Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

[Locked] Weapon Tuning Update - Early Discussion Thread

OP ske7ch

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 11
  4. 12
  5. 13
  6. 14
  7. 15
  8. ...
  9. 18
Seems odd that it's still going to be ranked during the testing phase, but I guess it's good for the matchups.
Honestly this just reads to me and my friends you're making the game even more competitive than it already is. I doubt any casual players wanted this besides some vocal people on the internet who are obsessed with Ranked Arena.
This entire update is absurd. It does nothing but pander to the dwindling competitive crowd.
This isn't about competitive, this is about the fundamental basics of balance. Bad balance doesn't benefit anyone.

And in case you didn't notice, 343 specifically pointed out that they are now thinking about an entirely different direction for competitive by completely separating the starting weapons all together, rather than merging the two settings as previously attempted.

This is a terrible idea. There is no need to adjust the weapons.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
If you don't think it's broken then you haven't been paying attention.

343 directly said that the AR has around the same statistical effectiveness compared to other weapons, but is significantly easier to use. This isn't even a matter of opinion, this is real developer statistics to back it up.

Similar effectiveness + easier to use = not balanced.
And again, bad balance doesn't benefit anyone, regardless of casual or competitive.

The real problem is that 343 took so long to address this that now people have become comfortable with the settings and come to believe that this is actually acceptable.
These issues should have been addressed during beta, let alone more than a year after release.

But some of the other things, it seems many people here are in agreement that they're not all that broken. Example, gunfighter already sucks at long range and nobody was really complaining about it being broken, so it seems odd seeing them talk about it in that context... but I'll wait it out for now and see what they do with it, maybe the new version will be even better.
Honestly this just reads to me and my friends you're making the game even more competitive than it already is. I doubt any casual players wanted this besides some vocal people on the internet who are obsessed with Ranked Arena.
This entire update is absurd. It does nothing but pander to the dwindling competitive crowd.
This isn't about competitive, this is about the fundamental basics of balance. Bad balance doesn't benefit anyone.

And in case you didn't notice, 343 specifically pointed out that they are now thinking about an entirely different direction for competitive by completely separating the starting weapons all together, rather than merging the two settings as previously attempted.
See, now that's the sort of thing I can get behind.
I do agree that they listen more than they get credit for. However, I'm also aware that they have only tested this update for Arena, and that testing will be carried out in one playlist alone. I also strongly suspect that they won't change their minds about a change with two years of data put into it even if the feedback is profoundly negative.
One post they "won't listen", but by the next post you agree they will. Wow, that was easy to convince you. Hey I am not complaining just surprised. Also there's this:
Quote:
While it would be great to facilitate a large-scale public test spanning all of Halo 5’s game modes, it’s unfortunately not viable on a technical level. The 343 team has been extensively testing the re-tuned weapons across Campaign and WZ and will be paying extra special attention to the impact of these changes in Campaign & Warzone once the update is released in November.
How is it you know they have only tested this in Arena, when they are clearly saying here otherwise? I can't tell whether you haven't read what will be happening, and are just making assumptions or you are flat out saying 343 is lying.

Either way, know the subject matter before making such negative accusations. Just a thought. It will give your arguments more weight. I am not going to address the rest since, in a way, you are really contradicting yourself here so it makes it difficult to discuss.

They listen or they don't. Can't have it both ways. I choose to take them at their word. They're telling us they want feedback. They will take them into account. Maybe it's naive and slightly too optimistic, but I can't imagine going your route. It is way too dismal.
DaxSeven09 wrote:
I do agree that they listen more than they get credit for. However, I'm also aware that they have only tested this update for Arena, and that testing will be carried out in one playlist alone. I also strongly suspect that they won't change their minds about a change with two years of data put into it even if the feedback is profoundly negative.
One post they "won't listen", but by the next post you agree they will. Wow, that was easy to convince you. Hey I am not complaining just surprised. Also there's this:
Quote:
While it would be great to facilitate a large-scale public test spanning all of Halo 5’s game modes, it’s unfortunately not viable on a technical level. The 343 team has been extensively testing the re-tuned weapons across Campaign and WZ and will be paying extra special attention to the impact of these changes in Campaign & Warzone once the update is released in November.
How is it you know they have only tested this in Arena, when they are clearly saying here otherwise? I can't tell whether you haven't read what will be happening, and are just making assumptions or you are flat out saying 343 is lying.

