Bloody Initiate

I do not have a Youtube channel, but I have enjoyed the work of some people who do. They all had some things in common: 1. They collaborate with other Youtubers, basically paying attention to what is going on it their industry. So you want to know your Halo 4 and you want to make sure you know what tools you can use to upload the best videos possible. This involves networking with people as well as actually working with them, and researching things so that you always are on the cutting edge of information about your content. 2. They give props to each other, and link each others' channels when they do work together. You don't want every one of your videos to have a dozen links to other Youtubers, but if you get an idea from one of them or work together on a video, you need to mention it in the video and make sure your viewers can find everyone who contributed. 3. They're all good at the games they use on their channels. No one wants to watch gameplay they can produce themselves, they want to watch gameplay they WANT to produce themselves. One guy I watched for a lot of BF3 videos was better than most of his fellow Youtube collaborators, and they were ALL good. When they used stock footage though, it was almost always his gameplay. Whenever he collaborated with someone who was better than him, as much as possible he directed the camera to that player instead of himself. This is probably the toughest requirement to fill, because not everyone is born talented at the same things, but if you work hard enough you can fool people into thinking you are. 4. Even though they're all good at their games, and must therefore invest time in said games, they all invest time in editing and preparing videos. I think when explaining his 8-hour workday the one guy said he gets about 3 hours of gaming and 5 hours of editing and such. The higher the production quality of your videos, the easier it is for viewers to understand what is going on onscreen and the more likely they are to come back. I don't know to what extent you want to grow your channel and focus on it, but the more successful Youtubers I've seen do all of the above. Once again, I don't have a channel and I don't know this stuff from first hand experience, but I do know what I see happening in the channels I enjoy watching. It's just like everything else in life, if you're serious and put your mind to it, you can handle it.

I agree. I think before they put the MLG playlist in Lone Wolves was probably the toughest ranked playlist in Halo 3 (Ranked BTB and Squad Battle might have been harder, since I hear you couldn't actually get a game past a certain level). Lone Wolves was the ONLY playlist where you couldn't be carried, and Trueskill actually works pretty well, so it was easily the best playlist for defining individual skill.

Really, because your list of long range weapons was still entirely made up of ordinance weapons and you compared them to a long range loadout weapon. I'm not nit-picking, I'm asking YOU what your argument is again? You haven't made one yet. Saying all the ordinance weapons are better than the loadout weapons may be a fact but it is NOT a "valid point" against the person you were quoting, and my pointing it out isn't narrow minded. You also demonstrate a dire lack of knowledge about this game. You said the beam rifle was better in close quarters and you forgot the name of the Suppressor. That may sound "nit picky" but you're the first person on these forums I've encountered who didn't know WTF the weapons do. Finally, I took issue with your telling someone to get an argument after you'd just failed to make one yourself. If English isn't your first language, I can forgive all, but it seems to me like the person who forgot their argument at home was NOT the person you were quoting. Back on topic and to get back to your "valid point" I think in the cases of the weapons without instant kill times you should perhaps better familiarize yourself with how weapons stack up against each other. I think you'll be surprised how close an AR user has to get in order to guarantee he can't be 5-shotted by a DMR before he kills said DMR.

He was attempting to explain how much you get out of those trigger squeezes and what they cost you. You get 14 trigger squeezes with a DMR before you need to reload, you get 12 with a BR. So having the same amount of trigger squeezes to kill suddenly makes the BR a little worse. Next up, each of your trigger squeezes with a BR is 3 bullets out of your clip. Guess how many bullets you need to kill someone (Hint: it's not a multiple of 3). Trigger squeezes aren't all that matters, it takes 13 bullets to kill with the Halo 4 BR, but it bleeds 2 bullets every kill because in order to fire 13 bullets it must fire 15 bullets. So you're actually losing 2/3rds of a burst every kill. 3 clips later (That's how many you have on spawn) you'll notice the hole in its magazine that has been dropping bullets out uselessly the whole time you've been carrying it. It adds up to being just a little bit worse in damn near every way. No one is disputing that the DMR is just plain better than the BR, and that's the problem. The BR doesn't have any place in this game, neither does the carbine, because the DMR does both of their jobs better than they do them. I don't like that, but I don't think nerfing a gun that works perfectly like the DMR is the way to go. I would be comfortable with the BR getting a RoF DECREASE if it could 4-shot, but it has to be 4-shot. It doesn't work at all if it's not. One argument is that the BR isn't THAT much worse so it shouldn't be bothered, but being inferior in every way, even if it's only by a little, makes a weapon pointless. Almost everyone who has the information we're discussing in this thread will prefer a DMR in-game (or a lightrifle in the right circumstances), because no one wants to have the gun that doesn't work. If the plasma pistol couldn't EMP, no one would use it. The whole point of that weapon is to EMP. If the needler's projectiles didn't track their target, no one would use it. The weapon is built on tracking projectiles. The BR is designed to kill in 4 shots. If the BR can't 4-shot, it's pointless.

