Lets talk RANKING SYSTEM!

Games Other Halo
1

Badnewz here. Avid halo player since Halo:CE. So im sure the majority of us have been pretty disappointed at the disappearance of our beloved 1-50 ranking system. Its been a a rough two years dealing without it with Halo:Reach. Lets be honest, Arena was such a decline from 1-50 its ridiculous. That playlist maybe manages 400-500 people at a time. Maybe 1000 during extra credit day or whatever its called lol.

Now we have Halo 4 approaching us. Now correct me if i’m wrong but there has been no talk about any kind of similar 1-50 ranking system. What does that mean? that means we will get handed some kind of alternate spiced up ranking system that probably won’t work again. EX: lets rank them on how they move around the map. I’ve even heard talk about something called your BPR. Anywho, what i think needs to happen is a revamp of the 1-50. It was the best thing that happened to halo 2 n 3. It was something that kept kids playing. Plus it was simple. Reach tried to give you too much info that basically just gets looked over.

I want to see a ranking system definitely for MLG also. By far this is going to be the best, most true Halo experience out there and i want to be ranked against my peers. I play tons of MLG matches and i cant tell you how inconsistent the matchmaking system is. Same for team slayer and any other reasonably competitive playlist. What do you think/want from the ranking system? And discuss intelligently kids lol

2

OP FOR PRESIDENT!

3

> OP FOR PRESIDENT!

thank you sir lol.

4

> Now correct me if i’m wrong but there has been no talk about any kind of similar 1-50 ranking system. What does that mean? that means we will get handed some kind of alternate spiced up ranking system that probably won’t work again.

I will correct you, because you are wrong. Unless you’ve played Halo 4 you have no grounds to make such a claim. Let’s get something clear right now: Halo does not need a 1-50. It never did, all it needs is a balanced system, that doesn’t have to be a 1-50, it could be a better system. Who knows.

The point being that when it comes down to it, the 1-50 is just a cloak for the system that makes it work behind it. The cloak is of no general importance, it’s what’s behind it that makes it work.

5

I totally agree. The ranking system in Halo 2 and 3 is what really drove me to keep playing. I was constantly trying to get better so I could get my ranking up. I wasn’t very good at the start (no many people are), but I stuck with it and kept playing until I was getting matched with the best of them.

Thats what I really miss from Halo. The intense online competition and being able to match against pros and other top players if you worked hard enough and got your level high enough. Now I whenever I get on Reach its like “Whats the point?”. I get bored playing social matches, the arena sucks, and I could really care less about unlocking stuff.

If Halo 4 doesn’t have some kind of skill ranking system based only on wins and losses then I’ll probably lose interest pretty quick, just like with every other generic shooter I play.

6

Why does everybody always think that playing Halo from the start always makes their argument better? Like any Halo fan that started after them have less say in topics. Not only that, but the idea of starting Halo from the beginning is always ignored if you don’t agree with the other person.

7

Think about this…
Halo Reach ranking system with the whole recruit-inheritor (or whatever the last one is.)
Along with reach arena system.
BUT, every season you work your way up to 1-50. After the season your 1-50 gets scrapped…but during your next season you play with people that are within the same 10’s

So if on season 1 you end at 41, season 2 you’ll be playing against people who earned 40-50.

8

1-50 Trueskill
No ranks

9

> > Now correct me if i’m wrong but there has been no talk about any kind of similar 1-50 ranking system. What does that mean? that means we will get handed some kind of alternate spiced up ranking system that probably won’t work again.
>
> I will correct you, because you are wrong. Unless you’ve played Halo 4 you have no grounds to make such a claim. Let’s get something clear right now: Halo does not need a 1-50. It never did, all it needs is a balanced system, that doesn’t have to be a 1-50, it could be a better system. Who knows.
>
> The point being that when it comes down to it, the 1-50 is just a cloak for the system that makes it work behind it. The cloak is of no general importance, it’s what’s behind it that makes it work.

Whoah there buddy, you sure are generalizing a lot. Some people want a 1-50 system, myself and OP included. And don’t pull the ‘wait until you play it’ crap. We both know that game designers “forget” to mention some stuff because it’s NOT in the game. Just based on the whole approach 343 is taking towards this game (CoD sell out style), we have to look at stuff from a neutral standpoint and not trust them to include everything we want, which is why people make threads like this. To try and spread the word in hopes of getting these features in the game.

