Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

[Locked] Weapon Tuning Update - Early Discussion Thread

OP ske7ch

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 14
  4. 15
  5. 16
  6. 17
  7. ...
  8. 18
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not post spam.
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not post spam.
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show
A few things I'd like to ask ske7ch; I'm sure some of this can't be responded to and as I'm writing I realize it's super long, sorry:
1. Why aren't the specs for each weapon readily made available by 343? I'm not just talking about the weapons in the update, but when the game shipped? Things like red reticle range, rate of fire, reload times, perfect kill times, damage per shot, etc. Community members make videos about this but why wouldn't this info be in-game somewhere? Is there a reason to keep this information "hidden" generally? And specifically for this update I'm not sure what "hiding" the information about the weapon changes actually accomplishes - is the belief that the community won't do their own testing and figure out the differences? Again, that's what we do now - so will this be different? Will anyone who wants to know the differences in the weapons not be able to find that information by the end of the first week? I'm just not sure what obfuscating it actually accomplishes. Actually I believe it's a detriment to the new player experience to not have the information readily available. Should I pick up this gun? Why? These things should be clearly stated in a in-game tutorial, 343 produced video, community update - really anything IMO. (And this extends to any functionality in the game that isn't expressly stated - things like flag return times for 1 person vs two people, strongholds capture times for 1 person vs 2/3, etc.)

2. IMO the standard magnum is the most "satisfying" weapon in the game - so it worries me that it is apparently not in the plan for the update. Can you go into the thought process behind making the BR the utility weapon? Was it easier to balance the other weapons around the BR vs the magnum? Or was it more simply just to freshen things up (and the nostalgia doesn't hurt)? I'm not against the change assuming the BR sort of works like the magnum does now, just wondering. And was there any thought given to making the magnum a four shot kill and then balance around that? IMO the starting/utility weapons should be a high lethality/high skill level weapon usable at most ranges and a low lethality/low skill level weapon usable at most ranges - and the pickups should be somewhere in the middle of those extremes with different ranges, creating the "balance". The stated goal of the update is only for competitive playlists, but I feel like not having a low skill level type weapon as a starting weapon (which I doubt either the new gunfighter or BR are) will not be satisfactory for some people. Competitive or casual the point should still to be to have fun and be inclusive of everyone.
1. You do know this is only a test phase, right? These changes are fluid and ever changing. They will give us the specific details and changes in November after the test is finished, and all the data is correlated. They aren't trying to deliberately "hide" anything from us. In fact here is a quote from ske7ch on the first page of this thread that I think explains their reasoning behind this pretty well:

Quote:
We have game data and metrics that will be used to assess the changes and compare them to the 'control' version of the weapons. Each tuning adjustment has some specific underlying goas and then they've identified specific metrics/game data to refute or validate those changes. We don't want to specify that "X weapon has changed by Y% in Z way" because communicating that up front doesn't impact how the weapons are used/actually played - we want untainted data and we don't want to introduce player bias into the results. Play as you normally will, see how things feel, we will gather a ton of data and then also offer an official forum for gathering anecdotal feedback.

So yes, I suppose you could call it a "road trip to spot the difference puzzle" but we aren't asking players to spot the difference - we're asking players to play as they normally would to give us pure data and then share some thoughts around if anything felt better/worse/etc...
2. I am a little skeptical about the BR/Gunfighter Magnum combo as well, but that's why we need to play the test as much as possible. Keep the dates in mind. This week, maybe tomorrow (they didn't give an exact date just said early next week), Team Arena will change just with the new maps and added weapons, but it's just our chance to get acclimated to the new maps and weapon positions. Then the next week is when the test phase actually begins and we have three weeks to play, and see what we think.

