My friend and I were playing MCC - Halo 3 multiplayer and realized how perfect Halo 3 was and how great the ranking system worked. I really hope that they bring the 1-50 rank system back to Halo Infinite. The thing is, when you play ranked matches with that system, you play hard and concentrated because you know that your rank can fall if you loose and that makes the game so intense and exiting. What do you guys think?
The Halo community was so great back in the days, where the big events were hold. MLG tournaments, people calling each other up for a battle in customs, amateur teams who really tries to became professionals… I really miss those days…
realistically, H3s system is kind of busted. Selling 50s was easy and ultimately lessened what it meant to be 50. Really, there needs to be more than just wins and losses that needs to be accounted for. The system just is not great for a player rank
Thats true, but it also depends on the motivation from the players. I did boost alot of accounts with my Team Doubles partner and earned thousands of Microsoft point and a lot of Xbox live membership. But mostly those who choose to buy their 50, they never play the game mode where their 50… I loved the ranking system, it gave me passion and motivation to play the game. It also shows the importance to play whit your teammates and not just get the sniper and camp at some tower, because there is a risk for falling in rank. The ranking systems now a days makes a lot of players selfish I believe and then the importance of playing the game disappears and the game becomes more like a fun-to play game, which I mean the social multiplayer mode is made for.
> 2535461326574953;3:
> I did boost alot of accounts with my Team Doubles partner and earned thousands of Microsoft point and a lot of Xbox live membership. But mostly those who choose to buy their 50, they never play the game mode where their 50.
And here you have just proven why we shouldn’t go back to the old days.
Bottom line is that;
It doesn’t matter if it’s ‘1 to 50’ or ‘Bronze to Onxy’ - both are still TrueSkill under the hood.
The system has to reward ongoing play (seasons, regular reset, or loss of ranking over time). There should be no incentive to buy a ‘50’ and then just sit on it.
The main reason people want to go back is that ‘50’ sounds cool - but ‘Diamond 3’ (equivalent of the old 50) - not so much.
> 2535461326574953;3:
> Thats true, but it also depends on the motivation from the players. I did boost alot of accounts with my Team Doubles partner and earned thousands of Microsoft point and a lot of Xbox live membership. But mostly those who choose to buy their 50, they never play the game mode where their 50.
This kind of proves my point. An ongoing system that resets rank after a set period of time and while consistently adjusting after each game is a better system. Its why champ was always changing.
> 2533274840624875;5:
> > 2535461326574953;3:
> > Thats true, but it also depends on the motivation from the players. I did boost alot of accounts with my Team Doubles partner and earned thousands of Microsoft point and a lot of Xbox live membership. But mostly those who choose to buy their 50, they never play the game mode where their 50.
>
> This kind of proves my point. An ongoing system that resets rank after a set period of time and while consistently adjusting after each game is a better system. Its why champ was always changing.
I like the resets… but it seem to upset a lot of people.
At lot of it is the misconception that you are ‘starting again’. You don’t. The system knows your previous skill level and essentially re-ranks you within 2-3 games. You just have to play the 10 games to show where you’re at.
Any drop in rank is because you’re form has sagged.
Maybe a better way would be to show the player their rank at all times… but only show it to everyone else if you’ve played a minimum number of games, say three, in the last 14 days.
> 2585548714655118;6:
> > 2533274840624875;5:
> > > 2535461326574953;3:
> > > Thats true, but it also depends on the motivation from the players. I did boost alot of accounts with my Team Doubles partner and earned thousands of Microsoft point and a lot of Xbox live membership. But mostly those who choose to buy their 50, they never play the game mode where their 50.
> >
> > This kind of proves my point. An ongoing system that resets rank after a set period of time and while consistently adjusting after each game is a better system. Its why champ was always changing.
>
> I like the resets… but it seem to upset a lot of people.
>
> At lot of it is the misconception that you are ‘starting again’. You don’t. The system knows your previous skill level and essentially re-ranks you within 2-3 games. You just have to play the 10 games to show where you’re at.
>
> Any drop in rank is because you’re form has sagged.
