Forums / Games / Halo: The Master Chief Collection (Xbox)

Possible Campaign Weapon Changes

OP SilverBarrel831

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. ...
  5. 3
How about you find strategy around those weapons instead of having them change for your benefit? You either accept it or leave it, no inbetween.
That is where you're mistaken. I do have strategy around them, I know how to use them and when, all I'm asking for is at least the slightest of tweaks.

For instance, the M6C in Halo 2 is practically useless, made bearable when dual-wielded. Is it too much to suggest that it could altered so a single pistol alone is a viable weapon as the SMG is?
No, it's not much to ask, the problem is the reception. Most of the community would burst in rage if they did this. Yes, it makes it more balanced, but it still makes it different from OG Halo 2. For example: in OG, you can't complete a section with dual-wielding Magnums, no matter what you do. Then you come to the remaster and have that same strategy work. See what I mean here?
It's best to leave the games as they are to avoid creating inconsistencies and, well, break the the purpose of a remaster.
The changes don't have to replace the original balance. They can just be optional changes that you can enable or disable before starting a mission similar to the way you can switch between classic and remastered music for halo ce.
I'd much prefer for campaign to be customizable as if it was a Custom game, of course, with other options to spice up the encounters instead of just changing numbers.
The damage boost on the Magnum is more likely to screw the player when fighting the Flood, one should go for the head which makes a damage boost useless.

Also the weapon is uncommon everywhere and missions tend to have areas a bit too large for the Magnum, almost forgot how power weapons are actually less rare past Cairo Station.

The killer is really it's rarity for me, it's not like you can't get closer to an enemy.
True, but other than headshots against unshielded enemies, its not particularly a useful weapon. True it would make fighting the flood a little harder, but I don't think it'd be too difficult.

And you do bring up a point, it is rather uncommon and hypothetically if any changes came about, they'd be for naught since the magnum only appears here and there. They'd have to likely increase the amount of times it appears in campaign, maybe in more UNSC missions, or dropped from those weapon torpedo/missile things.
How about you find strategy around those weapons instead of having them change for your benefit? You either accept it or leave it, no inbetween.
That is where you're mistaken. I do have strategy around them, I know how to use them and when, all I'm asking for is at least the slightest of tweaks.

For instance, the M6C in Halo 2 is practically useless, made bearable when dual-wielded. Is it too much to suggest that it could altered so a single pistol alone is a viable weapon as the SMG is?
No, it's not much to ask, the problem is the reception. Most of the community would burst in rage if they did this. Yes, it makes it more balanced, but it still makes it different from OG Halo 2. For example: in OG, you can't complete a section with dual-wielding Magnums, no matter what you do. Then you come to the remaster and have that same strategy work. See what I mean here?
It's best to leave the games as they are to avoid creating inconsistencies and, well, break the the purpose of a remaster.
The changes don't have to replace the original balance. They can just be optional changes that you can enable or disable before starting a mission similar to the way you can switch between classic and remastered music for halo ce.
But could an optional change be feasible?

No, it's not much to ask, the problem is the reception. Most of the community would burst in rage if they did this. Yes, it makes it more balanced, but it still makes it different from OG Halo 2. For example: in OG, you can't complete a section with dual-wielding Magnums, no matter what you do. Then you come to the remaster and have that same strategy work. See what I mean here?
It's best to leave the games as they are to avoid creating inconsistencies and, well, break the the purpose of a remaster.
The changes don't have to replace the original balance. They can just be optional changes that you can enable or disable before starting a mission similar to the way you can switch between classic and remastered music for halo ce.
I'd much prefer for campaign to be customizable as if it was a Custom game, of course, with other options to spice up the encounters instead of just changing numbers.
Maybe ... the changes could be a new skull?
I have a complaint about duel wielding. Why can’t we switch weapons and melee without dropping the second weapon? I get why we can’t throw grenades but not why we can’t melee, switch weapons, and get in to vehicles. It’s almost like Bungie was really lazy with duel wielding. If you want to throw grenades, just switch weapons or integrate the direction pad. Allow a down press on the directional pad to ditch the second weapon. Duel wieldable weapons in Halo 2 and 3 always felt underpowered. It SHOULD be overpowered. That’s the whole point of using two weapons at once. I do think duel wielding should stick to campaign and customs though. I never got why duke wielding was removed and never truly made to feel right.

Edit: I moved this to my own “Duel Wielding Needs to be Rebalanced” forum.
True, but other than headshots against unshielded enemies, its not particularly a useful weapon. True it would make fighting the flood a little harder, but I don't think it'd be too difficult.

