Black Ops 2 Has halo 2,3, style ranking

Halo 5 will probably have the same then.

Since Reach, halo has been catering to a new generation of gamers. The “entitled” generation. Everything is given at the cost or risk of nothing. If you lose a game its a pat on the back and you’re rewarded for not meeting the standard.

I’m hoping 343 delivers good news about a competitive ranking system. Their silence on the matter isnt looking good for us. Seems they don’t want an uproar of gamers raging that they pre-ordered halo reach 2.

> > Personally, I find game being balanced a lot more important compared to visible ranking system.
> >
> > Competitive gamers can always organize custom games to test out who’s the best and improve, that can be done without ranking system, but with luck factors like bloom and brainfarts like Armor Lock, it’s not possible.
> >
> >
> > Skill based ranking would be great, but it’s not essential. I’d rather Halo series get rid of matchmaking, and get dedicated servers, instead of bring out the 1-50 back.
>
> Meh, for me i never really cared for the visible part. The reason i loved 1-50 was it let me know if i was improving, where i stood in the community. (which is actually why i like reachs percentage rank better)
>
> But in reach and h4 it will be almost impossible to tell.
>
> Am i doing well because im facing bad people?
> Am i doing bad because im improving as a player, putting me against skilled people?
> Is this the noob playlist, where not very many good players are?
>
> Itll be impossible to tell where i stack in the community.

Well it’s still in progress at 343’s end. Responding to someone’s comment about skill ranking being hidden from the player, Frankie said that, while they’re trying to cut down on boosting, “We’re working with other metrics to let players figure out where they stand in the community” (sorry, I’m too lazy to find the Neogaf post). Based on that statement, I’d expect something more like Reach’s percentages, but with yours being only visible to you.

> > There is no ranking system that measures your exact skill in the game
>
> Which is why every ranking system since forever uses an aggregate of games to determine your rank. <mark>You can’t be lucky 50 games in a row.</mark>
>
>
> > I don’t know why some of you people are obsessed with seeing how good you are compared to rest of the community
>
> It’s natural instinct, <mark>I’m sure you are competitive about something in your life. The more invested you are in a hobby, the more competitive you get.</mark>

First, yes, but the 1-50 ranking system still isn’t perfect, you can be carried, you can buy it, it doesn’t take account the fact you might play with people lesser skilled than you, or guests. I’d love to see “Perfected” version of it back. With both competitive and casual crowd pleased, and able to enjoy the game.

For second highlighted part, I guess you’re right. When you put it that way, I think I understand (I play ice-hockey myself), I just never saw games as something to be competitive about even though I am a “veteran” when it comes to Halo.
You put that out pretty well though, I’ll thank you for helping me see the both sides, without thinking highly of yourself, or considering yourself above others, like some rotten apples of competitive gamer community.

It’s kind of funny really. Just as Halo moves away from its typical matchmaking experience in favour of one more like CoD’s, CoD realises that its matchmaking system is out-dated (half a decade old, even) and starts to evolve it with a feature people used to typically associate with Halo.

That said, we MIGHT be getting a ranking system that is currently being tweaked/developed (not getting my hopes up) and i’m sure if the absence of one proves to be that big a deal 343 will probably try and implement one with a title update, since they seem pretty determined to support H4, unlike Bungie with Reach.

With all that in mind, it does raise some doubts regarding 343 and their aspirations and such though. Keep up 343; it’s 2012 now and Halo should be a leader in the shooter market.

what i dont like about a ranking system is the deranking. I could work extremely hard to achieve a 50 or just a 45 and then when i get there, at first i will feel like a king, then later on it will just start stressing me out. I will be constantly trying to maintain a 50 and when i just play bad for a couple games I will be deranked and just stress myself out.

I would like to play my fav. playlists without having to worry about losing what i worked so hard to achieve. It would be nice to just play a couple games to relax, without screaming over it because i lost 2-3 ranks just because my team didn’t win or I was just takin it easy for a little.

