RedStarRocket91

I prefer 85% bloom over 0% bloom, actually. With the latter, non-precision weapon still seem to be affected, which makes precision weapons disgustingly overpowered. I admit it works very well for Arena-style games though, where everyone starts with a DMR and the only pickups are weapons that aren't affected by bloom. But for regular gametypes, because the precision weapons have such powerful scopes these days and those that don't can fire at incredibly high speeds, it actually feels more broken than vanilla gameplay.

What kind of ban?

Snipers, everytime. It's simultaneously incredibly exciting and yet very relaxing especially on the larger, more open maps.

You may wish to repost your ideas here.

Not as far as I know, I think you can only have 8 people in Big Team playlists. Worth a shot, though.

There was a rumour a while back that Halo 4 would have a version of Forge World which could import item coordinates from Reach, allowing maps to be be instantly recreated. While I don't know if that's even possible - Twinreaper needs something akin to a bat signal - it'd definitely be nice to be able to play the same maps between Halos 4 and 5. A separate multiplayer disc with classic maps would be great, and it would certainly have an audience going by how well populated the Anniversary playlists are.

Twinreaper discussed the mechanics behind armour damage in this thread a while ago. If it's simplistic it's definitely possible.

In fairness, your team should probably have won the second one - and you were playing SWAT in these games, whose settings are very different from regular gameplay. If you want to see crappy team in action, you could do worse than to look at these two games. The first one I literally won by myself and the second one... I still can't get over just how bad my team was. You don't go +20 through blind luck, the opposing team was pretty average.

Isn't the maximum party size for objective games 4?

I played Halo 2 LAN games for years. There were no ammunition boxes at all in multiplayer - the video you linked is from campaign, so I could be as well off linking a video from Reach's Firefight mode and saying there are ammunition boxes in multiplayer. This idea is interesting for Invasion-style games, players could be prevented from picking up new weapons and only capable of reloading from ammunition boxes. I don't like the idea of them in regular multiplayer games because it lends itself way too easily to power weapon hoarding. A simpler way to solve the problem of a sniper running out of ammunition until he can throw his weapon away and then go and get a new one would be for weapons to be set to spawn after pick up or once out of ammunition, regardless of whether they were currently being carried or not. Also, don't call people noobs just for disagreeing with you. In this case, you're the noob as both Mystic and Drizzy have been here a lot longer than you, so it doesn't even make sense. Plus, it kind of makes you look like a spoiled kid and makes other people a lot less likely to take your ideas seriously. I only say this on the off chance that you aren't a troll. If you actually want to discuss things, try and be more careful with your tone. If you just want to wind people up, please head over to Bnet where your kind are tolerated.

It is kind of frustrating. I'm not a bad player myself, but I've had some awful teams of late and ended up against woefully overpowered opposing teams. The problem isn't so much that people are playing with people outside their own skill, but that the system used to divide the teams up seems to put all the best players on one side, instead of splitting them up equally.

I'm kind of mixed. It's made a lot of players happy and it shows that 343 are willing to listen to what players want, the voting method in Team Slayer was a great way of finding out without just looking at the forums and that's encouraging for future titles. I am sort of disappointed that there isn't a matchmaking option for players wanting to play pre-TU gametypes, though. At the very least they could create a vanilla playlist offering Slayer and Objective games with pre-TU settings. Overall, I suppose I'm pleased with the result. It fixed most of the major issues players had with the game and they really do seem to have made an effort to appease their entire fanbase, which can only be a good thing.

If someone is sprinting at you to melee you, you'll have enough time to wound them that if you melee them back you'll kill them. If they're firing at you, they can't be sprinting, so just back away and don't let them get in melee range or use the half-second cooldown after they've disabled Sprint to hit them. It's really not that hard to counter. Anyway, 50% melee strength is really too low, as even if shields are down it's not a certain kill. 75% still feels a little too powerful, but is better than the current situation. Melee damage would work perfectly at about 65%, as it would only guarantee a kill once shields were down (or half a hit point from popping).

