Doesn't need a change? You're wrong

Games Other Halo
1

I see a lot of ‘Halo doesn’t need change’ and ‘it’s fine how it was’ threads, and I think you guys need to pull your head out of the sand

Firstly, it needs a BIG change from Reach that’s for sure. But we’ll ignore reach, and talk about H3.

The main thing I believe needs to be changed from H3 is the progression system. 1-50 was cool, but was easily exploited, undefined, and led to some VERY lame things like ‘Bought 50s’, Boosters, de-rankers and people just being jerks.

Reach tried to rectify this by making the truskill hidden, and offering time based ranks instead. Then offering the Arena mode. Which honestly was a good try, but didn’t offer the same satisfaction as the 1-50.

I honestly still think the arena mode is superior, but still, no-one played it. Why?

  1. Because you’re arena rank was obscured within the depths of your stats, you had to go searching for it just to find it, so the majority of players just overlooked it at a glance. - Solution: Have your arena rank be implemented into your nameplate. This would make players care about it.

  2. The progession system was based on credits, there were easier ways to get credits then play Arena, so people would just prefer the social playlists - Solution: Have Arena modes give out Much more credits then the default social playlists. Further rewarding players to play competetively.

  3. You had to play 20 matches just to be placed in a division, meaning you didn’t get that ‘per match satisfaction’ for winning, and watching your rank rise Solution: Have your arena rank be immediately affected by EVERY match you play

Now, aside from the ranking system, you know what else needs to change? The search preferences.

In Reach, you can search by “Chatty Players Only” yet get matched without a single person having a mic.

You can search by “Skill” and still get placed with guests and bad kids all day.

You can search by “Connection” and still never get host, and get matched with people on the other side of the country.

and maybe I just want to play against players in my region, because i’m from newfoundland, and newfoundlanders are exceptionally nicer then anyone in USA.

You know what else needs to be changed? Custom Games
Mainly I just would like to see a custom games finder

Another thing is gameplay specific, and you can’t really deny this. Something needs to be done about the AR/BR Splits in the same playlists.

Some players will always go for ARs and some players will always go for BRs, often time to the detriment of the map selection. This Divide just CANNOT EXIST. Just give us the ability to choose are preferred starting weapons (which is probably going to exist withing the loadout system)

Also, one thing that took a big dive with reach, and would love to see AMPLIFIED, is the idea of Dynamic maps. Moveable bridges, trampolines(Like H2 Midship), gates, doors, activateable teleporters and the like all add to create a more dynamic combat enviornment, and just more interesting scenarios.

So go ahead and think that Halo Doesn’t need a change, but the truth is, it could benefit greatly from many changes, and honestly if it doesn’t, I don’t really see it becoming the mainstream popular shooter of choice again

2

All of this, all of this, ALL OF THIS.

Seriously, thank you, OP. It’s good to see some positive energy and logic these days.

The only thing I think you forgot is the need to update the “Arena” ranks every game rather than once every few hours, and give a division % number on top of the emblem.

3

> All of this, all of this, ALL OF THIS.
>
> Seriously, thank you, OP. It’s good to see some positive energy and logic these days.
>
> The only thing I think you forgot is the need to update the “Arena” ranks every game rather than once every few hours, and give a division % number on top of the emblem.

Good call, i’ll do an edit. That was a big reason why you didn’t get the per match satisfaction as you did in previous halos. You had to play a total of 20 matches just to get ranked, unlike finishing every match and seeing that rank rise

4

The lack of playlists and the seasons are also reasons why Arena is inferior to Ranked 1-50.

But I agree with all you wrote and hope 343i takes some ideas from this thread.

5

> > All of this, all of this, ALL OF THIS.
> >
> > Seriously, thank you, OP. It’s good to see some positive energy and logic these days.
> >
> > The only thing I think you forgot is the need to update the “Arena” ranks every game rather than once every few hours, and give a division % number on top of the emblem.
>
> Good call, i’ll do an edit. That was a big reason why you didn’t get the per match satisfaction as you did in previous halos. You had to play a total of 20 matches just to get ranked, unlike finishing every match and seeing that rank rise

Also, your capitalization in the title is pretty wonky. Re-type your title in the text box, then copy/paste it into the title bar to get proper capitalization.

