Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'big bears'.
Found 1 result
-
I was thinking how I should approach this post and how I should get this point across... I considered going with ‘Spartans need more face armour’ or simply ‘Arrgggh!’ but then I realised that no matter what I do or how levelly I look at this it is going to get flamed to hell by a large chunk of the community once I insult their precious Battle Rifle... I’ve just had a game, one of many, in which the entire enemy team took to using Battle Rifles and backing away from every single encounter firing. Now some of you are surely going to say this is not an issue and just how the game is played... or rather, given the mindset of these people I’m expecting a lot of variously illiterate comments along the lines of: ‘LOL AM NOOB YOU?!’ The problem is, besides from being annoying, this tactic doesn’t really seem to really make any sense in this game. Most players who operate like this rarely seem to bother with a sidearm or their abilities... features which in their eyes may as well just be removed. So it has to raise a question as to the balance of the game when one weapon is utilised so heavily that not only other weapons but also key game features simply go unused. The other issue I have with this is that the primary way of beating a team doing this is to do exactly the same thing... which means the game soon becomes very solely focused and all semblance of tactics go out the window. On the face of it Halo 4 seems to offer quite a good degree of customisation which allows individuals to explore and develop their own play style. Armour specialisations, abilities, upgrades and weapon loadouts should create a great deal of variety in the opponents you face. However when one style of play defeats all others with ease it leaves people little option but to do the same. In short individual preferences go flying out the window faster than a grunt targeted by a fuel rod cannon... Now I am not going to suggest the Battle Rifle be nerfed, surely such a thing would be tantamount to heresy. I mean clearly the developers have decided that it should be able to beat automatic weapons at close range and that its ability to complete destroy armoured vehicles from across the map with its small calibre rounds is working as intended... but I feel as if one simple change could massively improve game play and balance issues. Reduce the speed at which you walk backwards. It’s that simple. The Battle Rifle can still be a flak cannon, shotgun and sniper rifle all rolled into one confusing bundle but just reducing the rate at which you can back peddle ever so slightly, I think, will make the game not only more balanced but more enjoyable. It would mean that when you have someone charging you down with the oddball they are actually a threat. It would make automatic weapons rightly more powerful in one on one close range fights. Most importantly it would just make sense. I mean as much as I’d love to see it there’s no 100m backwards sprint in the Olympics... Now perhaps everyone loves Battle-Rifle-back-peddling but when both teams are standing at opposite sides of the maps doing this it quickly resembles a game of duck hunt... The best games I’ve had were when both our team and the enemy used a variety of tactics and equipment. It meant you had to constantly adapt and weren’t sure what to expect next... that, ultimately, seems like the sort of game play Halo should revolve around. I’d dig out the box and quote it directly but if you recall, one of Combat Evolved’s main selling points was that you were the master of every weapon and that all vehicles were tools of destruction just waiting for a driver... it was not advertised as the ultimate ‘shoot each other in the face with a rifle until someone falls over’... game.
- 3 replies
-
- 1
-
-
- battle rifle
- matchmaking
- (and 7 more)
