A6ENT of CHA0S

I too must disagree. Personal loadouts weren't the problem; it was the options available in personal loadouts that harmed Halo's gameplay (not the only thing, of course). Spawning with the Plasma Pistol/Plasma Grenades made vehicular combat less engaging (not unlike the Stinger in Battlefield games), long-ranged precision rifles (DMR/Light Rifle) harmed map movement because you could be taken down from such a distance (especially when the shooter was outside of you weapon's effective range), the Boltshot harmed close-quarters engagement dynamics like melee by being a potential one-shot-kill weapon, and Tactical Packages/Support Upgrades (perks) sacrificed the gameplay principle of equal-starts (this is also true for Armor Abilities at-spawn) and previously default abilities/traits in an effort to give more choices to the player. The indulgence of choice isn't bad in moderation, and with that said: Limited Personal Loadouts Pick one precision rifle- Battle Rifle or Covenant Carbine Pick one automatic rifle- Assault Rifle or Storm Rifle Frag Grenades only/ no 'perks'/ no Armor Abilities Weapons like the DMR, Plasma Pistol, etc. would be placed on-map and balanced accordingly. Armor Abilities would be placed on-map as well, allowing less chaotic integration into gameplay (similar to Equipment from Halo 3). We could also reintroduce some weapons, like: the Plasma Rifle (differentiated from the Storm Rifle by a 'stun' and/or headshot factor, similar to its Combat Evolved iteration), Brute Spiker (with a more prominent melee modifier to be better 'up-close-and-personal'), and the Suppressed SMG from ODST. I also think the Forerunner/Promethean weapons should be re-envisioned as more powerful than their peers and placed on-map. As for Personal Ordnance (not ordinance), this feature deteriorates map control and gives gameplay an unfair random aspect that is in no way competitive. Dual-wielding (although cool and flashy) didn't do anything really productive. It limited weapons that were capable of the feature to be sub-par unless they were. Any perceived advantageous combos used through dual-wielding has always been possible solely through Halo's signature "two weapon" system. Bungie realized this after Halo 2's release and gradually 'weened' the Halo community from it by reintroducing the AR in Halo 3, and not including it in Reach.

Upon review of how I feel Personal Loadouts should be implemented, I've seen the role of 'secondaries'/sidearms as somewhat superficial. Rather than balancing "secondary weapons" into lesser roles, I think they should be treated simply as "weapons" (balancing them to be on-par but different from the existing "primary" weapons) and allow players the option of any combination of them. In other words: Pick Any Two Assault Rifle Storm Rifle M7S SMG* Plasma Rifle (headshot multiplier) Battle Rifle Covenant Carbine M6 Magnum variant (I'm leaning toward the M6C/SOCOM*) * From Halo 3: ODST; silencer/suppressor isn't needed, but wouldn't harm gameplay regardless.

Variation: The BR and CC may fulfill the same combat role, but they do so differently. If you really want to start getting down to "variation" over a more diverse weapon sandbox, then why do you think the DMR AND LR should come back? They fulfill the same combat role, all the while having different aspects to them (same as the BR/CC relationship). Play-style: Not all play-styles should be encouraged/allowed at-spawn. PP/'Stickies' is a play-style, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't harm vehicular (as well as infantry) gameplay. Having a close-ranged weapon like the Boltshot or Mauler to deal with enemies "up close and personal" is another play-style, but not one that should be allowed to anyone/everyone at-spawn. Likewise, long-ranged precision rifles offer a specific play-style, but in excess they discourage map movement and make closer-ranged weapons, like the AR, nearly useless. Also, the "cult following" for these weapons isn't the best point to make since the debate is on their integration, not their outright removal/inclusion (especially when you want to change core features of both e.g. zoom strength). Equality: There is really no way to make a short-mid ranged automatic (AR) and a mid-long ranged precision rifle (DMR) equal, because the AR can only effectively land shots up until a certain distance. After that, the DMR-user has nothing to fear from an AR-user. On the other hand, a DMR-user can consistently land shots at almost any range (especially closer ranges).The DMR has a chance in CQC, especially when you get into melee range. The AR-user still is in danger when confronted by a DMR-user, so that relationship can't really be considered equal. The AR may be better at close range than the DMR, but it can't really compete at all in long-ranged engagements.