6

> I honestly still think the arena mode is superior, but still, no-one played it. Why?

I’m sorry but the reason’s you provided are wrong, it’s much more deeper than that, i’ll explain but ill make a point of these being my own opinions and let other people decide if i am right or wrong (basically just to avoid a inb4YoudoNotSpeakForMe :stuck_out_tongue: ).

The Arena system, while probably good on paper, was ultimately flawed from the start, in the beginning it was based on Rating’s, ranks based on individual performance in team based games simply cannot work, in essence it turned a game of Team Slayer into a FFA in which you were not only competing against the opposing team but also your own team winning the game was pointless as it didn’t contribute to your rank, it promoted betrayals for power weapon’s simply to grab those few extra easy kills, also why should i help a team-mate being piled? my rank is based on my K/D so why would i risk my rating and thus my rank just to help him out? i can simply camp in this spot with a power weapon and the game will assume i am a good player. There is a reason why Microsoft based the TrueSkill system around team effort (google for more info if you are interested) and not individual performance as well you must of seen the flaws present during the Rating’s system.

Next Arena became based on W/L, you would of thought this would be better right? no, far from it actually, this system then meant rank was based on Quantity over Quality, why punish better skilled player’s simply because they cannot 24/7 Arena? i managed top 3% Onyx but could not play for 3 day’s for personal reasons (basically life got in the way) and i dropped to top 15%? i was being punished simply for not being able to play, how is that a good measure of skill or indeed rank?

Now onto 1-50, i admit it was not perfect but it was sure as hell far superior than the Arena system.

1-50 allowed multiple playlist’s, your rank in a particular playlist stayed where you last left it at, bored of Team slayer? then play Doubles or snipers! Life getting in the way? don’t worry! your rank in a particular playlist will be the same as you left it. The Arena system restrict’s the amount of playlists avaialble simply due to quantity over quality ranking, that is why there is only 1 single ranked list right now and it started with a insane total of… Two ranked lists :o .

Plus 1-50 was far more fun, addictive and intense (especially at higher ranks) you raged when you lost, you were ecstatic when you won and you loved it! i can guarantee that anyone who played a lot of Ranked Halo 3 (and 2 i guess) had a ton memorable moments and games (right now your probably thinking of several and a little smile has appeared on your face :slight_smile: )

All 1-50 need’s to improve is a few tweaks such as an Anti-derank/boost system and (in my opinion) less harsh, but not entirely removed, rank locking.

And so i bring you back to the quote at the start of my post, Arena is in no way superior to 1-50, far from it.

7

> The lack of playlists and the seasons are also reasons why Arena is inferior to Ranked 1-50.
>
> But I agree with all you wrote and hope 343i takes some ideas from this thread.

True indeed, I don’t know why they couldn’t have changed Arena to include Objective gametypes, or hell, even invasion. Since they made the division ratings based on win/loss and not individual score

8

you mentioned pure out of game rewards and starting weapons. if thats wat you think needs to change than i deeply agree. although i’d much rather have a more thought through and complicated 1-50. Because playing arena was flawed in so many ways. top 20% onyx getting matched up against silvers and golds every game shouldn’t happen. 1-50 was exploitable, but hell… all reach did was encourage you to forfeit teamwork and try to get alot of kills to rank up.

9

> So go ahead and think that Halo Doesn’t need a change, but the truth is, it could benefit greatly from many changes, and honestly if it doesn’t, I don’t really see it becoming the mainstream popular shooter of choice again

I don’t really see it becoming a mainstream FPS choice again period. IMHO Halo just isn’t popular in the “mainstream” and no matter what they do or how easy they make it they will never accomplish the numbers we once held.

