Halo Reach

Since 6980 Days

Posted by Viginti_Tres

There is no one-hit melee, sprinting away from grenades only works in one direction and you can't shoot, camping and invisibility does not compute. These AAs have balance in common, you give something up in order to do something else. In objective games AL has only benefits.

You cannot move. You are a sitting duck for nades at your feet. Your opponents have tactical or combative advantages: You cannot run. You cannot fly. You cannot be invisible. Heck, your opponent can go into AL right after you so when you come out you get EMP'd. Don't tell us it only has benefits.

AL shines, though, when it is used in a team setting. Not team games, but team setting. If a group of guys has someone skilled at AL and you stick together, yeah, it can be hard to break...

Unless you are playing on a team yourself.

Lone Wolfs are gonna hate Reach. Woot!

In reply to

Pwn'd by Phaethon360.

Since 6994 Days

Posted by Viginti_Tres

There is no one-hit melee

Wrong.

sprinting away from grenades only works in one direction and you can't shoot

It's still a way to get away from nades, and you can melee while sprinting...even if it ultimately ends your sprint.

camping and invisibility does not compute.

How so? Plenty of people go invisible and sit in a corner until someone walks by. Computes just fine.

These AAs have balance in common, you give something up in order to do something else.

Oh, I guess my AL is broken because I'm not able to move or shoot while it's activated, and I'm pretty much a sitting duck once it deactivates.

In objective games AL has only benefits.

Then why not use it?

Posted by GriftGFX

I'm not going to argue against it being a little overpowered, because it's essentially on the same side of the argument that says that the grav hammer takes skill and strategy to use effectively.

It needs to disallow the player using AL from turning around at the end. There seems to be a bit of a buffer period where the ALer is still invulnerable but can pull a 180 and land a melee kill. And no, the hammer doesn't take skill and strategy to use effectively against shitty players, but against decent ones, it does in order to get any kind of decent streak while not just getting gunned down.

In reply to

[quote=Viginti_Tres]There is no one-hit melee[/quote]
Wrong.

[quote]sprinting away from grenades only works in one direction and you can't shoot[/quote]
It's still a way to get away from nades, and you can melee while sprinting...even if it ultimately ends your sprint.

[quote]camping and invisibility does not compute.[/quote]
How so?  Plenty of people go invisible and sit in a corner until someone walks by. Computes just fine.

[quote]These AAs have balance in common, you give something up in order to do something else.[/quote]
Oh, I guess my AL is broken because I'm not able to move or shoot while it's activated, and I'm pretty much a sitting duck once it deactivates.

[quote]In objective games AL has only benefits.[/quote]
Then why not use it?

[quote=GriftGFX]I'm not going to argue against it being a little overpowered, because it's essentially on the same side of the argument that says that the grav hammer takes skill and strategy to use effectively. [/quote]
It needs to disallow the player using AL from turning around at the end. There seems to be a bit of a buffer period where the ALer is still invulnerable but can pull a 180 and land a melee kill.  And no, the hammer doesn't take skill and strategy to use effectively against shitty players, but against decent ones, it does in order to get any kind of decent streak while not just getting gunned down.

Zapp Brannigan: If we can hit that bull's eye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards...Checkmate.

Viginti_Tres

Since 6511 Days

So if you're immobile, how does that even matter in an objective game? Or how does it even matter with team mates around?

I'm talking about AL being used to maximum effect, the only environment that matters for balancing. The fact is, that someone using it to maximum effect will only use it briefly to get an advantage without giving up mobility. There is no apparent trade-off or limit other than the duration (something all AAs have in common). You get something for nothing, just like the equipment in Halo 3 works. AL should either drain your own shields, only be usable once per charge or have a fixed duration.

And Acert, you have to come up with something better than listing other AAs as "disadvantages". That way you can construct the most OP AA and say, hey at least he can't fly. And something that can be countered by itself? News at 11.

