RedStarRocket91

To me the DMR feels better - I find that semi-automatic fire looks more awesome than burst fire, and of course the actual firing sound is much deeper and more powerful than the Battle Rifle. It also does have a bit of a range advantage, and of course there's less worry about bullet spread due to the tighter reticle, so provided the user's aim is good it's more reliably able to deliver on its optimum kill time. But the thing is, the Battle Rifle is unquestionably the better gun in terms of performance. Being 4 trigger pulls to kill rather than 5 makes a huge difference in performance, so provided that a DMR-wielding opponent doesn't score two hits on you before you start firing back you're already at an advantage: it may not be a big difference in kill time, but it is an difference, and so unless you're engaging at long-range where the DMR's scope and precision give it the advantage, you're almost always going to be better off with the Battle Rifle.

Staff Response Video removed, thread locked. Please review our policy on off-site links here.

Staff Response Video removed, thread locked. Please review our policy on off-site links here.

That's a terrible way of looking at it, by that logic you might as well just ban all automatic weapons because they have spread and go to precision weapons only. Yes, if you use a weapon beyond its effective range, there's going to be some luck involved in the outcome - but that's the way it's always been, and yet most people aren't lining up to get rid of the Assault Rifle and SMG. And frankly, if someone insists on using their weapons at the wrong range, then if they get killed that's all to do with their own poor tactics and nothing to do with their weapons or spread.

Actually, it's fairly common industry practice for developers to work primarily with just one graphics card manufacturer, so saying Ubisoft have snubbed AMD is a bit misleading - and more importantly, both Nvidia and AMD users have been having issues with Watch Dogs since it was released. It's not so much that Ubisoft are picking sides so much as that they just don't care about PC gamers: most of the stuff they release is really poorly optimised, and in addition to their mandatory Uplay client software being invasive, restrictive and just generally unpleasant to use, their servers are also horribly inadequate. An awful lot of bad reviews come from people who've bought the game and are simply unable to log in: and I'm pretty sure I've heard of similar problems with Uplay games in the past. This isn't a problem specific to Ubisoft - EA and Valve are just as bad - but it does show an increasing contempt for gamers in the industry. Now I've been a PC games since the late 90s, and a console gamer even longer: heck, I was collecting rings and fighting bosses quite literally before I could read. But on the occasions where a game was released and found to be full of glitches, had game-breaking bugs or just really badly optimised, there'd be a huge outcry over it. Now, because there's such ridiculous restrictions from DRM preventing us from returning games for a refund, it's not uncommon to have to wait the best part of a year for a game to be patched to a playable state. I get that games are more complex than ever and it's difficult to wipe out all the bugs and things, but when titles with budgets as massive as things like Watch Dogs are released and they're so poorly optimised there's difficulty running them even on the highest-end system available, then there's something very wrong.

I actually think that since the introduction of reticule bloom, dual wielding would be even more balanced than before. Provided other automatics like the Assault Rifle had more controllable recoil and less maximum spread, I think it could work really well. Perhaps when dual-wielding weapons, reticules could expand twice as quickly and to twice their normal maximum spread levels, and then shrink back a little more slowly? That way there's a genuine drawback to compensate for the sheer firepower, and prevents damage tables from needing to be altered as with the older Halo titles. Plus, it would open up the secondary weapons slot a little more. Something like the SMG is both weak and inaccurate when used by itself, but taken as a secondary it could become very deadly once another dual-wieldable weapon was picked up. Plus, it might mean we actually get another proper plasma weapon back again to give a racial equivalent, and I'm all in favour of that - I'm sick of 'plasma' weapons that just do regular damage rather than stripping shields really quickly and bouncing off armour.

Chances are that while you're a worse player than you were back at the height of Halo 3's popularity, you're still not a bad player. Once you've played a few games and gotten a feel for the different physics, movement and weapons, you'll pick up your old skill levels pretty quickly. The problem with Halo 3 now is that the multiplayer is only ever touched by people who're completely new to the series and want to see why everyone keeps saying the older games are better than the new, and the old hardcore crowd who still don't want to move on. Either way, the chances of finding a good match based on your skill level aren't great, as you're likely to be paired up with teammates and opponents who're either much better or much worse than you, or mix of both. I still play Halo 3 on occasion, but it's usually just when I have people around or at LAN parties. It's nearly impossible to get a good connection in Britain anymore and so I tend to stay away from it.

Yep, that's fine!

Even if you think its content is obvious, try to make it clear when advertising it. There's always a chance that someone hasn't heard of it or doesn't know what it's about, and we want people to have as much information as possible when deciding whether or not to watch a stream.