But that is my opinion.

10

> > I honestly still think the arena mode is superior, but still, no-one played it. Why?
>
> I’m sorry but the reason’s you provided are wrong, it’s much more deeper than that, i’ll explain but ill make a point of these being my own opinions and let other people decide if i am right or wrong (basically just to avoid a inb4YoudoNotSpeakForMe :stuck_out_tongue: ).
>
> The Arena system, while probably good on paper, was ultimately flawed from the start, in the beginning it was based on Rating’s, ranks based on individual performance in team based games simply cannot work, in essence it turned a game of Team Slayer into a FFA in which you were not only competing against the opposing team but also your own team winning the game was pointless as it didn’t contribute to your rank, it promoted betrayals for power weapon’s simply to grab those few extra easy kills, also why should i help a team-mate being piled? my rank is based on my K/D so why would i risk my rating and thus my rank just to help him out? i can simply camp in this spot with a power weapon and the game will assume i am a good player. There is a reason why Microsoft based the TrueSkill system around team effort (google for more info if you are interested) and not individual performance as well you must of seen the flaws present during the Rating’s system.
>
> Next Arena became based on W/L, you would of thought this would be better right? no, far from it actually, this system then meant rank was based on Quantity over Quality, why punish better skilled player’s simply because they cannot 24/7 Arena? i managed top 3% Onyx but could not play for 3 day’s for personal reasons (basically life got in the way) and i dropped to top 15%? i was being punished simply for not being able to play, how is that a good measure of skill or indeed rank?
>
> Now onto 1-50, i admit it was not perfect but it was sure as hell far superior than the Arena system.
>
> 1-50 allowed multiple playlist’s, your rank in a particular playlist stayed where you last left it at, bored of Team slayer? then play Doubles or snipers! Life getting in the way? don’t worry! your rank in a particular playlist will be the same as you left it. The Arena system restrict’s the amount of playlists avaialble simply due to quantity over quality ranking, that is why there is only 1 single ranked list right now and it started with a insane total of… Two ranked lists :o .
>
> Plus 1-50 was far more fun, addictive and intense (especially at higher ranks) you raged when you lost, you were ecstatic when you won and you loved it! i can guarantee that anyone who played a lot of Ranked Halo 3 (and 2 i guess) had a ton memorable moments and games (right now your probably thinking of several and a little smile has appeared on your face :slight_smile: )
>
> All 1-50 need’s to improve is a few tweaks such as an Anti-derank/boost system and (in my opinion) less harsh, but not entirely removed, rank locking.
>
> And so i bring you back to the quote at the start of my post, Arena is in no way superior to 1-50, far from it.

You bring some valid points, the FFA nature of arena in the beginning was probably the worst of the worst. Such a bad call it’s not even funny.

Win/Loss was much better, definatly, but as you said it was annoying to take a break, only to come back and have your rank lowered.

Now, I want to challenge you on that point. Ok, so I agree that losing rank sucks. BUT, do you think the idea of maxing out at 50 and staying there is better? Realize, I’m sure that if you looked at the stats, the majority of ‘50s’ would play to get 50, and then NEVER play that playlist again out of fear of losing it. This was reinforced by the fact that Truskill would derank you to 49 after just ONE loss on your 50. So this isn’t really ideal, and doesn’t translate well to extended play.

Afterall, being in the top 1% means YOU ARE IN THE TOP 1%. So, if other players progess past you in Win/loss ratio, then justly so, you will drop in that division. It is more accurate, and translates better to long term play

11

> > So go ahead and think that Halo Doesn’t need a change, but the truth is, it could benefit greatly from many changes, and honestly if it doesn’t, I don’t really see it becoming the mainstream popular shooter of choice again
>
> I don’t really see it becoming a mainstream FPS choice again period. IMHO Halo just isn’t popular in the “mainstream” and no matter what they do or how easy they make it they will never accomplish the numbers we once held.
>
> But that is my opinion.

the massive majority of people want instant kills. gunskill is a word that they dont understand. and holding peoples attention for an entire 2 second br battle i far too much to ask of your average 12 year old. bad kids wanna kill 20 people in a game even if they die 60 times. i see you first i get kill hahahaha. cod mentallity at its finest.

i dont think halo will ever be the most popular game again, but i’d like to see it stick to its roots and impress those that do like the gameplay and even bring in new croud that never got to experience halo 1-3.