In reply to

Since 7009 Days

Posted by Ronsauce

It needs to disallow the player using AL from turning around at the end. There seems to be a bit of a buffer period where the ALer is still invulnerable but can pull a 180 and land a melee kill. And no, the hammer doesn't take skill and strategy to use effectively against shitty players, but against decent ones, it does in order to get any kind of decent streak while not just getting gunned down.

Nope.

In reply to

Viginti_Tres

Since 6511 Days

Posted by Ronsauce

...

One-hit melee, explanation please.

As for the rest. If you get yourself killed by an invisible corner hugger it's your own fault. You have a radar, use it. And I don't use any other AA other than sprint/evade. It's simply the only way I can have fun with this game.

In reply to

Since 7009 Days

I know you're just overlooking the obvious, since you clearly have more Halo experience than I do, but melee has always been one hit to the back. I'm pretty sure that counts as a one-hit melee kill. And invisibility also scrambles your radar, so I'm not sure how you're supposed to use that to counter a stealthy camper. Sure, it alerts you to their proximity, but it in no way keeps you from letting your guard down eventually. Don't drag yourself into an argument with Ronsauce though, you guys are never going to agree. Since you both know the other is wrong, that seems like a pretty easy solution.

In reply to

Since 6980 Days

Posted by Viginti_Tres

And Acert, you have to come up with something better than listing other AAs as "disadvantages". That way you can construct the most OP AA and say, hey at least he can't fly. And something that can be countered by itself? News at 11.

Then go back and read the examples of NEGATIVES I gave other than AA combat abilities.

But as for other AA advantages, you do realize by picking AL that in combat exchanges you are giving up the other abilities, right? You sound as if that is a "duuuhhh" statement but it doesn't seem to be computing, so I will put it in more detail: Your special ability with AL is to freeze yourself. Wow, sitting target! Now you go to fight... oh crap, everyone has a productive AA that benefits them in encounters. Me? Nuttin. Unless I want to sit here, frozen, and allow others to toss nades at my feet.

Maybe it is because I am good, or maybe I enjoy easy cheap kills, but when I see AL I see "free points!"

I have seen it used effectively by a few people, and when coordinated as a team effort it can be a tactical advantage. But it definitely isn't over powering. They are immobile, defenseless players!!! Time a nade, pull out your pistol, and head shot them!

Again, they cannot move and they cannot shoot. How is that not a huge disadvantage? And you are giving up abilities that ACTIVELY help you in combat. Being able to SPRINT or FLY is a HUGE advantage in combat. You give up those abilities by picking to be a bump on a log.

A bump on a log that pretty much is a magnet for idiot players who try to get too close. Why not just stand on nades while you are at it or give people free melee kills? Personally I think AL is the weakest of the AAs and only effective when used with a good group of team mates.

In reply to

[quote=Viginti_Tres]And Acert, you have to come up with something better than listing other AAs as "disadvantages". That way you can construct the most OP AA and say, hey at least he can't fly. And something that can be countered by itself? News at 11.[/quote]

Then go back and read the examples of NEGATIVES I gave other than AA combat abilities.

But as for other AA advantages, you do realize by picking AL that in combat exchanges you are giving up the other abilities, right? You sound as if that is a "duuuhhh" statement but it doesn't seem to be computing, so I will put it in more detail: Your special ability with AL is to freeze yourself. Wow, sitting target! Now you go to fight... oh crap, everyone has a productive AA that benefits them in encounters. Me? Nuttin. Unless I want to sit here, frozen, and allow others to toss nades at my feet.

Maybe it is because I am good, or maybe I enjoy easy cheap kills, but when I see AL I see "free points!"

I have seen it used effectively by a few people, and when coordinated as a team effort it can be a tactical advantage. But it definitely isn't over powering. They are immobile, defenseless players!!! Time a nade, pull out your pistol, and head shot them!

Again, they cannot move and they cannot shoot. How is that not a huge disadvantage? And you are giving up abilities that ACTIVELY help you in combat. Being able to SPRINT or FLY is a HUGE advantage in combat. You give up those abilities by picking to be a bump on a log.