Either way, know the subject matter before making such negative accusations. Just a thought. It will give your arguments more weight. I am not going to address the rest since, in a way, you are really contradicting yourself here so it makes it difficult to discuss.

They listen or they don't. Can't have it both ways. I choose to take them at their word. They're telling us they want feedback. They will take them into account. Maybe it's naive and slightly too optimistic, but I can't imagine going your route. It is way too dismal.
Wow, okay, clearly you aren't reading what I have to say. I agree that 343 listens more than they get credit for, but that this is an area that they either can not or will not ultimately be dissuaded from their course. You convinced me of nothing; I merely sought to discuss from common ground, but since you find that untenable...

As to your second point, their testing is irrelevant to players' feedback. If they only give us the one small slice of the game to test, then that is as good- or worse- than simply making the changes without feedback. In fact, I believe that this could have been a very good minor update along with Infinity's Armory or something else early in the game's life- without feedback. Now, it just doesn't make sense. I believe this whole thing was and is poorly handled, unnecessarily drawn out, unintentionally has the effect of skewing data, and is badly timed. I stand by that.

And yes, I am being negative here. Yes, I find it hard to see the positives of relearning the mechanics of weapons that have served for two years. Yes, I find it hard- for one of the first times, in fact; I am usually among 343's staunchest proponents- to believe 343 will listen. To take the little useful feedback that could come of this to heart- it's just not a statistical probability. You can reread my previous comments if you wish to understand why I feel this way.

The best I can say of it is this: I doubt this is as much for Halo 5 as it is for Halo's future installments. As 4 was a testing ground for 5, so too shall 5 be a testing ground for Halo 5: Guardians 2, H5 ODST, or Halo 6: Revenge of Tartarus, whatever comes next. I hope this gets them what they need to make that game as great as possible, but I harbor serious doubts that it will do Halo 5 many favors. So here's a positive thought for you: I hope it actually does.
I have a question that I couldn't find an answer to in the thread or in the announcement.

Will the changes to any weapons also effect their warzone variants, or more specifically, will changes to the energy sword affect the sword used in infection?

The announcement made it seem like some of the mobility and lock on range aspects of the energy sword are going to be nerfed, which could have unintended consequences for the zombies playlist, tilting things further towards human favor.
In fact, I believe that this could have been a very good minor update along with Infinity's Armory or something else early in the game's life- without feedback.
You seem annoyed that 343 is choosing to mess with weapons instead of giving us another content update. But my understanding is that they decided to tweak the weapons because they were going to update Halo 5 for 4K anyway, so they just said "well since we're giving it a 4K update, we might as well fix the weapon balance too, because eh why not".

In other words, this whole thing is somewhat of an afterthought, thrown in with the 4K update. Focusing on adding content probably would have taken more resources and maybe not be finished in time for the 4K update in the fall. So I don't think 343 was ever really "bragging" about this, or expecting us to "dance a teabag jig of joy" about it.
I'm sure this update will make everything more balanced, I'm looking forward for it!
In fact, I believe that this could have been a very good minor update along with Infinity's Armory or something else early in the game's life- without feedback.
You seem annoyed that 343 is choosing to mess with weapons instead of giving us another content update. But my understanding is that they decided to tweak the weapons because they were going to update Halo 5 for 4K anyway, so they just said "well since we're giving it a 4K update, we might as well fix the weapon balance too, because eh why not".

In other words, this whole thing is somewhat of an afterthought, thrown in with the 4K update. Focusing on adding content probably would have taken more resources and maybe not be finished in time for the 4K update in the fall. So I don't think 343 was ever really "bragging" about this, or expecting us to "dance a teabag jig of joy" about it.
Yeah, I know, but you have to admit, they are really pushing this as something to revitalize H5's lifespan, and they have been doing the slow reveals of nerfs as if it's a full content update. It clearly doesn't deserve the fanfare, but I take your point.
ps verb wrote:
I have a question that I couldn't find an answer to in the thread or in the announcement.

