{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
10/20/2007 1:21:11 AM
213
Halo 3's melee system is flawed, Let's get it fixed!
Note if you've come here to flame, thats not going to solve anything.
As most of you know, Halo 3's melee system has a problem. You can deny this all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that it is flawed, with evidence to prove that it is not lag related. [url]http://gruntsrus.com/news.php?readmore=802[/url]
In Halo 1 and 2 melee worked like this.
Player 1 has 20% health, Player 2 has 30% health, both will die from one melee.
Player 1 goes for a melee faster than Player 2,
His melee hits before player 2's does, and Player 2 dies.
He is rewarded for his fast reflexes and melee skills.
Now in Halo 3
Player one again 20% health with Player 2 with 30%, and again both will die from one melee
Player 1 again is faster and goes for the melee before player 2 does.
His melee hits before player 2's does.....BUT since player 2 had initiated his melee before player 1 hit him, but after player 1 started his melee, player 2's melee also hits.
Player 2 somehow survives despite the fact that player 1's melee hit first, and player 1 is the one who died, despite the fact that his melee hit player 2, and player 2 should be dead.
Player 1 is punished for having faster reflexes and having better melee skill.
Plyer 2 wins, because he was slower to react and had 10% more health.
So lets recap, player who melees first, on a target that can be killed by one melee, loses if that target has just the slightest more health than he does, and happens to hit B before he is hit.
The current system takes the 2 melees in the time frame, calculates which player has the most health, and kills the one with less, and doesn't count his melee either, even if he hit first.
Thats like having 2 people shoot each other in the head, but because one guy has a broken arm, the other guy doesn't die, whilst the guy with the borken arm does.
Bungie, either make it so the faster player wins, as he hits first, or make it so the system kills both people if they melee in the counter melee period.
[Edited on 10.19.2007 8:43 PM PDT]
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Tacky [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Reganomics4life i bet half the people defending the melee system for halo 3, havent just played on there own consol. Just because some players have "lag" doesnt mean that melees in halo 3 are fair. More sheilds+ melee=win even when you arnt playing online. We might as well make grenades and bullets stronger if you have more sheilds too...just to make more "fair". halo 3 would be 10x better if they would just fix the melee.[/quote] I don't understand what is so hard to comprehend that the stronger meleer is victorious... I don't defend the system because of latency issues. I know how it works, and I agree with it - partly. they either have to eliminate the lunge or have both players die if melee is simultaneous (pending both shields are low) conclusion is I am sure bungie will take a look at it and tweak it as necessary As is though, the algorithm is tolerable. [/quote] ok i've come to the conclusion that you actually don't understand the system, and that your defending some vague idea of how you think it currently works. Point is, player with more health wins, even if he is hit first, and logically should be dead. That is flawed, and to think other wise is quite tacky.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] VinoVeritas [quote] Thousands of people complaining… hundreds of millions playing. Perspective is a beautiful thing. [/quote] Vino, not even four million people own the game. I wanted to tell you those words, and, that pretty much sums up what a dictator would say about his people, right? xD Other than that, I enjoyed your counter-retort.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] DARKZSOU7 Its not who melees first anymore its who shoots first wins and I already adapt to the new melee so if I get shot first I dont attack him cause I know he will win. What I do is I try to hide for shields and then take him out.[/quote] FINALLY someone with a brain!!! THANK YOU! But do yourself a favor and let these idiots charge at you when you have initiative. Don't teach them how to play....
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Reganomics4life i bet half the people defending the melee system for halo 3, havent just played on there own consol. Just because some players have "lag" doesnt mean that melees in halo 3 are fair. More sheilds+ melee=win even when you arnt playing online. We might as well make grenades and bullets stronger if you have more sheilds too...just to make more "fair". halo 3 would be 10x better if they would just fix the melee.[/quote] I don't understand what is so hard to comprehend that the stronger meleer is victorious... I don't defend the system because of latency issues. I know how it works, and I agree with it - partly. they either have to eliminate the lunge or have both players die if melee is simultaneous (pending both shields are low) conclusion is I am sure bungie will take a look at it and tweak it as necessary As is though, the algorithm is tolerable.