I wouldn't go as low as 1/10, just because the game at least WORKED. There wasn't a glitch or anything that kept me from completing it, and I didn't find myself stuck or skewered on geometry. 343 certainly could have programmed the game better, but the campaign didn't seem to have any code weaknesses in the campaign. Since they displayed some technical proficiency but lacked narrative skill of any kind I'd aim more for a 5 or 6/10. You get a 5/10 from me if your campaign works, 5 is average. However I didn't care for it either. I've ranted about its problems in other threads, but I enjoyed your complaints because they were more varied and less coloured by the PTSD I have from MW2's campaign.

I've never gotten close to the XP cap, so I don't really care that it's there. I did get a code from a bag of doritos only to find out someone had used it already without buying it. Hard to be sympathetic. It was a pretty impressive bout of stupidity that had those codes on the outside of bags. I'm not sure how the handling of this game became so painfully dumb, but I think the XP cap is the least of its problems.

Regicide plays a lot like Rumble Pit used to, people seem to just ignore the king a lot of the time in favor of charging into the middle of the map to die. I tried playing it like REGICIDE, tracking the king down and killing him and defending my crown, and it kinda worked, but not always. I watched dudes become king, jet pack straight up in the air on Haven, all while firing the magnum into the crowd of fighters below... They kept leaping down to bottom mid in Haven too, which is suicide. I couldn't track down the king because who the king was changed every 5 seconds, I'd arrive ready to kill one and suddenly he'd lose his crown. I don't understand it, but as I recall I was in there for the automatic weapons challenge anyway, so I didn't have to spend a long time in there. The point is that while the gametype is called Regicide most of the players in the playlist just want to play FFA slayer, and so that's what the games become. I remember one game where I was leading the whole game, then at the end someone got pimp-slapped in the hallway and the pimp in question suddenly became king and won the game. I played Regicide the whole game, did VERY well as king defending myself and racking up the most kills, and he won by playing Slayer the whole game. I'm not sure how that works exactly, but I've seen the kills go all over the place in Regicide. People who never get king AND don't get most kills somehow win. Anyway, it's not far from Slayer is all I'm saying. I don't think Halo ever had a LOT of FFA playlists btw. You tend to get one that's ranked and one that's not. I'm not sure you should hold your breath for many of those on your list becoming available for the long term.

All the long range weapons you listed are ordinance, not loadout weapons. You also listed the concussion rifle? What? Nothing with a low projectile velocity is better at long range. You can fire the weapon and it will frequently get there before they can dodge the blast radius, but you require high ground or a wall close behind them or your projectile goes right past. At least make a decent argument of your own if you want to smugly dismiss someone else's. Instead you bring a concussion rifle, which would certainly win the argument in person, but not so much online.

I use it when there's a challenge for automatic weapon kills, but otherwise don't bother much. Generally the prevailing attitude is that if a precision weapon lands all its shots it should beat an AR - in AR range - every time. I wish this weren't so, but 343 disagrees with me... on a lot of things.

OP is dead wrong about a couple things. Halo 3 DID have an experience progression system, it just didn't do anything. It didn't do anything in Reach either (Unlock armor = nothing). Also Reach's Arena system was completely inadequate as a ranking system, at least the last I was playing anyway. I stopped playing a few months into Reach's life so they could have cleaned it up later. Otherwise yeah they ripped of CoD a whole helluva lot. I don't mind getting sprint and personal ordinance but I hate killcams, I hated the opening and closing of the campaign, and I hate how most of the maps are designed to continually loop back on themselves and leave you open from a dozen different spots (The purpose of this type of map design is to keep players from locking down a part of the map and dominating. They're forced to run around instead of doing the smart thing and setting up a defensible position. It's CoD. It's also very uninteresting because no part of the map is especially important or exciting, and even if it was you can't pause to enjoy it. It's just a paintball court, and it's not map design at all, it's just insertion of scenery and structure instead of design).

