as good in close range. But you might be able to hit someone or melee someone instead. Back up into mid-range distance, and again the Pistol dominates.

"Part of the reason you're here is because the magnum doesn't counter spartan charge so well." - I've said nothing of the sort. No one here did.

You're the one that made the assumption that because I use the Pistol a lot, I "obviously" over-rely on it and therefore tried to use it on a Spartan Charge and it failed. You assume that I'm here because Spartan Charge keeps killing me, when I haven't said that either. You've actually been prone to making a lot of assumptions here beyond the fact that maybe some people just don't like Spartan Charge and find it a bad game mechanic.

I could just as easily call you over-reliant on the Battle Rifle due to the fact that you have more kills with that over the Assault Rifle.

I still use the Assault Rifle when the situation calls for it, including Spartan Charge. I still have kills under it. I just am placed in more situations where the Pistol is just as useful, if not more useful, than using the Assault Rifle. I don't have a lot of melee kills either, implying that I don't always spend my time trying to get into close range if I don't have to. Someone a few pages back said it best: Once you eliminate/dodge Spartan charge, it doesn't really matter what weapon you have whether it's an automatic weapon or the Pistol. I have often punished Spartan Charge with the Pistol.

"You can try to characterize mid range support as "hiding from spartan charge," but that doesn't cheapen a good counter, especially coming from someone who just admitted immediately after that they play against the AI so much because game mechanics like spartan charge frustrate them." - I didn't say it wasn't a good counter. I said it didn't solve the problem.

Also, it wasn't just Spartan Charge, or even Spartan Abilities. I said "a good number of mechanics and sections of game design frustrate me when used against other players." There are things with Firefight that frustrate me as well, and I did say that it wasn't entirely relevant to this thread. So don't draw so much of a conclusion from it.

"Any problems with the sniper rifle at launch don't make a bit of difference either. Countering enemies with longer ranged weapons by avoiding open areas is something that has been omnipresent in the Halo franchise and pretty much all FPS games." - And yet, just going "avoid open areas" wasn't enough. The sniper rifle still got an update due to its bullet magnetism. So clearly even 343i had some belief that it was a problem that deserved fixing.

"And there are tons of reliable counters using automatics and CQC power weapons irregardless of your willingness to use them." - I have never once said that I was unwilling to use a weapon.

"Overall it's a great feature that punishes people who let you get close and do not use the proper weapons to counter your attack." - In other words, a melee? Something we already have?
Yeah right dude. You hardly ever use the assault rifle in spite of ALWAYS spawning with it. You have like 10x the magnum and BR kills as you do with the AR in Arena. Now lets look at how "over reliant" I am: If you combine my BR and magnum kills in Arena it's not even 2x as many as my AR kills. So yeah, you're obviously heavily reliant on the precision weapons and you probably aren't using the AR when the situation calls for it. If you were, spartan charge wouldn't be nearly as much of an issue for you. You're also unwilling to admit that spartan charge and melee are different, and yet we're only seeing you complain about one. Obviously you know they're different. Then there's the assertion that it's nearly unstoppable and few weapons can stop it, when in reality you spawn with a weapon capable of stopping it, there are a host of power and automatic weapons that are very good at countering it, and you don't use hardly any of them save for the gravity hammer. For you, this is about making the game easier for yourself. Just go play the gametypes without it.
Man, we're just going straight to stat-flaming me now? What did I just say about making assumptions? You're honestly turning into a matter of "If you don't like Spartan Charge, you're just not playing right!"

Yes I use precision weapons often, because I am normally placed in situations where the Pistol and Battle Rifle are better choices than the Assault Rifle. I mean, you always spawn a distance away from the opponent, so obviously I would use a weapon that excels at mid-distance. If I was placed in a close range situation, I would be using a close-range weapon, but that happens much less often for me.