A bump on a log that pretty much is a magnet for idiot players who try to get too close. Why not just stand on nades while you are at it or give people free melee kills? Personally I think AL is the weakest of the AAs and only effective when used with a good group of team mates.

Pwn'd by Phaethon360.

Viginti_Tres

Since 6511 Days

Posted by GriftGFX

I know you're just overlooking the obvious, since you clearly have more Halo experience than I do, but melee has always been one hit to the back.

Yes, I wasn't considering that. When you get rear ended by someone sprinting from the back it's your lack of attention that got you into this situation. Radar is a powerful tool, use it.

As far as I know there are ways to tell where the invisible guy is, just by looking at the radar. I have no way to confirm it right now, but the jamming plane should be circular, and that generally gives you a good idea where he is.

You're right about the arguing though. It is pointless, I'll stop right here.

edit: One thing though: Acert, that's a screwed way to look at it. You gain an ability, you don't give up the other 3 since that's never your choice.

In reply to

Since 7009 Days

You are giving up the other three though. It was your choice.

In reply to

Since 6877 Days

Balance is longevity, not personal anecdotes. I've played 150+ games of this Reach beta and have found myself dying to people using armour lock only infrequently. That doesn't mean it's balanced in of itself but if that experience correlates to the rest of the playing population then I think it's pretty hard to conclude armor lock is over-powered.

They already said the emp burst plus transition time in and out is going to be tweaked in addition to melee speed and recovery.

But regardless, if a player keeps standing next to somebody with armor lock and is repeatedly getting punched in the face game after game or multiple times in a game, I think it's a bit rich to blame 'balance'.

In reply to

http://twitter.com/deftangel

roxwell

Since 6957 Days

Does crouching not remove you from the radar in Reach?
I used to love doing that.

In reply to

Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.

Since 6994 Days

Posted by GriftGFX

Nope.

Yyyuuup!

Posted by Viginti_Tres

When you get rear ended by someone sprinting from the back it's your lack of attention that got you into this situation. Radar is a powerful tool, use it.

If you get yourself killed by an invisible corner hugger it's your own fault. You have a radar, use it.

Just so you know, I wasn't actually complaining about getting hit from behind by a sprinter...or invisible people camping. Those just seem like legitimate complaints IF people using AL is as well. I actually have no problems with any of the AAs...except that I wish sprint was hold-to-use.

In reply to

Zapp Brannigan: If we can hit that bull's eye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards...Checkmate.

Since 7009 Days

Posted by Ronsauce

I actually have no problems with any of the AAs

Or anything, seemingly. But that was sorta my point for Viginti. We're never going to really agree with anything when it comes to contradicting points about balance. Especially when you think the gravity hammer takes much if any skill on a level playing field (against relatively equal opponents), or ya know... that MW2 is a (good and) balanced game. We'll just agree that I think you're wrong (and vice versa) about everything and move on. "Yup versus nope," is about as productive a conversation as we can have.

Everything is perfect. I wonder why they even bothered having a beta.

Posted by roxwell

Does crouching not remove you from the radar in Reach?
I used to love doing that.

Yeah.

Posted by deftangel

Balance is longevity, not personal anecdotes. I've played 150+ games of this Reach beta and have found myself dying to people using armour lock only infrequently. That doesn't mean it's balanced in of itself but if that experience correlates to the rest of the playing population then I think it's pretty hard to conclude armor lock is over-powered.

Popularity itself doesn't necessarily imply everything about balance. While the M60 is a seriously over powered gun in Bad Company 2 (even post nerf!), it's insane popularity blows that image up out of proportion to the actual problem. People tend to trend towards what is best, and no matter how hard you try to do this rock-paper-scissors thing, you're never going to really get it right. Something will always stand out, as the pistol and DMR will continue to post beta, but that doesn't mean they're OP. Usage statistics are useful, sure, I mean just look at how top-heavy melee is--I just don't think they say everything.

And likewise, just because AL is less popular than other AA, or just because it takes more skill to deploy properly, doesn't necessarily mean that there's no issue here.

