No Bloom

[Three Bad Boys]

Removing bloom makes it so that simply the first person to shoot will win.

 

Absolutely false. You have it completely backwards. I can turn around and destroy someone with 4 or 5 quick shots (depending on MLG vs default settings) who had the first shot on me IF THEY MISS A SINGLE SHOT. This requires perfection on the part of the first shooter. A slight choke and you're dead. Now that's skill.

 

As for you MLG losers...your all mostly basement dwellers with no real world experience or usable skills so you hopelessly flock to MLG hoping that something you do in life will impress someone...You get maybe 2 years worth of my current salary...and when it ends, your back at your moms house eating hotpockets for the next 50 years.

 

Okay, that kind of comment shows a level of immaturity and ignorance that is unacceptable. I am not a pro player; I just enjoy the gameplay for which MLG strives. And nobody cares about what salary you're going to be making. I go to a top university with a 4.0 and will be doing just fine after I graduate...so nobody cares. Don't flaunt around your future prospects like all we do is play Halo all day. It's for recreation, but I prefer demonstrating skill in the process. Please become better educated and refrain from speaking like an ignorant little kid.

[VeteranOND]

As for you MLG losers...your all mostly basement dwellers with no real world experience or usable skills so you hopelessly flock to MLG hoping that something you do in life will impress someone. Look mom, I can use my thumbs!!! Being in MLG is not cool, a usable talent nor does it have any real world benefits. Even if you did manage to get signed...big deal. You get maybe 2 years worth of my current salary...and when it ends, your back at your moms house eating hotpockets for the next 50 years. Next time your uyp for that huge General/Project manager job...be sure to tell them how you went 30-0 ina slayer match or some ****...I'm sure that will land you the promotion. Do me a favor, keep your lame ass MLG talk out of it...that was not the point. The point was, how full bloom take more skill than 0 bloom.

 

MLG losers? Basement dwellers? No real world experience? Ok. I play MLG all the time wih a few of my friends and we are very good. Perhaps you'd like to come to my house and see all of my military decorations and awards I have hanging on my wall at home for being deployed halfway across the world to a combat zone. I've served in Iraq and seen and EXPEIENCED some of the worst things you can imagine. Have you been shot at? Or hit by an IED (roadside bomb)? Or having you been woken up by sounds mortar rounds landing 50 meters outside your door? Doubt it. Don't talk to me about experiences or usuable skills. So next time maybe you think before you start talking crap in generalities.

[Twinreaper]

I care nothing for your dedication to a fractured and poor country like the US. Just because you served doesnt equal anything. my great grandfather, grandfather and Uncle all have served the german military. This isn't about your ego or "your" miltary awareness or experience. This is about how people interpret poorly, what they see on screen in Halo and the age old tired debate of bloom, what it is in all actuality, and how lag plays the biggest part in the game in Reach, more than the previous titles. I knew some of you would get offended by my words, but that's not my concern. My concern is trying to educate people on the game mechanics and how they work based on actual decompressed and decrypted engine data...not what you see on screen due to many varying factors that effect gameplay.

[Three Bad Boys]

I care nothing for your dedication to a fractured and poor country like the US. Just because you served doesnt equal anything. my great grandfather, grandfather and Uncle all have served the german military. This isn't about your ego or "your" miltary awareness or experience. This is about how people interpret poorly, what they see on screen in Halo and the age old tired debate of bloom, what it is in all actuality, and how lag plays the biggest part in the game in Reach, more than the previous titles. I knew some of you would get offended by my words, but that's not my concern. My concern is trying to educate people on the game mechanics and how they work based on actual decompressed and decrypted engine data...not what you see on screen due to many varying factors that effect gameplay.

 

His point is that you assumed anyone enjoying a competitive game has no life and sits in a basement all day. You brought that upon yourself. Anyway, back to the topic at hand.