Twitch is a video service, so yes, that's fine. However if there's going to be any violence or bad language (whether by the players or in-game) you need to make that clear when you post the link.

The thing with the Needler is that even though you only need something like 7 needles to strike an opponent to kill them, because it's inaccurate and the projectile travel time is so slow most of the time you're going to have to empty the clip to guarantee a kill - unlike something like the DMR or Magnum where you know and can adjust instantly for something like a missed shot or an enemy ducking into cover. Because of this there's not much of a skill gap: even a veteran player is going to struggle to get more than one kill per magazine, and so it's extremely inefficient in terms of ammunition. Plus, a player making good use of cover or their armour abilities can counter a Needler fairly easily, as the Hardlight Shield completely deflects all damage from the needles, the Thruster Pack is great for dodging an incoming set, and deploying Active Camouflage (I think) cuts off their tracking ability. And of course, that's on top of just dodging them through movement, which is easy enough to do at close and long ranges. Only thing I really don't like is that individual needles do way too much damage to shields - even if you only get hit by three or four your shields will be almost totally depleted, which means you can easily be mopped up by other opponents. But as is, while holding a needler basically guarantees kills against unprepared opponents, the fact that it has so little ammunition and that it has such a small skill gap means that it seems pretty fairly balanced to me.

I honestly think that the way the Prometheans were set up to fight in Spartan Ops - multiple waves of large number of enemies attacking from all sides, repeatedly - would actually have been better suited to the Flood. One of my biggest gripes with Halo 4 is that while the Prometheans were definitely challenging, they just weren't actually very fun to fight. They weren't very varied, had stupid amounts of health, were difficult to headshot, had a lot of really cheap special abilities (teleport, anyone?), and of course tended to appear in huge swarms from any direction they chose, meaning it was nearly impossible to fight them without being killed on the higher difficulties in solo games. If the Flood is actually going to be in Guardians - and they're almost definitely going to appear at some point - then hopefully there'll be more diverse enemy types for us to fight, and of course variety is really important as a way of keeping gameplay fresh. Plus, I honestly think the Flood can be fun to fight if they're handled correctly, and of course their comparatively low individual health means they're well-suited for horde-based gameplay without things getting unbearable.

I actually agree that it would be possible to get a version of Guardians that worked on the Xbox 360, and provided that it was properly optimised and carefully structured, I'm pretty sure it would be possible to get comparable levels of graphics and physics whilst still maintaining 720p/30fps. Sure there'd be more loading screens and they would last longer, things would be a bit less good looking and there would certainly need to be more discs (and possibly a mandatory install for all of them), but it's definitely possible. The thing is that it's not going to happen, though. Developing for more than one console incurs a vast increase in costs, and then of course there'd need to be two teams working on patches, bug fixes, coding etc once the game had released. And then on top of that there's the big issue of Microsoft needing new exclusives to encourage people to buy the Xbox One, as while it has some great game sat the moment it still doesn't have as many essential core titles as it should, and while Titanfall was supposed to be a big system-seller it didn't do nearly as well, or have nearly the lasting appeal, that most people seemed to think and hope it would. Even though the Halo series has taken a bit of a beating from the fans on the basis of the last two games, I think a lot of us would still be excited enough by the release of a new instalment to consider buying a new console outright (I know I'm planning to pick up an Xbox One a few weeks before the next Halo title comes out) and so while bringing it to the Xbox 360 might well increase the amount of money Microsoft made from selling it, it would definitely hurt Xbox One adoption rates and cost them money both in hardware and on R&D for the second version on the weaker console, and that would be worse in the long run. So while it's a nice idea, and it's definitely possible from a technical standpoint, the chances of it actually happening are just about nil. Sorry.

A link to a personal clan website is absolutely fine. However, when we check that site and discover it's using IP.Board, is actively recruiting moderators, officers, a news group, an art department, a communications department, (often using the same names and colours as our own), has discussion forums (on the same topics and with the same names as our own), a shoutbox, and threads inviting people to apply for staff positions - all with nothing to do with actual clan activities to be found, or any sense of clan hierarchy - then it's not a clan site, it's a forum, and the rules don't make an exception for those.

wow such colour much gif 7/10

If it's a gameplay montage or a music video or a particularly funny gameplay clip, just saying so in one sentence would be enough. However, when it's something like a two or three minute long video of analysis, speculation, or opinion (five reasons why we need to bring back ranks, here's my reviews of the new DLC maps, here's what I think will be shown at E3, etc) then it's really not fair to shut people on mobile devices or with poor connections out of the discussion - and if someone really believes the content of their video is worth sharing, I'm sure they'd agree it's worth typing up to include as many people as possible. The only reason that wouldn't happen would be because they're fishing for views and frankly, the forums exist to give people a great place to discuss Halo, not to generate ad revenue.