>
> Maybe a better way would be to show the player their rank at all times… but only show it to everyone else if you’ve played a minimum number of games, say three, in the last 14 days.
true, or better. Just show what they were before and when the rank is calculated after whatever number games, show the past rank being included. So past + 10 games = current rank. So find a way to visualize that so people understand its not a reset
But the truth is also that if a player really want that top level and cant get it because of his skills then it doesnt matter if its the Halo 3 ranking system or another. If players start offering boosted accounts like they did before than low skilled players will buy it. So I mean people buying their top rank, is not depending on the ranking system but the motivation from the players side…
Bungie did a hell of a job with Halo 3 multiplayer. Those little details like showing the MVP of the match and the option to veto a map, these thing complete the game in my opinion. As you all can tell from my comment I really liked Halo 3 :D…
> 2533274839419012;9:
> But the truth is also that if a player really want that top level and cant get it because of his skills then it doesnt matter if its the Halo 3 ranking system or another. If players start offering boosted accounts like they did before than low skilled players will buy it. So I mean people buying their top rank, is not depending on the ranking system but the motivation from the players side…
>
> Bungie did a hell of a job with Halo 3 multiplayer. Those little details like showing the MVP of the match and the option to veto a map, these thing complete the game in my opinion. As you all can tell from my comment I really liked Halo 3 :D…
You cant buy champ rank. You could buy onyx sure, but the H3 system had a locking feature that would lock the rank to 50. Meaning people would buy locked 50 accounts and that rank would never change. A resetting rank system with the top ranks requiring to be maintained limits the viability of a payment system for top rank. Sure people could charge for carries and such, but again, it becomes less viable given the lack of permanency. H3s ranking system is just not ideal.
The issue with H5s system is basically it requires a larger player base (given a low one results in long queue times or inability to even play) and it can be way too strict in its match-making parameters. If FTP in infinite does create a more stable population and the game is actually good (fingers crossed) then many of the issues with 5s ranking/mm system can be avoided. That being said, things need to be less strict in social regardless but that’s another topic.
> 2533274840624875;10:
> > 2533274839419012;9:
> > But the truth is also that if a player really want that top level and cant get it because of his skills then it doesnt matter if its the Halo 3 ranking system or another. If players start offering boosted accounts like they did before than low skilled players will buy it. So I mean people buying their top rank, is not depending on the ranking system but the motivation from the players side…
> >
> > Bungie did a hell of a job with Halo 3 multiplayer. Those little details like showing the MVP of the match and the option to veto a map, these thing complete the game in my opinion. As you all can tell from my comment I really liked Halo 3 :D…
>
> You cant buy champ rank. You could buy onyx sure, but the H3 system had a locking feature that would lock the rank to 50. Meaning people would buy locked 50 accounts and that rank would never change. A resetting rank system with the top ranks requiring to be maintained limits the viability of a payment system for top rank. Sure people could charge for carries and such, but again, it becomes less viable given the lack of permanency. H3s ranking system is just not ideal.
>
> The issue with H5s system is basically it requires a larger player base (given a low one results in long queue times or inability to even play) and it can be way too strict in its match-making parameters. If FTP in infinite does create a more stable population and the game is actually good (fingers crossed) then many of the issues with 5s ranking/mm system can be avoided. That being said, things need to be less strict in social regardless but that’s another topic.
Exactly my friend… When I say that buying rank can be a option, i mean that people can start selling accounts or take over other accounts and rank them up. As you say, it wont be as easy like Halo 3, but if people really wants there will be some other ways to do it for sure.
One of the main reasons H3 ranking system worked so well is that there were a lot of people playing H3. For skill based matchmaking to work well it needs a good population to make even matches with. While H3 ranking seemed to work better I will say I liked how in H5 your skilled based rank was an actual rank that you earned instead of some arbitrary number and your xp “rank” or more appropriately level is just a number. Since xp doesn’t reflect any thing except time played really it should just be a number IMO. I hope Infinite follows the same rank structure as H5, maybe with more ranks and different names and the xp can be just numbers. Hopefully no more placement matches though because I always felt after my ten placement matches I found unusually never ranked up any more so there was pretty much no point to ranked any more. Working your way seems more satisfying than ten games alright your rank is this.
