Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts
|
|
|
||
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
| Frequently Asked Forum Questions | |
|||
|
||||
|
|
|||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts | ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| Re: 100% bloom vs 85% bloom, in pictures. | |
| Posted By: dalecooper <dale_cooper@hotmail.com> | Date: 2/10/12 12:51 p.m. |
In Response To: Re: 100% bloom vs 85% bloom, in pictures. (FyreWulff) : I don't see any need to. I just avoid the TU lists What I meant was that those of us who prefer the TU over vanilla Reach can believe that the sandbox balance has shifted, but also think the net effect of the TU is still a positive one for assorted reasons. Those reasons are the well-worn arguments I was referring to. I'm not a hyper-competitive MLG type player, but fundamentally I do think think of Halo as a competitive game where skill and tactics should triumph over luck, and what I dislike about 100% bloom is the introduction of too much randomness. Any shot fired with an expanded reticule hits a randomly-determined location, and the effect is amplified by any amount of network lag (which is unavoidable no matter how good the netcode for the game is - Reach has pretty decent netcode on the whole). But at mid-range - the primary effective distance for DMR usage - it still confers an advantage to spam shots and hope they hit than to pace (since bloom doesn't make all centered shots miss their target - just some). The purpose of vanilla Reach was to introduce a new skill element (pacing shots and crouching to fire), but the actual effect was much more heavily on the side of just making the game more random. Randomness is the opposite of competitive play, and I dislike it intensely. Hence I'd rather live with a TU that makes a few weapons less useful, rather than vanilla Reach where the sandbox balance is better but the primary utility weapon constantly makes me want to rage-quit. To each his own, of course, but that's how I feel about it. If they don't like "spamming" I'd be much more in favor of a hard-coded lower ROF. I've also heard, and proposed, some alternatives to bloom that might work, but you'll never see them in Reach because they're way different than the current model.
| |
|
| Replies: |
The HBO Forum Archive is maintained with WebBBS 4.33. |