Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

[Locked] Weapon Tuning Test - Phase Two Feedback - 9/11

OP ske7ch

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 70
  4. 71
  5. 72
  6. ...
  7. 73
DaxSeven09 wrote:
Anjumara wrote:
This is not the way to fix the BR, the weapon is shaky and extremely inconsistent. It has been turned from a little OP to completely useless. If you play on a high ping connection like myself, achieving a hit marker is almost impossible. Also if you look at peoples post stats, consistently average accuracies have shot through the floor. The gun is no longer a precision weapon in this condition. I would rather not have the gun in the game if it is going to preform in this manner.
The reason they changed the BR the way they did was to pander to the handful of HCS elitists who actually like the weapon that way.
I never understand this argument. Where do players get this idea that 343 is catering to HCS? Do you not actually watch their streams and videos? These guys are sometimes more critical of the game than the majority of the community.

I haven't seen one video response on youtube, from a pro player, that says the BR changes are a good thing.

It's too bad you chose to only play 8 games, and not give any real meaningful feedback. You missed out on a real involvement with the development of this and future Halo games.
I've given other feedback in this thread before, which you seem to have ignored, in which I clearly state that I think that while I detest the changes from the tuning test, I believe it has a place. I simply don't believe it should be implemented throughout the entire game but rather given its own separate playlist. That way people who like the changes can play it that way and people who don't can play it the way it was before. But go ahead and ignore that if you want. What's more I don't have that much time to play the game anymore and what time I do have, I don't want to spend on a game mode where I'm going to get my skull caved in every five seconds because a weapon that I used to be rather proficient with has been entirely nerfed and I can't keep up anymore with the other weapons. I've been a Halo fan for over a decade, I don't want to have to give up on a Halo game because I find it unplayable except for one game mode. Regardless of whether someone got their CSR in that playlist, they still played it, and I did say my piece as to what should be done if they did add those changes to the game. Funny how you're not responding to that.
Yea I know test is over, just wanted to give that last little feedback you know. Well I also know a few who don’t really like it but I can respect what you’re saying
Saying it's useless and not saying anything else is isn't all that helpful though. They need feedback that details why it didn't feel useful and if possible, a way to improve it in some way, that is the best way to give them feedback
Anjumara wrote:
Jaidabecca wrote:
Yeah...the BR is awful now. I would go into detail as to why but given that this topic has 34 pages of posts I'm sure anything I say has already been said in as many ways as possible.
My advice is to play more than one game to really learn how to use the retuned BR, one game isn't enough to get a good idea on how it and other weapons work with the retuned versions
The issue is that it's a weapon with too steep a learning curve in a game where getting used to a learning curve in a weapon is difficult enough without other factors getting involved (ie. a nonfunctional CSR system or smurf accounts). The tuning test is having the unfortunate side effect of fracturing an already divided fanbase and this needs to stop. Yes, I'd say that having a whole playlist for these changes is a good idea, but not applying it to the entire game as is being planned. This will drive away too many players who are comfortable with the current BR and other weapons that have been nerfed and entrench the plague of elitism that seems to have overrun the fanbase.
It sounds like what you, and many others, keep failing to realize is that this is just a test. Nowhere does it say that the weapons as they are at this very moment are already the finalized versions of what may or may not be implemented. I understand that change is scary for some people (very scary judging by all the pissing and moaning going on in this thread), but I think it'd be in our and 343i's best interests if we go ahead and cooperate with this test, give out constructive criticism that they can actually use to further their weapon tuning, and see what comes of it at the end.
Quite, I've seen many people here post something like "The BR sucks, fix it or I don't play" after playing one game. 343i aren't going to be able to get proper feedback without people trying the changes for more than one or two games, I've seen someone here play a whole bunch of games and leave some really good feedback.
The thing here is that I thought the BR was decent when I first tried the tuning test. After subsequent matches I changed my stance because I was starting to see the problems with its performance. I did add more in regards to what could be done, i.e. an entire playlist for the changes in question. I find it interesting how no one seems to comment on that.
Anjumara wrote:
Regardless of whether someone got their CSR in that playlist, they still played it, and I did say my piece as to what should be done if they did add those changes to the game. Funny how you're not responding to that.
Well I did respond to your post right after your HCS comment, but since you mentioned it I went back to look at what you have posted. This thread is pretty massive, and yes I do Follow it, but there is a lot here to comment on and keep track of.
Anjumara wrote:
While I don't mind the gunfighter magnum as a starting sidearm, I feel like they drastically reduced the damage on the BR to the point where you have to be one of the sweaties to really use it effectively. I feel like this tuning test is meant more for a small group in the fanbase who want to emulate HCS as opposed to the general fanbase, which is a mistake considering that HCS doesn't make the franchise viable. What I think they should do is leave the rest of the game as is and implement this tuning test in a separate playlist so people don't end up being alienated regardless of what weapon they want to use.
I have to say that I think you are overly concerned with the HCS influence. No one has been asking, "Hey I want things to be more difficult so I can feel like an HCS player." I stand by my first response to your take on the tuning test. Most of the pros don't even like how the BR was changed. So how is this catering to them?
Anjumara wrote:
The issue is that it's a weapon with too steep a learning curve in a game where getting used to a learning curve in a weapon is difficult enough without other factors getting involved (ie. a nonfunctional CSR system or smurf accounts). The tuning test is having the unfortunate side effect of fracturing an already divided fanbase and this needs to stop. Yes, I'd say that having a whole playlist for these changes is a good idea, but not applying it to the entire game as is being planned. This will drive away too many players who are comfortable with the current BR and other weapons that have been nerfed and entrench the plague of elitism that seems to have overrun the fanbase.
I really don't think there should be one playlist that has weapons that act differently from the rest of the game. We saw that with the Bloom/No Bloom playlists in Reach, and it didn't work out very well. You talk about fracturing the community, but keeping the changes for only a select few of players would really fracture things.