 

Let's compare the ways in which luck plays a factor. If I am in a 1v1 DMR battle with bloom and decide to pace my shots, the other person may decide to spam anyway and kill me by luck from close range. Guess how often luck plays a factor with zero bloom? NEVER! It is 99% of the time who can aim and strafe better. This is not even mentioning the greater opportunity for one player to take control of the game via multiple quick kills. How often do you see double and triple kills with a bloom DMR? It's so rare because the game is WAY too slow, and that equals a boring game.

 

I promise you if I play a lesser skilled player 1v1 with bloom settings, I may win 15-10. If I pop out while one-shot, I have no chance to out-shoot him, or if I do it will be by chance. In contrast, I will win 1v1 zero bloom 15-1 or 15-0. Trust me, I have experienced this multiple times. In that one-shot scenario, there is a good chance I can perform some crazy strafe or crouch jumping and completely embarrass my opponent. Bloom renders clutch aiming meaningless, which is rather stupid when you think about it. Just thinking about 1v1 scenarios with bloom compared to no bloom makes me laugh at the prospect of it taking more skill.

 

I can't tell you the number of times I've gone off on a tear in the Title Update playlist and gotten 25+ kills, and I get messages from the other team asking me how I do so well. Do you think that would even be possible with default settings? Absolutely not. I would be lucky to perform half that well with the game going slower and thus allowing the other team to regain map control. I would have just appeared to be another average player. So tell me, how does that provide for a more skill-based gameplay?

[Twinreaper]

So let me get this straight.... In standard Reach you fail. basically stating that what skill you do have, suffers from "luck", or "random" events that are calculated to work against you, and in TU, there are no random events or calculations that effect you and your true skill shows through?

 

Humor me..... show me exactly the constraints and calculated field data in the weapon tag that dictates the random placement of what you call "luck shots".

 

There is no luck in a game. A game by design, it written out and can on;y operate in a manner and to an extent in which the program is designed. Everything about a game is calculated precisly and layed out. Luck and random, indictaes forced beyond control or any seeable force. neither of things is present ina game.

 

If some guy spams you at close range and takes you out with a head shot...thats your fault. You could have done the same thing or strafed better. Yet again another example of how everyones bad game play is someone elses fault or the game sfault. Doesn't anyone ever take responsability for these things themselves? You will never see me cry about how bloom makes me suck. I suck at MM all the time. Do I suck because of the emchanics...no. I suck because I fail to outthink, out maneuver my opponents and I always fail at knowing which is a great spot to control on the map. Anything that happens in game, outside a power outage or lag...is 100% on the individual player and not the mechanics.

[MCPO Mayh3m]

Twin, I have a question.

 

Could the reticle bloom decrease accuracy of the DMR?

 

Think about it, you play ZB slayer and you fire 5 shots and your reticle was on the target you get the kill. If you play the original reach slayer, you shoot 5 shots on target, but because of the Reticle bloom the shots scatter and you begin missing shots.. not because your aim was off, but because the reticle bloom decreases the accuracy of the weapon.

 

Think that as the reticle bloom grows that the weapons accuracy decreases? Is that possible? If so, is this really the problem?

[Twinreaper]

That is exactly how it works. The weapon tag dictates a specific change in error with every trigger pull in such a mount of time. More so, the tag also tells you in which vector the projectile will go in accordance with every change. The reticule never expands at close range beyond the head of the enemy player. If you are at a close to almost mid-range, there is no reason to miss with bloom or without as long as you stay on target or outthink your opponent.

[Three Bad Boys]

Do I suck because of the emchanics...no. I suck because I fail to outthink, out maneuver my opponents and I always fail at knowing which is a great spot to control on the map. Anything that happens in game, outside a power outage or lag...is 100% on the individual player and not the mechanics.

 

Are you kidding me? Map positioning and outsmarting are useless with bloom because it takes so much longer to kill someone that they have a chance to get away. With zero bloom, if I outsmart you, that's it. You're dead.

 

I tell you what. Play me 1v1, first with bloom and then without. We'll see how much of a difference it makes.

[MCPO Mayh3m]

That is exactly how it works. The weapon tag dictates a specific change in error with every trigger pull in such a mount of time. More so, the tag also tells you in which vector the projectile will go in accordance with every change. The reticule never expands at close range beyond the head of the enemy player. If you are at a close to almost mid-range, there is no reason to miss with bloom or without as long as you stay on target or outthink your opponent.