10

From what I have heard Halo 4 will have a ranking system based on medals (assists, head shots, double kills, etc.) I think it was in the Game Informer video on multiplayer if I’m not mistaken

11

Instead of ranks, can I have skill matching? Honestly, I rather have this over 1-50 ranking. Ranks are pointless without skill matchmaking. Unless if I’m wrong, explain why is 1-50 needed?

12

Well, while I will not bash a person who wants a 1-50 ranking system (aside from the elitist gamers who I absolutely loathe.) I do not necessarily like the 1-50 ranking system myself. Long story short, I got stuck at 35 because I would win a lot of games then lose major rank because of derankers. But I do believe a mixture of the halo 2 ranking system and the Halo Reach ranking system would be fair. The competitive playlists would have the 1-50 ranking system, and the social playlists would have the Halo Reach playlist. Both types would give equal opportunity to earn armor, and lengthen the re-playability of the game. Well that’s what I think would work best anyway.

13

> Well, while I will not bash a person who wants a 1-50 ranking system (aside from the elitist gamers who I absolutely loathe.) I do not necessarily like the 1-50 ranking system myself. Long story short, I got stuck at 35 because I would win a lot of games then lose major rank because of derankers. But I do believe a mixture of the halo 2 ranking system and the Halo Reach ranking system would be fair. The competitive playlists would have the 1-50 ranking system, and the social playlists would have the Halo Reach playlist. Both types would give equal opportunity to earn armor, and lengthen the re-playability of the game. Well that’s what I think would work best anyway.

I totally agree. I’ve heard from a lot of casual oriented players that even though they wouldn’t play much ranked (trueskill 1-50), that they’d like it to be there. Otherwise what happens is that super competitive players get matched against them in social and completely ruin their fun. The competitive players don’t like this either because its no fun to completely run over a team, thats not why most competitive players play Halo.

I can tell you firsthand that the thing I miss from gaming and the main reason why I prefered Halo over other games was the incredibly intense games. I would hop into ranked Team Slayer, later on MLG, and play match after match of close nail biting games. It was literally the most fun I’ve ever had gaming in my life. By taking out the ranking system and replacing it with the Arena, Reach ruined this aspect for me.

14

> > Now correct me if i’m wrong but there has been no talk about any kind of similar 1-50 ranking system. What does that mean? that means we will get handed some kind of alternate spiced up ranking system that probably won’t work again.
>
> I will correct you, because you are wrong. Unless you’ve played Halo 4 you have no grounds to make such a claim. Let’s get something clear right now: Halo does not need a 1-50. It never did, all it needs is a balanced system, that doesn’t have to be a 1-50, it could be a better system. Who knows.
>
> The point being that when it comes down to it, the 1-50 is just a cloak for the system that makes it work behind it. The cloak is of no general importance, it’s what’s behind it that makes it work.

-“Halo does not need a 1-50”? Unless you’ve played Halo 4 you have no grounds to make such a claim.
-The cloak is important, just as the game devs have said making the sound effects of weapons feel more powerful makes players want to use the weapon more. There is a reason no one plays Arena.

> Instead of ranks, can I have skill matching? Honestly, I rather have this over 1-50 ranking. Ranks are pointless without skill matchmaking. Unless if I’m wrong, explain why is 1-50 needed?

The number is needed as an incentive for competitive players to work towards; and as something to show they’ve gotten better. You can disagree, but that is just how competitive players think. Keeping the skill matching but without the “cloak” of 1-50 is what Arena is, and you can see how much less players that attracts.

> Think about this…
> Halo Reach ranking system with the whole recruit-inheritor (or whatever the last one is.)
> Along with reach arena system.
> BUT, every season you work your way up to 1-50. After the season your 1-50 gets scrapped…but during your next season you play with people that are within the same 10’s
>
> So if on season 1 you end at 41, season 2 you’ll be playing against people who earned 40-50.

I would support this if it got rid of that stupid rank-plateauing that happened in H3 which forced people to make second accounts. Only negative would be if you got to 39 at the end of the season and got reset back to 30 and stuff like that.

