Jump to content
CyReN

Halo 5: Guardians Discussion

Recommended Posts

I meant as a starting weapon.

I don't see a need for that kind of change if the AR was in a good place. Having a close range weapon at the start of the game is pretty much core Halo.

Share this post


Link to post

The AR has a faster perfect kill time than the pistol. Think about that. It also has a faster fire rate making missing shots less punishing. Couple that with clunky close range aiming. But that's just the AR, the weakest of the autos. The smg kills even faster, and the storm rifle kills EVEN FASTER. If you don't think having autos with faster perfect kill times than precision weapons is a problem in competitive Halo the idk what to say.

  • Upvote (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post

Okay sorry there was a "dialogue" that Snakebite CLEARLY said didn't happen. I don't understand how you can't see this.

Because I'm telling you that the dialogue happened... the "poll" Snakebite referred to stems from him misunderstanding what Josh was talking about.

 

either way there's no possible discussion they could've had that would've led to what they said it led to, given what we know Based on actual polling data.

Statements like this lead me to believe that no matter what a few of you are going to believe what you've already decided to believe.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Well seeing as Halo 5's population has plummeted it format seem to far fetched. Plus they even stated that they can "tune weapons on the fly" or something like that, so for them to not even touch the weapons is absurd to say the least.

Just because they can be does not mean they will be. 343 is nothing more than a bully with your luchbox lifting it higher the more you jump. I'd poke you with a stick to trigger you too if I were them. 

Share this post


Link to post

I meant as a starting weapon.

It's an off-spawn counter to Camo and Overshield. It should be tuned to fit that role, rather than being removed as a starting weapon.

Share this post


Link to post

The AR has a faster perfect kill time than the pistol. Think about that. It also has a faster fire rate making missing shots less punishing. Couple that with clunky close range aiming. But that's just the AR, the weakest of the autos. The smg kills even faster, and the storm rifle kills EVEN FASTER. If you don't think having autos with faster perfect kill times than precision weapons is a problem in competitive Halo the idk what to say.

Are you of the opinion that the pistol vs autos should always win no matter what the range?
  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

@@Moa

 

"Posting in the Halo 5 Thread vs. the HWC Thread is like playing Arena vs. Warzone for REQ Points, you can sweat and make a massive constructive post in H5 and get an upvote, or you can post a Snoop Dogg gif in HWC and get 20 upvotes"

 

 

 

343 plz buff Arena Boosts

Beyond please buff rep output

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Because I'm telling you that the dialogue happened... the "poll" Snakebite referred to stems from him misunderstanding what Josh was talking about.

 

Statements like this lead me to believe that no matter what a few of you are going to believe what you've already decided to believe.

and statements like this lead me to believe you're not being objective.

 

They said it was somewhat split, but that there wasn't a majority pros not in favor of it being canned. We found the opposite to be true, it was not split, and most DID favor it being removed. That's what happened. There are words we use to describe this kind of contradiction.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Are you of the opinion that the pistol vs autos should always win no matter what the range?

If the player has the skill to pull it off, yes. 

 

You seem to think the weapons should be balanced on pretty much everything BUT skill required. Auto spray takes little to no skill, even worse if it's up close because then it's spray for half a second then melee with an incredible lunge range which takes even less skill.

 

I'm so sick of the average modern Halo player thinking that every weapon being viable automatically equals balance. 

  • Upvote (+1) 5

Share this post


Link to post

Is this whole thing just a joke to you? Like, just the most amusing and inconsequential thing in the world for you right now? Because with how minimizing your attitude is toward legitimate concerns over the direction of competitive Halo as a whole in this moment - and by legitimate, I mean not being a defeatist and trying to play the appeaser - it sure seems trivial over on your side of the table.

No, I'm legitimately trying to help contribute to discussion with the intent of allowing us to move competitive Halo 5 in a direction that is both healthy for the longevity of the game and fun to play/watch. I'm trying to do this with the context that I've been exposed to the inner workings and decision making processes taking place at 343. Unfortunately everything I say is disregarded immediately for that very reason.

 

This forum has the ability to have a profound impact on the direction of the Halo franchise. Making that happen will require compromise, period... I've accepted that. @@Sal1ent didn't come here for any reason other than his love for Halo and desire to make it a bad ass game. I didn't drop everything and move from Georgia to Washington for any other reason than to try and contribute to the franchise I love.

  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

Are you of the opinion that the pistol vs autos should always win no matter what the range?

the utility weapon should be able to compete, that doesn't mean always win, it should be a challenge to beat an ar user up close, but if the player is good enough they should win, it shouldn't impossible for someone with the utility to win in every situation other than when it is up against itself, that means it isn't an actual utility weapon.
  • Upvote (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

If you drop me some names in a PM, I'll talk to @@Infinity about it. We're always actively looking into removing inactive players.

Pretty much what Moa said. We sorted through I believe everyone in the company. If I really wanted to run the company the most efficiently I would have kicked a lot more people and brought on people who were truly very active. Sadly, some people played enough and are active community members that I would have felt bad for removing them and denying them the armor (inb4 but Ryan, your so corrupt?!).

 

We're not all true grinders but we're in it together, so hopefully getting the helmet goes smoothly. I have a feeling next month's Warzone update will help a ton.