And you do bring up a point, it is rather uncommon and hypothetically if any changes came about, they'd be for naught since the magnum only appears here and there. They'd have to likely increase the amount of times it appears in campaign, maybe in more UNSC missions, or dropped from those weapon torpedo/missile things.
Damage is almost the double, I don't expect the Flood to make Sacred Icon a lot harder but I wouldn't laugh, it's fast on Heroic and Legendary.

The rarity is the only thing to change but missions with Master Chief, arf... Metropolis, Delta Halo, Regret and High Charity aren't for the Magnum.
I'm thinking maybe a skull that disables dual wielding mechanic . That way it allows a rebalancing of only the dw weapons by the devs, that way it's not invasive or permanent but would be interesting and value adding for the on going replayability aspect that we all love . The biggest issue would be trusting the devs get the rebalancing somewhat correct.while it doesn't address everything , it is the least invasive to the legacy titles and easiest solution to implement so everyone in the community is getting a similar shared experience .
True, but other than headshots against unshielded enemies, its not particularly a useful weapon. True it would make fighting the flood a little harder, but I don't think it'd be too difficult.

And you do bring up a point, it is rather uncommon and hypothetically if any changes came about, they'd be for naught since the magnum only appears here and there. They'd have to likely increase the amount of times it appears in campaign, maybe in more UNSC missions, or dropped from those weapon torpedo/missile things.
Damage is almost the double, I don't expect the Flood to make Sacred Icon a lot harder but I wouldn't laugh, it's fast on Heroic and Legendary.

The rarity is the only thing to change but missions with Master Chief, arf... Metropolis, Delta Halo, Regret and High Charity aren't for the Magnum.
what is "arf"?

The rarity is definately a thing, but its strange to me, its rarity doesn't translate to its effectiveness, I mean you'd think a weapon that's not common to find would be particularly deadly, the Resistance 2 Magnum for instance. (I really love that game)