Anjumara wrote:
The thing here is that I thought the BR was decent when I first tried the tuning test. After subsequent matches I changed my stance because I was starting to see the problems with its performance. I did add more in regards to what could be done, i.e. an entire playlist for the changes in question. I find it interesting how no one seems to comment on that.
I did just comment on it. I think its a bad idea. You will have players going back and forth within the playlists, and not understanding why one feels differently from the other. How would that be a good thing to the new player?

No, it's too confusing and bad for even the veteran players. We work on muscle memory as well. No one wants to go from one playlist where the weapons feel different from another playlist.
DaxSeven09 wrote:
Anjumara wrote:
Regardless of whether someone got their CSR in that playlist, they still played it, and I did say my piece as to what should be done if they did add those changes to the game. Funny how you're not responding to that.
Well I did respond to your post right after your HCS comment, but since you mentioned it I went back to look at what you have posted. This thread is pretty massive, and yes I do Follow it, but there is a lot here to comment on and keep track of.

Anjumara wrote:
While I don't mind the gunfighter magnum as a starting sidearm, I feel like they drastically reduced the damage on the BR to the point where you have to be one of the sweaties to really use it effectively. I feel like this tuning test is meant more for a small group in the fanbase who want to emulate HCS as opposed to the general fanbase, which is a mistake considering that HCS doesn't make the franchise viable. What I think they should do is leave the rest of the game as is and implement this tuning test in a separate playlist so people don't end up being alienated regardless of what weapon they want to use.
I have to say that I think you are overly concerned with the HCS influence. No one has been asking, "Hey I want things to be more difficult so I can feel like an HCS player." I stand by my first response to your take on the tuning test. Most of the pros don't even like how the BR was changed. So how is this catering to them?