12

> you mentioned pure out of game rewards and starting weapons. if thats wat you think needs to change than i deeply agree. although i’d much rather have a more thought through and complicated 1-50. Because playing arena was flawed in so many ways. top 20% onyx getting matched up against silvers and golds every game shouldn’t happen. 1-50 was exploitable, but hell… all reach did was encourage you to forfeit teamwork and try to get alot of kills to rank up.

Until they changed Arena division placement to be determined by your Win/Loss ratio and NOT individual ka/d ratio.

Also, see my above post

13

> Now, I want to challenge you on that point. Ok, so I agree that losing rank sucks. BUT, do you think the idea of maxing out at 50 and staying there is better? Realize, I’m sure that if you looked at the stats, the majority of ‘50s’ would play to get 50, and then NEVER play that playlist again out of fear of losing it. This was reinforced by the fact that Truskill would derank you to 49 after just ONE loss on your 50. So this isn’t really ideal, and doesn’t translate well to extended play.

i agree that alot of people stopped playing on there 50’s. but you never stopped going up.

if you won 50 games on your 50, you could in theory lose about 50 games until it went down. or course other factors play in, but you get what i mean. i “locked in” tons of 50s and played on alot of my 50’s

14

> I see a lot of ‘Halo doesn’t need change’ and ‘it’s fine how it was’ threads, and I think you guys need to pull your head out of the sand
>
> Firstly, it needs a BIG change from Reach that’s for sure. But we’ll ignore reach, and talk about H3.
>
> The main thing I believe needs to be changed from H3 is the progression system. 1-50 was cool, but was easily exploited, undefined, and led to some VERY lame things like ‘Bought 50s’, Boosters, de-rankers and people just being jerks.
>
> Reach tried to rectify this by making the truskill hidden, and offering time based ranks instead. Then offering the Arena mode. Which honestly was a good try, but didn’t offer the same satisfaction as the 1-50.
>
> I honestly still think the arena mode is superior, but still, no-one played it. Why?
>
> 1. Because you’re arena rank was obscured within the depths of your stats, you had to go searching for it just to find it, so the majority of players just overlooked it at a glance. - Solution: Have your arena rank be implemented into your nameplate. This would make players care about it.
>
> 2. The progession system was based on credits, there were easier ways to get credits then play Arena, so people would just prefer the social playlists - Solution: Have Arena modes give out Much more credits then the default social playlists. Further rewarding players to play competetively.
>
> 3. You had to play 20 matches just to be placed in a division, meaning you didn’t get that ‘per match satisfaction’ for winning, and watching your rank rise Solution: Have your arena rank be immediately affected by EVERY match you play
>
>
> So go ahead and think that Halo Doesn’t need a change, but the truth is, it could benefit greatly from many changes, and honestly if it doesn’t, I don’t really see it becoming the mainstream popular shooter of choice again
[/quote]
I want to say that maybe I don’t speak for everyone, but I’m one of the people who says from thread to thread that Halo doesn’t need to change. But what I mean by that, is it’s core doesn’t need to change. We don’t need perks/AA’s/Custom loadouts. THAT is not Halo, it’s horrible change that just doesn’t fit into Halo’s balance of gameplay. I don’t mind changes such as like Dual Wielding, Hijacking, etc. because they offered new gameplay and didn’t infringe upon Halo’s balance. Everyone had to put up with those factors, everyone had the same exact abilities at the same time, all was well. Reach changed that and that’s why Reach is generally shunned by the majority of the Halo community. We don’t need BAD change. we want Halo to stay true to it’s core features. I’m all for change that holds the balance in the game and offers new gameplay.
>
> On the topic of ranking systems, I’d prefer Halo 2’s or Halo 3’s over Reach’s. I say this because in Halo 3, your rank meant something. It was obvious who bought their 50’s and who boosted to get their when you played against them. Getting a 50 in Halo 3 wasn’t necessarily hard, but it wasn’t the easiest thing either. Now in Reach with the whole arena system, I was greatly disappointed. It was just far too easy to get Onyx (At least in the first 2 seasons, because that’s all I played Reach for). BPR is somewhat of a joke in determining true skill because I feel like it caps out at 100 too quickly as well.
>
> If I could have any ranking system, I’d want Halo 2’s back without all of the cheaters. I liked the visually pleasing look of the ranks and how it was harder to obtain them.