"If you were, spartan charge wouldn't be nearly as much of an issue for you." - I'm going to have to ask you to go back and read that comment again. I have never said that Spartan Charge is a problem because it keeps killing me with my precision weapon. That is entirely your assumption, and at this point a strawman, since you're building up people's use of precision weapons as the problem so you can make your arguments easier.

"You're also unwilling to admit that spartan charge and melee are different, and yet we're only seeing you complain about one." - Because you have yet to give me a difference between the two that requires Spartan Charge's existence. I have directly asked you more than once, but you only served to dodge the question and expect me to answer my own question for you so you don't have to. The few differences I've stated are bad things and only prove my point further.

"Then there's the assertion that it's nearly unstoppable and few weapons can stop it" - Absolutely not what I said.

"For you, this is about making the game easier for yourself. Just go play the gametypes without it." - Well that's just plain insulting, and that's as far of a response as I'm willing to give it.

If you're no longer capable of making a rational discussion without going straight to attacking me or my stats, then I guess we're done here.
No, that is not "stat flaming" all of a sudden. We have been talking about this for a while. YOU are heavily reliant on precision weapons and that is probably why you're getting beaten by spartan charge (as were others) and this was another of your distortions of the the truth being exposed. For the record I still don't think there's anything wrong with that reliance, but it's none the less a reliance and is a probably part of your problem with countering spartan charge. It's in fact quite easy to counter given the use of proper weapons.

I thought the part where you pretended to be insulted was kind of confusing. As if you haven't already stated predominantly playing gametypes where cannot be used against you. I mean you even admitted to doing things like that a few posts back, citing that the mechanics frustrate you. And yet you're "insulted" because I suggested a gametype that caters specifically to the people who hate spartan charge? Oh, please.

If you're getting spartan charged a lot when playing against people, then you're not being attacked at midrange as much as you think. It's pure and simple - spartan charge is not a midrange attack. You're getting hit with spartan charge at closer ranges, so you should rely on the AR and other automatics more than precision weapons at that range. Again, you seem to understand range when it comes to selecting the magnum/BR over the AR. This makes it seem like you're trolling, and you're free to come back and have a rational discussions with me whenever you like. Ciao!
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not post spam.
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show
No, that is not "stat flaming" all of a sudden. We have been talking about this for a while. YOU are heavily reliant on precision weapons and that is probably why you're getting beaten by spartan charge (as were others) and this was another of your distortions of the the truth being exposed. For the record I still don't think there's anything wrong with that reliance, but it's none the less a reliance and is a probably part of your problem with countering spartan charge. It's in fact quite easy to counter given the use of proper weapons.

I thought the part where you pretended to be insulted was kind of confusing. As if you haven't already stated predominantly playing gametypes where cannot be used against you. I mean you even admitted to doing things like that a few posts back, citing that the mechanics frustrate you. And yet you're "insulted" because I suggested a gametype that caters specifically to the people who hate spartan charge? Oh, please.

If you're getting spartan charged a lot when playing against people, then you're not being attacked at midrange as much as you think. It's pure and simple - spartan charge is not a midrange attack. You're getting hit with spartan charge at closer ranges, so you should rely on the AR and other automatics more than precision weapons at that range. Again, you seem to understand range when it comes to selecting the magnum/BR over the AR. This makes it seem like you're trolling, and you're free to come back and have a rational discussions with me whenever you like. Ciao!
You keep saying "probably" and "seem." Those are assumptions, assumptions that aren't founded by anything other than the fact that I happen to have more precision weapon kills than AR kills. Considering that you think that I'm here to make the game easier for me or that I can't "handle" Spartan Charge due to my stats puts it closer to stat-flaming me than anything else.

The only way you're even capable of continuing this argument is by (falsely) putting me in situations that I never said I was in. Is it really too hard to believe that I simply don't like the mechanic?

"If you're getting spartan charged a lot when playing against people, then you're not being attacked at midrange as much as you think."

Like this statement. Please point to where I said I'm getting Spartan Charged a lot. Even when I explicitly say that I don't get Spartan Charged often and I'm capable of punishing Spartan Charge with a precision weapon, you still assume that it just fails and I get killed.