 

So the problem is really just the DMR sucks at medium to long range with the reticle bloom.

[VeteranOND]

I agree with OP. I dont care about weapons tags, bloom/error angles and all that garbage. I dont know what it is and dont care either. Guru throws it around cuz he knows hes prolly the only one on the site that knows what they are and tries to make others feel stupid. Bottom line, Where I aim is where the bullet should go. Period. NB takes more skill than bloom. I have DMRed many people when they had the first, or 2. Ive even out DMRed people when I had no shields at all. So tell me how that doesnt take skill. That doesnt happen with bloom.

 

And Guru, maybe thats why you are so narrow minded towards the US. Your family was in the German Army durring WW2 if what you say is true. I would be mad too if someone came to my house, kicked my teeth in, burned my house down, and then made me pay for it. Its people like you that make me sick and dont appreciate what me and my fellow soldiers do. Do you the same about cops or firefighters? Its a job. And Im proud of it. No matter what you say.

[CandiBunni]

I agree with OP. I dont care about weapons tags, bloom/error angles and all that garbage. I dont know what it is and dont care either. Guru throws it around cuz he knows hes prolly the only one on the site that knows what they are and tries to make others feel stupid. Bottom line, Where I aim is where the bullet should go. Period. NB takes more skill than bloom. I have DMRed many people when they had the first, or 2. Ive even out DMRed people when I had no shields at all. So tell me how that doesnt take skill. That doesnt happen with bloom.

 

And Guru, maybe thats why you are so narrow minded towards the US. Your family was in the German Army durring WW2 if what you say is true. I would be mad too if someone came to my house, kicked my teeth in, burned my house down, and then made me pay for it. Its people like you that make me sick and dont appreciate what me and my fellow soldiers do. Do you the same about cops or firefighters? Its a job. And Im proud of it. No matter what you say.

 

You say that zero bloom takes more skill. Alright, answer me this.

 

How is it that simply aiming at someone and firing as fast as you want, with little to no spread in your shots, more skill demanding than having to aim at someone and properly time your shots to maintain accuracy and ensure a quick and clean kill? The answer, in my eyes, is that it doesn't.

 

Without bloom it simply becomes point and shoot. You have no consequences for firing as fast as you want, no reason to time shots, no reason to worry about maintaining accuracy other than having the crosshairs on the person's body. With bloom, however, you not only have to keep your crosshairs on said person, but also time your shots so that each shot hits the target where you wish it to. If you fire too quickly, you get more shots out at a faster rate, but you lose a considerable amount of accuracy. However if you pace your shots properly, you get less shots out than someone who spams, but each shot is going to land right where your reticule is aiming.

[Azaxx]

 

 

You say that zero bloom takes more skill. Alright, answer me this.

 

How is it that simply aiming at someone and firing as fast as you want, with little to no spread in your shots, more skill demanding than having to aim at someone and properly time your shots to maintain accuracy and ensure a quick and clean kill? The answer, in my eyes, is that it doesn't.

 

Without bloom it simply becomes point and shoot. You have no consequences for firing as fast as you want, no reason to time shots, no reason to worry about maintaining accuracy other than having the crosshairs on the person's body. With bloom, however, you not only have to keep your crosshairs on said person, but also time your shots so that each shot hits the target where you wish it to. If you fire too quickly, you get more shots out at a faster rate, but you lose a considerable amount of accuracy. However if you pace your shots properly, you get less shots out than someone who spams, but each shot is going to land right where your reticule is aiming.

 

Exactly, if people dissagree, they're so wrong

[Azaxx]

 

 

On the contrary, I have communicated with or listened to many of the top pro players in one way or another, and they all prefer zero bloom to bloom. So nice try. And I do get it, because I have been playing Halo since CE, and I know that when I shot someone in the head who was injured in a past Halo, they died. This is not the case in default Reach, and I don't know what more you can say to that.