Will the changes to any weapons also effect their warzone variants, or more specifically, will changes to the energy sword affect the sword used in infection?The announcement made it seem like some of the mobility and lock on range aspects of the energy sword are going to be nerfed, which could have unintended consequences for the zombies playlist, tilting things further towards human favor.
The sword specifically is kind of a weird, unique situation. While the team wants to keep the finer details close to our chest for the time being, I can say that for things like campaign speed runs and gametypes like Infection it'll still be possible to use a sword that offers the same type of behavior you're currently used to.
TBH I think that the weapons are fine as they are, but eh... I reckon 343 wouldn't deliberately make halo worse.
Would it be ideal to conduct a large scale public test across all game modes? Absolutely. Would the team do that if they could? For sure.

Unfortunately it just isn't possible the way the game and sandbox systems work. Most sandbox items can be tweaked and modified on a per-playlist basis but it's not possible to do that with Warzone or Campaign. The team did explore many possible scenarios to try and solve for this but none of them proved to be viable.

The team is doing internal testing to validate and assess these tuning changes in WZ and Campaign but we understand that can only account for so much - nothing compares to mass-scale testing in the wild with real players. That said, we'll be watching this very closely. One final tunings are determined and they go out in the November update we'll be monitoring data and feedback and there are already some contingency plans in the schedule to allow for further iteration and response should any of these tuning changes end up having unintended negative outcomes in WZ or Campaign.

Personally I think it's pretty exciting to take a stab at freshening things up in a two year old game and also addressing a few known "issues" with how many of these weapons perform versus their intended roles in the sandbox. But sure, it's also risky and after two years players have grown accustomed to the way things are. It's going to be an interesting exercise that will result in at least some very positive outcomes for Halo 5 and there may also be some interesting learnings along the way for things that didn't work out as expected. We're also going to get some great learnings that inform future projects. This process alone - particularly in terms of the limitations and hurdles faced to make these kind of tuning changes - has already been very insightful in that regard.
ske7ch wrote:
Would it be ideal to conduct a large scale public test across all game modes? Absolutely. Would the team do that if they could? For sure.

Unfortunately it just isn't possible the way the game and sandbox systems work. Most sandbox items can be tweaked and modified on a per-playlist basis but it's not possible to do that with Warzone or Campaign. The team did explore many possible scenarios to try and solve for this but none of them proved to be viable.
Do you mean technically possible, or in terms of perception?

And I know this is probably more low-key info but.. has this situation at all functioned as a learning tool for Halo 6?

So much of the current situation wouldn't at all be "controversial" if you guys had just spent the first couple months after release being like, "expect weekly or even daily tweaks immediately after launch as we fine tune the details."

Not to mention much easier to test, implement & get feedback from with a system that allows for tweaking of every value from the client-side.. (eg. "max bloom %, bullet magnetism %, bloom reset time, look acceleration delay (in ms), delay between bullets" etc. etc. (on a per-weapon basis)) as some sort of "advanced" custom game settings.

Imagine if those things were enabled/designed around from the start, you would already have tons of statistics available from custom games/custom browser by now.
Hi ske7ch, or 343 in general: I am a fan of the weapon update, i agree the weapons are too powerful in certain situations, but with this adjustment to the weapons (nerf) won't that leave the unadjusted weapons to be a little more overpowered now? For example now the the BR, DMR, and AR are getting nerfed, won't that leave the standard pistol more powerful than ever? It will do the same damage, still be hitscan with virtually no recoil, while the other rifles are getting toned down in a sense?