> 2533274816788253;12:
> One of the main reasons H3 ranking system worked so well is that there were a lot of people playing H3. For skill based matchmaking to work well it needs a good population to make even matches with. While H3 ranking seemed to work better I will say I liked how in H5 your skilled based rank was an actual rank that you earned instead of some arbitrary number and your xp “rank” or more appropriately level is just a number. Since xp doesn’t reflect any thing except time played really it should just be a number IMO. I hope Infinite follows the same rank structure as H5, maybe with more ranks and different names and the xp can be just numbers. Hopefully no more placement matches though because I always felt after my ten placement matches I found unusually never ranked up any more so there was pretty much no point to ranked any more. Working your way seems more satisfying than ten games alright your rank is this.
Exactly! - I really hope that Microsoft conceders these factors. But as you say, the game needs players to be successful. I remember when Halo 3 just came out, there were almost 3 million people online at the same time! I saw it on the mini world map that was available when you were in a multiplayer lobby. That’s a lot of players, when it’s a game you only could play on Xbox back then.
> 2533274816788253;12:
> One of the main reasons H3 ranking system worked so well is that there were a lot of people playing H3. For skill based matchmaking to work well it needs a good population to make even matches with.
Definitely. Matchmaking is only as good as the population. No algorithm can compensate for not having enough players of similar skill playing close to you.
> 2533274816788253;12:
> While H3 ranking seemed to work better I will say I liked how in H5 your skilled based rank was an actual rank that you earned instead of some arbitrary number and your xp “rank” or more appropriately level is just a number. Since xp doesn’t reflect any thing except time played really it should just be a number IMO. I hope Infinite follows the same rank structure as H5, maybe with more ranks and different names and the xp can be just numbers.
XP rank makes more sense as a number (the military ranks were just confusing). Time played for more XP (maybe a small bonus for a win). And I wouldn’t put a max number on it (just keep repeating the XP required for the last level jump).
> 2533274816788253;12:
> Hopefully no more placement matches though because I always felt after my ten placement matches I found unusually never ranked up any more so there was pretty much no point to ranked any more. Working your way seems more satisfying than ten games alright your rank is this.
This wasn’t done well in H5 - it just frustrated people… but we do need a regular reset (to stop people buying accounts and sitting on them).
You aren’t supposed to ‘rank up’ during placement. You are supposed to come out of it with the rank that reflected your skill level - which is very likely going to be the same rank you went into it with. The game knows what skill level you were before - and TrueSkill can supposedly work out your current rank in 2-3 games anyway.
People got very disappointed when they came back to H5 after a break - played their qualifying games and then ranked down. I’m not sure what they expected - of course you aren’t going to be at the top of your game after not playing for a while.
I would show the player their rank at all times - but you can only show it off if you’ve fufilled the ‘placement’ requirements. This doesn’t have to be 10 games confined to arbirarty seasons - but could instead be a minimum number of games over a time period. eg. Your rank is only displayed publically if you have played 10 games in the last two weeks.
> 2585548714655118;6:
> > 2533274840624875;5:
> > > 2535461326574953;3:
> > > Thats true, but it also depends on the motivation from the players. I did boost alot of accounts with my Team Doubles partner and earned thousands of Microsoft point and a lot of Xbox live membership. But mostly those who choose to buy their 50, they never play the game mode where their 50.
> >
> > This kind of proves my point. An ongoing system that resets rank after a set period of time and while consistently adjusting after each game is a better system. Its why champ was always changing.
>
> I like the resets… but it seem to upset a lot of people.
>
> At lot of it is the misconception that you are ‘starting again’. You don’t. The system knows your previous skill level and essentially re-ranks you within 2-3 games. You just have to play the 10 games to show where you’re at.
>
> Any drop in rank is because you’re form has sagged.
>
> Maybe a better way would be to show the player their rank at all times… but only show it to everyone else if you’ve played a minimum number of games, say three, in the last 14 days.
It needs to show your top rank. So many people on smurfs with like a 1 champ arena. You literally have no clue what your up against every game. Theres no reason not to put it on there if I can see your season stats anyways. Seasons resets are pointless and I can see why people prefer not having them. Ask anyone who got an MCC 50 only to have it reset 4 times and now people don’t play ranked. Imagine having one of the best franchises in history and not show people their rank.