Copy/pasted from the Halo Waypoint forums. I've replied there with a question for you, but I suppose it wouldn't hurt to post it here as well... P.S. Next time you copy/paste, you might want to "Paste as plain text". Doesn't include the black highlight You wrote: "So many people keep saying the DMR and LR cannot be made to fit into Load-outs, and should hence forth be beefed up slightly, and made low tier power weapons. I disagree. I think the potential to make them fit load-outs is there, you just have to think outside the box." Let me just say, when referring to the DMR and LR , I don't think its IMPOSSIBLE to fit them into Personal Loadouts. However, they would need to be better balanced with the other primaries to require more skill to use/be less effective at less-than-long ranges to prevent them from being comparatively overpowered. In my opinion, this integration dulls the edge of such weapons and gives players a weapon with a niche that doesn't fit well at-spawn (long-range weapon capabilities often lead to a lack of map movement) and wouldn't fulfill that niche as well as it could. On the other hand, if the DMR and LR were to be placed on-map, they could still have a noticeable advantage. There wouldn't be as strict a mandate to jump through hoops to make these weapons balanced to the primaries, only to make them effective and balanced into the sandbox as a whole. In short, I don't believe its necessarily a matter of "Is it possible to integrate them into loadouts?" so much as it is a matter of "Is it best to integrate them into loadouts?" I'll ask you this question: Why do you believe these weapons would be genuinely better suited as loadout primaries as opposed to map pick-ups?

As the implementation of dual-wielding was in past games, yes. However, that can be changed. What if there was a downside to dual-wielding (not simply the delay on grenade throws)? For instance, the M6H (Magnum) is a useful sidearm in Halo 4, yes? Not over- or under-powered into a submissive role or labeled "useless". What if when dual-wielding the Magnum, the bloom was more prevalent as both weapons were being fired? SMG could similarly implement an increase in climbing recoil. Overall, the aiming reticule could be enlarged (making weapons less accurate in exchange for more firepower). Another point to be made is that (at least in Halo 3) damage output didn't stack when dual-wielding as you might think. Rather than gaining an extra 100% from carrying a second SMG, each SMG would decrease in damage by about 25% (meaning an approximately 50% increase when fired simultaneously when compared to firing a single, non-dual-wielded SMG).

How is it that an increase in effective range is any less of a 'buff' than damage-per-shot or a larger magazine? It still makes the weapon more effective and interferes with the balance the AR (for example) would have with the BR. Without the attachment, the AR would have to be balanced, but include the option for a scope (allowing better accuracy) and to balance that, you'd have to make the standard AR less effective. Handi-capping/crippling a weapon's performance to justify and encourage the use of attachments is not the way to go, IMO.

We're getting a bit off-topic here... Besides, those two questions can't be sufficiently answered by anyone except the 343i employees who came up with this change/variation in GEN2 armor. Getting back to the point of this topic, I believe the problems with Armor Abilities aren't the abilities themselves. Rather, its the way they are implemented: allowing players these abilities at-spawn (thus eliminating the 'equal starts' of basic player traits) and the fact that they are infinitely reusable. Imagine Halo 3 where everyone could spawn with a Bubble Shield, Regen. Field, or Gravity Lift and that the chosen Equipment would replenish over time...

The problem I see with customization of weapons is that it makes engagements much less predictable. You won't know exactly how your opponent's weapon works, even if you recognize that at its core its a BR. Different zoom strength, damage-per-shot, magazine size, etc. don't belong in the game IMO. The Suppressed variants in ODST were fine because they were different weapons in themselves and their "standard" forms weren't present at all in the game. Adding attachments, thus changing stats, also makes weapon balancing a greater challenge and a potential train-wreck. Weapon skins don't affect gameplay, so I don't have a problem with that. However, having attachments be purely visual customization would be somewhat redundant, as it would take more time/ effort/ storage space to offer very little (rather than spending these resources making the weapons themselves better balanced). In short, I say "NO" to gameplay-altering attachments, "YES" to focusing on balancing static weapon stats.

The altering of the armor's appearance (and by extent, the armor's combat performance) is what I was referring to. The armor now has similar qualities to GEN2, like the undersuit mesh, the shoulder pieces, and the back. The GEN1 and GEN2 Mk. VI armor have comparable shield strength, so it doesn't affect gameplay, but the modifications are still evident. The GEN2-esque armor John-117 wears in Halo 4 is arguably more permitting of movement/ maneuverability, without sacrificing any notable components or functions (which is what GEN2 was designed to do).