> Well, while I will not bash a person who wants a 1-50 ranking system (aside from the elitist gamers who I absolutely loathe.) I do not necessarily like the 1-50 ranking system myself. Long story short, I got stuck at 35 because I would win a lot of games then lose major rank because of derankers. But I do believe a mixture of the halo 2 ranking system and the Halo Reach ranking system would be fair. The competitive playlists would have the 1-50 ranking system, and the social playlists would have the Halo Reach playlist. Both types would give equal opportunity to earn armor, and lengthen the re-playability of the game. Well that’s what I think would work best anyway.

Yes, I think a split between Ranked and Social just like H3 is the best way to do this. And get rid of the stupid rank-plateauing in the trueskill (which is probably part of the reason you got stuck at 35). And ban derankers.

> Why does everybody always think that playing Halo from the start always makes their argument better? Like any Halo fan that started after them have less say in topics. Not only that, but the idea of starting Halo from the beginning is always ignored if you don’t agree with the other person.

Deeper and more diverse experience of what Halo has been.

15

Here’s to hoping that a skill gap is like that of atleast Halo 3 in Halo 4 and we get our 1-50 back!

16

There is neither confirmation nor denial of a 1-50 rank in Halo 4.

Calm your -Yoink-.

17

Valid points made by both arguments.

The ranking system is what helped Halo 3 survive for how long it did. People loved to see themselves progress overtime, setting and accomplishing goals is a great assets to any game.

I personally think it is needed to help Halo succeed and survive. As said above, so many people continue to play (or even get newer players getting hooked) by setting and achieving goals. Taking pride in a players skill is also something important to many games, including Halo. Having something to show for it is a nice addition.

I would like to see something from either H2 or H3. I loved how H3 had both EXP ranks and 1-50 ranked tiers, although the system might have been questionable, aside from that it was the right idea.

Another point made is that ranks aren’t needed for the game, just a balanced system. While a balanced system is absolutely necessary (as seen how poorly reach’s MM system is), the ranks are also necessary in order to Halo to continue to grow and prosper (but not for the game to actually function). It never hurt anybody right? :wink:

18

Honestly, I want a system that takes history into consideration. You stop playing for a few days, your rank is going to drop. Also, it isn’t directly tied to your Trueskill rank: allowing players to still get matched up with similar skilled opponents, even if your Competitive rank drops due to inactivity.

It’s a very rough sketch, but what I’m trying to say is that I want a system to do the following:

-Make a competitive rank that players will fight for and play.

  • Competitive rank isn’t directly tied to trueskill. Those that do not care of it shouldn’t worry about getting paired up with players of higher skill due to inactivity.

  • Eliminates boosting in the long run. You can’t keep your high rank if you lose or stay away from the playlist.

  • Changes the skill system from a ladder that ends to an elevator that moves up and down.

  • Does NOT reset!

  • Does not require to make you play for half an hour to make a placement. Play 1 game, you make your results, then you move up, down, or maintain in ranks.

To me, if they want to do 1-50, they should do it like this. Works like the Arena, but has more ranks and an endless incentive to keep playing your favorite playlist. It also can actually be awesome in Social. Instead of everyone saying you “bought” your 50, you actually earned it and they’ll know from the start. :slight_smile:

19

Although 1-50 Ranking system was not perfect
IE- New account - derankers - cheaters - boosters-
Even with all of these things

It still is better then Arena –
And if your going to say Arena is better – Arena has all of the same problems as 1-50 but even more long search times/ cant find games when you reach high onyx %…

Halo 2 &3 had it Right …

Just my 2 cents

20

I cannot understand the need for one. If a game cannot get people to keep playing and breed competitiveness on it’s gameplay alone, I don’t see how a skill rating system is going to do that.

Now, one thing that Reach failed to do was match people of similar skill, which is necessary for true competitive play. However, a visible skill rating system is not necessary. Trueskill, or any skill rating system, can do this without being visible or tied to a visible rank.

Now, let’s talk if a 1-50 or similar system were to return. For me, a few things would be a must. For one, it should not be based on wins ands loses, or at least, not entirely. The wins/loses basis for 1-50 is where boosting, deranking, and several of the problems related to the system stem from (this is when Onyx boosting in Arena stems from, too). Two, the skill rating should, in now way, be linked to a player’s Global Rank.