15

> > > So go ahead and think that Halo Doesn’t need a change, but the truth is, it could benefit greatly from many changes, and honestly if it doesn’t, I don’t really see it becoming the mainstream popular shooter of choice again
> >
> > I don’t really see it becoming a mainstream FPS choice again period. IMHO Halo just isn’t popular in the “mainstream” and no matter what they do or how easy they make it they will never accomplish the numbers we once held.
> >
> > But that is my opinion.
>
> the massive majority of people want instant kills. gunskill is a word that they dont understand. and holding peoples attention for an entire 2 second br battle i far too much to ask of your average 12 year old. bad kids wanna kill 20 people in a game even if they die 60 times. i see you first i get kill hahahaha. cod mentallity at its finest.
>
> i dont think halo will ever be the most popular game again, but i’d like to see it stick to its roots and impress those that do like the gameplay and even bring in new croud that never got to experience halo 1-3.

You’re right, everybody isn’t gonna like halo, and that shouldn’t be our goal. But that doesn’t mean people are going to ignore it. If it’s truly a great game, people will talk about it, and people will want to play. Sure it will never dominate the market like H2 did, but realize there are exponentially more players online then there was in h2 era, and people FPS players across the board are dieing for something new, exciting, deep and rewarding.

People stopped playing H3 because there wasn’t enough progression. ‘COD players’ as you put it, and many others truly enjoy the act of progression. H3 had 1-50, which was good, but it took a special kind of person to really push for 50, and what happens when you level lock, and you don’t see any progression? well then you stop playing, because you don’t feel like you’re getting anywhere. This is just another reason why just having 1-50 in H4, would be a MASSIVE mistake

16

> > Now, I want to challenge you on that point. Ok, so I agree that losing rank sucks. BUT, do you think the idea of maxing out at 50 and staying there is better? Realize, I’m sure that if you looked at the stats, the majority of ‘50s’ would play to get 50, and then NEVER play that playlist again out of fear of losing it. This was reinforced by the fact that Truskill would derank you to 49 after just ONE loss on your 50. So this isn’t really ideal, and doesn’t translate well to extended play.
>
> i agree that alot of people stopped playing on there 50’s. but you never stopped going up.
>
> if you won 50 games on your 50, you could in theory lose about 50 games until it went down. or course other factors play in, but you get what i mean. i “locked in” tons of 50s and played on alot of my 50’s

Well, see the thing is You are not the norm. the 1-50 system was designed around the idea that everyone will not get there. It is inherent in it’s design. So what happens when players get ‘level locked’ in a low level. What’s left for them? A time based rank which just leads to a little symbol on your name? Is that gripping? Is that rewarding?

17

> > Snip.
>
> You bring some valid points, the FFA nature of arena in the beginning was probably the worst of the worst. Such a bad call it’s not even funny.
>
> Win/Loss was much better, definatly, but as you said it was annoying to take a break, only to come back and have your rank lowered.
>
> Now, I want to challenge you on that point. Ok, so I agree that losing rank sucks. BUT, do you think the idea of maxing out at 50 and staying there is better? Realize, I’m sure that if you looked at the stats, the majority of ‘50s’ would play to get 50, and then NEVER play that playlist again out of fear of losing it. This was reinforced by the fact that Truskill would derank you to 49 after just ONE loss on your 50. So this isn’t really ideal, and doesn’t translate well to extended play.
>
> Afterall, being in the top 1% means YOU ARE IN THE TOP 1%. So, if other players progess past you in Win/loss ratio, then justly so, you will drop in that division. It is more accurate, and translates better to long term play

I actually did (and several currently do especially now) still play on their 50’s and this is due to playlist progression, it give’s more incentive to play at least to me (and them). I know i am good enough to get to 50 and at least get it back if i ever lost it but i do understand when you talk about the fear of losing a 50.

As far as i am concerned the majority of top 1-2% Onyx are not entirely legit, while they may be good players the fact remains that the ‘2s trick’ (To4 matching vs randoms) is heavily exploited by them.

But at the end of the day i do support a new rank system for Halo 4 but personally would prefer something eerily similar to 1-50, i really hope it’s nothing even remotely close to Arena as i seriously cannot see that working at all. I may be surprised in the coming months though.

18

> > I see a lot of ‘Halo doesn’t need change’ and ‘it’s fine how it was’ threads, and I think you guys need to pull your head out of the sand
> >
> > Firstly, it needs a BIG change from Reach that’s for sure. But we’ll ignore reach, and talk about H3.
> >
> > The main thing I believe needs to be changed from H3 is the progression system. 1-50 was cool, but was easily exploited, undefined, and led to some VERY lame things like ‘Bought 50s’, Boosters, de-rankers and people just being jerks.
> >
> > Reach tried to rectify this by making the truskill hidden, and offering time based ranks instead. Then offering the Arena mode. Which honestly was a good try, but didn’t offer the same satisfaction as the 1-50.
> >
> > I honestly still think the arena mode is superior, but still, no-one played it. Why?
> >
> > 1. Because you’re arena rank was obscured within the depths of your stats, you had to go searching for it just to find it, so the majority of players just overlooked it at a glance. - Solution: Have your arena rank be implemented into your nameplate. This would make players care about it.
> >
> > 2. The progession system was based on credits, there were easier ways to get credits then play Arena, so people would just prefer the social playlists - Solution: Have Arena modes give out Much more credits then the default social playlists. Further rewarding players to play competetively.
> >
> > 3. You had to play 20 matches just to be placed in a division, meaning you didn’t get that ‘per match satisfaction’ for winning, and watching your rank rise Solution: Have your arena rank be immediately affected by EVERY match you play
> >
> >
> > So go ahead and think that Halo Doesn’t need a change, but the truth is, it could benefit greatly from many changes, and honestly if it doesn’t, I don’t really see it becoming the mainstream popular shooter of choice again
[/quote]
I want to say that maybe I don’t speak for everyone, but I’m one of the people who says from thread to thread that Halo doesn’t need to change. But what I mean by that, is it’s core doesn’t need to change. We don’t need perks/AA’s/Custom loadouts. THAT is not Halo, it’s horrible change that just doesn’t fit into Halo’s balance of gameplay. I don’t mind changes such as like Dual Wielding, Hijacking, etc. because they offered new gameplay and didn’t infringe upon Halo’s balance. Everyone had to put up with those factors, everyone had the same exact abilities at the same time, all was well. Reach changed that and that’s why Reach is generally shunned by the majority of the Halo community. We don’t need BAD change. we want Halo to stay true to it’s core features. I’m all for change that holds the balance in the game and offers new gameplay.
> >
> > On the topic of ranking systems, I’d prefer Halo 2’s or Halo 3’s over Reach’s. I say this because in Halo 3, your rank meant something. It was obvious who bought their 50’s and who boosted to get their when you played against them. Getting a 50 in Halo 3 wasn’t necessarily hard, but it wasn’t the easiest thing either. Now in Reach with the whole arena system, I was greatly disappointed. It was just far too easy to get Onyx (At least in the first 2 seasons, because that’s all I played Reach for). BPR is somewhat of a joke in determining true skill because I feel like it caps out at 100 too quickly as well.
> >
> > If I could have any ranking system, I’d want Halo 2’s back without all of the cheaters. I liked the visually pleasing look of the ranks and how it was harder to obtain them.
[/quote]
honestly, i’m not trying to say H4 should have arena. As I do agree, there was some funamental flaws in it’s design. But there was also massive flaws in the 1-50 design as well.
> >
> > I’m just hoping 343 learns from both, and comes up with something that allows progression, is rewarding yet is challenging and worthwhile.
> >
> > Either way, it needs to change