 

I mean, yeah, some of these players are maybe not "inactive" but they are definitly not playing enough to be helpful at all. Since its all about the "kill" commendation I looked more at the kills of the people instead of SR.

 

We have people like:

Raven: 37'000

Beast: 37'000

Juicy Pie: 22'000

Mythik Nick: 20'000

Aimdown: 30'000

 

And then we have a lot of people still that have only around 5'000 kills or less. I think we as the company together should maybe talk about a minimum requirement like lets say around 10'000 kills or something? And only replace these people with more active players from TB. I dont want to be the dick that just kicks out people or give one of you that title. But I feel like if the company agrees we should reward the players that are grinding very active.

 

idk ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

Edit: Just realised I am posting this into the middle of a huge debate, so we might talk about this later again because I feel like this will get burried :lxthul:

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

If the player has the skill to pull it off, yes.

 

You seem to think the weapons should be balanced on pretty much everything BUT skill required. Auto spray takes little to no skill, even worse if it's up close because then it's spray for half a second then melee with an incredible lunge range which takes even less skill.

 

I'm so sick of the average modern Halo player thinking that every weapon being viable automatically equals balance.

First off, I never said anything you've accused me of, I've only been asking questions to other people about automatic nerfs. I actually agree that autos are too strong right now.

 

Second off, is there really no room for a player to be punished for not keeping a decent range between themselves and an automatic user? I think it makes for a pretty boring game if only one tier 1 weapon is viable (see: CoD4 or Destiny)

Share this post


Link to post

and statements like this lead me to believe you're not being objective.

 

They said it was somewhat split, but that there wasn't a majority pros not in favor of it being canned. We found the opposite to be true, it was not split, and most DID favor it being removed. That's what happened. There are words we use to describe this kind of contradiction.

Yes, that was the consensus from the discussion that Josh Holmes referenced. Yes, later on in an actual poll the results reflected another consensus and a change was made in respect of those results.

 

There could be plenty of reasons as to why the results differed - by no means is that proof of wrong doing or deception.

Share this post


Link to post

I'm trying to do this with the context that I've been exposed to the inner workings and decision making processes taking place at 343.

 

 

Considering you had a position that was completely unrelated to game design and are no longer with them, I find it odd how people disregard your perspective when it could very well be the least biased out of all of us.

 

I mean... you shill.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Meanwhile, I'm farming Assassinations and Spartan Charges in Griffball...

 

Do Spartan Charges in Grifball count?

Share this post


Link to post

Meanwhile, I'm farming Assassinations and Spartan Charges in Griffball...

 

Spartan Charges dont count in Grifball, sadly.

Share this post


Link to post

I mean, yeah, some of these players are maybe not "inactive" but they are definitly not playing enough to be helpful at all. Since its all about the "kill" commendation I looked more at the kills of the people instead of SR.

 

We have people like:

Raven: 37'000

Beast: 37'000

Juicy Pie: 22'000

Mythik Nick: 20'000

Aimdown: 30'000

 

And then we have a lot of people still that have only around 5'000 kills or less. I think we as the company together should maybe talk about a minimum requirement like lets say around 10'000 kills or something? And only replace these people with more active players from TB. I dont want to be the dick that just kicks out people or give one of you that title. But I feel like if the company agrees we should reward the players that are grinding very active.

 

idk ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

Edit: Just realised I am posting this into the middle of a huge debate, so we might talk about this later again because I feel like this will get burried :lxthul:

Fair points. We'll talk about it and see what we can come up with. After the mistakes made recently, I feel like this should be an open dialogue so we're not kicking anybody unfairly.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

I mean, yeah, some of these players are maybe not "inactive" but they are definitly not playing enough to be helpful at all. Since its all about the "kill" commendation I looked more at the kills of the people instead of SR.

 

We have people like:

Raven: 37'000

Beast: 37'000

Juicy Pie: 22'000

Mythik Nick: 20'000

Aimdown: 30'000

 

And then we have a lot of people still that have only around 5'000 kills or less. I think we as the company together should maybe talk about a minimum requirement like lets say around 10'000 kills or something? And only replace these people with more active players from TB. I dont want to be the dick that just kicks out people or give one of you that title. But I feel like if the company agrees we should reward the players that are grinding very active.

 

idk ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

Edit: Just realised I am posting this into the middle of a huge debate, so we might talk about this later again because I feel like this will get burried :lxthul:

FUCK YEA IM NEAR THE TOP WITH 37,000 WOOOOO

Share this post


Link to post

Yes, that was the consensus from the discussion that Josh Holmes referenced. Yes, later on in an actual poll the results reflected another consensus and a change was made in respect of those results.

 

There could be plenty of reasons as to why the results differed - by no means is that proof of wrong doing or deception.

its proof of bad communication for sure.
  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

So, based on the fact that you can see that I play the shit out of the game, you now know that I'm not just blindly hating because "Fuck Halo 5". I just feel like it could be better man.

Share this post


Link to post

So, based on the fact that you can see that I play the shit out of the game, you now know that I'm not just blindly hating because "Fuck Halo 5". I just feel like it could be better man.

nah you're dumb kid :kappa:
  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

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