I'm starting to struggle to see why I should take these comments seriously when you're just doing the equivalent of "Nuh uh you just suck" instead of tackling...the actual issues I and other people have with Spartan Charge.

"As if you haven't already stated predominantly playing gametypes where cannot be used against you. I mean you even admitted to doing things like that a few posts back, citing that the mechanics frustrate you."

1. I never specified "Spartan Charge." In fact, I never specified which mechanics in the first place.

2. I also said some elements of Firefight frustrate me as well.

I don't know why you cling to that one statement when it has possibly the least amount of relevance to the topic at hand.
There's nothing wrong with saying "probably" and "seem." It means they're educated guesses based on what you prefer to do things that you have said. Spartan charge seems to frustrate you because you are having trouble countering it, and you don't believe there are a good supply of reliable counters to it. You even tried to use videos of people mostly getting spartan charged from behind to illustrate your point. The only guy actually facing his attacker was spartan charged, double teamed, and lost by a tiny sliver of health. There are no major issues with spartan charge. A lot of people like it as a feature and don't have trouble countering it either. You're simply part of a vocal minority. I get that you don't want to get better with it or learn to counter it. That's why you should continue playing game types without spartan charge and hold out hope they change it next game. But that's they way the franchise went and it is better for both diverse and balanced gameplay. Not everyone wants to limit themselves to plinking people with the magnum/BR all game long, and if you do you should learn to pull out a close range weapon when attacked at close range. Spartan charge fulfills roles that "walking up and punching someone" cannot. If you think you suck for any of that or are generally offended about the facts, it's on you.
Spartan charge seems to frustrate you because you are having trouble countering it, and you don't believe there are a good supply of reliable counters to it.
See, there we go again with the assumptions. It's like you're not even reading my comment. Educated guesses are still guesses, and guesses can be wrong.

I'll say again, Please point to where I said I'm getting Spartan Charged a lot.

Half of your paragraph is just you being condescending and believing that I can't use the Assault Rifle in cases where I would normally use the Assault Rifle.

Quote:
You even tried to use videos of people mostly getting spartan charged from behind to illustrate your point. The only guy actually facing his attacker was spartan charged, double teamed, and lost by a tiny sliver of health.
That's not what the examples were trying to show. That's just you making, yet again, an assumption or "educated guess." An objectively wrong one at that, since I told you what the point of those examples were, but you ignored it and claimed your assumption was correct anyway.

Spartan charge fulfills roles that "walking up and punching someone" cannot.
Okay, so explain what those "roles" are.
Not everyone wants to limit themselves to plinking people with the magnum/BR all game long, and if you do you should learn to pull out a close range weapon when attacked at close range.
Did you know that Promethean Vision was a good ability because you could shoot back at them while they were using it? Armor Lock was great because you could just stand there waiting for them to get out of it and then just melee them or throw a grenade. Jetpack was fine despite it breaking maps because you could shoot them while they were in the air. That's literally what you sound like in the majority of your posts whenever you make that ridiculous defense of Spartan Charge. Being able to counter an ability by performing a certain action might be a good way to defend against it, but it certainly doesn't dismiss the problems that it does have which a few people have brought up in this thread.
Spartan charge seems to frustrate you because you are having trouble countering it, and you don't believe there are a good supply of reliable counters to it.
See, there we go again with the assumptions. It's like you're not even reading my comment. Educated guesses are still guesses, and guesses can be wrong.

I'll say again, Please point to where I said I'm getting Spartan Charged a lot.

Half of your paragraph is just you being condescending and believing that I can't use the Assault Rifle in cases where I would normally use the Assault Rifle.

Quote:
You even tried to use videos of people mostly getting spartan charged from behind to illustrate your point. The only guy actually facing his attacker was spartan charged, double teamed, and lost by a tiny sliver of health.
That's not what the examples were trying to show. That's just you making, yet again, an assumption or "educated guess." An objectively wrong one at that, since I told you what the point of those examples were, but you ignored it and claimed your assumption was correct anyway.