I know there are some people who aren't happy with all of this for whatever reason, but I am really looking forward to it. To try something new, to know that I am helping just by playing, and then further helping with giving my opinion.
DaxSeven09 wrote:
A few things I'd like to ask ske7ch; I'm sure some of this can't be responded to and as I'm writing I realize it's super long, sorry:
1. Why aren't the specs for each weapon readily made available by 343? I'm not just talking about the weapons in the update, but when the game shipped? Things like red reticle range, rate of fire, reload times, perfect kill times, damage per shot, etc. Community members make videos about this but why wouldn't this info be in-game somewhere? Is there a reason to keep this information "hidden" generally? And specifically for this update I'm not sure what "hiding" the information about the weapon changes actually accomplishes - is the belief that the community won't do their own testing and figure out the differences? Again, that's what we do now - so will this be different? Will anyone who wants to know the differences in the weapons not be able to find that information by the end of the first week? I'm just not sure what obfuscating it actually accomplishes. Actually I believe it's a detriment to the new player experience to not have the information readily available. Should I pick up this gun? Why? These things should be clearly stated in a in-game tutorial, 343 produced video, community update - really anything IMO. (And this extends to any functionality in the game that isn't expressly stated - things like flag return times for 1 person vs two people, strongholds capture times for 1 person vs 2/3, etc.)

2. IMO the standard magnum is the most "satisfying" weapon in the game - so it worries me that it is apparently not in the plan for the update. Can you go into the thought process behind making the BR the utility weapon? Was it easier to balance the other weapons around the BR vs the magnum? Or was it more simply just to freshen things up (and the nostalgia doesn't hurt)? I'm not against the change assuming the BR sort of works like the magnum does now, just wondering. And was there any thought given to making the magnum a four shot kill and then balance around that? IMO the starting/utility weapons should be a high lethality/high skill level weapon usable at most ranges and a low lethality/low skill level weapon usable at most ranges - and the pickups should be somewhere in the middle of those extremes with different ranges, creating the "balance". The stated goal of the update is only for competitive playlists, but I feel like not having a low skill level type weapon as a starting weapon (which I doubt either the new gunfighter or BR are) will not be satisfactory for some people. Competitive or casual the point should still to be to have fun and be inclusive of everyone.
1. You do know this is only a test phase, right? These changes are fluid and ever changing. They will give us the specific details and changes in November after the test is finished, and all the data is correlated. They aren't trying to deliberately "hide" anything from us. In fact here is a quote from ske7ch on the first page of this thread that I think explains their reasoning behind this pretty well:

Quote:
We have game data and metrics that will be used to assess the changes and compare them to the 'control' version of the weapons. Each tuning adjustment has some specific underlying goas and then they've identified specific metrics/game data to refute or validate those changes. We don't want to specify that "X weapon has changed by Y% in Z way" because communicating that up front doesn't impact how the weapons are used/actually played - we want untainted data and we don't want to introduce player bias into the results. Play as you normally will, see how things feel, we will gather a ton of data and then also offer an official forum for gathering anecdotal feedback.

So yes, I suppose you could call it a "road trip to spot the difference puzzle" but we aren't asking players to spot the difference - we're asking players to play as they normally would to give us pure data and then share some thoughts around if anything felt better/worse/etc...
2. I am a little skeptical about the BR/Gunfighter Magnum combo as well, but that's why we need to play the test as much as possible. Keep the dates in mind. This week, maybe tomorrow (they didn't give an exact date just said early next week), Team Arena will change just with the new maps and added weapons, but it's just our chance to get acclimated to the new maps and weapon positions. Then the next week is when the test phase actually begins and we have three weeks to play, and see what we think.

I know there are some people who aren't happy with all of this for whatever reason, but I am really looking forward to it. To try something new, to know that I am helping just by playing, and then further helping with giving my opinion.
Yeah, I know it's a test - but is it really fluid? I mean once the changes are in place they're not going to change the weapons again during the test, right? That wasn't mentioned in the tuning test roadmap but maybe I misunderstood.

And regardless of that, what I'm saying is that 343 has not given the specs for the weapons since launch. Is there a reason for that? By "hidden" I just mean not readily available, IMO it should be in-game somewhere (on-screen manual, tutorial, etc.) so that everyone knows what a weapon's capabilities are, when to pick up specific weapons, etc. Same goes for stronghold capture times, flag return times, etc. - why is that info not in-game somewhere? Would that not help new players to Halo?