Last problem is those -Yoinks!- that bash on you 'cause you have a lower rank. one reason why I stopped using my mic. in matchmaking. A progression system makes me feel good about winning- I rank faster- and I also gain diff. armor, and some actual game effecting things, like new weapons. I love it.

343 has already stated That there will be a skill based system so dont worry about being matched up against high ranks or easily winning against low ranks.

Honestly I don’t see a problem with the way 343 has their system set up I find it more enjoyable.

P.S. knowing call of duty they’re probably going to -Yoink!- up the ranking system anyway.

A few comments (Note: I like both Halo and CoD, and honestly speaking I fail to understand why some Halo fans want to see CoD to crash and burn :slight_smile: ):

  1. Halo 4 may or may not have a similar system: http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=43179985&postcount=9540

> The reason we can’t be specific right now is that it is in flux and in dev. That’s annoying to you guys, but if I say “no” it’s as much of an inaccurate statement as if I say “yes.”
> …
>
> This is not a marketing feature, in fact about 99% of people don’t care. But the 1% of people who do care are super important to us, just as much so as any other constituency - and Kevin Franklin and I have been - and continue to work on something useful and deep for a long time…

In a nut shell, it could happen.

  1. In terms of Skill-based ranking system, What BO2 has is the following (as an FYI):

> a) The system is called “League Play”
>
> b) Number of leagues: 7
>
> Lower Level League (starting point, bottom 0-20%?)
> Silver League (bottom 20-40%)
> Gold League (40-60%?)
> Platinum League (top 20-40%?)
> Green League (top 2-20%)
> World League (top 2%)
>
> Only 6 are listed above. My guess is that the 7th is for practice/placement purpose.
>
> c) Team size for league play
>
> 6v6: solo allowed, scorestreak enabled, typical CoD experience;
> 4v4: full team only, scorestreak disabled, MLG/GB type of rules;
>
> d) Confirmed: all weapons, perks, and attachments unlocked in League Play
>
> e) Confirmed: each team you are part of (Solo being a special case) has a different ranking
>
> f) Confirmed: rating adjustment will be purely W/L based. K/D whores who are not good at winning games will not do well.
>
> g) Game modes: no info on this yet.
>
> h) Playoff system “might” be introduced later.

It is a greatly simplified version of SC2 League System, more like Arena system than 1-50 system. So, No, it does NOT have Halo 2/3 style ranking. The majority of the players probably won’t care much about the system once they are stuck in the middle of a league. I believe that this is why Frankie said “99% of people don’t care”.

  1. I consider myself a big fan of a skill-based ranking system, so I am very excited about BO2’s introduction of League Play. However, I realized that my excitement is based on having a sense of “progression”, i.e.: I can move up the ladder as I get better. I am not sure how much I would love it once I found myself “plateau-ed” at a certain level or league, which is bound to happen. As a result, my excitement was really based on an unrealistic expectation (that I can continue moving up).

My current thinking after the realization mentioned above: a visible ranking would only be useful to the top players. For others (like me), what we really need is “skill-based matchmaking”, which I am confident that will be well implemented by H4.

  1. A well designed League Play system (like SC2) addresses the above only-2%-people-care problem by introducing additional features like ladders, playoff, etc. Such a system will make non-top players getting the sense of competitive experience after they hit their skill ceiling.

Just my 2 cents.

> First of all: 1-50 doesn’t make a game competative.
>
> Secondly: seems CoD is once again YEARS behind. Level design in those games already is a relic from the mid 90’s, AI is worse than what H2 had in 2004, multiplayer is about the only thing that isn’t some shamefully ancient thing that was criticized in back in the days and now is cool because its in CoD. And now they have a ranking system Halo has abandoned long time ago…
> Way to go.
>
> No: I’m no CoD fan, I think its a series thats bad for the progress other games like Halo made in the genre. And no: I’m also not a big 1-50 fan. I’m more of a fan of just trying to beat people and being competative in that sense. <mark>Numbers are just a collection of pixels that mean nothing to me.</mark>

Funny thats how I feel about progressive ranks because they don’t show me anything except who participated in more matches.

Also unlockable armor what does that do? Nothing its just a collection of pixels on the screen.