In recent months, concerns have been raised over the clarity of general rule 1F, which concerns our policy on off-site links. As we've been reviewing and updating this policy, it has become clear that a more in-depth explanation is needed in order to avoid confusion: what follows therefore is a series of circumstances in which it is acceptable to post an off-site link, as well as certain factors which automatically disqualify a link from being acceptable. Please read the following rules carefully and familiarise yourself with them: You may link off-site in order to give credit to the original source of your material when writing news articles You may link off-site to any content on official 343i.org-administered platforms such as our Facebook page, Twitter feed, and YouTube channel You may link off-site to any content on official 343i.org affiliates-administered platforms such as HaloCustoms, THFE, or Forge Cafe You may link off-site to images and videos, provided that: You link directly to the image or video in question, not just the web page it is on, and The image or video in question does not violate any other forum rules. Mild swearing is acceptable in videos, provided it is clearly labelled as such You may link off-site to clan websites such as Enjin, however is only permissible from within threads in our dedicated clan recruitment subforum You may link to forum threads containing off-site links via the shoutbox or status updates You may not link to any content which contains adult themes such as nudity, bigotry, substance abuse or realistic violence, whether in image or in video form You may not link to any content designed to harm members, their accounts, or their devices You may not link to any content of a religious or political nature You may not link to discussions on other forums or websites You may not link to any off-site location using short links, such as tinyurl or bitly. Please use full links so that users can see where they are being sent to You may not link to other websites, including personal websites, YouTube channels or blogs, in lieu of post content or for the purposes of generating pageviews, subcribers or ad revenue: Any links should be fully supported by textual descriptions so that members know what they're about without needing to follow them Links to YouTube must include a summary of all key points made throughout the video, so as not to disadvantage members with low bandwidth connections Lastly, you may directly contact a member of the moderating team to ask for permission to post specific links: if granted, the relevant moderator will then edit your post to include the link and show their approval. This system helps to protect against falsification of moderator approval, and whether permission is granted or not is entirely at the discretion of the individual moderator: however in most cases where the link is found to be safe and to comply with general site rules, permission will likely be granted. In essence, if a link does not meet the standard auto-approval criteria listed above, check to make sure it has moderator approval before following it, and please report any posts which you feel may violate this policy.

But then, what would the point of including it be? If there's no point firing it on full-auto because it becomes too inaccurate then what's the advantage it has over the DMR? If it had a faster kill time then people would dislike it as they'd see it as a luck-based weapon rather than a skill-based weapon and one which was too powerful at closer ranges (just like the DMR in Reach), and if it killed at the same or a lower speed then there'd be no advantage in using it over the DMR. If you want to go for a new precision weapon of some kind, how about a Forerunner weapon designed for civilians rather than soldiers? The Forerunners were basically arming everyone who could carry a gun by the end of their war with the Flood, regardless of whether they knew how to fight or not, so something like a weapon with a slower kill time but much higher aim assist/bullet magnetism would be both lore-friendly and useful to newer or weaker players who aren't so good with traditional precision weapons. As long as it kills appreciably slower than traditional precision weapons it wouldn't be unbalanced, and you'd have a new weapon which serves a specific role in the arsenal, rather than just making multiple weapons for the same role.

I can actually imagine BZ's 'The Specialist' being very effective on smaller, less open maps like Adrift or Landfall - the Suppressor combined with Dexterity makes for an incredibly dangerous close-quarters combination, and pairing it with Promethean Vision and the Resistor tactical package means that you'd be much more effective at attacking defensive opponents as well as able to run away whenever you're caught in the open. Add some frags and maybe a Magnum as a secondary and I can honestly see this being a pretty deadly loadout if used correctly. Okay, so loadout suggestions for next time (I name my loadouts by gametype so I've just made these up, sorry if they're rubbish!): 'The Red' Primary: Carbine Secondary: Boltshot Grenades: Frags AA: Hardlight Shield TP: Shielding SP: Recharge This is my most common loadout and I find it works pretty effectively across most gametypes. The big advantage is that it's got really strong survivability - the Hardlight shield is great for dealing with opponents who're coming at you from beyond the Carbine's maximum range and the Boltshot lets you deal with anyone who lets you get up close, while the upgrade packages mean that you're much more likely to survive successive encounters. 'The Professional' Primary: None Secondary: Magnum Grenades: Stickies AA: Jetpack TP: Mobility SP: Stability This loadout also works reasonably well in most situations, although it's much better when used aggressively. The combination of Mobility and Jetpack gives you essentially unlimited map control, so make sure you rush powerups and power weapons at the start of the match, and enable to you flank opponents or escape fights with ease, and Stability gives you a big advantage in your scope duels. The Magnum actually has one of the fastest kill times of all the loadout weapons provided every shot hits, so provided you've got a steady aim I think you'll catch a lot of opponents by surprise!