I say add recoil to pistol or reduce rate of fire, Reduce lethality of storm rifle, brute rifle, etc. If not then they will be (even more) OP ;p
So just read the weekly update https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/news/halo-5-weapon-tuning-test and these parts (in bold) I especially don't like the sounds of and have me worried,

Quote:
We’re also experimenting with changing the starting loadouts for Team Arena to BR & GunFighter Magnum. Additionally, during the weapon tuning test period, Team Arena will adopt the “Ability Tracker”, which is the modified version of the Motion Tracker used in HCS Settings (this version of the tracker has reduced functionality and only displays enemies that are using Spartan Abilities or firing an un-silenced weapon).
This change is part of a broader goal the team has around differentiating and refining the play styles between Social/Casual play and Ranked/Competitive play and freshening up the overall multiplayer experience in Halo 5. In the future, Social playlists will likely stick to the default Motion Tracker with AR & Magnum starts, but this tuning test gives us (and you!) an opportunity to test something new for Ranked play specifically.
Not all of us who like and play Ranked like the HCS radar aka "ability tracker radar" i'd say a good chunk don't. Not only that, but in my opinion, going towards a "ranked modes play differently then soical modes" per say, isn't a good idea at all. Having two types of radars (which plays very differently I might add) in a game isn't a good idea. It'll just leads to confusion and frustration for too many players who enjoy social modes but also ranked modes that aren't HCS.

Now, if you want to have no radar or a different one for the HCS playlist(s) (Maybe just have a few HCS playlists in ranked and that's it, leave the other ranked playlists alone) that's fine go ahead, no one is complaining on that at all!! but please don't turn ALL ranked modes into HCS style playlists aka there radar.

I understand that is this is a test and nothing is set in stone but it's clear to me already that you (343I) have thought about this for a while and are pretty set on making all Ranked modes have more of a HCS style and feel. At least it sure seems like it going by your statement earlier.

I can honestly say if something like Ranked Team Slayer adopts a HCS style radar, myself along with my Spartan company will be done playing ranked (maybe even Halo) as none of us really like the HCS radar settings and most of my company don't like any soical mode save maybe BTB either. I'm also pretty sure they'll be a lot of other people that feel like us out there.

I'm all for experimenting with weapons, game modes, etc. But my advise to you 343I is to keep HCS settings in HCS playlists.
Let's go! I love every change listed above. I'll miss standard Magnum starts, but of course I'll take a BR. And I look forward to the new radar, I like it fine in HCS.

i also love the differentiation between ranked and social being clear.
So just read the weekly update https://www.halowaypoint.com/en-us/news/halo-5-weapon-tuning-test and these parts (in bold) I especially don't like the sounds of and have me worried,

Quote:
We’re also experimenting with changing the starting loadouts for Team Arena to BR & GunFighter Magnum. Additionally, during the weapon tuning test period, Team Arena will adopt the “Ability Tracker”, which is the modified version of the Motion Tracker used in HCS Settings (this version of the tracker has reduced functionality and only displays enemies that are using Spartan Abilities or firing an un-silenced weapon).
This change is part of a broader goal the team has around differentiating and refining the play styles between Social/Casual play and Ranked/Competitive play and freshening up the overall multiplayer experience in Halo 5. In the future, Social playlists will likely stick to the default Motion Tracker with AR & Magnum starts, but this tuning test gives us (and you!) an opportunity to test something new for Ranked play specifically.
Not all of us who like and play Ranked like the HCS radar aka "ability tracker radar" i'd say a good chunk don't. Not only that, but in my opinion, going towards a "ranked modes play differently then soical modes" per say, isn't a good idea at all. Having two types of radars (which plays very differently I might add) in a game isn't a good idea. It'll just leads to confusion and frustration for too many players who enjoy social modes but also ranked modes that aren't HCS.

Now, if you want to have no radar or a different one for the HCS playlist(s) (Maybe just have a few HCS playlists in ranked and that's it, leave the other ranked playlists alone) that's fine go ahead, no one is complaining on that at all!! but please don't turn ALL ranked modes into HCS style playlists aka there radar.

I understand that is this is a test and nothing is set in stone but it's clear to me already that you (343I) have thought about this for a while and are pretty set on making all Ranked modes have more of a HCS style and feel. At least it sure seems like it going by your statement earlier.