I honestly can't think of any way Sandtrap could be improved. Perhaps the bunkers on either side of the canyon between the bases could be linked with an underground passage or something, but that's really all I can think of. Sandtrap was literally perfect as it was.

It's 'Hemmorhage', just for the future! Betrayal abuse is ridiculous, especially on the aforementioned Hemmorhage. I had one guy betray me twice in order to get it, then missed every shot. The next time he started shooting me, I put one shot through his head - and immediately got booted. Although I suppose that's another story. OT: I think the Sniper Rifle is a good idea, it's a key part of the FPS sandbox and the game would play completely differently without it. I dislike how powerful it is against vehicles in Reach, though. And I'd also like a steeper skill curve, along the lines of an idea I had months ago. But yeah, having them in the game is definitely a good thing!

I disagree, it's a much better weapon because it actually does plasma damage rather than bullet damage. It would really even things up in close quarters. Plus it actually fires faster the hotter it gets. The Repeater's fire is slow, inaccurate, and weak. The Rifle is at least powerful and consistently accurate, even if its projectile speed only make it effective at close quarters.

I can't believe nobody's ever thought of doing this before!

Couldn't agree more. The most important thing about Halo has always been that whoever wins any given battle does so because they were the better player. If they had a better weapon, they earned that weapon in the game. If they had the same weapon, they were better at using it. They timed a melee better, they were better positioned, their movement was better, they used grenades more effectively, whatever. It's a philosophy that worked perfectly for almost ten years. If someone is a good player, they should be rewarded for it - but only by actively using that ability. Just because I'm worse than someone else doesn't mean they should have an equipment advantage over me from the start. Likewise, just because I might have spent a lot of time playing the game doesn't mean I should get to spawn with more health and faster movement than someone else, and therefore beat them even though they're a much better player.

I actually like them both equally, although I think Gears 3 has the edge over Reach, at least pre-TU. It's actually quite difficult to compare them, they're completely different types of game.

I think those who like vanilla Reach should definitely still be able to play it in matchmaking, although playlist population might be quite low and reduce match quality. I don't think it could hurt though, perhaps there could just be a vanilla playlist with combined Slayer and Objective gametypes? That would probably have a large enough population that match quality would be decent.

@Esteemed Vitamin: first off, welcome to the forums! As far as I'm aware, the reticule does have to have turned red for a lunge to connect, rather than the enemy just being in range. I agree that it doesn't really need a great deal of skill though, as even a poor player can still aim at something right in front of them and pull the trigger, but I think the risk involved makes up for that. I'm not so sure about battery being depleted for missed attacks, if the sword user misses and then you kill them even though you beat them you're still being punished for their mistakes because of a lack of ammunition. Losing battery is still an interesting idea though, even if I'm not sure it would work in the game. Perhaps an alternative would be that if a regular melee is used it depletes the battery less, as players should be rewarded for being able to get a kill without the homing lunge?

Agreed, I'd hate for it to be rushed out, 343i really needs a huge success to win over the people who doubt that anyone but Bungie can make a good Halo game, and I'd hate for them to lose all their support because they've been rushed to a deadline.

So something like an Invasion Objective playlist, then? I think it's definitely possible, although it may not happen in Halo for the remainder of this console generation as Reach is pushing the very edge of what the 360 can do and that can be laggy enough with a straight 8v8. That said, I think the Battlefield series is probably more mechanically complex and that copes okay. This is definitely a question for TwinReaper, at any rate!

I've had frag grenades knock out my entire shield from three or four metres away while people standing much closer have barely taken any damage at all. Damage just isn't consistent, you never really know how much damage any given grenade will do or even when it will explode. One of my grenades once went off about a metre from me. I deserved to get killed because my shields were down. What wasn't deserved was that my opponent's shields were also down, my grenade was closer to him than me and he survived it.

I did indeed! Thanks Firena, I really need to sit down and learn the DLC map names at some point!