A Progression System Can Still Be Competitive

In Reach, Bungie (and eventually 343i) had the ability to tweak the amount of credits each playlist/gametype dealt deep into release (as proved by Gruntpocalypse). This leads me to believe Halo 4 could do the same. Now, if it’s never too late to make such changes, so suggestions may still be considered (when it comes to the Progression System).

Now, let’s cut to the chase:

Progression Systems are more reliant of the amount of time you spend on a game as opposed to how well you play, that said, better players have always had an advantage (though not very meaningful). Halo 4 will have a PS, that is fact, and it is unknown whether a Ranking System (as in 1-50, for example) will be available as well.

Reach’s PS wasn’t as rewarding for competitive players as it should and could have been, but Halo 4’s PS can still be much better. Now, it will never be a true Ranking System (unless there is a RS too), but certain play-lists can give a clear advantage for competitive players, by dealing out a much greater XP profit to players with a high K/D and long winning streaks, and the system can be so rewarding to players that DO follow that path, that it may even become a hub of competitive play for Halo 4 and a place where all the best of the best can compete. All of this can be done WITHOUT a Ranking System and presumably well into the game’s life too (if Gruntpocalypse is anything to go by).

How? Well, let’s get down to business. Keep in mind this is all hypothetical and is just a few suggestions by your average gamer (not an experienced developer):

Let’s say the average post-game XP in normal playlists would be 1000.

Now back to the special playlist (which I will call the “Ranked” Playlist for the lack of a better name)… Completing a match would be worth 100 XP, and will be a set number for all players. Winning a match would initially be worth 300 XP, but with each stacking win, the you will earn 100 more XP (as in 300, 400, 500…) with a max cap of 1000 XP until you lose, at which point your XP will be reset to 200. Instead of a system that calculates your K/D, a better system IMO is a system which gives evey kill more priority than every death. A simple system would work just fine. Each kill gives you 20 XP and each death subtracts 10 XP. if your K/D is so low that your deaths have more weight than your kills, you will not get a Kill Bonus, but nor will you lose XP. This should make people care about their K/D much more, while not bumming them out completely if they have a bad game. The next way to get experience is to complete the match’s objective. Scoring the Flag in CTF should earn you 100 XP, doing so twice should earn you a total of a 200 XP Objective Bonus. Returning the flag, would grant you 50 XP. In Assault, it will work the same but with bomb plants and bomb deactivations, in KotH it will be the same but with a 100 XP bonus for every 30 seconds you spend within a hill whereas the 50 XP bonus would be awarded to players that survive within a hill without being killed during it’s whole life span (basically, don’t lose the hill to anybody else). In Slayer, the 100 XP bonus would be awarded for every ten kills you score and the 50 XP bonus would be awarded for every three assits you get. Players with a postive K/D would get an extra 100 XP bonus.

During a standard match (lets say you get positive in your standard) a competitive player could get around 800 XP in their first game, but every win they stack and the more they improve would shift the numbers up to around 1200. Extremely talented player that tend to play to win could earn significantly more, too.

Moving on from the walls of text, a system such as this would attract competitive players since it has benefits for winning, accomplishing the objectives, getting a high K/D and staying through the length of the games. Competitive players could rank up significantly faster than standard players this way, and can achieve a high level much earlier than them.

TL;DR

If the way XP is delivered is changed in a certain, more competitive playlist to be more about winning and getting a high K/D, this could give competitive players an edge over casuals (in terms of their level and unlocked items) as it should always be. Significantly better players should equal significantly better payoffs, and this playlist it actually could. Please read the longest paragraph.

Thoughts? Improvements? Hate?

Now with TL;DR. Sorry for the long read.

Has anyone else thought that the BPR used right now on our stats page will be used in-game?

It can work UPDATED Oh a progression system I voted wrong I thought it was something else I guess no

> It can work UPDATED Oh a progression system I voted wrong I thought it was something else I guess no

Well, a Progression System is already confirmed, and it is highly likely that a Ranking System will not be available. This may actually be the best of a bad situation (which was my vote btw).