I bet you think they are a great addition to the game and you would be upset if they were gone, but in all reality they are just a bunch of pixels even more so than 1-50 because the level of competition doesn’t get higher like it did for the 1-50 system.

A team of inheritors were still playing noobs, slumber parties, and guests. a team of 50’s were playing another team of 50’s.

1-50 was a lot more competitive than fighting AI, or playing social slayer against a team of guests who team kill. 1-50 you are always playing people on your rank trying their hardest to win, and they don’t want to lose.

> > The 1-50 has its pros and cons, i personaly think it has more cons. Guess CoD players will find out what those cons are. The series is already plagued with exp rank boosters, lets see how long the 1-50 ranking lasts.
>
> The cons are, boosters and account selling(thats all), CoD already had way more boosting and selling prestige lobbys than Halo ever had without the ranking system.
>
> The pro’s were, Making matches more competitive and intense, winning means more, losing means more, less quitters and betraying, an addicting system that makes you strive to get better, equal balanced matches, it encourages teamwork and rethinking strategies if you lose.
>
> Unfortunately I might have to get BO2 for my competitive fix, and play Halo 4 more casually while I get matched up with slumber parties and guests. Getting team killed for power weapons and mechs.
>
> I always loved getting in intense 50-49 matches that a loss could mean a downrank and a win could move you closer to the next rank. <mark>Instead of the 50-12 Roflstops because a team of noobs is being matched against a team of pros.</mark>
>
> If i’m on the winning team it’s not fun for me because it’s not challenging, and if i’m on the losing team its not fun getting betrayed for a power weapon and playing with a team of guests.

Posts like these are annoying me so much now!

You guys act like just becuae there is no 1-50 that there is no skill based system AT ALL!

They have a skill based system going on in the background, so basically they are putting you up against people in your skill level without specifically telling you what your skill level is. that’s the difference.

You are not going up against noobs if your a pro, you’re going against other pros. YOU JUST DON’T HAVE A 50 NEXT TO YOUR GT!

Gosh, you guys always jump to conclusions. 343 say one thing and you act as if you can predict what’s going to happen for the next 2 years!

/rantover

Deranking was never an issue in Halo 2. I think they should have a visual 1-50 similar to H2 that works independently from the trueskill system and is based purely off wins/losses. Therefore deranking would simply bring your rank down and have no effect on boosting ranks.

I’m going to assume that you find it ironic that CoD is picking up on Halo’s old features, while Halo is picking up on CoD’s. Then, let’s play the original that at the same time has incorporated the one feature that instantly make any game great, regardless of gameplay.

> OK, picture the setting. Its 3 months before halo 5 comes out. The community is once again begging for 1-50 back.
>
> 343s response: “We dont want halo 5 to be like call of duty”

Yet they copy almost every aspect of it, so there’s a good chance we’ll have it by Halo 5.

So Blackops 2 ranking system is 1-50? Its not Halo 2+Halo 3’s ranking system unless its ELO 1-50.

I do think the competitve/social balance in H2+H3 was a huge reason for its success and longevity and that the competitve/social balance becoming 95 percent social in Reach hurt the competitve side/longevity of the game greatly. Because not only do competitve players not have an “environment” to play in Reach, but there is very little default playlists that actually are trying to cater to the competitve crowd. In H2+H3 it was a competitve player’s dream being able to play any playlist they want knowing they were getting competitve games almost every time. So many great memories from those games, the communities were much more tight-knit as well multiplayer wise.

> > The 1-50 has its pros and cons, i personaly think it has more cons. Guess CoD players will find out what those cons are. The series is already plagued with exp rank boosters, lets see how long the 1-50 ranking lasts.
>
> The cons are, boosters and account selling(thats all), CoD already had way more boosting and selling prestige lobbys than Halo ever had without the ranking system.
>
> The pro’s were, Making matches more competitive and intense, winning means more, losing means more, less quitters and betraying, an addicting system that makes you strive to get better, equal balanced matches, it encourages teamwork and rethinking strategies if you lose.
>
> Unfortunately I might have to get BO2 for my competitive fix, and play Halo 4 more casually while I get matched up with slumber parties and guests. Getting team killed for power weapons and mechs.
>
> I always loved getting in intense 50-49 matches that a loss could mean a downrank and a win could move you closer to the next rank. Instead of the 50-12 Roflstops because a team of noobs is being matched against a team of pros.
>
> If i’m on the winning team it’s not fun for me because it’s not challenging, and if i’m on the losing team its not fun getting betrayed for a power weapon and playing with a team of guests.

