Jump to content

BigShow36

Member
  • Content Count

    1,318
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    5

Recent Profile Visitors

7,598 profile views
  1. That right there is how you balance vehicles. We need to get it out of our heads that vehicles need to be overpowered "because they are vehicles." They need to be balanced, and that means throwing some realism out the window. The Scorpion was an indestructible, one-shot kill behemoth in CE, but it wasn't overpowered because you could snipe the driver right out of it. Every vehicle should give opposing players the opportunity to slay the driver with a few well-placed shots.
  2. That's the same argument for having power weapons on a pick-up timer. "If you don't grab the rockets the first time, you should have even less of a chance of getting them the second time."
  3. They don't do any damage. Furthermore, I certainly wouldn't reward them by potentially allowing them to land a shot with random bloom.
  4. The depth of any gametype, SWAT included, should not and can not come from random elements of shooting.
  5. Beyond the punishments that already come from missing and assuming we're talking about a headshot specific 1-shot gametype? Yes, I disagree.
  6. Decrease aim assists, increase strafe. Problem solved, and you just avoided the shitbag of issues that come with bloom. Bloom does the opposite of what you think. If I'm a bad player playing against a good player, I want bloom. I want as much randomness as possible. If I know the other player has better aim than me, then spamming the trigger and getting as many shots downrange in as short a time as possible, even with bloom, will work out in my favor. Simple is better.
  7. The fact that another player is shooting back is the punishment. Why are we complicating this?
  8. No, there really doesn't need to be. If you miss a shot, the other player has an opportunity to land a shot. If you both miss, then you both need to aim again. With bloom, you both now have randomness affecting your 2nd shots. Completely unnecessary. You've got the Bungie logic going. "We need to make shooting harder, let's add bloom." How about you just lower aim assist and make strafing better?
  9. A bullet that goes straight. You see, it misses 100% of the time.
  10. Hyperbole. The very existence of bloom ensures that someone hits a headshot when they should have missed. You know who really isn't hitting headshots? People who miss when there is no bloom.
  11. Except it can also reward players who miss.
  12. Sure, but that doesn't mean it's a good thing, and we're talking very different levels of bloom/randomness vs. Reach. One of the reasons I never got into CS as a kid was because of the randomness. You ignore bloom in Reach because there isn't any other option. That's the issue with random features; you literally cannot do anything about them. If someone enjoyed playing Reach enough to play the tournaments, I would suspect that they accept bloom and are willing to play with it. The top pros ignored bloom, but that doesn't mean plenty of other players (who could have been pros) didn't abandon the game because of bloom. It's just survivorship bias, like current Halo 5 players having no issues with the movement or abilities; they're the only players left playing the game, so of course they accept the gameplay as it stands. Everyone else has already abandoned the game.
  13. The point is that bloom NEVER HELPS THE PLAYER WITH BETTER AIM. No one is saying that spamming with bloom is better than having perfect accuracy on the first shot; that's a completely asinine strawman. What people are saying is that bloom will always bring an element of randomness that can ONLY be beneficial to the player with worse aim on average. The punishment for missing a shot is that you missed the shot. 1 less bullet in your magazine, 1 more bullet fired by your opponent. Why add randomness to that?
  14. But that's a total different game. Games like that or CoD or whatever else are about weighing the risk and reward of movement; that's almost the entire premise. Should I move to a better spot and sacrifice my ability to fight back or should I not? That's also why the entire objective of those games requires people to move to certain areas; otherwise no one would move. Halo was unique and successful because it didn't do that; it allowed people to move and fight back at the same time. It wasn't a twitch shooter, but it also wasn't a "tactical" shooter. It was an amalgamation of both. Movement became rolled into the overall skillgap; the best players could move well while also shooting well. You shouldn't be punished for moving, you should be punished for standing still. I don't want obnoxiously slow animations for certain movements because that breaks the entire flow of Halo.
×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.