In terms of shield strength/quality, not necessarily. Keep in mind that the GEN2 armor was made years after GEN1. UNSC shield technology has probably come along, allowing the design to be more streamlined. The power source (located on the back of the harness) is more compact, for instance. As for the S-IIs recieving "the best", keep in mind that GEN1 was the best at the time it was issued to the S-IIs (unless you include the experimental Headhunter/Black Team variants) . Considering that Master Chief's armor was altered (by Cortana, canon-wise) to be more like the GEN2 and the fact that he is just as effective in Halo 4, I'd say they're about equal in the field. However, when you bring in the economics of production, the GEN2 is arguably the superior iteration.

It hasn't been adeptly described, but observations of the designs can be speculated to give increased mobility (just look at the chest plate; it has much less armor along the sides). Also, while the GEN1 armor required a significant amount of time/effort to remove safely, the GEN2 is put on/taken off in little time (given the automated equipment to aid in this otherwise tedious process). The "undersuit" was also redesigned, as seen by the hexagonal 'mesh' appearance of the outermost layer. On a side note, Dr. Halsey didn't help create the GEN2 armor, instead going straight to the Mark VII armor (like Naomi wears). The GEN2 armor was designed by the Materials Group of the UNSC and manufactured by various companies...

Alright, let me set something straight: the S-IVs aren't equipped with Mark VII MJOLNIR, they are equipped with Mark VI GEN-2 (which is designed to be less expensive and lightweight). The S-IVs aren't typically equipped with Armor Abilities (according to the cinematics of Spartan Ops and the ones you see in Campaign); they were given in multiplayer to add 'variety' to gameplay. While it did accomplish this, I believe it went overboard by allowing players to spawn with them. They are in a training simulation, sure, but that doesn't mean that they should be armed with equipment that they wouldn't be given or see much of in the field. Canon and common sense aside, allowing AAs at-spawn deteriorates the "equal-spawns" principle of Halo multiplayer. The fact that you can select different abilities at-spawn, rather than picking them up from the map, may add 'variety' but it renders the concept of 'equality' rather mute (the same could also be said for Tactical Packages/Support Upgrades). That isn't to say that Armor Abilities are a bad addition, but I truly believe they should be placed on-map (with reiterations of some Equipment in the form of AAs, as well) and giving them a set amount of usage before depletion. https://forums.halowaypoint.com/yaf_postst228577_Personal-Loadouts-CAN-Work.aspx

Needle Pistol. Essentially, it would serve as the true counterpart to the UNSC's Magnum, whereas the Plasma Pistol functions in a very different way (EMP overcharged shots are the norm). In terms of function, it could work like a miniature Needle Rifle (semi-auto, zoom feature, non-seeking projectiles). Best of all, the Needle Pistol already canonically exists (although it should be balanced for gameplay purposes). http://halo.wikia.com/wiki/Needle_Pistol

How to fix Personal Loadouts: https://forums.halowaypoint.com/yaf_postst228577_Personal-Loadouts-CAN-Work.aspx

I suggest going here and reading/giving ideas. The Halo Waypoint forums are much more active and many comments seem more informed, IMO. https://forums.halowaypoint.com/yaf_topics27_Halo-Xbox-One.aspx

@CannibalisticTurtle Why do you feel so strongly about Personal Loadouts? I don't like them in their current form because of the long-ranged primaries at spawn (discourages map movement and outperforms automatics at anything but CQC), Plasma Pistol/Boltshot secondaries (gimmicked sidearms with lackluster damage and unbalanced overcharges that destroy vehicular combat and offer 1-shot-kills), Tactical Packages/Support Upgrades (perks), and Armor Abilities at spawn (they make combat too random and go against "equal starts" in Halo). Keep in mind that "equal" and "identical" are two different things. These parts of loadouts can be removed, allowing only choice between AR/BR/Storm Rifle/Carbine, Magnum/perhaps a "Needle Pistol"? (like a miniature Needle Rifle balanced to be the Magnum's counterpart), and maybe Frags/'Stickies' (I know there's a lot of hatred for Plasma Grenades at spawn, but that's due to them being unbalanced compared to Frags). If Frags had a larger blast radius and retained its short fuse and ricochet factors, while Plasmas had a smaller blast radius and did less damage to vehicles, I think they could be balanced and equal. Armor Abilities should be placed on-map with limited usage "charge", similarly to how Halo 3's Equipment worked, but not necessarily a "one-use-only" deal.