Spartan charge fulfills roles that "walking up and punching someone" cannot.
Okay, so explain what those "roles" are.
The first part is a strawman. Your examples of people getting spartan charged from behind were very poor. They illustrated people dying from being spartan charged from behind, which should happen. The one where the guy actually got a chance to fight back was a decent defense against it, but he didn't thrust evade, missed a lot of his follow up shots, and he got double teamed. That's what the examples show. The role of spartan charge is to attack from greater range with more power than a regular melee. It also lets you better rush contested objectives, free vehicles, flip warthogs, etc.
LUKEPOWA wrote:
Not everyone wants to limit themselves to plinking people with the magnum/BR all game long, and if you do you should learn to pull out a close range weapon when attacked at close range.
Did you know that Promethean Vision was a good ability because you could shoot back at them while they were using it? Armor Lock was great because you could just stand there waiting for them to get out of it and then just melee them or throw a grenade. Jetpack was fine despite it breaking maps because you could shoot them while they were in the air. That's literally what you sound like in the majority of your posts whenever you make that ridiculous defense of Spartan Charge. Being able to counter an ability by performing a certain action might be a good way to defend against it, but it certainly doesn't dismiss the problems that it does have which a few people have brought up in this thread.
I certainly hope I sound like that, what you said makes sense. I see no reason why you shouldn't be able to counter abilities with gunfire and grenades. What's more is that everyone spawns with a weapon that is a decent counter to the ability in question, one that few opponents of spartan charge seem to utilize regularly. On top of that you get a level full of automatics and CQC power weapons that people usually ignore, weapons and grenades that are great/hard counters to SC. That's why your opinions of too much range/magnetism/stun/"nooby gameplay" get such little attention. Nearly everyone knows SC is fine.
Spartan charge seems to frustrate you because you are having trouble countering it, and you don't believe there are a good supply of reliable counters to it.
See, there we go again with the assumptions. It's like you're not even reading my comment. Educated guesses are still guesses, and guesses can be wrong.

I'll say again, Please point to where I said I'm getting Spartan Charged a lot.

Half of your paragraph is just you being condescending and believing that I can't use the Assault Rifle in cases where I would normally use the Assault Rifle.

Quote:
You even tried to use videos of people mostly getting spartan charged from behind to illustrate your point. The only guy actually facing his attacker was spartan charged, double teamed, and lost by a tiny sliver of health.
That's not what the examples were trying to show. That's just you making, yet again, an assumption or "educated guess." An objectively wrong one at that, since I told you what the point of those examples were, but you ignored it and claimed your assumption was correct anyway.

Spartan charge fulfills roles that "walking up and punching someone" cannot.
Okay, so explain what those "roles" are.
The first part is a strawman. Your examples of people getting spartan charged from behind were very poor. They illustrated people dying from being spartan charged from behind, which should happen. The one where the guy actually got a chance to fight back was a decent defense against it, but he didn't thrust evade, missed a lot of his follow up shots, and he got double teamed. That's what the examples show. The role of spartan charge is to attack from greater range with more power than a regular melee. It also lets you better rush contested objectives, free vehicles, flip warthogs, etc.
It is definitely not a strawman. You assumed I'm dying to Spartan Charge a lot, I said I do not, but you continue on saying I do anyway. If anything, that's you creating a strawman on false information.

Third time's the charm I guess: Please point to where I said I'm getting Spartan Charged a lot.

Honestly the conversation shouldn't even continue unless you provide a response to that part.

"They illustrated people dying from being spartan charged from behind, which should happen." - That's two comments you blatantly ignored now. I have never said the point of those examples were to show the damage of Spartan Charge from behind. hat's just you making, yet again, an assumption or "educated guess." An objectively wrong one at that, since I told you what the point of those examples were, but you ignored it and claimed your assumption was correct anyway.