In reply to

[quote=Ronsauce]I actually have no problems with any of the AAs[/quote]

Or anything, seemingly. But that was sorta my point for Viginti. We're never going to really agree with anything when it comes to contradicting points about balance. Especially when you think the gravity hammer takes much if any skill on a level playing field (against relatively equal opponents), or ya know... that MW2 is a (good and) balanced game. We'll just agree that I think you're wrong (and vice versa) about everything and move on. "Yup versus nope," is about as productive a conversation as we can have.

Everything is perfect. I wonder why they even bothered having a beta.

[quote=roxwell]Does crouching not remove you from the radar in Reach?
I used to love doing that.[/quote]

Yeah.

[quote=deftangel]Balance is longevity, not personal anecdotes. I've played 150+ games of this Reach beta and have found myself dying to people using armour lock only infrequently. That doesn't mean it's balanced in of itself but if that experience correlates to the rest of the playing population then I think it's pretty hard to conclude armor lock is over-powered.[/quote]

Popularity itself doesn't necessarily imply everything about balance. While the M60 is a seriously over powered gun in Bad Company 2 (even post nerf!), it's insane popularity blows that image up out of proportion to the actual problem. People tend to trend towards what is [i]best[/i], and no matter how hard you try to do this rock-paper-scissors thing, you're never going to [i]really[/i] get it right. Something will always stand out, as the pistol and DMR will continue to post beta, but that doesn't mean they're OP. Usage statistics are useful, sure, I mean just look at how top-heavy melee is--I just don't think they say everything.

And likewise, just because AL is less popular than other AA, or just because it takes more skill to deploy properly, doesn't necessarily mean that there's no issue here.

Since 6994 Days

Especially when you think the gravity hammer takes much if any skill on a level playing field (against relatively equal opponents)

The original complaint seemed to be that someone who can't get 10-15 kills with a normal weapon due to a lack of skill can get that many kills with the grav hammer. At least in the Arena, if you aren't able to pull down that many kills with the pistol/AR/nades/DMR, you won't be good enough, either through decent awareness or decision-making or ability to move around safely, to get that many kills with the hammer against decent players(ie NOT relatively equal opponents). That much couldn't be any more obvious.

Or anything, seemingly.....Everything is perfect. I wonder why they even bothered having a beta.

Posted by Ronsauce

It needs to disallow the player using AL from turning around at the end. There seems to be a bit of a buffer period where the ALer is still invulnerable but can pull a 180 and land a melee kill.

Aside from this issue, I haven't had any problems with balance that haven't already been mentioned(AR seemingly underpowered), and I simply don't feel the need to claim that every little thing I find annoying is OP.

or ya know... that MW2 is a (good and) balanced game.

Maybe from the start it's not balanced as countering the airstrikes can be a pain, but after unlocking a few perks, sure, it's balanced enough and fun too. Or at least that's what I found after playing a good deal more than a few hours on some free Steam weekend.

In reply to

[quote]Especially when you think the gravity hammer takes much if any skill on a level playing field (against relatively equal opponents)[/quote]
The original complaint seemed to be that someone who can't get 10-15 kills with a normal weapon due to a lack of skill can get that many kills with the grav hammer. At least in the Arena, if you aren't able to pull down that many kills with the pistol/AR/nades/DMR, you won't be good enough, either through decent awareness or decision-making or ability to move around safely, to get that many kills with the hammer against decent players(ie NOT relatively equal opponents). That much couldn't be any more obvious.

[quote]Or anything, seemingly.....Everything is perfect. I wonder why they even bothered having a beta.[/quote]
[quote=Ronsauce]It needs to disallow the player using AL from turning around at the end. There seems to be a bit of a buffer period where the ALer is still invulnerable but can pull a 180 and land a melee kill.[/quote]
Aside from this issue, I haven't had any problems with balance that haven't already been mentioned(AR seemingly underpowered), and I simply don't feel the need to claim that every little thing I find annoying is OP.