 

And i can comeback to that' when you shoot someone in the head when they have no shields, they die, in ALL games

[Three Bad Boys]

You say that zero bloom takes more skill. Alright, answer me this.

 

How is it that simply aiming at someone and firing as fast as you want, with little to no spread in your shots, more skill demanding than having to aim at someone and properly time your shots to maintain accuracy and ensure a quick and clean kill? The answer, in my eyes, is that it doesn't.

 

That's the point. It makes it so the outcome is determined solely by aiming and strafing ability.

 

Without bloom it simply becomes point and shoot. You have no consequences for firing as fast as you want, no reason to time shots, no reason to worry about maintaining accuracy other than having the crosshairs on the person's body. With bloom, however, you not only have to keep your crosshairs on said person, but also time your shots so that each shot hits the target where you wish it to. If you fire too quickly, you get more shots out at a faster rate, but you lose a considerable amount of accuracy. However if you pace your shots properly, you get less shots out than someone who spams, but each shot is going to land right where your reticule is aiming.

 

With bloom, there is less of a consequence for missing shots because both of you are praying your reset bloom is accurate. In zero bloom, if you miss a shot, you're dead. Talk about skill. Similarly, with bloom, people are able to escape after being outsmarted because bloom takes so much longer to kill someone that you are able to sprint away around a corner, whereas if you get flanked or otherwise outplayed in zero bloom, you're dead. Think about the situation where you find yourself behind three guys from the other team. With bloom, you have zero chance of killing all three of them. Even if you place a perfect grenade, after one headshot your bloom will cause your subsequent headshots to be inaccurate. With zero bloom, there's a very good chance you're getting a triple kill. Which game would you rather play? Finally, someone from point blank can spam and get a lucky kill over someone who paces shots, and so there is an inconsistency.

 

Again, I challenge anyone who supports bloom to play me 1v1 first with bloom, and then without. We'll see how much of a difference it makes.

[CandiBunni]

With bloom, there is no consequence for missing shots because both of you are praying your reset bloom is accurate. In zero bloom, if you miss a shot, you're dead. Talk about skill. Similarly, with bloom, people are able to escape after being outsmarted because bloom takes so much longer to kill someone that you are able to sprint away around a corner, whereas if you get flanked or otherwise outplayed, you're dead. Finally, someone from point blank can spam and get a lucky kill over someone who paces shots, and so there is an inconsistency.

 

Again, I challenge anyone who supports bloom to play me 1v1 first with bloom, and then without. We'll see how much of a difference it makes.

 

No consequence for missing shots? You miss a shot with bloom, you didn't land a shot. You missed a chance to hit your opponent and deal damange. That is the consequence. Don't even start with complaining about how someone can sprint around a corner to escape death. You know what you do then? You can go after them. You can find an alternate path, or go through the way they went. You're not unable to do anything about it. You've also got to deal with the fact that not all battles are going to, or have to end in someone dying. If someone positions themselves in such a way that they have an easy way to escape should they need to, they were using better positioning. If you are out in the open, yet I'm near a wall, I'm using my environment to my advantage if I step or sprint behind said wall when you open fire upon me.

 

If you're in point blank range, it is more effective to fire faster because your shots are more likely to hit someone than when you're further away. If we're only a few steps away from each other and I fire as fast as I can, while you wait for your shot to reset, I'm going to win because I used my weapon the correct way for the correct range. Pacing is required for longer distances to maintain a more accurate shot. The closer you are to your opponent, the less you have to worry about your shots missing, which means the less you have to pace. I used my gun the correct way for the correct range, and I won. If I were to spam at long range, while you paced, you would win. There wouldn't be any complaining. However if you tried to pace as you would for longer ranges at close range, while I fired faster (due to my shots having more of a chance to hit because of the smaller distance between us), you would lose. There's nothing wrong with that. That's how it should work.

 

You have to learn how to pace for the appropriate range. If we're right next to each other, it makes no sense to wait for every shot to reset before you fire. You're going to hit me because there is a larger area in which I cover.

 

All of this is yet another reason for why bloom requires more skill than no bloom. With no bloom, you don't have to think about how you fire your gun. You just do it. You needn't worry about how you should fire at close, medium, or long ranges. Shooting someone is made simpler and easier in that no matter the distance, you're encouraged to just fire as quickly as possible because your shots are going to land as long as you're aiming at the target. With bloom, you have to learn how to fire your weapon at each range. You have to learn how each weapon that is significantly affected by bloom does at each of those three ranges. You have to learn different paces for different ranges, all depending on which weapon you're using. You have to memorize and learn how the weapon behaves when you fire it a certain way at a certain distance.

 

When you use something like the DMR in no bloom settings, all you do is fire as fast as you possibly can at every range, with no consequence except for missing, wasting ammunition, and giving your opponent the chance to land more shots because of your mistake. With bloom, firing incorrectly at the incorrect range results in all of this plus having to wait for your shot to reset to the appropriate level and learning how to properly fire it to get a quick and effective kill.

 

 

Edited to word things more properly and clean it up a bit.

Edited March 7, 2012 by Ms. Mystic

[Three Bad Boys]

If you're in point blank range, it is more effective to fire faster because your shots are more likely to hit someone than when you're further away. If we're only a few steps away from each other and I fire as fast as I can, while you wait for your shot to reset, I'm going to win because I used my weapon the correct way for the correct range. Pacing is required for longer distances to maintain a more accurate shot. The closer you are to your opponent, the less you have to worry about your shots missing, which means the less you have to pace. I used my gun the correct way for the correct range, and I won. If I were to spam at long range, while you paced, you would win. There wouldn't be any complaining. However if you tried to pace as you would for longer ranges at close range, while I fired faster (due to my shots having more of a chance to hit because of the smaller distance between us), you would lose. There's nothing wrong with that. That's how it should work.

 

That's fine and all, but there is still the chance that, no matter how well you "learn" to use your gun, there is no guarantee that you will win based on the proper strategy. You use phrases like "less likely" and "more likely". Here a groundbreaking concept: how about the word "definitely"?

 

Of course I noticed you disregard the 1v1 challenge.

[CandiBunni]

That's fine and all, but there is still the chance that, no matter how well you "learn" to use your gun, there is no guarantee that you will win based on the proper strategy. You use phrases like "less likely" and "more likely". Here a concept: how about the word "definitely"?

 

Of course I noticed you disregard the 1v1 challenge.

 

Do you want to know why I disregarded the 1v1 challenge? Because I don't have to play against you just because I want to offer my opinion. I don't care how good you are or not. I don't play very many games as of late, and me being rusty is only going to give you the chance to try to rub your opinion in my face claiming that you're right and I'm wrong and that I have no idea what I'm talking about. I offered my opinion, you offered yours. We disagree, let's leave it at that and move onto other things.

[Three Bad Boys]

Do you want to know why I disregarded the 1v1 challenge? Because I don't have to play against you just because I want to offer my opinion. I don't care how good you are or not. I don't play very many games as of late, and me being rusty is only going to give you the chance to try to rub your opinion in my face claiming that you're right and I'm wrong and that I have no idea what I'm talking about. I offered my opinion, you offered yours. We disagree, let's leave it at that and move onto other things.

 

There are no hard feelings. I just have a theory that lesser skilled players claim bloom takes more skill because they subconsciously (or consciously) realize that that gives them the best chance of beating people significantly better than they are. They claim pacing is skillful, whereas they know deep down they'd get destroyed if they had to rely on aiming and strafing. This has been a recurring theme in my personal experience.

 

There is a reason everyone in the MLG community vehemently supports zero bloom, whereas people in other communities do not like it. It's not a coincidence. People in the MLG community are, on average, better players and thus prefer to play with the most skillful gametypes. Hence, no sprint and no bloom. Empirical evidence pretty much proves the skill gap is infinitely bigger with zero bloom. If you think bloom takes more skill, then find 4 solid players if you are too rusty and coach them as they take down Instinct. After all, they may have dominated last season, but according to you, you stand a chance now with zero bloom.

 

Come on man, you're full of it and you know it.

[CandiBunni]

There are no hard feelings. I just have a theory that lesser skilled players claim bloom takes more skill because they subconsciously (or consciously) realize that that gives them the best chance of beating people significantly better than they are. They claim pacing is skillful, whereas they know deep down they'd get destroyed if they had to rely on aiming and strafing. This has been a recurring theme in my personal experience.

 

There is a reason everyone in the MLG community vehemently supports zero bloom, whereas people in other communities do not like it. It's not a coincidence. People in the MLG community are, on average, better players and thus prefer to play with the most skillful gametypes. Hence, no sprint and no bloom. Empirical evidence pretty much proves the skill gap is infinitely bigger with zero bloom. If you think bloom takes more skill, then find 4 solid players if you are too rusty and coach them as they take down Instinct. After all, they may have dominated last season, but according to you, you stand a chance now with zero bloom.

 

Come on man, you're full of it and you know it.

 

First off, don't call me man. Secondly, I don't have to do anything like what you've said because I have a different opinion than you. Those are players that practise for possibly countless hours of the week. I don't happen to know. I do know that they play a hell of a lot more than I do, and more than I'd care to. You want me to coach a team, get them into an MLG tournament, and see how they fare? Sure, I'll do that. You've just got to give me the money it would take to get everyone together, get a proper training room set up for practise, pay for the trip to whatever location a tournament is being held, etc. Are you seriously asking me to do all of this just to back up my opinion? I've given my reasons for why I think bloom takes more skill, I don't have to go to any other lengths to do so.

 

I said that zero bloom takes less skill than having bloom. I've stated my reasons for why I believe that, and I don't need to do anything more. It's my opinion, and I'm entitled to it. You can disagree with it all you want, and I'm not stopping you. However, don't come here and tell me I'm "full of it" because you don't like what I say, and don't agree with it. Don't tell me that I'm "full of it" at all, for that matter.

 

Using every single mechanic and option available in the game effectively and to outplay your opponents is more skill demanding than limiting it to a few select options in my eyes.

 

I'm not full of it, so no, I don't know that.

 

Edited because I felt I was a bit too harsh with my closing statement. If I was, I apologise. Hopefully I did not come across as mean or hateful in my post. If I did so, again, I apologise.

Edited March 7, 2012 by Ms. Mystic

[Three Bad Boys]

First off, don't call me man. Secondly, I don't have to do anything like what you've said because I have a different opinion than you. Those are players that practise for possibly countless hours of the week. I don't happen to know. I do know that they play a hell of a lot more than I do, and more than I'd care to do. You want me to coach a team, get them into an MLG tournament, and see how they fare? Sure, I'll do that. You've just got to give me the money it would take to get everyone together, get a proper training room set up for practise, pay for the trip to whatever location a tournament is being held, etc. Are you seriously asking me to do all of this just to back up my opinion? I've given my reasons for why I think bloom takes more skill, I don't have to go to any other lengths to do so.

 

I said that zero bloom takes less skill than having bloom. I've stated my reasons for why I believe that, and I don't need to do anything more. It's my opinion, and I'm entitled to it. You can disagree with it all you want, and I'm not stopping you. However, don't come here and tell me I'm "full of it" because you don't like what I say, and don't agree with it. Don't tell me that I'm "full of it" at all, for that matter.

 

Using every single mechanic and option available in the game effectively and to outplay your opponents is more skill demanding than limiting it to a few select options in my eyes.

 

I'm not full of it, so no, I don't know that. Learn to show some respect.

 

My apologizes for the "man" remark. I did not notice the "Ms." in your name. Please excuse me.

 

As for the MLG challenge, it was merely to prove a point that it is going to be much harder for any randoms to beat Instinct, no matter how much they practice. I understand you have an opinion and don't follow MLG, which is cool, but I assure you that the best teams are going to dominate even more now. Their ability to communicate and maneuver in combination with zero bloom is going to make them virtually unstoppable. And it won't be because they are no longer having to time their shots. Believe me, that was inhibiting their skill so much that it was ludicrous.