Anjumara wrote:
The issue is that it's a weapon with too steep a learning curve in a game where getting used to a learning curve in a weapon is difficult enough without other factors getting involved (ie. a nonfunctional CSR system or smurf accounts). The tuning test is having the unfortunate side effect of fracturing an already divided fanbase and this needs to stop. Yes, I'd say that having a whole playlist for these changes is a good idea, but not applying it to the entire game as is being planned. This will drive away too many players who are comfortable with the current BR and other weapons that have been nerfed and entrench the plague of elitism that seems to have overrun the fanbase.
I really don't think there should be one playlist that has weapons that act differently from the rest of the game. We saw that with the Bloom/No Bloom playlists in Reach, and it didn't work out very well. You talk about fracturing the community, but keeping the changes for only a select few of players would really fracture things.
Agreed, having changes this big specific to one playlist is detrimental to a game's survival as players would have to constantly have to adjust as they switch between them. This test, while great, has made playing the game with the old versions of the weapons allot harder due to how I have gotten used to the new versions. It's similar to if you've been playing one Halo and jumped to play another, you'll try to do things in a certain way like reload with melee or ADS with the right stick. Limiting changes like this would really divide the players and cause more problems than it solves
BR's def off possibly shorter range/less accurate burst spread. also why can't Spartan's choose which primary Rifle we spawn with in Slayer playlists?
Not being able to choose what we spawn with is a design decision made by 343i after people reacted negatively to Halo 4's system. It messed with the balance of the game as anyone could just spawn in with a BR or DMR and destroy anyone who had other weapons. I understand why you want this, it makes your Spartan feel more personal, but ultimately, the way they went with Arena in Halo 5 favours skill over spawning with the best weapons
so why re-tune weapons if everyone is supposed to be more equal. I'll admit i did pretty bad in WTT, 3/7 out of qualifying rounds. but shouldn't weapons function as they always have?
Balance has never been an easy thing, the BR for example, for the most part, has been a little too powerful, it was way too easy to land all shots and get perfects. The retune was designed to make the weapon more akin to its older incarnations, getting perfects is meant to be a reward for good aim. Other weapons, like the SMG, were too effective outside their intended range, this needed to be toned down. I believe someone from 343i would be infinitely better at explaining this than me though
I am not trying to be mean or insult anyone but your service record shows 282 perfects on 10317 BR kills that amounts to just under 3% perfect rate. So 3 out of every 100 kills are perfect and you say the BR is too easy to use. Even a pro or former pro like Naded only perfects at around 11% so I just don't understand how one can say the BR is too easy to use.
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not post spam.
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show
RzR J3ST3R wrote:
eLantern wrote:
RzR J3ST3R wrote:
eLantern wrote:
[Suggestion to make damage variable according to distance]
The problem with this IMO is that it becomes too hard to know (and communicate) how weak enemies are. Commonly now you can cross map an enemy then make callouts like "pink 1, two shot", and have that mean something, because you know exactly how much damage your shots did when you got hit-markers. If the damage is variable, it breaks that awesome dynamic in the game, or makes it overly complex to the point that it's simply impossible to communicate in a fast-paced game.
The most important form of communication revolving damage is the "one shot" callout which would not be impacted by this change because of the visual indication of an opponent's shields breaking. While I suppose communication beyond the "one shot" call-out could get a little murky when outside a weapon's RRR I think it still presents a very favorable trade-off given the benefits that would be realized.
Well certainly at the pro player level, callouts like "two-shot" and "got one on him" are very common. You hear them all the time in their twitch streams. And I'd like to know if I shoot a guy 4 times with my magnum that he will actually be 1-shot, rather than be unsure if he's 2-shot or 1-shot. A lot of the split second decisions you make about challenging or not challenging rely upon knowing how many shots up you'll be in the fight if you challenge.

Right now it's worth peeking cross-map to try and get a hit on a guy your teammate is fighting, because it will mean 1 fewer shot they have to hit. if your shot from cross map isn't worth a full hit, it becomes too complicated to figure out whether it's worth trying to get that cross map hit, cause it might not help your teammate enough to matter, if your shots are weaker.
@Double A

To add to the communication argument above vs your BR spread points:

You argue the law of averages will ensure that BR spread will affect teams evenly by the end of the match, but that presumes all kills are equal. If a guy misses his four shot (through no fault of his own) when I'm about to cap his flag, is that lack of kill equal to me "missing" perfect shots on him when he is out of position bottom mid? No. All kills are not equal is halo. Even in slayer on map weapons play the role of an objective, therefore making certain kills carry more weight in the overall match.

Also: the game causing you to miss shots JUST ISN'T FUN. You aren't going to be able to argue people into playing something they don't enjoy, especially as someone who hasn't play themselves for a month.
Anjumara wrote:
Anjumara wrote:
This is not the way to fix the BR, the weapon is shaky and extremely inconsistent. It has been turned from a little OP to completely useless. If you play on a high ping connection like myself, achieving a hit marker is almost impossible. Also if you look at peoples post stats, consistently average accuracies have shot through the floor. The gun is no longer a precision weapon in this condition. I would rather not have the gun in the game if it is going to preform in this manner.
The reason they changed the BR the way they did was to pander to the handful of HCS elitists who actually like the weapon that way.
This is complete misrepresentation of the competitive communities view at large. Go to teambeyond.net and read their forums. Not only do the "HCS elitists" want a gun that shoots straight, they prefer a single fire gun.