[quote]or ya know... that MW2 is a (good and) balanced game.[/quote]
Maybe from the start it's not balanced as countering the airstrikes can be a pain, but after unlocking a few perks, sure, it's balanced enough and fun too. Or at least that's what I found after playing a good deal more than a few hours on some free Steam weekend.

Zapp Brannigan: If we can hit that bull's eye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards...Checkmate.

Since 7009 Days

I hit level 70 after five minutes, thanks to the buggy-broken-ass nature of the game, so I got to play for a good amount of time with mostly everything unlocked. It's still broken. But we've had that discussion already, just like we've discussed the hammer in pretty good detail. My counter argument for the hammer would be this: put me in a room with my friends, give me the hammer, and I'll get a hammer spree. And honestly, I'm not much better than most of them and quite a few of the people I play with are considerably better than me. But whatever, you're wrong, I'm wrong, what difference does it make.

In reply to

Since 6877 Days

Posted by GriftGFX

Popularity itself doesn't necessarily imply everything about balance. While the M60 is a seriously over powered gun in Bad Company 2 (even post nerf!), it's insane popularity blows that image up out of proportion to the actual problem. People tend to trend towards what is best, and no matter how hard you try to do this rock-paper-scissors thing, you're never going to really get it right. Something will always stand out, as the pistol and DMR will continue to post beta, but that doesn't mean they're OP. Usage statistics are useful, sure, I mean just look at how top-heavy melee is--I just don't think they say everything.

And likewise, just because AL is less popular than other AA, or just because it takes more skill to deploy properly, doesn't necessarily mean that there's no issue here.

Where did I mention popularity? :) I nicked Griesmer's "balance is longevity" phrase more in an attempt to suggest what balance isn't. It isn't, "I keep dying because of feature/weapon X, therefore it must be overpowered" any more than its "tactic I owned noobs with in previous game is no longer as effective, they've taken skill out of the game".

I'm not making any wild sweeping claims as to how balanced Reach is at this point. Quite the opposite, it definitely has a more unfinished feel then the Halo 3 beta. But the vast majority of the "under/over-powered" arguments I've read are to me thoroughly unconvincing.

For me, there are plenty of things that need to feel better to use but I've not really seen anything that's made me sit up and think "that's so getting nerfed". Closest thing to it would probably be the range on the Hammer, which is very high and it seems to lack the effect where it pushes players you don't quite get away from you. That said, I'm unsure whether it's supposed to be a power weapon or not and I've not found it to be an aggravating issue in any of the games I've played. (i.e. in an Arena match on Powerhouse, I've not seen a trend for rushing the hammer or assume I'm screwed if my team didn't get it.)

In reply to

[quote=GriftGFX]

Popularity itself doesn't necessarily imply everything about balance. While the M60 is a seriously over powered gun in Bad Company 2 (even post nerf!), it's insane popularity blows that image up out of proportion to the actual problem. People tend to trend towards what is [i]best[/i], and no matter how hard you try to do this rock-paper-scissors thing, you're never going to [i]really[/i] get it right. Something will always stand out, as the pistol and DMR will continue to post beta, but that doesn't mean they're OP. Usage statistics are useful, sure, I mean just look at how top-heavy melee is--I just don't think they say everything.

And likewise, just because AL is less popular than other AA, or just because it takes more skill to deploy properly, doesn't necessarily mean that there's no issue here.[/quote]

Where did I mention popularity? :) I nicked Griesmer's "balance is [u]longevity[/u]" phrase more in an attempt to suggest what balance [i]isn't[/i]. It isn't, "I keep dying because of feature/weapon X, therefore it must be overpowered" any more than its "tactic I owned noobs with in previous game is no longer as effective, they've taken skill out of the game".

I'm not making any wild sweeping claims as to how balanced Reach is at this point. Quite the opposite, it definitely has a more unfinished feel then the Halo 3 beta. But the vast majority of the "under/over-powered" arguments I've read are to me thoroughly unconvincing.