"The role of spartan charge is to attack from greater range with more power than a regular melee. It also lets you better rush contested objectives, free vehicles, flip warthogs, etc." - Oh hey you finally answered my question, only took you 6 tries, but I guess that's progress nonetheless.

Why is there a need for a melee that is either a longer range or more damage? The range doesn't matter because the intention and end result was to make physical contact with the player. The point of both of them was to remove the shields of the player to finish off with a second action, which melee does even better because you can do the action and then melee, but you can't do an action and then Spartan Charge.

"Rush Objectives" - If sprinting blindly to the objective is your plan, then you've already lost out on a lot of damage because you're wasting time running in the hopes of dealing damage, not running while dealing damage.

"Free vehicles" - That is the most niche situation I've ever heard. Not only is that rarely useful in a match to warrant a whole player mechanic, but that only gets involved in 3 playlists: BTB, Warzone, Warzone Assault.

There is literally a button to flip vehicles already.

And if you're going to quickly change and say "enemy vehicles", I'm going to question why are you running straight into a moving vehicle that has a gunner on it?
Spartan charge seems to frustrate you because you are having trouble countering it, and you don't believe there are a good supply of reliable counters to it.
See, there we go again with the assumptions. It's like you're not even reading my comment. Educated guesses are still guesses, and guesses can be wrong.

I'll say again, Please point to where I said I'm getting Spartan Charged a lot.

Half of your paragraph is just you being condescending and believing that I can't use the Assault Rifle in cases where I would normally use the Assault Rifle.

Quote:
You even tried to use videos of people mostly getting spartan charged from behind to illustrate your point. The only guy actually facing his attacker was spartan charged, double teamed, and lost by a tiny sliver of health.
That's not what the examples were trying to show. That's just you making, yet again, an assumption or "educated guess." An objectively wrong one at that, since I told you what the point of those examples were, but you ignored it and claimed your assumption was correct anyway.

Spartan charge fulfills roles that "walking up and punching someone" cannot.
Okay, so explain what those "roles" are.
The first part is a strawman. Your examples of people getting spartan charged from behind were very poor. They illustrated people dying from being spartan charged from behind, which should happen. The one where the guy actually got a chance to fight back was a decent defense against it, but he didn't thrust evade, missed a lot of his follow up shots, and he got double teamed. That's what the examples show. The role of spartan charge is to attack from greater range with more power than a regular melee. It also lets you better rush contested objectives, free vehicles, flip warthogs, etc.
It is definitely not a strawman. You assumed I'm dying to Spartan Charge a lot, I said I do not, but you continue on saying I do anyway. If anything, that's you creating a strawman on false information.

Third time's the charm I guess: Please point to where I said I'm getting Spartan Charged a lot.

Honestly the conversation shouldn't even continue unless you provide a response to that part.

"They illustrated people dying from being spartan charged from behind, which should happen." - That's two comments you blatantly ignored now. I have never said the point of those examples were to show the damage of Spartan Charge from behind. hat's just you making, yet again, an assumption or "educated guess." An objectively wrong one at that, since I told you what the point of those examples were, but you ignored it and claimed your assumption was correct anyway.

"The role of spartan charge is to attack from greater range with more power than a regular melee. It also lets you better rush contested objectives, free vehicles, flip warthogs, etc." - Oh hey you finally answered my question, only took you 6 tries, but I guess that's progress nonetheless.

Why is there a need for a melee that is either a longer range or more damage? The range doesn't matter because the intention and end result was to make physical contact with the player. The point of both of them was to remove the shields of the player to finish off with a second action, which melee does even better because you can do the action and then melee, but you can't do an action and then Spartan Charge.

"Rush Objectives" - If sprinting blindly to the objective is your plan, then you've already lost out on a lot of damage because you're wasting time running in the hopes of dealing damage, not running while dealing damage.