If I was to try and consolidate there opinion into one unifying thought, it would most likely be they are confused why BR starts are being implemented at all, when a buff to the magnum (damage or rof) would solve a lot of the problems in the sandbox.

If the only way to make the BR not easy (unskillful) is to make it inaccurate (unskillful) the HCS community isn't interested. The magnum is an accurate weapon which takes some amount of skill to land perfect shots, the big problem is it's perfect kill-time isn't rewarding vs other weapons in the sandbox.
The thing about the old BR was that it was a good overall precision weapon that wasn't hyper-selective with who could use it effectively. The way it is now it's only effective in the hands of a select few and that's a drastic step down from the accessibility that Halo is supposed to be known for. I personally can still get kills with it, but it's become next to useless in my hands and don't say it's because I'm not good at the game because that's a cop out. The fact is that they've made the H5 BR too selective with who can use it effectively where it used to be a good bridging point for players of different skill levels. Before the tuning test, the BR was a weapon that a less skilled player could pick up and have a fighting chance against someone of a higher skill bracket. Otherwise, if you're of a lower skill level you might as well just stick with the starting weapons and be satisfied with constantly getting their skulls caved in every five seconds, or is that what you're going for?
There are ranks for a reason. As I understand it, these changes are meant to affect ranked playlists. Johnny No Thumbs is not matching Snipedown. There is no reason squish all the players under a low skill ceiling. If you can't five shot with the magnum matchmaking will find you someone with the same ability.
DoubIe A wrote:
RzR J3ST3R wrote:
eLantern wrote:
RzR J3ST3R wrote:
eLantern wrote:
[Suggestion to make damage variable according to distance]
The problem with this IMO is that it becomes too hard to know (and communicate) how weak enemies are. Commonly now you can cross map an enemy then make callouts like "pink 1, two shot", and have that mean something, because you know exactly how much damage your shots did when you got hit-markers. If the damage is variable, it breaks that awesome dynamic in the game, or makes it overly complex to the point that it's simply impossible to communicate in a fast-paced game.
The most important form of communication revolving damage is the "one shot" callout which would not be impacted by this change because of the visual indication of an opponent's shields breaking. While I suppose communication beyond the "one shot" call-out could get a little murky when outside a weapon's RRR I think it still presents a very favorable trade-off given the benefits that would be realized.
Well certainly at the pro player level, callouts like "two-shot" and "got one on him" are very common. You hear them all the time in their twitch streams. And I'd like to know if I shoot a guy 4 times with my magnum that he will actually be 1-shot, rather than be unsure if he's 2-shot or 1-shot. A lot of the split second decisions you make about challenging or not challenging rely upon knowing how many shots up you'll be in the fight if you challenge.
Right now it's worth peeking cross-map to try and get a hit on a guy your teammate is fighting, because it will mean 1 fewer shot they have to hit. if your shot from cross map isn't worth a full hit, it becomes too complicated to figure out whether it's worth trying to get that cross map hit, cause it might not help your teammate enough to matter, if your shots are weaker.
@Double A
To add to the communication argument above vs your BR spread points:
You argue the law of averages will ensure that BR spread will affect teams evenly by the end of the match, but that presumes all kills are equal. If a guy misses his four shot (through no fault of his own) when I'm about to cap his flag, is that lack of kill equal to me "missing" perfect shots on him when he is out of position bottom mid? No. All kills are not equal is halo. Even in slayer on map weapons play the role of an objective, therefore making certain kills carry more weight in the overall match.
Also: the game causing you to miss shots JUST ISN'T FUN. You aren't going to be able to argue people into playing something they don't enjoy, especially as someone who hasn't play themselves for a month.
I added a clipped quote from Double A to help alert him to the fact that you are responding to his post. I tried to add a User Link for him, but it wouldn't work for him.
Either way it helps to either quote who you are responding to or adding a user link. That way they get a notification that you did, and can more easily continue with the conversation.