I think it's sort of implied (and I wish I could remember which book it is) that the weapons we see in Halo 4 are branch-specific Promethean weapons rather than 'standard' Forerunner weaponry, just like the Plasma Repeater and DMR in Reach. They might be very similar to 'standard' Forerunner weapons, but they aren't quite the same thing. I'll try and remember to update this if I ever re-read which books that's said in. Anyway, post-update the Boltshot is a perfectly balanced weapon. The only real problem it ever had was the kill range, which was definitely too far, but now it's not guaranteed to be lethal unless it's fired at almost point-blank range. Combined with the long cooldown time after each shot, the loud charging noise and short charge time before it, and the fact that it can only carry a maximum of two shots per magazine, it does actually require a bit of skill to use now, and if whoever's using it mucks it up the first time they've basically guaranteed to die - and when you consider that the Magnum has one of the fastest kill-times in the game, it's not really that much of a problem. If you're struggling, try carrying an automatic weapon, which are very effective against Boltshot users, or by just fighting them at medium or long range. Alternatively, if you're having problems with campers, try using Promethean Vision to spot them, Hologram to draw them out of suspected camping spots, or using the Grenadier/Resupply perks to check suspicious locations by looking for hitmarkers. Sure, the Boltshot is a great weapon in the right hands, but since the weapon update its kill range is so much lower and other weapons kill so much faster that there's no reason anyone can't counter it with a bit of practice.

For the most part, I have to admit that I found the Promethean weapons to be a bit disappointing. Although I knew at least some of them would just be racial analogues of existing weapons, I was expecting a bit more variety in the power weapon department - but then those turned out to basically just be supercharged racial analogues, too. There were a couple of things I definitely liked though, like the fact that quite a few weapons had multiple firing modes: the Lightrifle was really great in this regard, even if the burst-fire mode was too weak, and although it wasn't a popular weapon I did like the principle of the Boltshot. I also really liked the targeting beam the Binary Rifle had, because it's an absolutely terrifying psychological weapon as much as one to actually shoot people with - even if it's out of ammunition, since they don't know it's empty you can still use it to intimidate opponents into staying away from its scope, which makes it great for locking down newly-spawned vehicles, power weapons and objectives. But there's no denying that the Suppressor, Scattershot and Incineration Cannon were disappointing - and even though it had a cool gimmick, I could also say much the same of the Lightrifle. I get why it's done, because there needed to be weapons that could fill the general-purpose automatic and rifle weapon slots on Promethean missions, but I did hope we'd be seeing some more interesting power and utility weapons. I wouldn't agree that Reach was better in the new weapon department, because most of the new weapons there were either racial analogues (as with the Grenade Launcher and Concussion Rifle, which were basically just alternate Brute Shots, the DMR and Needle Rifle, which were just enhanced Carbines and Battle Rifles, and the Plasma Cannon, which was just a weaker Spartan Laser), but I am hoping we'll get to see some more variety in Halo 5.

When handing out an award to multiple people, I use the 'bulk award' system so that I don't have to track them down individually and go through the single award process for each member: this takes about 2-3 minutes per member so it's not exactly long, but if I'm doing it for 15 people it can potentially add up to half an hour's worth of work. Now that's not a huge investment of time by any stretch, but it is time I could be using for other things like actually reading the forums, and since the member search function can potentially turn up thousands of members if all I can input is a fragment of a username (assuming I actually know their username and it hasn't changed) it can take a lot of time to find it that way. Incidentally, this is part of why whenever we hold a Community Event, we ask members to post in a sign-up thread with their GTs, because it gives us a nice convenient place where we can find members very quickly and match them to the GTs we saw in the lobby, and use the manual award system if the bulk award system doesn't like their name. The way the bulk award system is configured is the other half of it, because characters in a username have to match up exactly with those of the member receiving the award - inputting even slightly wrong means the system just shows an error message and nobody receives any awards. What makes this even worse is that some special characters simply aren't recognised by the system, so even copying and pasting names doesn't work.