"Free vehicles" - That is the most niche situation I've ever heard. Not only is that rarely useful in a match to warrant a whole player mechanic, but that only gets involved in 3 playlists: BTB, Warzone, Warzone Assault.

There is literally a button to flip vehicles already.

And if you're going to quickly change and say "enemy vehicles", I'm going to question why are you running straight into a moving vehicle that has a gunner on it?
That first part is still a strawman. We need longer ranged melee attack for the same reason we need longer ranged weapons. It diversifies the gameplay and encourages an up tempo game. The same goes for ground pound, which is another great mechanic. Spartan charge actually works very well when it comes to finishing off weakened enemies who are retreating and trying to recover their shields, far better than melee does. Running into objectives, like the bases on viking for example, and charging defenders inside works wonders for me. They have virtually no room to maneuver which can be really troublesome when trying to dodge a charge. Many defenders will try to lock down a cramped area near an objective. Flipping warthogs, (not your flipping vehicles strawman) is an important role. You'd probably be surprised but running straight at it is a terrible idea, they're far more vulnerable on sides and the rear quarter. Even without flipping them it causes the warthog to fishtail and slow greatly, which leads to boarding opportunities and slow moving targets.

Aside from your lack of knowledge on the uses and mechanics of spartan charge, I've yet to see one good reason it should be completely removed from the game. That lack of knowledge is another reason why it isn't surprising you would rather it not be fixed and simply removed. Your videos of people getting spartan charged from behind were also less than impressive.
This post reminds me of something, fellow classic fans lets go back to 2012:

Classic fans: Remove loadouts, killcams, bring back equal starts. This is not Halo...

Halo 4 fans: ADAPT HATER! THIS IS HALO NOW! LOAOUTS AND KILLCAMS ARE HERE TO STAY!!!! GO PLAY HALO 3!

343 on Halo 5: We are removing loadouts, killcams, and bringing back equal starts.

Halo 4 fans: SEE HATERS? 343 LISTENS TO THEIR COMMUNITY! I CANT WAIT FOR HALO 5!!

Classic fans: ...........

Caps used to emphasise the number of people that would descend on you when you *dared* to ask for the removal of loadouts/killcams, and now the removal of sprint/spartan charge etc.

It would not be far fetched to assume sprint and spartan charge are next in the bin. I would guarantee if 343 removes these and these fans actually gave that game a go they would like it....You all did not listen when we said equal starts are better, but then when they did it with Halo 5 it was unanimous praise for 343....
They're more than welcome to do it and I think SC is the most likely feature to be removed. I'm more skeptical about sprint, which has been featured in the games for like 8 years now in one form or another. But the thing is that there are a lot of long time fans out there who simply go with it and adapt to changes. That's what I do anyway. Classic Halo was fun but it's largely gone, and they're not going to bring it back except in the form of remastered games and special playlists. Still, little bits of it survive can be found even in Halo 5 with the Brute Plasma Rifle and CE Magnum. People want more weapons, move vehicles, more armor types (apparently), and more story. But they're going to keep changing the game play with each installment.
Spartan charge seems to frustrate you because you are having trouble countering it, and you don't believe there are a good supply of reliable counters to it.
See, there we go again with the assumptions. It's like you're not even reading my comment. Educated guesses are still guesses, and guesses can be wrong.

I'll say again, Please point to where I said I'm getting Spartan Charged a lot.

Half of your paragraph is just you being condescending and believing that I can't use the Assault Rifle in cases where I would normally use the Assault Rifle.

Quote:
You even tried to use videos of people mostly getting spartan charged from behind to illustrate your point. The only guy actually facing his attacker was spartan charged, double teamed, and lost by a tiny sliver of health.
That's not what the examples were trying to show. That's just you making, yet again, an assumption or "educated guess." An objectively wrong one at that, since I told you what the point of those examples were, but you ignored it and claimed your assumption was correct anyway.