I like the JIP system, but I also like the idea of a penalty for quitting. In fact I don't understand why they stopped penalizing it in the first place. I don't think the penalty should be that severe, something simple like subtracting the amount of experience from their spartan rank that they'd normally get for just a game complete + victory + minimum score. I think it should be possible for this penalty to drop you a rank and re-lock things you've unlocked. Quit enough and I feel ok giving everyone a 10 minute break from you by banning you for 10 minutes. You can always get the experience back by NOT quitting, the penalty isn't that severe, and if you get penalized for quitting when you actually just lagged out, oh well. No system is perfect, and I'd be fine with losing 3k experience on the rare occasion that I lag out. The fact is finishing the game is part of the game, don't do it and you hurt other people's experience. You are entitled to YOUR game experience that YOU paid for, but you are not entitled to damage the experience of others. If you have a problem with it, I'm sure no one cares, just like you didn't. I don't think quitting is the end of the world, but I think doing it often is a ****ty move, and you should get a slap on the wrist. Not much more than a slap on the wrist though, because it's a game and you DID pay for it. Too bad money can't buy you a better personality.

I never liked dual-wielding, it felt amateur/unprofessional/ineffective. There is also the major drawback of having a weapon which is designed to be wielded with another, which means you have two crappy guns instead of one good one. It's such a sad thought to look at the gun in your hand, know its terrible, and have no choice but to double down on awful. I have also never liked the idea of the inaccurate "bullet hose" guns. Militaries don't use them. They use bullet hoses, but accurate ones. So the idea of having something like a Tec9 in a military shooter always just pissed me off.

I wasn't pleased when they introduced boss fights in Halo 2, just because I'd prefer the final encounter to be some insanely difficult scenario instead of one tough dude. That being said, I'd happily take Halo 2's boss fights over Halo 4's Call of Halo: Modern Fanfare 2 boss fight. If you haven't played the absolutely awful hateful misery that is Modern Warfare 2's campaign, then you won't appreciate just how ****ing furious I became when they wanted me to crawl at the end of Halo 4. Earlier when I noticed stupid things (Like the climbing up the elevator shaft bit) I just loudly announced to my TV "This is stupid" but when I saw that they wanted me to crawl, I was too angry to speak. Master Chief doesn't crawl, and I'm horrified at how many times I've watched developers copy Call of Duty. Not just 343, the Battlefield 3's campaign story is told through an interrogation too. It's like originality is frowned upon or something in the industry. I loved CoD4's campaign, but MW2 was the worst I've ever played. I hear Black Ops campaigns are good, but you don't just COPY the successful company, that doesn't get you anywhere. You offer something they don't! You can't copy their SUCCESS. Ask K-Mart how it worked out for them when they tried to copy Wal-Mart. Sorry, just apparently picked this thread to rage in, I was disgusted when the game opened with Hallsey's interrogation. The worst part is it got worse later.

As someone who uses the Ammo upgrade in my Big Team loadout, I disagree that it's the problem. Yes you do get more ammo when you pick up ordinance, but it's based on the ammo that would be in the weapon normally. The ammo upgrade appears to apply a multiplier to weapon ammo, so if there's less ammo in the weapon, there's less ammo in the ammo upgrade. Also I specified that I use Ammo only in my BTB loadout because in smaller maps you can't get anywhere safe enough to actually use all your extra ammo. I never run out of ammo in smaller maps, remember this is without the ammo upgrade. Everyone who dies is dying closer to you, so their weapons are also closer to you and you can get ammo from them. Every one who spawns is spawning closer to the power weapons than they would in BTB, so you either risk a fight for a power weapon or you go for a minor ordinance that you don't think anyone will want. The point is: I don't recommend the ammo upgrade in smaller maps, which is where power weapons have most of their influence. Having a rocket launcher or incineration cannon in BTB is damn handy, but it's not nearly as much of a power weapon as it is in a smaller map. Smaller maps are where you're least likely to need the Ammo upgrade, so the Ammo upgrade isn't the problem with power weapon ammo counts.