-
Its not who melees first anymore its who shoots first wins and I already adapt to the new melee so if I get shot first I dont attack him cause I know he will win. What I do is I try to hide for shields and then take him out.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Tacky [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Zagashi I love how people try to come up with explanation or benefits to defend a flawed system. Point is, in a melee fight, the person with more health wins NO MATTER WHAT the player with less health does. Player with less goes to melee knowing it will kill, he loses because even though his melee hit, the other player with more health had time to press B, and because he has more health, he automatically wins. Player with less health waits to be the second one to melee, he loses because he has less health. [/quote] LISTEN TO YOURSELF if you have less health, you deserve to die. Doesn't that make sense? If you have the leader of a wolf pack and a gimped rabbit do battle, the wolf is going to win! why? IT MAKES SENSE One guy is stronger than the other, he should win the melee battle If you think you have less health, you need to find a new way to turn the tide of the battle than do the Halo 2 thing and charge and massively lunge, then pull off your BXR/BXB.[/quote] Oh your such a fing noob. read above. Somehow you think the person who hits first, and should kill loses. Because the second player was slower to hit, but had a tiny bit more health. [Edited on 10.19.2007 7:13 PM PDT]
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Reganomics4life i bet half the people defending the melee system for halo 3, havent just played on there own consol. Just because some players have "lag" doesnt mean that melees in halo 3 are fair. More sheilds+ melee=win even when you arnt playing online. We might as well make grenades and bullets stronger if you have more sheilds too...just to make more "fair". halo 3 would be 10x better if they would just fix the melee.[/quote] agreed
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Tacky [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Zagashi [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Sharpest It's not flawed, it's just different. Learn to adapt.[/quote] ...[url]http://gruntsrus.com/news.php?readmore=802[/url] its flawed. And you can't adapt, because if you have less health, there is now NO WAY to beat the guy who has more health in a melee fight, even if it only takes 1 melee to kill him. If you go first, despite hitting him, you lose somehow, if you go second, he hits you, and you still lose because you had 0.000001% less health. Theres no way a player with less health can win in a melee fight, and theres now no longer any skill in melees. Its been changed from who hits first, to who has more health. [/quote] Wow, listen to yourself. If you have less health you SHOULD lose the battle, because obviously your opponent did SOMETHING right to get you to less health and deserves the kill. And if your in melee range obviously your opponent is as well and he deserves the kill. Go back to halo 2 so you can have your cheap BXR and BXB melee battles - I'm glad they got rid of these stupid glitches, which is more important than the "flawed" h3 melees[/quote] Listen to your self. If you melee first, and hit, an opponent who should die.....but lose because he has more health, and hit B after you did, you still think thats right? So melee has no skill, and its just an instant reward to the player who saw the other player first. The guy with slightly health, when both go into melee, even if the other guy hits first, should win....??? Thats like saying I have a broken arm but I shot that guy in the head first, but because he shot his gun at my head, albeit slower, I die, but he lives despite my bullet hitting him in the head. I'd be fine if we both died, but him living makes no sense. AND I HATED HALO 2, and will never go back. Don't you throw that fanboy garbage line at me.
-
i bet half the people defending the melee system for halo 3, havent just played on there own consol. Just because some players have "lag" doesnt mean that melees in halo 3 are fair. More sheilds+ melee=win even when you arnt playing online. We might as well make grenades and bullets stronger if you have more sheilds too...just to make more "fair". halo 3 would be 10x better if they would just fix the melee.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Zagashi I love how people try to come up with explanation or benefits to defend a flawed system. Point is, in a melee fight, the person with more health wins NO MATTER WHAT the player with less health does. Player with less goes to melee knowing it will kill, he loses because even though his melee hit, the other player with more health had time to press B, and because he has more health, he automatically wins. Player with less health waits to be the second one to melee, he loses because he has less health. [/quote] LISTEN TO YOURSELF if you have less health, you deserve to die. Doesn't that make sense? If you have the leader of a wolf pack and a gimped rabbit do battle, the wolf is going to win! why? IT MAKES SENSE One guy is stronger than the other, he should win the melee battle If you think you have less health, you need to find a new way to turn the tide of the battle than do the Halo 2 thing and charge and massively lunge, then pull off your BXR/BXB.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Zagashi [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Sharpest It's not flawed, it's just different. Learn to adapt.[/quote] ...[url]http://gruntsrus.com/news.php?readmore=802[/url] its flawed. And you can't adapt, because if you have less health, there is now NO WAY to beat the guy who has more health in a melee fight, even if it only takes 1 melee to kill him. If you go first, despite hitting him, you lose somehow, if you go second, he hits you, and you still lose because you had 0.000001% less health. Theres no way a player with less health can win in a melee fight, and theres now no longer any skill in melees. Its been changed from who hits first, to who has more health. [/quote] Wow, listen to yourself. If you have less health you SHOULD lose the battle, because obviously your opponent did SOMETHING right to get you to less health and deserves the kill. And if your in melee range obviously your opponent is as well and he deserves the kill. Go back to halo 2 so you can have your cheap BXR and BXB melee battles - I'm glad they got rid of these stupid glitches, which is more important than the "flawed" h3 melees