Spartan charge fulfills roles that "walking up and punching someone" cannot.
Okay, so explain what those "roles" are.
The first part is a strawman. Your examples of people getting spartan charged from behind were very poor. They illustrated people dying from being spartan charged from behind, which should happen. The one where the guy actually got a chance to fight back was a decent defense against it, but he didn't thrust evade, missed a lot of his follow up shots, and he got double teamed. That's what the examples show. The role of spartan charge is to attack from greater range with more power than a regular melee. It also lets you better rush contested objectives, free vehicles, flip warthogs, etc.
It is definitely not a strawman. You assumed I'm dying to Spartan Charge a lot, I said I do not, but you continue on saying I do anyway. If anything, that's you creating a strawman on false information.

Third time's the charm I guess: Please point to where I said I'm getting Spartan Charged a lot.

Honestly the conversation shouldn't even continue unless you provide a response to that part.

"They illustrated people dying from being spartan charged from behind, which should happen." - That's two comments you blatantly ignored now. I have never said the point of those examples were to show the damage of Spartan Charge from behind. hat's just you making, yet again, an assumption or "educated guess." An objectively wrong one at that, since I told you what the point of those examples were, but you ignored it and claimed your assumption was correct anyway.

"The role of spartan charge is to attack from greater range with more power than a regular melee. It also lets you better rush contested objectives, free vehicles, flip warthogs, etc." - Oh hey you finally answered my question, only took you 6 tries, but I guess that's progress nonetheless.

Why is there a need for a melee that is either a longer range or more damage? The range doesn't matter because the intention and end result was to make physical contact with the player. The point of both of them was to remove the shields of the player to finish off with a second action, which melee does even better because you can do the action and then melee, but you can't do an action and then Spartan Charge.

"Rush Objectives" - If sprinting blindly to the objective is your plan, then you've already lost out on a lot of damage because you're wasting time running in the hopes of dealing damage, not running while dealing damage.

"Free vehicles" - That is the most niche situation I've ever heard. Not only is that rarely useful in a match to warrant a whole player mechanic, but that only gets involved in 3 playlists: BTB, Warzone, Warzone Assault.

There is literally a button to flip vehicles already.

And if you're going to quickly change and say "enemy vehicles", I'm going to question why are you running straight into a moving vehicle that has a gunner on it?
That first part is still a strawman. We need longer ranged melee attack for the same reason we need longer ranged weapons. It diversifies the gameplay and encourages an up tempo game. The same goes for ground pound, which is another great mechanic. Spartan charge actually works very well when it comes to finishing off weakened enemies who are retreating and trying to recover their shields, far better than melee does. Running into objectives, like the bases on viking for example, and charging defenders inside works wonders for me. They have virtually no room to maneuver which can be really troublesome when trying to dodge a charge. Many defenders will try to lock down a cramped area near an objective. Flipping warthogs, (not your flipping vehicles strawman) is an important role. You'd probably be surprised but running straight at it is a terrible idea, they're far more vulnerable on sides and the rear quarter. Even without flipping them it causes the warthog to fishtail and slow greatly, which leads to boarding opportunities and slow moving targets.

Aside from your lack of knowledge on the uses and mechanics of spartan charge, I've yet to see one good reason it should be completely removed from the game. That lack of knowledge is another reason why it isn't surprising you would rather it not be fixed and simply removed. Your videos of people getting spartan charged from behind were also less than impressive.
That's a lot of words for not pointing to where I said I'm getting Spartan Charged a lot.

I'm going to do what I said before and keep that conversation right there before you try to deflect again, since that is a major pillar of your argument. Just spouting "strawman!" doesn't make it a strawman, especially when it's something you've said word-for-word.

After you've provided a proper response to that part, maybe actual progress will be made and the other parts can be tackled.
Spartan charge is a rubbish thing 5o have this game is halo not rubbish destiny
Yeah I love putting shots into a Rank 4 and then they Spartan Charge me and AR me for a kill...
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 4
  4. 5
  5. ...
  6. 6