I can honestly say if something like Ranked Team Slayer adopts a HCS style radar, myself along with my Spartan company will be done playing ranked (maybe even Halo) as none of us really like the HCS radar settings and most of my company don't like any soical mode save maybe BTB either. I'm also pretty sure they'll be a lot of other people that feel like us out there.

I'm all for experimenting with weapons, game modes, etc. But my advise to you 343I is to keep HCS settings in HCS playlists.
Could you give some more info about what you (and your spartan company) don't actually like about the ability tracker?
How about the range? (default 18m vs. 24 HCS)

What about the tactics/gameplay that the default radar creates as a result -- spartan charge, mindless/reckless AR charging and frequent crouching?
The ability tracker makes these things a lot less viable, do you actually prefer the hectic pace & increasingly random results that it creates?
Wow, okay, clearly you aren't reading what I have to say. I agree that 343 listens more than they get credit for, but that this is an area that they either can not or will not ultimately be dissuaded from their course. You convinced me of nothing; I merely sought to discuss from common ground, but since you find that untenable...
I believe that I am clearly reading what you are saying:
The worst part? They won't even listen to the feedback.
then your very next post...
I do agree that they listen more than they get credit for.

You would have to be a dedicated opponent of the changes to force yourself through round after round to provide a clear review, and even then, it would be seen as anomalous and discarded.
Which is why I don't really go into why you think it won't work to give feedback in the first place since you go back and forth with your premise here. I am not sure where the common ground might be here.

As to your second point, their testing is irrelevant to players' feedback. If they only give us the one small slice of the game to test, then that is as good- or worse- than simply making the changes without feedback. In fact, I believe that this could have been a very good minor update along with Infinity's Armory or something else early in the game's life- without feedback. Now, it just doesn't make sense. I believe this whole thing was and is poorly handled, unnecessarily drawn out, unintentionally has the effect of skewing data, and is badly timed. I stand by that.
I think sk37ch probably gives a better response to this than I can. I appreciate the challenge of learning something new. I just hope it isn't too jarring. I don't have the exact quote at the moment, but I know in one of the updates or maybe a response in this thread, there is a mention that some of the changes will be very slight.

It would have been nice to have the info all at once, but the lead up was fine as well. It's a lot of information that I think is better served giving it to us a piece at a time. Would you have rather them tell us everything Thursday and then start the changes next week? I am a little impatient myself about it, but I am fine with giving it all some good feedback at all different stages.
The best I can say of it is this: I doubt this is as much for Halo 5 as it is for Halo's future installments. As 4 was a testing ground for 5, so too shall 5 be a testing ground for Halo 5: Guardians 2, H5 ODST, or Halo 6: Revenge of Tartarus, whatever comes next. I hope this gets them what they need to make that game as great as possible, but I harbor serious doubts that it will do Halo 5 many favors. So here's a positive thought for you: I hope it actually does.
If that is true than I say it's an even better prospect. Why not be involved with helping to shape how the next Halo plays? Yes, this is a little ambitious, and a somewhat odd to change this up so far into the life of the game, but I am all for them trying new things. I don't need everything to stay the same as always just playing along with no real changes down the line. I probably would just keep playing, but I thoroughly believe this will put some new life into the game.

I hope it does as well. I am glad to be a part of it.
Could you please remove the grenade hitmarker?
I think it is completely unskilled.. Halo doesn't need a feature like this.
So with this new updated Team Arena or 'Weapon Testing Playlist' it has been stated that:
  • The Motion Tracker will use the "Ability" settings relevant to the HCS Playlist.
  • Player starts will feature Battle Rifle, Gun Fighter Magnum and assuming two Fragmentation Grenades.
  • Include non-competitive maps like Torque and Stasis, which realistically Torque could be balanced for competitive play and another Capture the Flag map in the HCS rotation. The pathway additions between Bottom Mid and Top Mid relationship via the central piston is a good start as well as the Bottom Mid Tunnels. Would also suggest possibly creating a "clamber" or skill-jump ledge from the Yards to Top Mid.
Seems to me this playlist is attempting to create a HCS version 2 playlist.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 11
  4. 12
  5. 13
  6. 14
  7. 15
  8. ...
  9. 18