19

I’d rather have a ranking system that actually ranks you, resulting in better matches. Not one that is there to make the player feel better about themselves. Bring back halo 2 1-50. It was extremely difficult to rank up, the highest I was able to get was 30. 50 in Halo 2 was reserved for the top 1%, not the top 20% as it was in Halo 3. If people still want that feeling of progression, they can do what Halo 3 and reach did with an experience based ranking system alongside the 1-50.

20

Changes suggested in the OP are good.

One other gripe I have with the ranking system is Trueskill itself. In Halo 2 I had a very easy time telling what sort of playstyle players would have based on rank in a playlist – 1-10, 11-15, 16-21, 22-25, 26-30, 31-33, then at 34-36.5 button combos and PPs and really keeping on top of power weapons, 37-40 was characterized by good (besides the mod crew) team shooting and always being in elevated cover with escape routes, as well as relentless team assaults, 40+ saw truly individual tactics and tricks unique to the player as well as much, much more reserved play when in the lead. Ranks reflecting proficiency with available tools is a natural consequence of rank reflecting skill (besides, of course, cheaters).

In Halo 3 the ranks are really indistinguishable and I don’t notice any such divisions and it is impossible to gauge someone’s playstyle, or if you will, how efficient they are at killing and team play. The same is true of Reach. Partly for this reason I don’t care at all about my own rank in Arena and have no incentive to get one (besides Arena being, of course, the most slow and boring out of the dozen FPS’s I’ve played). I think if a rank is going to be useful or meaningful or worth anything to anyone they have to be consistently indicative of efficiency.

I think the main reason for this, besides the lowered skill range due to slowing down everything and neutering all the plasma weapons so there are no advantages to using them in certain situations (close range), and the maps which are too cluttered and don’t lend themselves to characteristic strategies, is Trueskill. It operates based on the entire population and I am convinced that the effect of this is that is hands out a 40 to everyone who plays daily, which is a significant chunk, and which is the population to which ranks should have any meaning at all. This leaves very little room for rank distribution compounded with the fact that the formula has to operate in the extremes. 50s in particular had a very wide range and indicated anything from ho-hum to beastly.

Reach tried to fix this by only ranking players who played in Arena, but this only had the effect of being completely unable to determine efficiency for pretty much everyone. (And, of course, during the first couple seasons, only implied that you were good at running out senselessly with an AR and getting 19 kills and 18 deaths, trading kills with relentless kamikaze “buddies” who would rank up on the other team too, and probably losing positioning, whereas 14-5 or so would consistently rank you down to Iron).

I submit we go back to ELO. It doesn’t have the problems trueskill has with population and rank distribution. It worked terrifically in Halo 2 and cheating should not be an issue anymore. Since 343i will be forced to used Trueskill by Microsoft they can weigh it at 30% or something.

The one thing Arena did right was occasional resetting of the ranks. It was fun every once in a while in previous Halos to start new accounts and get matched with games with, for want of a better word, average players. There is nothing wrong with this and it’s not an issue in other games but because Halo doesn’t have custom searches (and because recently it has been so boring no one would ever submit themselves to a custom for either fun or competition) mingling with all sorts of players is something that’s missing from the experience. It’s very irritating when it inevitably takes forever to find players and you keep playing with the same two dozen people, regardless of whether it’s an arena or invisible rank playlist.