a 1-50 with a Team Slayer, Objective, BTB, Doubles, Swat, Snipers, MLG, FFA as ranked playlists and their social alternatives. deranking, boosting, and selling accounts fixed.
or
reach rank with rank being about equal to time played and with a ranked playlist that resets rank every month or 3 months.
<mark>Cast your vote above and post your resons for your choice so we can keep this thread alive and have a good idea of what the concerned halo community wants.</mark>
1-50, it was good for competitive and casual players because there was social and ranked. It was simple and efficient. Reach was just outright ridiculous.
> > Funny how you propose a thoroughly fixed version of Halo 3’s ranking system, yet you leave Halo Reach’s the same.
>
> Cuz if you fixed the reach/cod system you would just get the H2 or h3 system either way.
1-50 dominates every poll. There are always one or two kids whining about how they don’t wanna get made fun of and people be rude if there not a fifty it’s funny. Who cares if your a 1 or a 50 it gives competitive game play and stop being baby’s if someone is making fun of you, -Yoink- there is a mute button for a reason!!!
1-50 dominates every poll. There are always one or two kids whining about how they don’t wanna get made fun of and people be rude if there not a fifty it’s funny. Who cares if your a 1 or a 50 it gives competitive game play and stop being baby’s if someone is making fun of you, -Yoink- there is a mute button for a reason!!!
> a 1-50 with a Team Slayer, Objective, BTB, Doubles, Swat, Snipers, MLG, FFA as ranked playlists and their social alternatives. deranking, boosting, and selling accounts fixed.
>
>
>
> or
>
> reach rank with rank being about equal to time played and with a ranked playlist that resets rank every month or 3 months.
>
>
> <mark>Cast your vote above and post your resons for your choice so we can keep this thread alive and have a good idea of what the concerned halo community wants.</mark>
Why do people still think that polls here in the forums matter? Or are statistically relevant.
> > > Funny how you propose a thoroughly fixed version of Halo 3’s ranking system, yet you leave Halo Reach’s the same.
> >
> > Cuz if you fixed the reach/cod system you would just get the H2 or h3 system either way.
>
> Not at all.
Then explain to me what you would “fix.” You didn’t offer any alternatives either; you just simply stated that the OP didn’t.
Halo 3’s MM had something to fix, whereas Reach is just time played and the only fixable thing would be to only reward cR when players are constantly moving, but even then complications arise and it’s still the same, worthless ranking system.
> > a 1-50 with a Team Slayer, Objective, BTB, Doubles, Swat, Snipers, MLG, FFA as ranked playlists and their social alternatives. deranking, boosting, and selling accounts fixed.
> >
> >
> >
> > or
> >
> > reach rank with rank being about equal to time played and with a ranked playlist that resets rank every month or 3 months.
> >
> >
> > <mark>Cast your vote above and post your resons for your choice so we can keep this thread alive and have a good idea of what the concerned halo community wants.</mark>
>
> Why do people still think that polls here in the forums matter? Or are statistically relevant.
cuz the people who care about the franchise/game come to this site. so this is the voice of the people who know the most about the series and care.
> > a 1-50 with a Team Slayer, Objective, BTB, Doubles, Swat, Snipers, MLG, FFA as ranked playlists and their social alternatives. deranking, boosting, and selling accounts fixed.
> >
> >
> >
> > or
> >
> > reach rank with rank being about equal to time played and with a ranked playlist that resets rank every month or 3 months.
> >
> >
> > <mark>Cast your vote above and post your resons for your choice so we can keep this thread alive and have a good idea of what the concerned halo community wants.</mark>
>
> Why do people still think that polls here in the forums matter? Or are statistically relevant.
They aren’t conclusive and they don’t represent the whole player base, but they give an impression of what people in this community prefer. It’s clear that the majority here prefers some type of permanent numbered ranking system over arena and over just a progression system. And that seems to be reflected by the feelings of the overall population if you look at the population numbers of Halo 2, 3, Reach over an extended period of time.
I would like to see 1-50 comeback it was nice to find out where you stand skill wise reach was just a little bit more complicated and no one could see it that kind of makes match making feel so random.
> > a 1-50 with a Team Slayer, Objective, BTB, Doubles, Swat, Snipers, MLG, FFA as ranked playlists and their social alternatives. deranking, boosting, and selling accounts fixed.
> >
> >
> >
> > or
> >
> > reach rank with rank being about equal to time played and with a ranked playlist that resets rank every month or 3 months.
> >
> >
> > <mark>Cast your vote above and post your resons for your choice so we can keep this thread alive and have a good idea of what the concerned halo community wants.</mark>
>
> Why do people still think that polls here in the forums matter? Or are statistically relevant.
political elections are not statistically relevant either unless you think only less than 60% of the population should have a voice.
Rather polls represent the voices of the people who care, If you dont care enough to vote or go to places to vote, your opinion doesn’t matter.
> > > > Funny how you propose a thoroughly fixed version of Halo 3’s ranking system, yet you leave Halo Reach’s the same.
> > >
> > > Cuz if you fixed the reach/cod system you would just get the H2 or h3 system either way.
> >
> > Not at all.
>
> Then explain to me what you would “fix.” You didn’t offer any alternatives either; you just simply stated that the OP didn’t.
>
> Halo 3’s MM had something to fix, whereas Reach is just time played and the only fixable thing would be to only reward cR when players are constantly moving, but even then complications arise and it’s still the same, worthless ranking system.
Keep the same basic principle, you get credits for playing the game. Now, after a game the winning team gets more credits than the losing team (Say 1000 more when starting out, but the winning bonus increases slightly as your rank gets higher).
It should also take into consideration how well the player did that game (K/D ratio). If Player A was on the losing team but did a good job that game, then he would be rewarded more than normal but less than the winning bonus.
On a related note, if Player B was on the same team as Player A but Player B did a poor job (low K/D) then B earns the lowest amount of credits possible for completing a game. Though, If Player B was on the winning team he would still earn the winning bonus.
This allows good players not to be punished for their team lagging behind, but it gives an incentive to win.
If anyone has any problems or questions with this idea I would be willing to expand on it.