And I understand the intent of not detailing the changes being made, but I just think it is misplaced. I feel like we're going to know most if not all of the changes within a week anyways. Do you disagree with that? I remember in the early days of Halo 5 no one picked up the storm rifle - and then everyone picked up the storm rifle a week later. Maybe it was in-game experience getting melted by it, maybe it was people testing it and seeing that the kill time was sub 1 second. I just don't think they're going to get untainted data as it is being described. Once the changes are in the wild, one youtube video or tweet can "taint" the test. People will post their opinions on weapons, other people will read it, and that will undoubtedly affect their play. (I'll definitely be looking for other people's impressions, as probably anyone posting in this thread will.)

And maybe they have in-house metrics they're going to use to validate the changes - but the first thing I think of is when I see that is when Josh Menke used data to show that above a certain level an AR duel was more about luck than skill. I mean, it's cool that he used data to verify that, but did anyone who played the game a decent amount not already know it? What is the data going to show that we won't know in a week or so? Maybe I'll be surprised but honestly a lot of the balance changes needed are just common sense. The problem is that most of these changes have been needed for two years now, so while I'm hopeful the changes are great I really don't have a great feeling about the way it's being approached.

And yeah, I definitely will be playing as much as I can and I'll give feedback. I love Halo and I want the game/series to succeed. H5 definitely needs some "life" injected into it, especially with Destiny and COD WW2 coming out and there's no real "next Halo" news yet. Maybe this update and the H3 playlist will bring some hype back.
Sure man, but it's kind of hard for me to speak for every single member of my company as it would involve me getting into very fine details. I do know however we all share a very similar general view though.
Thanks for the reply man, tons of detail too.
You even slightly changed my stance on the solution! :)
And yeah, by no means do I expect 1 person to know every detail of a larger representation of players, just the general idea.

343I made Halo 5 around Spartan abilities. In my opinion the ability tracker radar all but discourages you to use those abilities. You yourself even said it makes Spartan abilities a lot less visible using the tracker ability radar, so we agree on that 100% So to me it comes down to this... if your going to make Spartan abilities in aboat half your game (ranked modes) more less nonexistent..... why even have Spartan abilities in the game at all???
While we do agree with the lessened "overall" viability, they still completely change the game!
Spartan abilities are still extremely powerful even with the radar, the only difference is that you have to be smart about it.

I played about 100 games of...proving grounds wasn't it called? With the ability tracker radar when it came out and I noticed a huge difference in how it played. Not saying it's better or worse just that it's very different. For me, I didn't enjoy it as much. I still didn't mind it but found it frustrating like I mentioned earlier.
I felt much the same as you my first 100 games of proving grounds...
The game felt very different and while it felt good in some ways, it also felt "less fun" in others.

Heck, when the playlist first came out, it felt like I had active camo on 24/7.
All I had to do was just not sprint, and nobody even looked at me.
It was like "shooting fish in a barrel" -- everyone just looked like mindless lemmings, easy for the picking.
Honestly, it was so easy to the point that it got boring.

But it's absolutely nothing like that anymore.
The HCS gameplay is completely different from proving grounds, and it's not because everyone else stopped using abilities, it's because people adapted.
Heck, simply not using abilities like I initially did would get you destroyed now, even by players of relatively equal skill in any other areas.

That's because these abilities are strong as heck.
Even with HCS radar, they are used constantly & absolutely necessary.
Heck, it doesn't even feel like abilities are being used any less in HCS than other playlists, it's just that they're being used smarter.

I just don't see the benefits or reasoning to changing the radar for half the game when there's no need too.
There's absolutely a need to change it: balance.
[[PREFACE: But there's more than 1 way to accomplish that, more on that at the end..]].

With regular radar, you can just derp around mindlessly charging and it will still pay off as long as you have basic mastery of inputs -- dodging grenades, shooting at your opponent, etc.
As long as you know how to deal with being in an engagement, you're fine -- but you don't have to think about how and when to start those engagements in order to be successful.
Understand spacing, flow of the game, spawns etc. only require the most basic level of experience with and you've already hit a skill ceiling.

And this is the problem right here:
Default radar heavily biases success towards players who have mastered the basics of control, and downplays the success of players who are more strategic.
This creates a very fundamental problem across all skill ranges: lack of granularity in skill progression.

1.
People new to the game get absolutely obliterated by mid-range-skill players, to the point where the game is nearly unplayable.
Every spawn, you're nearly instantly dead before you even know where you're at.
You have no time to breathe, no time to get your bearings, no time to ask for help/advice and no time for your teammates to help you.
It's like drowning and it's just not fun.

2.
People trying to push beyond the mid-range-skill encounter an enormous skill gap between themselves & anyone higher.
This has a lot to do with the AR, but the problem with the AR is inherently linked to sprint & radar.
The mindless-charge & AR/spartan charge is so powerful to the point that you basically need a near-pro-level aim to combat it.
If you're not already at the level of having an amazing shot, you aren't able to capitalise on the strategy you may know, because simply playing faster can overpower it.

This creates a heavy bias towards people exactly around & a bit below your skill range: the noobs don't stand a chance, and pros are rarely encountered.
This creates the illusion of balance, as you're dead centre in the ideal range where the 2 biggest problems simply aren't an issue.

Very new players quickly give up, and very experienced players are more likely to leave because there's "nothing else to do."
New players feel like it's too competitive, and highly skilled players feel like it's too nooby.
And that ultimately comes down to a fundamental lack of balance, radar being one of them.

so I don't know why 343I would even be considering changing all ranked mode to use the ability tracker radar when I don't think people are calling for that at all. Far from it actually. I hear more people asking for the radar to be increased in range (like how it used to be, and mainly because of Spartan charge I think which as I said should be tweeted) not changing it to an entirely different one.
Unfortunately, "most people" that are still left playing this game are in exactly the same bubble as you are..
The people who do have an issue with the game are mostly gone by now, and frankly, that number far outweighs the number that remains to post on waypoint.
So saying "I hear more" is a bit misleading, as this completely discounts the opinions of those who are the true majority.

That being said, it raises an important point:
Even if these changes were better, is it worth changing them at such a late state of the game's lifespan?
Do you risk losing that large remaining population in favour of those who are unlikely to return regardless?

With this in consideration, perhaps you're right that it shouldn't be expanded to all playlists, though at the very least, it should certainly be put back to the range it has always been at.
I don't think 343 has ever properly defended why they changed it from what has been the standard for over a decade and I've seen enough complaints about it to last a lifetime, across all players of every preference.

For the rest of your post, I don't have anything to add -- I'm mostly agreement in with everything you said, and certainly, "there's more than one way to skin a cat."

Changing the radar globally isn't necessarily the best way to change things -- in fact, I would say it isn't, since this has been the way in every Halo, not just H5.
Ideally, I would just increase its range, lower the AR's mid-range effectiveness, remove the lag compensation and "stun" effect for spartan charge.
I think that would tremendously help remedy the "blocks" at very low & very high skill demographics without significantly changing the feel for people who like the current formula.
Actually, I believe the game should revert back to what made it great in the first place. The controls in general are too sensitive (I constantly have to go into the options menu) and the weapon balancing is a little over done. I don't need 17 different types of weapons with 3-4 sub variants for the power weapons then have 15 different kinds of BRs etc... the game has become too complicated along with the weapons in general. The main focus of this game was war zone. We had 2-3 different variants of the same map along with forge and these weapons keep changing spots along with the damage being changed more than I have seen in a game besides an MMO. I say these changes shouldn't be made but is making me guess it's a testing ground for Halo 6.
Thank you so much for this, 343.

Weapons not fitting inside their unique, intended roles is what I see as likely the biggest problem in Halo 5's multiplayer. Everything has so much range and so many weapons work so well in all situations with relatively little skill necessary. The gameplay feels great already at its core, but it's nevertheless plagued by these weapon design issues.

I am extremely happy to hear what this update will do to the Assault Rifle, Battle Rifle, DMR, Carbine, SMG, Gunfighter pistol, Railgun, and Beam Rifle.

Some of the others I'm not completely sure on personally, but I don't have all the data you guys do so I'll wait and see for now. From personal experience I was quite worried when the first weapon changes were revealed: the Active Camo, which already seems extremely effective, and the Energy Sword, which in my experience has seemed far less effective than in previous games even with the speed boost. So I'm not sure about those, and if anything to me it would seem better to eliminate that huge increase in lunge range with Smart Link rather than nerf the speed boost. I guess you have your reasons though.

The Fuel Rod Gun I'm neutral on. I don't have much experience with it in H5 and I'm not sure how it will change exactly.

I can't really tell what you're doing to the Grenade Launcher either from the wording, but I really hope it's a nerf. I love the GL with all my heart. It was a favorite in Reach and it looks beautiful in 5 and that "thump" sounds awesome! XD But it is way too powerful in H5. Part of the appeal in Reach was its high-skill/high-reward. Hard to use but great payoff once you're good with it. The "pro-pipe". But in Halo 5 it's extremely easy to use and extremely powerful. Please nerf.
Yeah, I know it's a test - but is it really fluid? I mean once the changes are in place they're not going to change the weapons again during the test, right? That wasn't mentioned in the tuning test roadmap but maybe I misunderstood.
The way I understood it that they made changes, we will test those changes, give our feedback, they will analyze the data and feedback, make further changes, release the update, and finally continue to monitor if those changes need further tweaking.

And regardless of that, what I'm saying is that 343 has not given the specs for the weapons since launch. Is there a reason for that? By "hidden" I just mean not readily available, IMO it should be in-game somewhere (on-screen manual, tutorial, etc.) so that everyone knows what a weapon's capabilities are, when to pick up specific weapons, etc. Same goes for stronghold capture times, flag return times, etc. - why is that info not in-game somewhere? Would that not help new players to Halo?
Ah, I see what you are saying there. Yeah, it probably would help a new player. I am kind of old school, and I sometimes miss my game disc with the insert. But in reality now all we have to do is google something. I agree it would be cool to see some type of in game explaination of the weapons, but if a new player really cares enough they can look it up.

And I understand the intent of not detailing the changes being made, but I just think it is misplaced. I feel like we're going to know most if not all of the changes within a week anyways. Do you disagree with that? I remember in the early days of Halo 5 no one picked up the storm rifle - and then everyone picked up the storm rifle a week later. Maybe it was in-game experience getting melted by it, maybe it was people testing it and seeing that the kill time was sub 1 second. I just don't think they're going to get untainted data as it is being described. Once the changes are in the wild, one youtube video or tweet can "taint" the test. People will post their opinions on weapons, other people will read it, and that will undoubtedly affect their play. (I'll definitely be looking for other people's impressions, as probably anyone posting in this thread will.)
It's one thing if the community speculates during the testing. I kind of like going into this wondering a little, and anticipating trying to figure the changes out on my own. In my opinion it wouldn't be as interesting if I knew all the details.
DaxSeven09 wrote:
And regardless of that, what I'm saying is that 343 has not given the specs for the weapons since launch. Is there a reason for that? By "hidden" I just mean not readily available, IMO it should be in-game somewhere (on-screen manual, tutorial, etc.) so that everyone knows what a weapon's capabilities are, when to pick up specific weapons, etc. Same goes for stronghold capture times, flag return times, etc. - why is that info not in-game somewhere? Would that not help new players to Halo?
^^ THIS.

Why on earth do youTubers like Aozolai need to spend their valuable time experimenting and calculating all these numbers, when 343 clearly has them all well-defined in their code...? Especially when there are SO many guns in this game, when you include warzone.

The weapons descriptions are so unhelpful in Warzone. "Laser BR has increased accuracy" -- wtf does that MEAN? 1 year into the game I finally realized by watching videos that it means more bullet magnetism, whereas the long barrel increased red-reticle-range. But how MUCH? And how do the various scopes affect RRR? How does damage boost affect number of shots to kill? etc.

These are some numbers 343 should make available, on Waypoint if not in-game, for every weapon and vehicle. I'm sure there are more:
  1. red reticle range (scoped, unscoped)
  2. amount of bullet magnetism (maybe like on a scale of 1-10)
  3. rate of fire
  4. projectile speed
  5. shots to kill (headshot)
  6. shots to kill (body)
  7. time to kill (optimal)
  8. shots to break shields
  9. shots required before melee kill.
  10. damage per shot (and we should also know the "damage" required to break a shield, and to kill a spartan with no shields.
  11. kill radius (for explosive weapons)
  12. Damage required to break shields (for vehicles)
  13. Damage required to kill with shields down (for vehicles)
eLantern wrote:
I've long been an advocate for replacing Team Arena or blending HCS into Team Arena while providing an objective only playlist. There's already a Slayer only playlist so it'd be nice to have an objective only playlist too.
Totally, I thought this was pretty obvious personally, & seemed a common opinion...
though now that so much time has passed without any changes to Arena, with so many losses to the overall population & the fact that so much of the remaining population is Arena..
I'm not really too sure anymore because we're at a very precarious point because the "dreaded scaring off players" hyperbole is... actually a legitimate concern for once :S