https://forums.halowaypoint.com/yaf_postst228232_CAN-Personal-Ordnance-Have-a-Place-in-Halo.aspx This is a post I made on Halo Waypoint's "Halo Xbox One" Forums. It details how Personal Ordnance could be implemented in Campaign/Spartan Ops/Firefight, as well as gives an idea for how it can be included in Matchmaking without undermining map control. If you're interested, please go to the link and leave your thoughts/suggestions.

I think the Elites can be balanced without being identical to the S-IVs without them being the same in terms of size, stance, and hitboxes. To balance the Elites' larger size (which makes them a larger target), I think they should be given a slightly faster movement speed/jump height and slightly stronger shields (not strong enough to warrant an extra BR burst, but merely a few AR rounds worth). The difference in stature (the Elites' hunched-over physique) does make them harder to get a headshot on from behind, but there are two factors that balance this out, in my opinion: the Elite player can't shoot at you at all when facing away from you, and the head itself is larger in size (both length and width), and so is a bit more susceptible to headshots from the side. As for how to approach loadouts for Spartans and Elites, I can actually agree that they should be able to use any of their primary/secondary weapons (although I would probably match my player model with my weapons anyways, I don't suppose there's a reason to limit players on balanced choices being used interchangeably). While I initially felt that this list should be comprised of the AR, Storm Rifle, BR, Carbine, DMR, and Needle Rifle as primaries, perhaps it would be better for gameplay purposes to limit the DMR and Needle Rifle to 'on-map-weapon' status. That would allow a few players to possess these longer-ranged primaries, but with more limited ammo (as they couldn't pick up ammo from dead players unless they also had them). Maybe loadouts should include the choice between Spartan or Elite, rather than making the player model consistent throughout all loadouts? As for the secondary weapons, I hope that we can all agree that the Plasma Pistol doesn't belong in loadouts, as it makes loadouts enable and encourage the N00B Combos and makes vehicles much less effective than in previous games. To take its place, I'd like to see a Needle Pistol (essentially a sidearm that operates similarly to the Needle Rifle, but balanced to be a counterpart to the Magnum). Then, we could also have the SMG and Plasma Rifle as secondary options. I don't see much of a problem with allowing Plasma Grenades in loadouts, so long as they are truly balanced with the Frags. I think Frags should do more damage to compensate for not having the "adhesive" factor that Plasma Grenades have. Combine that with the age-old differences like the bouncing physics and detonation times (again, in a balanced way), and MAYBE limit the grenade count at spawn to 1 to prevent "2-sticking" vehicles and decrease grenade-spamming in general (while allowing the 'Resupply' ability to return to base player traits). As for this customization option's place in Matchmaking, I'd like to see it acceptable in the "competitive" scene, but realize that that's being very hopeful no matter how balanced the differences are. Maybe in the competitive group of playlists (assuming/hoping there will be one), there could be a Spartans vs. Elites (SvE) playlist that would allow two rounds in a match, giving players a round each as the different species. This playlist could range from simple SvE Slayer to more objective-based gametypes, including Invasion.

https://forums.halowaypoint.com/yaf_topics27_Halo-Xbox-One.aspx https://forums.halowaypoint.com/yaf_postst226077_The-Appeal-Of-Equipment.aspx https://forums.halowaypoint.com/yaf_postst226047_What-SMG-to-Put-in-Halo-5.aspx https://forums.halowaypoint.com/yaf_postst225843_The-Role-of-Forerunner-Weapons-in-Multiplayer.aspx

Imagine going somewhere where the hostile Storm Covenant grow/sustain their Lekgolo. It would be like a mixture of Assembly (Halo 3 multiplayer map) and the Harvester (from H4 Spartan Ops) with a touch of Cortana (H3 campaign level). There you could see move variants of Hunters, as well as see they are preparing Scarabs... maybe even fight a newly operational Scarab at the end.