There are ranks for a reason. As I understand it, these changes are meant to affect ranked playlists. Johnny No Thumbs is not matching Snipedown. There is no reason squish all the players under a low skill ceiling. If you can't five shot with the magnum matchmaking will find you someone with the same ability.
These changes are meant to go game wide, all of multiplayer and campaign will get these changes.
DaxSeven09 wrote:
DoubIe A wrote:
RzR J3ST3R wrote:
eLantern wrote:
RzR J3ST3R wrote:
eLantern wrote:
[Suggestion to make damage variable according to distance]
The problem with this IMO is that it becomes too hard to know (and communicate) how weak enemies are. Commonly now you can cross map an enemy then make callouts like "pink 1, two shot", and have that mean something, because you know exactly how much damage your shots did when you got hit-markers. If the damage is variable, it breaks that awesome dynamic in the game, or makes it overly complex to the point that it's simply impossible to communicate in a fast-paced game.
The most important form of communication revolving damage is the "one shot" callout which would not be impacted by this change because of the visual indication of an opponent's shields breaking. While I suppose communication beyond the "one shot" call-out could get a little murky when outside a weapon's RRR I think it still presents a very favorable trade-off given the benefits that would be realized.
Well certainly at the pro player level, callouts like "two-shot" and "got one on him" are very common. You hear them all the time in their twitch streams. And I'd like to know if I shoot a guy 4 times with my magnum that he will actually be 1-shot, rather than be unsure if he's 2-shot or 1-shot. A lot of the split second decisions you make about challenging or not challenging rely upon knowing how many shots up you'll be in the fight if you challenge.
Right now it's worth peeking cross-map to try and get a hit on a guy your teammate is fighting, because it will mean 1 fewer shot they have to hit. if your shot from cross map isn't worth a full hit, it becomes too complicated to figure out whether it's worth trying to get that cross map hit, cause it might not help your teammate enough to matter, if your shots are weaker.
@Double A
To add to the communication argument above vs your BR spread points:
You argue the law of averages will ensure that BR spread will affect teams evenly by the end of the match, but that presumes all kills are equal. If a guy misses his four shot (through no fault of his own) when I'm about to cap his flag, is that lack of kill equal to me "missing" perfect shots on him when he is out of position bottom mid? No. All kills are not equal is halo. Even in slayer on map weapons play the role of an objective, therefore making certain kills carry more weight in the overall match.
Also: the game causing you to miss shots JUST ISN'T FUN. You aren't going to be able to argue people into playing something they don't enjoy, especially as someone who hasn't play themselves for a month.
I added a clipped quote from Double A to help alert him to the fact that you are responding to his post. I tried to add a User Link for him, but it wouldn't work for him.
Either way it helps to either quote who you are responding to or adding a user link. That way they get a notification that you did, and can more easily continue with the conversation.

There are ranks for a reason. As I understand it, these changes are meant to affect ranked playlists. Johnny No Thumbs is not matching Snipedown. There is no reason squish all the players under a low skill ceiling. If you can't five shot with the magnum matchmaking will find you someone with the same ability.
These changes are meant to go game wide, all of multiplayer and campaign will get these changes.
Thank you.

And you're right of course.

I misspoke. What I was referring to was the loadout specifically. 343 mentioned here about how loadout and motion tracker may be used to more define the ranked and Social split: https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/news/halo-5-weapon-tuning-test

So my point stands in that it is likely as far as we know that players will only start with the BR in ranked playlists, so to worry how unskilled and master players interact as far as BR starts go is not relevant, as matchmaking will take care of that.
  1. I did notice that the plasma pistol runs out of ammo too quickly to be any effective.
I appreciate the fact, that 343i puts even 2 years after halo 5 has been released a lot of effort into ensuring the future of the game by tackling controversial issues concerning the gameplay.

That said, changing the game in such a fundamental way years into its lifetime gives me the impression that the changes are not made with the legitimate complains of players in mind but is more so related to the closer coming release of halo 6. The player base that stuck with halo 5 so far didn’t seem to be unhappy with the fundamental behavior of almost all the main weapons or power ups. The complaints were usually connected to certain circumstances like the incredible precision of the BR on large BTB maps or the extreme efficiency of the sword on small and easy to traverse maps like truth. To fix those issues a complete overhaul was never required nor asked for by the player base. We stuck with h5 because we liked it already! The fact that 343i is willing to severely interfere with the core mechanics of their game (weapon behavior in a fps) but doesn’t address the biggest issues that got addressed since the beginning of halo 5 like spartan abilities and international matchmaking convinces me even more, that the upcoming changes are not made with the enjoyment of the current player base in mind.

Apart from those concerns I experienced the weapon changes (mostly played on my alt account) to be less of an improvement and more of a trade for a source of new conflicts:

- The BR feels inconsistent which clashes with the core principle of weapon handling in halo 5.
- The recoil of the gunfighter magnum is way too strong. The way the gun handles makes me feel like I’m playing battlefield and not halo as a Spartan.
- The fuel rod is too weak for being a power weapon.
- The Railgun charges way too long. Movement in halo 5 is too quick for such a long charging time. Especially on longer distances it is now super easy to evade any shots.
- The bloom of the AR is too big. Especially if 343i intends it to be a pick up and not a starting weapon. The AR is now the worst weapon in the whole sandbox. If you continuously spray the bullet spread is too big. If you fire bursts the time to kill is too slow. The gunfighter magnum is more precise and has a lower time to kill. Why would anybody pick up the AR? Only for the suppressor?
- The Carbine feels like the BR inconsistent.
- The camouflage seems inconsistent. The have been moments I could spot people a mile away.

The changes of the other weapons didn’t bother me per se. Other weapons that didn’t seem to be affected by the changes at all or at least not to the same degree as the light rifle, storm rifle, binary rifle, gravity hammer, boltshot, plasma rifle, storm rifle and supressor will be over powered if the changes are implemented which will make another round of adjustments necessary. The light rifle and storm rifle were obviously dominating the matches.

Overall I can’t appreciate the changes. In my opinion the skill based arena setting relies on a pin point accuracy with little to no handling inconsistencies. If I want to play a game with (realistic) weapon recoil, crazy bullet spread or bullet drop (I know this wasn’t implemented (yet)) I would play fps like battlefield in the first place. Those weapon characteristics just don’t seem to fit into halo 5 and alienate me as a player. On top of this the changes will cause only more balancing issues with the unaltered weapons and sandbox and therefore not solve anything in the short run. Since the changes will be implemented in November without any further -necessary- tests, players of halo 5 will now be forced to constantly beta test the weapon balance which is a core part of a multiplayer fps until the balance is satisfactory enough to be implemented into halo 6. Unfortunately this is a future I’m really not up to.
is this the time in the games life to make changed this grate in the gamestile
Adair W117 wrote:
  1. I did notice that the plasma pistol runs out of ammo too quickly to be any effective.
They made no changes to the Plasma Pistol. That and the Weapon Tuning Playlist is not in the game anymore. What playlist were you playing?
BR's def off possibly shorter range/less accurate burst spread. also why can't Spartan's choose which primary Rifle we spawn with in Slayer playlists?
Not being able to choose what we spawn with is a design decision made by 343i after people reacted negatively to Halo 4's system. It messed with the balance of the game as anyone could just spawn in with a BR or DMR and destroy anyone who had other weapons. I understand why you want this, it makes your Spartan feel more personal, but ultimately, the way they went with Arena in Halo 5 favours skill over spawning with the best weapons
so why re-tune weapons if everyone is supposed to be more equal. I'll admit i did pretty bad in WTT, 3/7 out of qualifying rounds. but shouldn't weapons function as they always have?
Balance has never been an easy thing, the BR for example, for the most part, has been a little too powerful, it was way too easy to land all shots and get perfects. The retune was designed to make the weapon more akin to its older incarnations, getting perfects is meant to be a reward for good aim. Other weapons, like the SMG, were too effective outside their intended range, this needed to be toned down. I believe someone from 343i would be infinitely better at explaining this than me though
I am not trying to be mean or insult anyone but your service record shows 282 perfects on 10317 BR kills that amounts to just under 3% perfect rate. So 3 out of every 100 kills are perfect and you say the BR is too easy to use. Even a pro or former pro like Naded only perfects at around 11% so I just don't understand how one can say the BR is too easy to use.
Do I really have that many BR kills? Anyway, think about all the previous Halo games, how easy was it to land a perfect on a target at any range? It wasn't easy, most of those perfects are most likely in mid to close range engagements, a BR shouldn't be too effective in CQC and at distance at the same time. The BR, as I've already said, is too easy to use. It had to be changed to work more effectively
DaxSeven09 wrote:
Rail gun is now useless imo
Tuning test is over. Rail gun is back to normal.

And the majority seemed to like the changes to the Rail gun. It just took a little more planning when using it. It is too easy to use in its current form.
I did not come away with that sense at all, reading this thread. I personally despise the weaker railgun. It's nearly useless at the faster pace of high-level games. And I got the sense that many here on the forums agreed with me. Yes there were some who liked it, but I don't think that was a majority opinion necessarily.
RzR J3ST3R wrote:
DaxSeven09 wrote:
Rail gun is now useless imo
Tuning test is over. Rail gun is back to normal.

And the majority seemed to like the changes to the Rail gun. It just took a little more planning when using it. It is too easy to use in its current form.
I did not come away with that sense at all, reading this thread. I personally despise the weaker railgun. It's nearly useless at the faster pace of high-level games. And I got the sense that many here on the forums agreed with me. Yes there were some who liked it, but I don't think that was a majority opinion necessarily.
I could be remembering this wrong. I wish we had a breakdown of how many liked what in this thread.
DaxSeven09 wrote:
RzR J3ST3R wrote:
DaxSeven09 wrote:
Rail gun is now useless imo
Tuning test is over. Rail gun is back to normal.

And the majority seemed to like the changes to the Rail gun. It just took a little more planning when using it. It is too easy to use in its current form.
I did not come away with that sense at all, reading this thread. I personally despise the weaker railgun. It's nearly useless at the faster pace of high-level games. And I got the sense that many here on the forums agreed with me. Yes there were some who liked it, but I don't think that was a majority opinion necessarily.
I could be remembering this wrong. I wish we had a breakdown of how many liked what in this thread.
If only there was a technology where people could respond to a question (e.g .did you like the new railgun) with a yes/no response, and those responses would be counted and displayed. If such technology existed, surely 343 would have used it on this forum.
RzR J3ST3R wrote:
DaxSeven09 wrote:
RzR J3ST3R wrote:
DaxSeven09 wrote:
Rail gun is now useless imo
Tuning test is over. Rail gun is back to normal.

And the majority seemed to like the changes to the Rail gun. It just took a little more planning when using it. It is too easy to use in its current form.
I did not come away with that sense at all, reading this thread. I personally despise the weaker railgun. It's nearly useless at the faster pace of high-level games. And I got the sense that many here on the forums agreed with me. Yes there were some who liked it, but I don't think that was a majority opinion necessarily.
I could be remembering this wrong. I wish we had a breakdown of how many liked what in this thread.
If only there was a technology where people could respond to a question (e.g .did you like the new railgun) with a yes/no response, and those responses would be counted and displayed. If such technology existed, surely 343 would have used it on this forum.
Are you being sarcastic? Because that sounds like a poll to me, and it definitely would have been nice for them to have had an official one alongside the feedback forum.

Oh well, if I have time I will go through all of these posts and see if I can come up with it.
DaxSeven09 wrote:
RzR J3ST3R wrote:
DaxSeven09 wrote:
RzR J3ST3R wrote:
DaxSeven09 wrote:
Rail gun is now useless imo
Tuning test is over. Rail gun is back to normal.

And the majority seemed to like the changes to the Rail gun. It just took a little more planning when using it. It is too easy to use in its current form.
I did not come away with that sense at all, reading this thread. I personally despise the weaker railgun. It's nearly useless at the faster pace of high-level games. And I got the sense that many here on the forums agreed with me. Yes there were some who liked it, but I don't think that was a majority opinion necessarily.
I could be remembering this wrong. I wish we had a breakdown of how many liked what in this thread.
If only there was a technology where people could respond to a question (e.g .did you like the new railgun) with a yes/no response, and those responses would be counted and displayed. If such technology existed, surely 343 would have used it on this forum.
Are you being sarcastic? Because that sounds like a poll to me, and it definitely would have been nice for them to have had an official one alongside the feedback forum.

Oh well, if I have time I will go through all of these posts and see if I can come up with it.
Lol yes i thought it was so obvious that I could omit the /s. ;-)
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 70
  4. 71
  5. 72
  6. ...
  7. 73