At this point, i don't think anything can be decided until seeing how this next month goes.
Not only because of the weapon tuning tests but also because there's so much going on with alternative games...
This month is going to steal a lot of players regardless of what the opinions on the update are and I fear that could leave some bad/false implications in the minds of 343 directors.

Would also be a lot easier to comment on these things if we actually had access to the playlist stats though, lol...

eLantern wrote:
I think the only reason 343i hasn't provided us with an objective only playlist is because some of Halo's past experiences have indicated that it may not be popular enough to support healthy matchmaking; yet, strangely enough I can recall that Halo 4's CTF only playlist was one of its' strongest, so I think there's some evidence to suggest a non-slayer based playlist could exist as long as it limited itself to a select few more popular non-slayer based modes (in a mixed fashion) or perhaps just the most popular one (aka CTF).
Huh, that's interesting about the CTF playlist. I don't even remember that entirely..
Was that later on in H4 or something? I didn't play much, it was my least played title (even though I liked the gameplay more than Reach) because it just got incredibly boring only being able to play social, plus the boltshot was even more broken than destiny shotguns.

eLantern wrote:
Sorry, but I can't get behind this. The truth is that trying to appease all could easily lead to appeasing none and I think that's exactly what this would lead to.
Oh, don't get me wrong: I probably wouldn't get behind it either, haha -- hence why I very deliberately specified "only demonstrative purposes" :p
I just thought it would be an interesting general style of approach for 343 to at least explore, since it seems that they still want to at least try a blended approach, and this offers a completely different way of accomplishing that.
If they end up fully committing to the separation of settings, then by all means I personally wouldn't complain, at least for H5 anyway.

ske7ch wrote:
Updating this thread now that [...]
Didja hear that?? -- I SAID, there's still another a completely different approach of accomplishing what you guys tried with H5..
Now maybe it is stupid and unrealistic -- I too have my reservations, especially this late in H5's cycle -- but I think it's at least worth trying out in internal testing (even if just for the sake of setting aside for the 'ole H6 idea bin).

Here's the jist:
H5 has tried to make an "always-on" compromise, rather than a "sometimes on" compromise, meaning...
  • We get sprint!... but it's not actually faster than previous titles, just scaled maps to create an illusion
  • We get spartan charge! ... But it's not actually any stronger than double beatdown, it just feels powerful
  • We get clamber! ... But again, maps are just scaled to make it seem like you're more mobile, when the reality is that it just removes your ability to shoot while traversing
  • We get balanced weapons! ... Except a few months into the game, you realise that even the pros still can't beat autos most of the time
All the hyped features for both casuals & competitive players are present, but they're each so greatly compromised to suit the conflicting community views to the point that no group ends up fully satisfied... and since they're always active, the gameplay never changes, making the game very repetitive & stale.

The difference with what I propose is less base compromise but isolated in waves:
Quote:
  • Default Slayer bumps up to 75 kill limit, but each 2 minutes, you gain access to more loadouts.
  • Start out with "classic" movement (no sprint/thrust) and only "1-handed" weapons like pistol and SMG..
  • then a "Second wave" after 2 minutes opens up access to rifles (BR, AR) and either sprint OR thrust and abilities-only radar
  • then "third wave" after another 2 minutes opens up sprint+thrust, DMR & further weapon variants like Gunfighter magnum or dual-wielding
  • Possibly (if the game even lasts this long) even a fourth stage with reach-style abilities (but obviously less OP than straight-up camo) as substitutions for thrust.
Not only does this add more variety than the always-on approach, but it allows design to more fully cater each "round" to the wishes of that particular community:
  • Classic players get a truly classic experience
  • Competitive get a truly competitive experience
  • Casuals get a truly casual experience (heck, there's even room for Reach-style AA's)
  • Generalists get a truly general experience
... without the need to nerf everything along the way!
Instead of a constant compromise, it's more of a collective time-sharing agreement (+customs for non-sharers)!

