SilentGamer64

http://postimg.org/image/qa3v9nl4j/full/ What do you think about this? Personally, if they can balance both weapons well enough with the existing sandbox, I'm all for it. There's also rumors of vehicles new to Halo 2 being implemented into the Anniversary MM as well. That leaves vehicles from all the other Halo's as fair game, or even new ones like the recently confirmed "Gungoose".(http://postimg.org/image/a9r1c5ntp/full/ ). Thoughts on possible vehicles are also welcome.

343i would never do that though, because then it would just be a free flying killtacular. That's why the troop transport hog isnt in multiplayer either. If we have to trade the falcon's offensive firepower (side turrets) for objective carrying capabilities (passenger seats), then I think we would just be better off if the Hornet returned, so the pilot at least had some way of defending the vehicle while the teammates ride with the objective. Otherwise the falcon's purpose as the "warthog of the skies" would be downgraded to the "mongoose of the skies".

I know button combos are widely considered competitive, but they are actually mistakes that Bungie did not intend to be in the game. In fact, one of Bungies "hints" in Halo 2's matchmaking lobby said that bxr is cheating. And IIRC, Bungie eventually patched out the button glitches because they never wanted them to be a part of the game in the first place. Don't get me wrong, I like competition, and I'm sure everyone has a little competitiveness inside of them. But like someone above me said about "wavedashing" and "L canceling" in Super Smash Bros, a lot of competitive communities take unintended mistakes of game developers in games and blow them way out of proportion to the point where they are hosting tournaments based on who can abuse and exploit these mistakes the best.

The one with the windshield? Yeah, I always liked the look of that mongoose. Would be even cooler if it could actually protect the driver by blocking bullets from the front. As for the Hawk, I'm not sure about that. I mean, its got a friggen spartan laser mounted on it, which would be way too OP for multiplayer. I guess it could work for campaign like the Halo 4 pelican did though. I personally want to see a rebalanced hornet with improved flight controls return for multiplayer.

I know a lot of people were upset when they somehow pulled off an assasination when all they wanted was a beatdown, and ended up in a bad situation due to the slightly longer time frame assasinations keep you imobile. An option to toggle them on and off for yourself in your own personal control settings would be ideal. To clarify, toggling them off would only disable assasinations for yourself. Opponents will still be able to use them on you if they are toggled on. In terms of new assasinations I'd like to see, every brute weapon should have its own unique assasination (this is assuming brute weapons return). The spiker blades would be used to stab the user once or twice before pushing them aside. The brute shot blade would be used to slice an opponent in the chest area, likely cutting through vital organs. The small mauler blade could be used to slit an opponent's throat from behind, and the gravity hammer would force a victim to their knees followed up by a satisfying helmet-splitting axe chop to the head, ending with the wielder pushing thier foot on the body while slowly pulling the blade out of the skull of the corpse. If not the rest of the brute weapons, I'd at least want to see some kind of hammersasination implemented, since the sword has its own already. I say this for brute weapons because they have other means of killing opponents through their attached blades and I dont believe using actual munitions to perform assasinations are necessary. This is mainly because it would be wasteful (and possibly useless if you're weapon is empty) if ammo is used for weapon assasinations, and unrealistic if no ammo is used at all. I think they should just keep it simple and stick with melee-based weapons.

The main gist of my post is in yellow. Most people who are pro-sprint seem to be side-stepping the actual content of the OP. Yes, it has already been established that the OP's opinion is that sprint doesnt fit with Halo's gameplay. People should have caught on to that just by reading the title before even clicking on it. Its the content of the OP that people are avoiding discussion about. Only a small handful of people have actually attempted to debate with the OP in favor of sprint. Everyone else is just running around in circles using the "its just your opinion" strawman. The OP doesnt state opinions on why sprint doesnt fit in with Halo's gameplay, it talks about the purpose of sprint in Halo, and counters those reasons with rational examples of why Halo can just as easily be well off without sprint. If you personally enjoy sprint and feel like the OP is wrong, dont get all emotional and resort to strawmen arguments. Fight for it. Hell, the OP did all the initial work for you by bringing up practically every argument you would use in favor of sprint. If you feel strongly enough about sprint, want to see it in Halo again, and are willing to fight for it, reinforce these arguments for sprint provided in the OP, or bring your own to the table, and counter the OP's counterarguments with facts and rational evidence. This is how people debate, they defend what they believe is right and attack what they believe is wrong using facts and supporting evidence. If your argument holds more water, the opposition will concede (or if they're less mature they'll strawman you as they retreat out the door). This is how political debates work, and how groups of people such as ourselves get things put into motion. Consider this. If your country's leader announced that they believe all citizens not related to a political position should be forced into the military regardless of wether or not they want to, are you just going to say "I disagree but its just your opinion" and walk away? No? Then fight for what you believe is right. Fight for sprint. I also want to point out that Jazzi is probably as polite as they come in regards to fans who are against sprint in Halo. He's respectful and wont belittle anyone based on their opinions, but judging by the length, its clear that he worked hard on the OP and is just seeking out pro-sprinters to humor him with evidence that sprint can work in Halo. Sure he'll counter you, but in the end, if you can put up a better argument, I'm sure he'll graciously concede.

The only thing I can think of would be making it do as much damage as a standard melee, and just having it be more of a flashy version of it. Assuming the energy waves it appears to give off have an aoe larger than what a standard melee would offer, I could see it being used over melee without making it redundant. Other than that idea, I'm at a loss for making "ground pound" work while staying relevant, unfortunately. Both, really. Not that DW and boarding bother me, but neither of them have options in customs to be turned off. I'm thinking that if they do return, they, along with other SA's should be toggleable (I know there was an option to disable certain seats of a vehicle, but none for boarding). In terms of MM, I gave you the example of me not wanting to rely on thruster pack over strafing, and puting myself at a disadvantage every time I face grenades as a result. Like DW and boarding, I want these SA's to be balanced enough to the point where I can be well off enough without them, or to be able to use other, equivalent means to react to situations where other players generally would use them.