It saves you from a lot of people crouching around corners and lets you begin lining up your shot before you can actually take your shot (So when the person comes around the corner you almost always get the first shot, except against another PV or Wetwork). Those uses are pretty effective, not as useful on larger maps. I've seen people do a lot of cool things with the thruster pack, but I'm not sure I have the patience to focus on mastering all its tricks. It's a pretty good AA in the right hands, but then again most of them are (ever seen a what happens to a boltshot user against a hardlight shield?) The best players use specific ones, not because those AAs are uniformly better but because 1. mastering one thing is more useful in competitive play than getting good with a lot of things and 2. when settings for MLG or whatever are released they'll probably use only a few armor abilities again, and the best players don't want to spend their time with an AA that won't be available in the toughest arenas. I think using the thruster pack to get a bit of a double jump would save people from a lot of grenades. I know I use and see people use the jet pack to do that now. While grenades aren't as insanely badass in this game as they were in Reach, you still can't afford to take a shield hit because it takes SIX SECONDS to begin recharging. I keep meaning to check out thruster pack, but also want to switch back to bumper jumper. I expect they'll get in each other's way.

First off, you're saying it's better at picking up kills, which against one shots is probably true, but you don't seem to notice that you're arguing based on people being one-shot. It seems like a pretty extenuating circumstance to hang your argument on, especially since your basis is someone else handling the heavy lifting for you. I think it probaby IS harder to dodge a BR shot, but since the BR spread is actually extremely tight (Fire it into a wall some time) I feel like it's the difference between dodging a housefly and dodging a gnat (The BR being a housefly). You're talking about a very very small area, and I expect people probably miss by more than that when they do miss. As for the amount of shots it takes when people miss a bit, I don't know if we can argue that because I doubt there is any way of actually measuring what you're claiming. I think over enough fights you're probably right, that's the point of burst fire. I don't think it's a big enough advantage to keep the BR in the running though. I wondered whether you flinched more when hit by a BR. Even if you do, you're talking about a scoped combat, and I expect if you're using the BR in a scoped combat you have much bigger problems than flinch. I don't want the BR to be pointless, it is right now. Being just a little worse than everything else makes a weapon pointless. It doesn't have any real advantage, so why would I bother using it? I WANT it to have an advantage so I CAN justify using it, but right now it just collects dust. I don't like that there's a king gun. I want them all to do their jobs, and the BR isn't doing its job.

...but it IS weaker, as you state. Even at the range in which it is supposed to be better. Why would you use a gun that is designed to lose every fight? I've never been the best Halo player, but since Halo 3 I've been good enough to play at the levels where weapon choice matters. I therefore use the DMR in Halo 4. I might whip out the BR and the Carbine when I want the commendations, but I'm not sure I'll have the patience for those pieces of crap. Some of us also don't like that one weapon is always king, we want variety and we want to feel like the other weapons have a purpose. Right now they don't.

The tone of this bothers me. The idea that the "jury is out" so to speak. Same thing that bothers me with people arguing against global warming, pretending the research hasn't already been done. YOU may still be awaiting a "verdict" on what the best rifle is but those of us who have checked it out don't have any question in our minds.

I think you should do some research. Start with how many shots it takes to kill with a BR. Do the research yourself with an idle controller in Forge.

I wouldn't call it overpowered. The needles stay in you for awhile, so you have to think twice about taking someone on if they've already hit you a few times, but in that situation you can often just turn and leave. It does its job, I like it, but I rarely use it.

I didn't know there were any arguments to improve the DMR. As for the lightrifle, I think it's probably fine as it is. When I'm getting hit with a light rifle in BTB I take cover FAST. That's pretty cool. I don't even notice when I face them up close, maybe the people who run them usually pick firepower and pack a DMR for non-scoped combat. Seems like people know that they either use it scoped or not at all.

You have to improve the BRs and Carbines if you want them to beat the DMR. They both suck pretty bad atm.

My favorite weapon is the Gauss Turret (The fact that I can't actually run around with it as a weapon doesn't stop me from loving it best) My favorite gun that I can run around with is probably a binary rifle. My favorite gun that I can actually start with would be the DMR. If the BR were 4 shot it would probably be the BR. My favorite Vehicle is the Mantis

BR should be 4 shot, DMR should remain 5 shot with one more shot in the clip. Lightrifle is good I think, doesn't need a lot of work done on it. Carbine needs help.

I don't know how to explain the problems you're having but I have noticed lots of oddities in the challenges. The "fully automatic" ones I have yet to get legit I think. I try for them but eventually the game gives me the challenge over the course of two games or something, very odd, because it doesn't do it every time. A clanmate of mine told me he's gotten the multi-kill ones over two games or something even though the challenges state it has to be in a single game.