Now, again: I want to stress this so that I don't get taken out of context:
  • I don't personally advocate this approach ((I actually prefer things to be based on map traits like man-cannons rather than player traits)), I only raise it as an alternative way to approach the "how to make competitive+casual settings global/default" conundrum, if 343 is still on the fence as to whether the dream is dead
  • And if 343 still wants to continue (whether in H5 or H6) to at least try to blend the communities rather than purely isolate them to different playlist settings, an alternative style like this may be worth at least testing out internally
  • After the years & years of loyal feedback from us fans to 343, personally, I would like to hope that you guys at least attempted/tried/tested all avenues related to a blended approach, because if you truly managed to successfully pull it off, the end result would have far more potential than a non-blended approach in the long-run
  • And finally... as mentioned earlier, I literally only came up with this idea on the spot -- it's only meant to be a rough example of a much more general design approach, no specifics intended -- (eg. the "timed rotational rounds" are purely for example/demonstrative purposes of how a non-always-on blended approach could look)
  • Finally: yes, I realise 343 probably already tried & scrapped something like this anyway lol
Quote:
But in reality now all we have to do is google something. I agree it would be cool to see some type of in game explaination of the weapons, but if a new player really cares enough they can look it up.
It's actually a huge headache to look up specifics on H5, there's just so much useless filler in the search results.

Even if you specifically type in "Halo 5" in quotations and specifically remove "Halo Reach," google still insists on giving results for Reach or H4 or...
Heck, even completely unrelated games that just coincidentally happen to have a weapon or ability with the same name.

Even if that weren't the case, it's still good practice to include basic information about the game.. you know, in the game :p
DaxSeven09 wrote:
But in reality now all we have to do is google something. I agree it would be cool to see some type of in game explaination of the weapons, but if a new player really cares enough they can look it up.
It's actually a huge headache to look up specifics on H5, there's just so much useless filler in the search results.

Even if you specifically type in "Halo 5" in quotations and specifically remove "Halo Reach," google still insists on giving results for Reach or H4 or...
Heck, even completely unrelated games that just coincidentally happen to have a weapon or ability with the same name.

Even if that weren't the case, it's still good practice to include basic information about the game.. you know, in the game :p
I don't have that kind of problem when I search. In regards to what we are specifically talking about I googled Halo 5 Weapon Specs. Everything on the first page referred to Halo 5. I agree that some items in game would be helpful to new players, but I am also under the impression that this type of thing rarely happens anymore if ever.

We have so much information available to us nowadays.To have the devs spending time making an in-game manual is a big waste of resources in my opinion. Not to mention the fact that they want you to buy the guides. There is no way they will make something to show us in the game that will supersede the need/want for players to buy one of their guides.
DaxSeven09 wrote:
DaxSeven09 wrote:
But in reality now all we have to do is google something. I agree it would be cool to see some type of in game explaination of the weapons, but if a new player really cares enough they can look it up.
It's actually a huge headache to look up specifics on H5, there's just so much useless filler in the search results.

Even if you specifically type in "Halo 5" in quotations and specifically remove "Halo Reach," google still insists on giving results for Reach or H4 or...
Heck, even completely unrelated games that just coincidentally happen to have a weapon or ability with the same name.

Even if that weren't the case, it's still good practice to include basic information about the game.. you know, in the game :p
I don't have that kind of problem when I search. In regards to what we are specifically talking about I googled Halo 5 Weapon Specs. Everything on the first page referred to Halo 5. I agree that some items in game would be helpful to new players, but I am also under the impression that this type of thing rarely happens anymore if ever.

We have so much information available to us nowadays.To have the devs spending time making an in-game manual is a big waste of resources in my opinion. Not to mention the fact that they want you to buy the guides. There is no way they will make something to show us in the game that will supersede the need/want for players to buy one of their guides.
But do the paid guides actually HAVE the information I asked for above? like red reticle ranges, damage output by weapons/vehicles, shots to kill vehicles, etc.?