So, there's been a demand for the return of the SMG, but a debate springs from that want: Which SMG? The Halo 3 SMG or Halo 3: ODST's Silenced SMG. Halo 3's SMG would be less powerful than the AR and so, if put into loadouts, would probably be a sidearm choice. It would probably be nerfed to be balanced with the Magnum. This decision also warrants whether or not it should be dual-wieldable... I'd personally like to leave dual-wielding behind, given that it construes the Golden Triangle by disabling melee and grenades in exchange for more firepower. As for the Silenced SMG, it could be balanced into a primary weapon choice, differing from the AR in rate-of-fire, recoil "climb", and a different reload speed. Most importantly, it would be a fully automatic loadout weapon capable of zoom. This could also give the possibility of ODST's "Automag" pistol, which could be a second UNSC loadout sidearm (differing from H4's Magnum in range, rate-of-fire, and damage-per-shot, so it wouldn't be pointless). The "silenced" aspect of these weapons is purely of an audible nature and wouldn't give any unfair "stealthy" advantages, as you could still be seen as normal on motion trackers and the sound can still be heard. What do you think? Which SMG would you prefer and why?

The Halo Waypoint forums have actually been responded to at times by 343i employees like Andy "Bravo" Dudynsky, so you may have a better chance of them seeing what you have to say by posting in those forums. Those forums also have more traffic and often times have more focused discussions (albeit with obvious exceptions).

I have since rethought this idea and also came to the conclusion of simplifying loadouts, among other things. If you would like to see them, here's the link: https://forums.halowaypoint.com/yaf_postst221865_Halo-Xbox-One--How-to-Handle-Weapons-and-AAs.aspx I'd love to hear feedback from you, if you have the time.

From my topic on the Halo Waypoint forums: (Disclaimer: these are my opinions) Loadouts should not be as extensive/over-complicated as they are in Halo 4. Make it where your primary weapon choices are: AR, BR, or DMR (no reason, canonically or otherwise, why S-IVs are issued Covenant/Promethean weapons). Same goes for sidearms and grenades, so I think Magnum and Frags should be default and unchangeable (this gets rid of the problems with N00B combos, PP/Plasma grenades, and Boltshot at spawn). Resupply is now, or rather once again, a default characteristic (no reason to over-complicate the elegant "golden triangle" dynamic of firearm-grenade-melee that has been around since CE). That said, no support upgrades/tactical packages or AAs at spawn. Rather than having Sprint as an innate ability of all players, increase base player speed and allow the choice between Sprint and Evade as such (choose between increased mobility or maneuverability). I feel that the Covenant arsenal should once again include the Needle Rifle (balanced to be the counterpart to the DMR, as the Storm Rilfe is to the AR and the Carbine is to the BR). Brute weapons and grenades should also return, with the Brute Shot (replacing Concussion Rifle), Mauler (replacing Boltshot), Spiker Rifle (heftier Spiker with Retro Lancer-like design), and Spike/Incendiary grenades. Brute vehicles, mainly the Brute Chopper, should also return. The Promethean arsenal should receive a damage boost, making them more effective versions of their UNSC/Covenant counterparts. The Boltshot, however, should stay out of multiplayer. Armor Abilities and weapons, not just a few power weapons, should be placed on the map. This puts more emphasis on map control and should remain a recognized staple of Halo. Ordinance should only be able to drop Armor Abilities. That said, a few AAs that I think should return (or be made) are: Bubble Shield, Regen Field, Hologram, Active Camo (but with changes to promote movement rather than camping), Gravity Lift (substitute for Jetpack in multiplayer), and the EMP Mine (releases EMP to drop shields and stop vehicles, but doesn't kill). The thing that made Equipment work seems to be that they affected the map, rather than affecting how the player's worked. i think 343i needs to keep that in mind when designing/balancing AAs in the future.

Although I personally don't like the over-complications of loadouts in Halo 4 (I would rather just be able to select primary weapon, keep Magnum as only secondary, Frag grenades only, and possibly keep support upgrades/tactical packages). However, I understand that many others feel differently and so will admit that an "Evasive Manuever" modifier would be a sound addition. In terms of how it would modify, I'm leaning more in terms of simply decreasing the cool-down. My reasons for the loadout limitations/simplifications listed above stem from the thought that, while loadouts are not necessarily a bad addition, the choices of things like spawning with Armor Abilities (rather than putting them on the map like Equipment), Plasma Pistol/Plasma Grenades, the N00B combo, and the Boltshot seem to be some of the factors that plague the multiplayer experience.