For me, there are plenty of things that need to feel better to use but I've not really seen anything that's made me sit up and think "that's so getting nerfed". Closest thing to it would probably be the range on the Hammer, which is very high and it seems to lack the effect where it pushes players you don't quite get away from you. That said, I'm unsure whether it's supposed to be a power weapon or not and I've not found it to be an aggravating issue in any of the games I've played. (i.e. in an Arena match on Powerhouse, I've not seen a trend for rushing the hammer or assume I'm screwed if my team didn't get it.)

http://twitter.com/deftangel

Since 7009 Days

I've played 150+ games of this Reach beta and have found myself dying to people using armour lock only infrequently.

I interpreted this as an implication that because AL is not wildly used compared to other AA, that it's an indication of balance. It can be, but it's certainly not definitive.

In reply to

Since 6980 Days

Seeing as my Xbox is down and out I can say this about Reach: Very encouraged.

Also feel it is very, very incomplete. The combat seems to lack a visceral feeling and the gunplay offers little feedback. I hate to power weapon horde, even hate map memorization and weapon spawn camping more, but Reach outside of Generator defense felt a LOT like this. (I loved my couple play throughs on Generator Defense).

Bungie did a good job, love the AAs, graphics are a step in the right direction... but for pure MP Reach needs a lot of tweaking and refinement. Still a good game, but for it to be great in its own right, and not just living off the 4 letter name, it really needs to be refined both in terms of gameplay and UI/Feedback.

Bungie really could learn something from DICE and IW in terms of feedback to players though.

In reply to

Pwn'd by Phaethon360.

Since 6994 Days

Posted by Acert93

The combat seems to lack a visceral feeling and the gunplay offers little feedback.

Bungie really could learn something from DICE and IW in terms of feedback to players though.

Definitely, but I've always found this to be true of Halo games, so I don't find it particularly jarring to my Halo senses. And to be honest, I do find it a bit better in Reach...maybe do to improved animations.

In reply to

Zapp Brannigan: If we can hit that bull's eye, the rest of the dominoes will fall like a house of cards...Checkmate.

Since 6877 Days

For me one of the most criminal things they did was ship a beta with a supposedly placeholder HUD. I struggle to understand how they didn't pick up on the problems with reticules and damage indicators in their internal tests. I can't see how it's helpful to ship a beta with those sort of fixes required.

Some of the weapons feel visceral and some do not. Grenades definitely do! The DMR needs a lot more work to feel good to use.

In reply to

http://twitter.com/deftangel

Since 6980 Days

Bungie mentioned the possibility of unannounced AAs. I think an "overshield" would fit the game because 1) it is a powerup in the game and 2) could fit with the heavy spartan. To make it have negatives it could players down ala a big lumbering spartant. Another AA would be melee. More range, keep the fast follow up, and enhanced sword abilities.

I am sure those ideas will get some fuming ;)

In reply to

Pwn'd by Phaethon360.

Nietzsche

Since 6362 Days

I just wish they would make the AR more powerful at close range. It's not fun to feel like pistol is my only choice. semi-automatic gets old if you feel you have to use it all the time. fully automatic weapons are just simply FUN to use, it's a shame they get little love in the Halo-verse. Still, the game is fun for sure, but I have to admit it's not impressing me as much as I was hoping for.

I do like generator defense a lot though, I'm just worried about that game type not having enough good maps. We'll see I guess.

In reply to

Since 6877 Days

Posted by Acert93

Bungie mentioned the possibility of unannounced AAs. I think an "overshield" would fit the game because 1) it is a powerup in the game and 2) could fit with the heavy spartan. To make it have negatives it could players down ala a big lumbering spartant. Another AA would be melee. More range, keep the fast follow up, and enhanced sword abilities.

I am sure those ideas will get some fuming ;)

Almost certainly. They could tie this in with the fiction so there is 6 abilities to represent each of the Spartans in Noble Team. Another one could be a 'medic' of sorts that kicked out a regeneration field for everyone's shields or the opposite which takes them down.

In reply to

http://twitter.com/deftangel