In my post above, I wasn't implying they had to be in game. Waypoint is fine, or a blog post or wherever. just SOMEwhere.
DaxSeven09 wrote:
DaxSeven09 wrote:
I don't have that kind of problem when I search. In regards to what we are specifically talking about I googled Halo 5 Weapon Specs. Everything on the first page referred to Halo 5. I agree that some items in game would be helpful to new players, but I am also under the impression that this type of thing rarely happens anymore if ever.

We have so much information available to us nowadays.To have the devs spending time making an in-game manual is a big waste of resources in my opinion. Not to mention the fact that they want you to buy the guides. There is no way they will make something to show us in the game that will supersede the need/want for players to buy one of their guides.
I have the Prima collector's edition guide, and it does list the weapons and high-level things like magazine size, reserve ammo, firing speed (full-auto, single-shot, etc.), recommended range (close, medium, long), etc. - but those things aren't at the detail level that really matters to anyone. None of the stuff RzR J3ST3R mentioned is in the guide.

And even if the real info was in the guide, what good does a physical copy of a guide do when a tuning update changes how weapons work? (Yeah, it was a waste of money information-wise but it is a nice looking book and I support Halo.) Also it's sort of funny that there is a "Headshots" category for the weapons in the guide and the AR says no headshots but there is actually a headshot bonus when using the AR (after shields are popped I think).

Also there are top-down views of the maps in this guide with weapon pick-up locations - of course all of that information was irrelevant the first time the weapon spawns changed. I think those kinds of top-down map views should also be in the game somewhere and updated when the spawn locations change (like with this update).

And I can't speak to the resources or the time needed to put any of these things in (someone in studio would have to do that) - but I believe these things actually have value and once they were in place I don't think they would be hard to update. I doubt anyone on the development team is worried about selling guides. The barrier to entry to Halo for a new player vs COD/Destiny/Battlefield is so much higher in my opinion that the "new" Halo player has to be catered to. And really anyone who is investing time into the game should have the information provided to them. People like information.

And again I think the best place for this information is in-game (more people will see it there), but if it's anywhere that's readily available that would be great.
So my early thoughts looking at the map layouts is why the hell the boltshot is taking the place of other weapons being that its not being tuned at all, and secondly, why the hell is it still trying to be made a thing as it is. The boltshot is terrible, has the most magnetism and should be removed not added.

Sword on Truth should only ever spawn at top mid where it belongs, and 2 power weapons on Truth seems a bit much.

Silenced ARs/SMGs and gunfighter magnums need to stay in Warzone as req weapons where they belong, not tainting Arena play.

Im not happy about BR55s being taken off Torque either.
This is the kind of things that I love of 343, always thinking in the players.
Can grenades get nerfed or at least they make it so people don't spawn with them? I find it's no fun trying to go somewhere and having hundreds of grenades being thrown at you.
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not post comments that are discriminatory in nature.

*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show
You folks at 343i need to learn to leave the sandbox alone. Stop trying to reinvent the wheel. You are breaking Halo. OGs like me hate what you are doing to the game. I tried playing Halo today and
The weapon changes haven't been made yet.
I feel like if you go back into campaign and play with the original layout of how weapons operated and behaved it really feel smoother than the current tweeks. Excluding the ones that are about to happen for team arena. But that's just me. Maybe roll out a playlist in social that plays exactly like how the game was from day one. That would be fun, Just saying, it also would be a great way to compare in real time. Just an idea.
SHREYAS wrote:
I feel like if you go back into campaign and play with the original layout of how weapons operated and behaved it really feel smoother than the current tweeks. Excluding the ones that are about to happen for team arena. But that's just me. Maybe roll out a playlist in social that plays exactly like how the game was from day one. That would be fun, Just saying, it also would be a great way to compare in real time. Just an idea.
How can you know this without having played the new versions yet? And what current tweaks are you talking about? You mean like the ones made to the Snipe and Plasma Caster?

I don't see how having a Social playlist open to this would make a difference. The weapons will be tested as long as we play them. No matter what playlist they are in.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 14
  4. 15
  5. 16
  6. 17
  7. ...
  8. 18