Theres still a true skill its just not visable, also there comes allot of grief that comes with a 1-50 such as rage quiting, cheating, deranking and people taking the game way to seriously.

> OK, picture the setting. Its 3 months before halo 5 comes out. The community is once again begging for 1-50 back.
>
> 343s response: “We dont want halo 5 to be like call of duty”

cool then it can be like Halo 3

problem solved

> > > Personally, I find game being balanced a lot more important compared to visible ranking system.
> > >
> > > Competitive gamers can always organize custom games to test out who’s the best and improve, that can be done without ranking system, but with luck factors like bloom and brainfarts like Armor Lock, it’s not possible.
> > >
> > >
> > > Skill based ranking would be great, but it’s not essential. I’d rather Halo series get rid of matchmaking, and get dedicated servers, instead of bring out the 1-50 back.
> >
> > Meh, for me i never really cared for the visible part. The reason i loved 1-50 was it let me know if i was improving, where i stood in the community. (which is actually why i like reachs percentage rank better)
> >
> > But in reach and h4 it will be almost impossible to tell.
> >
> > Am i doing well because im facing bad people?
> > Am i doing bad because im improving as a player, putting me against skilled people?
> > Is this the noob playlist, where not very many good players are?
> >
> > Itll be impossible to tell where i stack in the community.
>
> Why won’t you just enjoy the game, if you won a 50 in Halo 3, was it purchased or did the 50 just have a bad day, or was he carried by his friends to 50?
>
> You got whooped by sergeant, did he get lucky? Second account? Or did you just have a bad day?
>
> There is no ranking system that measures your exact skill in the game, only way to tell how good someone is at the game is playing against them, in-game. I don’t know why some of you people are obsessed with seeing how good you are compared to rest of the community, it’s a game, just enjoy it and don’t stress out if you happen to fall on few game losing streak.
>
> But I could mention, there should be some sort of ranked playlists for competitive people to test out their skill against other people who play for win, BUT it shouldn’t be global, some people don’t care for that kind of thing, which is why Reach failed on catering both competitive and casual crowd.

Well no -Yoink- it had problems, but a bad ranking system > no ranking system

Black Ops 2 has a Halo 2 & 3 style ranking system you say? That’s fine - as long as the people that play the game are happy with the terrible atmosphere that such a system fostered.

Second (third, forth, fifth, sixth, etc) accounts, people talking down to each other, people buying/selling accounts, people hacking level 50 accounts so they could sell them, etc.

If that’s what you want then fine. I would suggest taking off the rose tinted glasses before begging for 1 - 50 to come back though, because it didn’t work in Halo 2 or Halo 3.

>

But boosting 50’s helped me pay off my gold subscription. What am I supposed to do now?

CoD has 1-50? Let them. Let them have all the problems with boosters, second accounts, etc. Thats the reason 343i didn’t bring back 1-50, its plauged with those problems.

But I am still waiting to hear if they did manage to get a decent compromise of a ranking system that offers skill based rank (and matches you up good) and doesn’t bring/promote the problems 1-50 had.

The last thing we knew is that 343i is still working on it. That might mean it’ll be ready by launch for an update, or they’ll gather data for some time after launch and then release it. Or they couldn’t find a good compromise and won’t have a ranking system.
I’m not that into the hyper-competitive atmosphere that some people crave, so either solution is fine with me. I prefer to show skill throuh gameplay, not through a number in the pre-game lobby.

> >
>
> But boosting 50’s helped me pay off my gold subscription. What am I supposed to do now?

Go mow some lawns. :wink: