TO: Bungie FROM: WheelmanForHire RE: The Melee Update. DATE: refer to post information. Maybe a memo will get your bureaucratic attention. Because this seems like a bureaucratic idea: Kill the meaning behind battle just because some people can't take losing for "no reason" If you ask me, the "fix" of the melee system, with mutual deaths, will ASSURE no reason to the entire engagement of fists. [b]Everyone who has paid attention KNOWS that the battle is given to the victor with the highest health level.[/b] You have told us this at least twice by my reckoning. HOWEVER This "fix" is unacceptable. Given the usual means by which melees come down to (in my games) They are down to the wire and usually engaged by both players, heading towards each other, and swinging. Both people's shields are usually depleted or low. Under Halo 1/2 the winner was the first to strike. Understandably, Halo 3 gives it to the one with the higher shield. Now: BOTH PLAYERS DIE. How insanely stupid is that? Is Bungie trying to invoke MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction, to the uneducated) tactics and just do away with melee? What's going to be the point of melee? It'll be assassination or nothing. Granted, it will be given to interpretation on how they phrase: "[i]sizeable health advantage[/i]" if that's going to be just a "notable" As to whether that means a shield advantage, or the indeterminable "health" post shields. HOW THEY SHOULD DO IT: Instead of a double kill, a "clash" or blocked attack should happen (a glancing blow of the other's strike). A timer started on both consoles at the event, and the first person to swing a second time is given the kill after conferring who has swung first. Alternatively, blows are weighted towards direction. Whoever is closer to "center" on their target is given the stronger strike and the kill. (instead of swinging "close" and hitting their shoulder for a lethal kill) OR JUST GO BACK TO FIRST COME FIRST SERVE. -------------------------------------------------------------- I can't say right now how I'll respond. If this becomes as much of a nuisance as I think it I will have to retire Halo. With 20% of my kills being from melee and being a close quarters player I don't see any reason to proceed to the battle-rifle fest that it shall become. Just because some people can't UNDERSTAND or ADJUST to the new system doesn't mean it requires an overhaul like you suggest. All you're managing to do is cater to the whiners who refuse to learn the system and complain the loudest. The rest of us has quietly upped and changed our game. @1086K to 667D, melee only, I have learned to ADAPT to the new melee system. It's not "random" to me. I've learned to avoid engagements where I know they have the bullet count upperhand. You don't have to count bullets, you just have to know who fired first and how long you've kept on target. If you can fire first and keep your crosshair on them then you're up for the win. If you have strayed off target or they fired first then it's best to keep your distance and hope to evade the fire. IT IS NOT THAT HARD. This new system, depending on how bad it goes, could (by my estimates of "close" melee engagements, alter my melee success from anywhere of 5% to 20% I'd rather ask "what" instead of be pissed that I'm forced to wait a respawn time for a mutual death. It sucked to sit through ALL of Romeo and Juliet just to watch them both die and I'll feel the same way every fight this happens. I'd rather the fight actually be meaningful. I'd rather die and let them, the understandable winner of the foray, (knowing that they had the edge damage-wise) then to have us both die and waste our times and negate the battle entirely. This could be a deal-breaker, Bungie. If this proceeds as you've planned and even ebbs on a 10% frustration rate, I'll walk faster than through 2 straight rounds of shotty snipers (I've said, already, I'm a close range player. I don't do snipers. Green Thumb, Inverted, 8's don't snipe.