Great post Jazzi. What worries me about the potential of the "ground pound" ability working the way you described is that players are going to continue to get to high ground and sit up there until they are either contested in that area or attempt to use the ability on an enemy below, rinse, and repeat. Its essentially the same problem Sword Base had on Reach. Players would get the shotgun/sword, camp at the top of the grav lifts and farm kills off of enemies coming from below. Of course, "ground pound" will have the tradeoff of sacrificing that high position, but that wont stop people from repeating those tactics, leading to a boring, repetitive game of KOTH instead of slayer or whatever other gametype is being played. Competitive maps and gameplay mechanics should promote movement flow, but not lock downs. I'm also worried that these abilities are going to be default and therefore non-toggleable. Thinking back to Halo 2 and 3, duel wielding and boarding were not toggleable, not that they were bad mechanics, but the option to turn them off was just never there. Sure, you could choose not to use duel wields and stay away from enemy vehicles, but that wont prevent others from doing the same. Likewise for these new SA's. For example, maybe you want to strafe away from grenades instead of relying on the thruster pack as a crutch. By doing so you may take some damage from enemy grenades, while your enemy who thrust away took little to no damage. Assuming you continue to strafe and refuse to use thrust, guess who will win most of those engagements? DW didnt have those problems, because you could still hold your own against duels with single wield weapons, regardless of wether they had superior range like the BR or inferior range like the shotgun. Same with boarding, by simply hunting down the rockets/splazer, picking off an enemy vehicle's occupants, and being a smart driver to prevent your own vehicle from being boarded. But how do you hold your own against an ability like thruster pack if you dont wish to use it yourself, without puting yourself at a disadvantage?

As long as I get my CQB helmet back, I'll be fine.

I agree, the boltshot's semi-auto mode cant even kill on its own. Major flaw right there. The fact that we can spawn with it is its biggest issue, and if it were to spawn on the map, then it could be treated like a mid-tier power weapon instead of an OP spawn weapon. Also, having both the boltshot and scattershot as forerunner shotguns is pretty redundant, and in the end I would rather they pick one to keep and scrap the other and bring in something better, like the sentinel beam. That thing was powerful on both shields and health in Halo 2 and 3, and I could see it being an awesome and deadly power weapon in MM.

I agree, invisible walls do suck. But not as much as the "10 seconds to return to battlefield" countdown. That basically kills all potential exploration in the levels.

What concerns me about the possibility of this being the MA5K is what its going to replace. According to the wiki, the gun has 30 rounds, which is only two rounds short of what the AR has. It's also a full auto weapon, like the AR. That being said, I don't want this weapon to come anywhere near the games if it means its going to replace our beloved AR. And even if it doesn't replace the AR, I still don't really want it because it also puts the SMG (one of my favorite weapons in Halo) in danger of being left out again, not to mention duel wielding, in favor of this single-wielded full auto weapon. Then again, I'm hoping it isn't a scopeless BR that indicates functional weapon attachments either, because that would have some serious balancing problems with Halo's gameplay.

Halo 3 got it right. Not only vehicle/player health, but also weapons to counter vehicles (Rockets, Fuel Rod, Spartan Laser, Missile Pod, Turrets, Grenades, and even the Brute Shot had some flipping power over vehicles). IMO, Pistols, AR's, BR's, DMR's, and Snipers (especially snipers) shouldn't be able to do significant damage to vehicles. Not only do these weapons have ample amounts of ammo, but they are mostly hitscan, meaning there is little to no risk in missing a moving vehicle compared to shooting at it with, say, a rocket launcher. Most of those weapons are also headshot capable, so if anything you should be focused on picking off the driver rather than shredding the entire vehicle to pieces anyways.

First of all, gameplay trumps realism/practicability any day, especially in Halo. Secondly, tweeking it to the extreme the way you said above is going to do the opposite of "quell the fans". It's going to **** them off. Bloom is a counter-intuitive mechanic for duel wielding, because DW is supposed to encourage close range spray and pray tactics. Bloom is a visual representation of increased inaccuracy to encourage burst firing, which works for two-handed weapons like the AR and other rifles, but NOT a bullet hose weapon like the SMG. If you're trying to burst fire duel SMG's, or even one SMG for that matter, you're doing it wrong. A medium-sized static crosshair that indicates the weapon's range through a red reticule will suffice for duel wield weapons. Reload speeds for duel wields in Halo (save overheating/plasma weapons) have always been longer than most two-handed weapons. Increasing the reload time too much will make DW redundant, and leave fans of the mechanic unsatisfied. Changing the accuracy of DW weapons based on the dominant hand would be extremely complicated and chaotic. You are suggesting two different reticules with different bloom/spread sizes. A lot of players will be confused and turned off by this, and I imagine it would be very hard to compensate one DW weapon over the other simultaneously in the heat of battle. I'm not against having left or right handed options for single wielding, but DW should be kept as simple as possible. The challenge that players will face when compensating DW weapons will come when they try duel wielding two different weapons, like the SMG and plasma rifle. I personally want to see duel wielding find a middle ground of balance to the point where it isnt too OP like Halo 2's system, or too UP like Halo 3's system. Other than that, I dont want to see too much drastic change from Halo 2 and 3's DW mechanics.

Not really a new weapon, but a good forerunner weapon to bring back would be the sentinel beam from Halos 2 and 3. I was disappointed to find nothing after killing a few sentinels in Halo 4's campaign.