As far as damage it is still particularly bad, I'm just saying a little nudge in the right direction would be somewhat helpful. I'm not a believer in useless or pointless weapons in video games, and the Halo 2 Magnum is pointless. Nearly every other weapon is better than it at something, the SMG is better are close range, the Battle Rifle is way more accurate. The Magnum has no place, it does nothing good and excels nowhere.
I'm thinking maybe a skull that disables dual wielding mechanic . That way it allows a rebalancing of only the dw weapons by the devs, that way it's not invasive or permanent but would be interesting and value adding for the on going replayability aspect that we all love . The biggest issue would be trusting the devs get the rebalancing somewhat correct.while it doesn't address everything , it is the least invasive to the legacy titles and easiest solution to implement so everyone in the community is getting a similar shared experience .
That's an idea, could be worth thinking over maybe.
omarlotrc wrote:
I don't see this happening, OP. Fans would lose their minds if the games they love and remember were changed in such a way.
I wouldn't like the game I love change in such extent as this! Would just spoil the whole thing!
No, it's not much to ask, the problem is the reception. Most of the community would burst in rage if they did this. Yes, it makes it more balanced, but it still makes it different from OG Halo 2. For example: in OG, you can't complete a section with dual-wielding Magnums, no matter what you do. Then you come to the remaster and have that same strategy work. See what I mean here?
It's best to leave the games as they are to avoid creating inconsistencies and, well, break the the purpose of a remaster.
The changes don't have to replace the original balance. They can just be optional changes that you can enable or disable before starting a mission similar to the way you can switch between classic and remastered music for halo ce.
I'd much prefer for campaign to be customizable as if it was a Custom game, of course, with other options to spice up the encounters instead of just changing numbers.
Maybe ... the changes could be a new skull?
I have no idea how I dodged this one. I'm sorry. Anyway, I'd much rather for a customizable campaign instead, changing the things we want and leaving the core game untouched. Always dreamed of such thing, actually.
tonic bom wrote:
omarlotrc wrote:
I don't see this happening, OP. Fans would lose their minds if the games they love and remember were changed in such a way.
I wouldn't like the game I love change in such extent as this! Would just spoil the whole thing!
I feel that is the general feeling at this point, ah well. It was worth finding out everyone's opinion :-)
No, it's not much to ask, the problem is the reception. Most of the community would burst in rage if they did this. Yes, it makes it more balanced, but it still makes it different from OG Halo 2. For example: in OG, you can't complete a section with dual-wielding Magnums, no matter what you do. Then you come to the remaster and have that same strategy work. See what I mean here?
It's best to leave the games as they are to avoid creating inconsistencies and, well, break the the purpose of a remaster.
The changes don't have to replace the original balance. They can just be optional changes that you can enable or disable before starting a mission similar to the way you can switch between classic and remastered music for halo ce.
I'd much prefer for campaign to be customizable as if it was a Custom game, of course, with other options to spice up the encounters instead of just changing numbers.
Maybe ... the changes could be a new skull?
I have no idea how I dodged this one. I'm sorry. Anyway, I'd much rather for a customizable campaign instead, changing the things we want and leaving the core game untouched. Always dreamed of such thing, actually.
But wouldn't that be difficult to implent? And how would it work?
tonic bom wrote:
omarlotrc wrote:
No, it's not much to ask, the problem is the reception. Most of the community would burst in rage if they did this. Yes, it makes it more balanced, but it still makes it different from OG Halo 2. For example: in OG, you can't complete a section with dual-wielding Magnums, no matter what you do. Then you come to the remaster and have that same strategy work. See what I mean here?
It's best to leave the games as they are to avoid creating inconsistencies and, well, break the the purpose of a remaster.
The changes don't have to replace the original balance. They can just be optional changes that you can enable or disable before starting a mission similar to the way you can switch between classic and remastered music for halo ce.
I'd much prefer for campaign to be customizable as if it was a Custom game, of course, with other options to spice up the encounters instead of just changing numbers.
Maybe ... the changes could be a new skull?
I have no idea how I dodged this one. I'm sorry. Anyway, I'd much rather for a customizable campaign instead, changing the things we want and leaving the core game untouched. Always dreamed of such thing, actually.
But wouldn't that be difficult to implent? And how would it work?
Simple. They allow us to customize ourselves, changing basically all we can change in Customs. Wouldn't it be cool if we could start a mission with a Rocket and Sniper all the time with overshield, 300% speed and such in the beginning of a mission?
As for AI, that's what the colored Skulls are for. Remember those from Reach? We set their resistances, how much damage they deal, blind, eagle eye, lucky, unlucky, all that stuff.
tonic bom wrote:
omarlotrc wrote:
No, it's not much to ask, the problem is the reception. Most of the community would burst in rage if they did this. Yes, it makes it more balanced, but it still makes it different from OG Halo 2. For example: in OG, you can't complete a section with dual-wielding Magnums, no matter what you do. Then you come to the remaster and have that same strategy work. See what I mean here?
It's best to leave the games as they are to avoid creating inconsistencies and, well, break the the purpose of a remaster.
The changes don't have to replace the original balance. They can just be optional changes that you can enable or disable before starting a mission similar to the way you can switch between classic and remastered music for halo ce.
I'd much prefer for campaign to be customizable as if it was a Custom game, of course, with other options to spice up the encounters instead of just changing numbers.
Maybe ... the changes could be a new skull?
I have no idea how I dodged this one. I'm sorry. Anyway, I'd much rather for a customizable campaign instead, changing the things we want and leaving the core game untouched. Always dreamed of such thing, actually.
But wouldn't that be difficult to implent? And how would it work?
Simple. They allow us to customize ourselves, changing basically all we can change in Customs. Wouldn't it be cool if we could start a mission with a Rocket and Sniper all the time with overshield, 300% speed and such in the beginning of a mission?
As for AI, that's what the colored Skulls are for. Remember those from Reach? We set their resistances, how much damage they deal, blind, eagle eye, lucky, unlucky, all that stuff.
Fair enough good point!
omarlotrc wrote:
I don't see this happening, OP. Fans would lose their minds if the games they love and remember were changed in such a way.
Same, but H2 pistol really does need change.
tonic bom wrote:
omarlotrc wrote:
No, it's not much to ask, the problem is the reception. Most of the community would burst in rage if they did this. Yes, it makes it more balanced, but it still makes it different from OG Halo 2. For example: in OG, you can't complete a section with dual-wielding Magnums, no matter what you do. Then you come to the remaster and have that same strategy work. See what I mean here?
It's best to leave the games as they are to avoid creating inconsistencies and, well, break the the purpose of a remaster.
The changes don't have to replace the original balance. They can just be optional changes that you can enable or disable before starting a mission similar to the way you can switch between classic and remastered music for halo ce.
I'd much prefer for campaign to be customizable as if it was a Custom game, of course, with other options to spice up the encounters instead of just changing numbers.
Maybe ... the changes could be a new skull?
I have no idea how I dodged this one. I'm sorry. Anyway, I'd much rather for a customizable campaign instead, changing the things we want and leaving the core game untouched. Always dreamed of such thing, actually.
But wouldn't that be difficult to implent? And how would it work?
Simple. They allow us to customize ourselves, changing basically all we can change in Customs. Wouldn't it be cool if we could start a mission with a Rocket and Sniper all the time with overshield, 300% speed and such in the beginning of a mission?
As for AI, that's what the colored Skulls are for. Remember those from Reach? We set their resistances, how much damage they deal, blind, eagle eye, lucky, unlucky, all that stuff.
Okay, okay. This sounds cool, so. Where would the options be? Imagine we're in the MCC games menu with campaign, multiplayer etc etc down the side, where would we go to set up these changes?
omarlotrc wrote:
I don't see this happening, OP. Fans would lose their minds if the games they love and remember were changed in such a way.
Same, but H2 pistol really does need change.
All I've wanted is to make things feel "fair" and for each weapon to actually have an actual use.
tonic bom wrote:
omarlotrc wrote:
No, it's not much to ask, the problem is the reception. Most of the community would burst in rage if they did this. Yes, it makes it more balanced, but it still makes it different from OG Halo 2. For example: in OG, you can't complete a section with dual-wielding Magnums, no matter what you do. Then you come to the remaster and have that same strategy work. See what I mean here?
It's best to leave the games as they are to avoid creating inconsistencies and, well, break the the purpose of a remaster.
The changes don't have to replace the original balance. They can just be optional changes that you can enable or disable before starting a mission similar to the way you can switch between classic and remastered music for halo ce.
I'd much prefer for campaign to be customizable as if it was a Custom game, of course, with other options to spice up the encounters instead of just changing numbers.
Maybe ... the changes could be a new skull?
I have no idea how I dodged this one. I'm sorry. Anyway, I'd much rather for a customizable campaign instead, changing the things we want and leaving the core game untouched. Always dreamed of such thing, actually.
But wouldn't that be difficult to implent? And how would it work?
Simple. They allow us to customize ourselves, changing basically all we can change in Customs. Wouldn't it be cool if we could start a mission with a Rocket and Sniper all the time with overshield, 300% speed and such in the beginning of a mission?
As for AI, that's what the colored Skulls are for. Remember those from Reach? We set their resistances, how much damage they deal, blind, eagle eye, lucky, unlucky, all that stuff.
Okay, okay. This sounds cool, so. Where would the options be? Imagine we're in the MCC games menu with campaign, multiplayer etc etc down the side, where would we go to set up these changes?
Simple as well. Blend in the Skulls with Options square and there we go.
tonic bom wrote:
omarlotrc wrote:
No, it's not much to ask, the problem is the reception. Most of the community would burst in rage if they did this. Yes, it makes it more balanced, but it still makes it different from OG Halo 2. For example: in OG, you can't complete a section with dual-wielding Magnums, no matter what you do. Then you come to the remaster and have that same strategy work. See what I mean here?
It's best to leave the games as they are to avoid creating inconsistencies and, well, break the the purpose of a remaster.
The changes don't have to replace the original balance. They can just be optional changes that you can enable or disable before starting a mission similar to the way you can switch between classic and remastered music for halo ce.
I'd much prefer for campaign to be customizable as if it was a Custom game, of course, with other options to spice up the encounters instead of just changing numbers.
Maybe ... the changes could be a new skull?
I have no idea how I dodged this one. I'm sorry. Anyway, I'd much rather for a customizable campaign instead, changing the things we want and leaving the core game untouched. Always dreamed of such thing, actually.
But wouldn't that be difficult to implent? And how would it work?
Simple. They allow us to customize ourselves, changing basically all we can change in Customs. Wouldn't it be cool if we could start a mission with a Rocket and Sniper all the time with overshield, 300% speed and such in the beginning of a mission?
As for AI, that's what the colored Skulls are for. Remember those from Reach? We set their resistances, how much damage they deal, blind, eagle eye, lucky, unlucky, all that stuff.
Okay, okay. This sounds cool, so. Where would the options be? Imagine we're in the MCC games menu with campaign, multiplayer etc etc down the side, where would we go to set up these changes?
Simple as well. Blend in the Skulls with Options square and there we go.
That's not a bad idea.
I think what they are trying to bring back is the community and being able to mod as a community like when we all forge maps and they play them with the community, it brings people together. It also helps 343 have new material all the time without having people on their end being paid to.
Plus a good halo community thrives on the love of creation and the love of the game. As soon as the community has a love of 343 we're on the right path again....
I think the pistol is great as it is, because its fun to challenge yourself with it.
I think the pistol is great as it is, because its fun to challenge yourself with it.
It's not terrible in the beginning, I found it moderately okay at first, but it just doesn't have enough "umf" to it, a weapon can be a decent challenge to use, without it feeling useless and the H2 pistol, is sadly useless. There's something much better and more common at whatever the pistol tries to do.
I like the weapons settings the way they are just fine.
Legitsky wrote:
I like the weapons settings the way they are just fine.
Sadly it would seem that is the general feeling around here.

Ah well, I thought I'd try at the very least.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. 2
  4. ...
  5. 3