[CandiBunni]

My apologizes for the "man" remark. I did not notice the "Ms." in your name. Please excuse me.

 

As for the MLG challenge, it was merely to prove a point that it is going to be much harder for any randoms to beat Instinct, no matter how much they practice. I understand you have an opinion and don't follow MLG, which is cool, but I assure you that the best teams are going to dominate even more now. Their ability to communicate and maneuver in combination with zero bloom is going to make them virtually unstoppable. And it won't be because they are no longer having to time their shots. Believe me, that was inhibiting their skill so much that it was ridiculous. It was like having training wheels on a bicycle for them. They had always been ready for the real game, whereas the casual player desperately needed the training wheels.

 

It's fine. I get people who don't notice the "Ms." part of my name from time to time in the shoutbox. No hard feelings, okay?

 

I know that it's harder for just a bunch of random people to get together and beat a well coordinated team like, for example, Instinct. No doubt that a team like them will fare quite well against a team comprised of a bunch of random players thrown together. No doubt that they're more than likely to come out on top. No matter what settings, I believe that those who use better teamwork and what options are given to them more effectively than others are going to win regardless.

[Three Bad Boys]

It's fine. I get people who don't notice the "Ms." part of my name from time to time in the shoutbox. No hard feelings, okay?

 

I know that it's harder for just a bunch of random people to get together and beat a well coordinated team like, for example, Instinct. No doubt that a team like them will fare quite well against a team comprised of a bunch of random players thrown together. No doubt that they're more than likely to come out on top. No matter what settings, I believe that those who use better teamwork and what options are given to them more effectively than others are going to win regardless.

 

Oh no doubt. But to make the analysis meaningful, perhaps it would be best to compare them to the rest of the field. These are teams that have been competing regularly since Reach came out (and some since CE came out), and thus have been putting in just as much time and dedication. Some are pros and some are semi-pros. I believe fully that they will dominate more relative to those people, keeping everything else constant.

[DSB Clazer]

There are no hard feelings. I just have a theory that lesser skilled players claim bloom takes more skill because they subconsciously (or consciously) realize that that gives them the best chance of beating people significantly better than they are. They claim pacing is skillful, whereas they know deep down they'd get destroyed if they had to rely on aiming and strafing. This has been a recurring theme in my personal experience.

 

There is a reason everyone in the MLG community vehemently supports zero bloom, whereas people in other communities do not like it. It's not a coincidence. People in the MLG community are, on average, better players and thus prefer to play with the most skillful gametypes. Hence, no sprint and no bloom. Empirical evidence pretty much proves the skill gap is infinitely bigger with zero bloom. If you think bloom takes more skill, then find 4 solid players if you are too rusty and coach them as they take down Instinct. After all, they may have dominated last season, but according to you, you stand a chance now with zero bloom.

 

Come on man, you're full of it and you know it.

 

 

 

^^^^^^^this

[VeteranOND]

Mystic, No bloom takes more skill because you have less time between shots to acquire your target. If you miss just one shot, youre probably dead. With bloom, you have a little more time to aim your weapon. ZB is faster. Period. If you cant aim fast, and maintain your reticle on target youre dead. It depend on your skill level in general. I have have out DMRed people with no shields because they failed to get a headshot by the I got my 5 shots on them. I have also been hit first and out strafed or ghandi hopped my opponent to win the duel. With bloom, it doesnt happen too often unless im playing complete scrubs, because bloom allows lesser skilled players more time to aim.

[Three Bad Boys]

Mystic, No bloom takes more skill because you have less time between shots to acquire your target. If you miss just one shot, youre probably dead. With bloom, you have a little more time to aim your weapon. ZB is faster. Period. If you cant aim fast, and maintain your reticle on target youre dead. It depend on your skill level in general. I have have out DMRed people with no shields because they failed to get a headshot by the I got my 5 shots on them. I have also been hit first and out strafed or ghandi hopped my opponent to win the duel. With bloom, it doesnt happen too often unless im playing complete scrubs, because bloom allows lesser skilled players more time to aim.

 

Yep.