NOTE: this isn’t my idea, just something i saw in another thread, i cannot gives credit because the guy quoted this without stating a name.
this would pretty much fix the problems with boosting that halo 3 had, and it was thought up by some random guy on the forums. halo 3’s ranking system has a lot of room for improvement, this is evidence.
"Fixes to 1-50:
Take Halo 3’s 1-50 exactly as it was and then say that the maximum disparity between ranks that you search with can be 5 (or 10, for lenience.)
What I mean by that is that if you have a party of a 44, a 27 and an 11, the party will be considered as a 44, 39 and 39 (or 44, 34 and 34 if you go for the 10 option)
This means that the ability of a player to boost another player up is greatly diminished because it’s not like they’re winning with a crap teammate, they’re winning with a teammate regarded as relatively close to them in skill. It’s not ideal but it would fix the problems with boosting, provided that 343 were to make sure that people knew that boosting no longer worked."
halo needs a competitive drive to sustain it’s population, and another arena isn’t going to cut it.
Halo 3’s 1-50 wasn’t good.
I got a 50 2 weeks after the game came out.
Halo 2’s 1-50 was vastly superior minus the cheaters which are much less common.
> Halo 3’s 1-50 wasn’t good.
>
> I got a 50 2 weeks after the game came out.
>
> Halo 2’s 1-50 was vastly superior minus the cheaters which are much less common.
i wasn’t playing much halo outside of campaign back in 2004, so i dont really know anything about halo 2’s system, other than it was also 1-50, so i cant really comment.
You think this is clever, but its not. Because under this system, two peoples trueskill are taken to be wildly different from their actual skill level which will cause crazy mismatches. Which is exactly what boosting does aswell.
Yes, this is so dumb it actually causes the same problem it tried to fix.
Edited by Moderator - Please do not flame/attack others.
*Original post, click at your own discretion.
343 FAILS… THEY ARE A BUNCH OF NOOBS THATS WHY THEY DONT WANT 1-50.
> You think this is clever, but its not. Because under this system, two peoples trueskill are taken to be wildly different from their actual skill level which will cause crazy mismatches. Which is exactly what boosting does aswell.
>
> Yes, this is so dumb it actually causes the same problem it tried to fix.
this is only taken into account if you are in a party with someone who is a vastly higher or lower rank than you, and if the low ranker is a legitimate bad player then you shouldn’t really be going into ranked with him in the first place, jump into social or customs if you really want to play with him/her so bad.
> 343 FAILS… THEY ARE A BUNCH OF NOOBS THATS WHY THEY DONT WANT 1-50.
Agreed lol 343 sucks and there going to screw up halo’s new trilogy the first game they make… ughh its sooo sad
Again,
Problem: Peoples real skill level isnt what they getting matched up as.
Solution: Make it so that peoples real skill level isnt what theyre getting matched up as.
Wut.
Why should they care?
Instead of trying to fix something flawed from the beginning (Reach), it’s better to make a new system, to try again and make it better from the start (Halo 4). 1-50 is after all a system that was used many years ago with the tools available at that time, but now we have new technology, new code, and better systems. Why not use it?
You don’t want graphics from Halo 2, neither physics, nor any real factor, why bring back rank?
Because it was good back then and nostalgia makes it look even better? sounds about right.
> Halo 3’s 1-50 wasn’t good.
>
> I got a 50 2 weeks after the game came out.
>
> Halo 2’s 1-50 was vastly superior minus the cheaters which are much less common.
Just out of curiosity, how did the Halo 2 system work? I played tons of Halo 2, but I mainly played the campaign back then.
> > Halo 3’s 1-50 wasn’t good.
> >
> > I got a 50 2 weeks after the game came out.
> >
> > Halo 2’s 1-50 was vastly superior minus the cheaters which are much less common.
>
> Just out of curiosity, how did the Halo 2 system work? I played tons of Halo 2, but I mainly played the campaign back then.
Not very well.
It was based on ELO. But the weightings were all off. and it was boosted to hell. Everything over 30 was cheaters basically. It was a nightmare.
> > Halo 3’s 1-50 wasn’t good.
> >
> > I got a 50 2 weeks after the game came out.
> >
> > Halo 2’s 1-50 was vastly superior minus the cheaters which are much less common.
>
> Just out of curiosity, how did the Halo 2 system work? I played tons of Halo 2, but I mainly played the campaign back then.
Halo 2 1-50 was based off ELO and not Trueskill. I’m a bit sketchy on the inner workings, but IIRC it exponentially got harder and harder to rank up the higher up you were, to the point that the only way to be 40+ was to cheat.
There is a much more absolute fix that would eliminate the problem completely.
> Why should they care?
> Instead of trying to fix something flawed from the beginning (Reach), it’s better to make a new system, to try again and make it better from the start (Halo 4). 1-50 is after all a system that was used many years ago with the tools available at that time, but now we have new technology, new code, and better systems. Why not use it?
> You don’t want graphics from Halo 2, neither physics, nor any real factor, why bring back rank?
> Because it was good back then and nostalgia makes it look even better? sounds about right.
Im as are most fine with a new Ranking system / just not Arena but a new revamped 1-50 or what ever 343i has in mind I would just like it to take more from 1-50 then Arena .
New Ranking system might work out great might, fail like Arena only time will tell …
Incidentally, the arena rating system is closer to the H2 ELO system than weve had since H2. And people roundly rejected it. Hilarious.
This thread is getting far too many negative posts from my observations of what the community actually want.
Firstly, this is a great idea to FIX boosting. I am completely confident that this would work. I personally would make it -5 levels to hinder boosting to an excellent level.
Secondly, yes it’s giving the lower ranked players a inaccurate rank however this is the way it was in Halo 2/3 pretty much. If somebody of a lower rank party’d up with somebody of a higher rank they would (rightfully) play with people of the higher ranks level. The difference with this idea is that now they cannot do that and BOOST their levels higher than what they truly are. Simple.
Thirdly, Halo 2 and 3’s ranking system love is not nostalgic based. Both had flaws but they both gave the competitive players a lot of enjoyment and a motivating factor to continue playing. If you are a casual player you just may not understand this. There is plenty of love that is nostalgic based for Halo 2 and 3 but the basic ranking system is not one of them. Believe me.
Finally, any individualistic system will only promote selfish gaming. This is a TERRIBLE idea for team based competitive play. I am open to new ranking systems however it needs to be skill based, it needs to be win/loss based and it needs to match you up efficiently to people of your skill level. Reach is AWFUL for this.
Overall I approve immensely of this thread and I only hope 343i will thoughtfully consider this idea.