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Tacky [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Zagashi K well everyone knows the lunge ruined everything, thats an old argument, I;ve just come to accept that Bungie won't ever go back. But now they give us this bs that the person with more health, even if its 0.000000001% more, always wins, and not the person who has faster reaction time, which is what fps is all about. [/quote] It is not necessarily the faster reaction time that wins. Just because you lunge first does not mean your lunge should win. Player with more health might have spaced himself in a superior position so when you lunge he is waiting for your lunge so that: 1) he gets more shots in 2) he controls the battle on when the melee will happen 3) he can choose where to hit you with his melee 4) you will hit him at the END of your melee, he will hit you with the START of his melee. Reflexes has a lot to do with the game, but not everything. Brains > any skill on these games...[/quote] I love how people try to come up with explanation or benefits to defend a flawed system. Point is, in a melee fight, the person with more health wins NO MATTER WHAT the player with less health does. Player with less goes to melee knowing it will kill, he loses because even though his melee hit, the other player with more health had time to press B, and because he has more health, he automatically wins. Player with less health waits to be the second one to melee, he loses because he has less health. [Edited on 10.19.2007 7:05 PM PDT]
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Zagashi K well everyone knows the lunge ruined everything, thats an old argument, I;ve just come to accept that Bungie won't ever go back. But now they give us this bs that the person with more health, even if its 0.000000001% more, always wins, and not the person who has faster reaction time, which is what fps is all about. [/quote] It is not necessarily the faster reaction time that wins. Just because you lunge first does not mean your lunge should win. Player with more health might have spaced himself in a superior position so when you lunge he is waiting for your lunge so that: 1) he gets more shots in 2) he controls the battle on when the melee will happen 3) he can choose where to hit you with his melee 4) you will hit him at the END of your melee, he will hit you with the START of his melee. Reflexes has a lot to do with the game, but not everything. Brains > any skill on these games...
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] VinoVeritas [quote]Oh so I guess you HATED the melee system in Halo 2 and must have complained about it every day.[/quote] No, I actually loved it because I had an incredibly fast connection so I would win every single melee showdown I got into. The system was incredibly flawed and unfair… but it worked to my advantage. [quote]Blind fanboy, don't defend it just because Bungie made it that way.[/quote] Yup. I'm defending it "just because Bungie made it that way." It couldn't possibly have anything to do with all those perfectly logical reasons I just listed. How about actually trying to respond to something I'm saying instead of just calling me a "fanboy" and acting like a douchenozzle? [quote]Theres thousands of people complaining, and yet you think its fine.[/quote] Thousands of people complaining… hundreds of millions playing. Perspective is a beautiful thing. [quote]No one complained about Halo 2's melee( not even me of all people(besides the autolunge))[/quote] Because it was harder to see the flaws. No theater and you can't "prove" that latency was the cause of your death. You FAIL. [/quote] Lag has been around in every online game ever, but the removal of skill to fix lag, is not a good solution. I'd rather both people just die if they hit within the same window, at least that is fair. Hundreds of millions playing, wow you fail at math. Perspective is a beautiful thing, if you don't lie about it. The theater is irrelevant, it simply allows people to check the flaws, as people notice these flaws in game alot more, and thats why they go to the theater to check. [Edited on 10.19.2007 7:00 PM PDT]
-
VinoVeritas lol, one of the best posters I've read on this forum. KUDOS. [Edited on 10.19.2007 6:57 PM PDT]
-
yeah I don't c why the don't just go bacl to the halo 1 style. In most cases, the more skilled (faster reflex) player would win...and in the case of true simultaneous, both peeps die (making for one hell of an epic battle/saved film :))
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Get Stoked I think it's funny how people call it a Melee System, as if it's some sort of complicated mechanical process... There's no "System" to the Melees, it's just a Melee with a simple deciding factor.[/quote] aka a system/mechanic thats what the word means.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Tacky I SOMEWHAT agree. Let me explain. Halo 1 melee works fine and as expected. Halo 2 works "decently" but also very messed up. Player one could in fact be punished for faster reflexes. Countless times my melee lunge would jsut bring me closer to the enemy for their beat down to hit me first. I think h2 melees were the most screwed of the 3 halos so far. So many assassinations from the front, and the lunge was just horrific. Again halo3 has the lunge (very small) and since it's small it works fairly decently. I also agree that what you have described DOES indeed happen, and it is as bungie has intended. I agree with bungie too, that this is how it should work (if melees happen very close to each other, or player one is lunging and player two does not have to lunge). HOWEVER, what is dumb, is when player two SINCE he decides not to melee right when player one does he gets in that 1 or 2 extra shots (AR, SMG, Spiker, whatever) and that extra shot(s) causes you to have less health and therefore lose melee battle. So good post for the most part, but the fix is really taking out the lunge and i don't think that's possible now.[/quote] K well everyone knows the lunge ruined everything, thats an old argument, I;ve just come to accept that Bungie won't ever go back. But now they give us this bs that the person with more health, even if its 0.000000001% more, always wins, and not the person who has faster reaction time, which is what fps is all about.