Why can’t they mix a progressive system with a ranking system. Winning games will increase your ranked number and playing games will upgrade your symbol(noble, eclipse, etc)

A progression system won’t work that way. If it works like you suggest, it will still have all of the problems of a normal progression system.

There are a lot of competitive players who don’t care about credits/spartan points. Therefore, these people won’t be influenced by “extra” credits that you get if you win or have a good k/d. Even then, they would cap a flag and then spawn kill the rest of the game since they get extra for having a huge k/dd ratio.

Also, giving out points for having a good k/d will promote betraying for power weapons as your k/d is important. Teammates will betray each other so that they get the flag cap and the credits that come with it. This introduces more problems than it solves.

> Why can’t they mix a progressive system with a ranking system. Winning games will increase your ranked number and playing games will upgrade your symbol(noble, eclipse, etc)

Obviously that would be the best way to go, but my suggestion comes to place if they can’t do it or don’t intend to do it.

> A progression system won’t work that way. If it works like you suggest, it will still have all of the problems of a normal progression system.
>
> There are a lot of competitive players who don’t care about credits/spartan points. Therefore, these people won’t be influenced by “extra” credits that you get if you win or have a good k/d. Even then, they would cap a flag and then spawn kill the rest of the game since they get extra for having a huge k/dd ratio.
>
> Also, giving out points for having a good k/d will promote betraying for power weapons as your k/d is important. Teammates will betray each other so that they get the flag cap and the credits that come with it. This introduces more problems than it solves.

Every disadvantage you stated could have a countermeasure. For instance, the betraying problem could be solved by removing friendly fire specifically to this playlist or making the victim’s weapons unavailable to his betrayer after he betrays.

Do you believe a normal Progression System at all times will be better than an option like this (for those that choose to adopt it)?

it’s easy, make people only win SP if they win a battle, make them loose if quit. no need for k/d and other overthought maths, keep it simple and more people may like it.

> > A progression system won’t work that way. If it works like you suggest, it will still have all of the problems of a normal progression system.
> >
> > There are a lot of competitive players who don’t care about credits/spartan points. Therefore, these people won’t be influenced by “extra” credits that you get if you win or have a good k/d. Even then, they would cap a flag and then spawn kill the rest of the game since they get extra for having a huge k/dd ratio.
> >
> > Also, giving out points for having a good k/d will promote betraying for power weapons as your k/d is important. Teammates will betray each other so that they get the flag cap and the credits that come with it. This introduces more problems than it solves.
>
> Every disadvantage you stated could have a countermeasure. For instance, the betraying problem could be solved by removing friendly fire specifically to this playlist or making the victim’s weapons unavailable to his betrayer after he betrays.
>
> Do you believe a normal Progression System at all times will be better than an option like this (for those that choose to adopt it)?

Your version is better than a normal default version, that I will admit. But I know that if it is just a progression system and there is nor real ranking system, then it will be much harder to stay interested in the game.

One of the only reasons that I still play Reach is because of Halotracker and that is because they have their own 1-50 system.

It would only allow better players to rank up FASTER… not HIGHER

One way to make a progression system truly competitive is:
XP needed to rank up is gained from playlists that also have 1-50 trueskill ranks. For every skill level there is an XP cap. Example = If you are highest skill 10, you can get a total of 10000 XP (which is enough for lieutenant) before you stop gaining XP, then when you reach highest skill 11 the cap is raised and you can now get 12000 XP.

This way there is an XP grind for each skill level and you don’t rank up instantly when you get to a new skill, you have to keep playing in that playlist and maintain that level. Therefore it has more longevity than basic 1-50 and this would also deal with derankers.

I know there probably won’t be any 1-50 so I voted ‘Best of a bad situation’

> it’s easy, make people only win SP if they win a battle, make them loose if quit. no need for k/d and other overthought maths, keep it simple and more people may like it.

But what, you’d get 1000 XP for winning? And the others get nothing regardless of how well they played. I don’t like that, it would make most competitive players that do care about progression play the normal playlists (since it would be significantly harder to get XP, if you lose you get nothing).