-
I think it's funny how people call it a Melee System, as if it's some sort of complicated mechanical process... There's no "System" to the Melees, it's just a Melee with a simple deciding factor.
-
[quote]Oh so I guess you HATED the melee system in Halo 2 and must have complained about it every day.[/quote] No, I actually loved it because I had an incredibly fast connection so I would win every single melee showdown I got into. The system was incredibly flawed and unfair… but it worked to my advantage. [quote]Blind fanboy, don't defend it just because Bungie made it that way.[/quote] Yup. I'm defending it "just because Bungie made it that way." It couldn't possibly have anything to do with all those perfectly logical reasons I just listed. How about actually trying to respond to something I'm saying instead of just calling me a "fanboy" and acting like a douchenozzle? [quote]Theres thousands of people complaining, and yet you think its fine.[/quote] Thousands of people complaining… hundreds of millions playing. Perspective is a beautiful thing. [quote]No one complained about Halo 2's melee( not even me of all people(besides the autolunge))[/quote] Because it was harder to see the flaws. No theater and you can't "prove" that latency was the cause of your death. You FAIL.
-
They way that i see this is that if you player 1 hits first and has 20 % health and his melee would do 40% damage and player 2 has 30 % health and melees after player 1. player 1's hit would kill player 2 before his hit made contact, the blow would push his melee away, and it wouldn't hit him. player 1 wins due to mad skillz, and player 2 got pwned. first hit should hit first and have the damage subtracted from the hitt-e and then if he survives his hit could make contact. [Edited on 10.19.2007 6:53 PM PDT]
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Quaggledorf yeah...the melee system makes the maulers (and to a lesser extent shotguns) way to powerful. I think there are 3 possible solutions: 1.) make the gap for a simultaneous action WWAAAYYY smaller 2.) go bacl to halo 2 system 3.) (my favorite and probobly fairest) go back to halo 1 system which was exxentially the same thing has the halo 2 system except if it was a simulatneous action BOTH players would die (this would be fair and make for some bad-blam- saved films[/quote] Option 3 is a great fix. At least it makes sense. Since both melees do hit, but now only one counts, why not make both hit, and have equal results.
-
see yes if somebdy hits someone first they should die simple as that no oh he tried to block or sum -blam!-
-
I SOMEWHAT agree. Let me explain. Halo 1 melee works fine and as expected. Halo 2 works "decently" but also very messed up. Player one could in fact be punished for faster reflexes. Countless times my melee lunge would jsut bring me closer to the enemy for their beat down to hit me first. I think h2 melees were the most screwed of the 3 halos so far. So many assassinations from the front, and the lunge was just horrific. Again halo3 has the lunge (very small) and since it's small it works fairly decently. I also agree that what you have described DOES indeed happen, and it is as bungie has intended. I agree with bungie too, that this is how it should work (if melees happen very close to each other, or player one is lunging and player two does not have to lunge). HOWEVER, what is dumb, is when player two SINCE he decides not to melee right when player one does he gets in that 1 or 2 extra shots (AR, SMG, Spiker, whatever) and that extra shot(s) causes you to have less health and therefore lose melee battle. So good post for the most part, but the fix is really taking out the lunge and i don't think that's possible now.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Zagashi [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Alexxxx [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Zagashi [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Alexxxx [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAwiELHDEdA]this describes it all[/url][/quote] yah I hate how people are actually defending that. [/quote] Cause there the one with sausage fingurs that melee to slow and win[/quote] Yah it rewards noobs, and then these noobs go on and defend it, and as usual, blame lag. Its such a pointless argument its rediculous. Fix it Bungie. [/quote] Yep... I doubt they'll fix it though.. Hopefully they will though, I've learned to stay away fake them out. Walk in then back and keep shooting. [Edited on 10.19.2007 6:53 PM PDT]
-
yeah...the melee system makes the maulers (and to a lesser extent shotguns) way to powerful. I think there are 3 possible solutions: 1.) make the gap for a simultaneous action WWAAAYYY smaller 2.) go bacl to halo 2 system 3.) (my favorite and probobly fairest) go back to halo 1 system which was exxentially the same thing has the halo 2 system except if it was a simulatneous action BOTH players would die (this would be fair and make for some bad-blam- saved films
