New Ranking System!

> 2533274792623659;184:
> kind of related but completely off the halo topic: Mario kart has the most skill based ranking system of any online multiplayer out there. You win (or place in top 4 or 5) and you get points, you do terribly you lose points. Amount of points you get varies based on the people you just beat/lost to. So if you’re 1000, and you beat a bunch of people higher than you, you’ll get like 25 or more points, by if you’re like 3500 and you lose, you lose points. Dont see why online shooters can’t adopt a similar system, obviously we wouldn’t start off at 1000 like Mario kart

Well i think halo 3 got it right. Everybody started at skill 1, and you got matched with similar skill lvl. If you won several games or got in 2nd place that meant you’re a better player than the others and deserved to rank up, if you lost games,that meant you’re not as good and deserved a rank down.

Well I dont like quitter eiter but welp, if i lost a game because one drops out I just finish my match, get out of the lobby and get inside again to find new players.

> 2533274846562867;10:
> > 2533274796457055;9:
> > > 2533274846562867;7:
> > > > 2533274796457055;4:
> > > > > 2533274846562867;2:
> > > > > The whole ranking system is a mess, they should had used the halo reach ranking system
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > What Reach ranking system? The cR version or the Arena one?
> > >
> > >
> > > The one based on credits of course
> >
> >
> > Erm. No thank you. “Rank up by playing” isn’t exactly fun in the long run.
>
>
> Well thats my opinion. I find it quite frustrating that even though I did good in a match, my rank decreases because one guy in my team only got 1 kill and managed to get killed 18 times.

Agreed that Rank up by playing is not very fun long term, but it would be nice if your performance within your team were considered for improving rank. That way I won’t feel as bad when I pull people down with me. =p

The game makes it to where you need a full fire team of good people to be able to progress. It’s both good and bad for the game itself

> 2533274846562867;2:
> The whole ranking system is a mess, they should had used the halo reach ranking system

Halo reach wasn’t a rank system. It showed experience. Anyone that was an inheritor early on sucked at Multiplayer because all they knew was firefight.

I bet that all of you guys that are complaining about the ranking system, are the same people that don’t have a mic to communicate with your teammates. This ranking system should encourage you guys to find people that are willing to create a fireteam with people you meet online so you can win games and get your ranks up

> 2533274807926394;197:
> > 2533274874353940;188:
> > > 2533274817492720;3:
> > > they should have the halo 3 ranking system, actually made me feel like i was good. i have always thought the “getting points and ranking up” system was crap. just cause you play a lot doesn’t mean you should be the top rank, only way to get the top rank is to do good and earn it.
> >
> >
> > I’ve never been, nor do I expect to in the future, dominate the map as I’ve seen others do. In my opinion The ranking system should reflect separate stats for total achievements (dedication) and the skill rating should reflect the performants stats. Matchmaking should be based purely on performance stats.
>
>
> I don’t get it. Do you agree or disagree with Greassy?

I agree with his assertion that matchmaking based on how much you play is not equitable. I added that you should attain levels based on dedication but that should not fit into the matchmaking equation.

> 2533274865607515;205:
> > 2533274846562867;2:
> > The whole ranking system is a mess, they should had used the halo reach ranking system
>
>
> Halo reach wasn’t a rank system. It showed experience. Anyone that was an inheritor early on sucked at Multiplayer because all they knew was firefight.

Hey! that’s me your talking about! I resemble that remark!

Edit: Sorry only made Mythic

> 2533274874353940;207:
> > 2533274807926394;197:
> > > 2533274874353940;188:
> > > > 2533274817492720;3:
> > > > they should have the halo 3 ranking system, actually made me feel like i was good. i have always thought the “getting points and ranking up” system was crap. just cause you play a lot doesn’t mean you should be the top rank, only way to get the top rank is to do good and earn it.
> > >
> > >
> > > I’ve never been, nor do I expect to in the future, dominate the map as I’ve seen others do. In my opinion The ranking system should reflect separate stats for total achievements (dedication) and the skill rating should reflect the performants stats. Matchmaking should be based purely on performance stats.
> >
> >
> > I don’t get it. Do you agree or disagree with Greassy?
>
>
> I agree with his assertion that matchmaking based on how much you play is not equitable. I added that you should attain levels based on dedication but that should not fit into the matchmaking equation.

Oh i see your point. Now, thats pretty much the halo 3 ranking system.

It would be nice if they didn’t reinvent the wheel every time. Modify when there is a need or a big enough desire yes, but completely recreate? Why?

I will get a 1.5 to a 2.1 kill death ratio and still get de-ranked due to me playing with randoms and loosing the games. I have only played warzone for that fact and only play arena if my clan members are on. Please add a new ranking system to fix (one like the reach ranks would be great). THL Creature

I much preferred Halo 3s ranking system. I came up with my own idea for a ranking system which incorporates the modern Halo 5’s with Halo 3’s:

There are 2 ranking systems that add to an overall rank and should include a separate Pro hardcore arena playlist like we have now with the system we have now like Halo reach did.

1 - 50 Competitive Ranked playlist

The arena system should go back to the good old 1 - 50 system. You shouldn’t be judged over 10 games because luck is a factor of this and unfairly rank people. You stat at 1 and each game you level up depending on your individual skill, and the outcome of the match also determines a boost to your rank. Each rank slowly increases the rank gap but not by an insane amount like double every time. but it will ensure constant winning and good player skill will be highly rewarded and those who play bad won’t receive anything

Top player, based on KDA ratio, will revive 4 points towards there next rank, second would be 3, 3rd would be 2 and 4th would be 1. That would leave 4 players on a stand still and would not receive individual player xp keeping there rank how it is and leaving it down to weather they won or lost. Then if your team wins you revive an extra 2 points. if you lose you revive -2 points. By doing this you ensure that if you come out of the game as a MVP you will still get a small boost if your team looses. here is an example end game chard

Red Team - Winners
Player 1 = 2nd place = 3xp + 2 = 5
Player 2 = 4th place = 1xp + 2 = 3
Player 3 = 5th place = 0xp + 2 = 2
Player 4 = 7th place = 0xp + 2 = 2

Blue Team - Losers
Player 5 = 1st place = 4xp - 2 = 2
player 6 = 3rd place = 2xp - 2 = 0
Player 7 = 6th place = 0xp - 2 = -2
Player 8 = 8th place = 0xp - 2 = -2

I understand the flaws that maybe you could carry a player if you had a good enough team. But it would be a very slow process for them and if you lose they will go right back down making the prior game you won pointless and time wasting which people won’t enjoy doing.

They could even disguise the rank 1 - 50 system to something more pleasant like iron 1- 10, bronze 1 - 10, silver 1 - 10, gold 1 - 10, platinum 1 - 10. just to make it more pleasant to look at rather than just a number. This Rank would pair you up with players the same rank so it would get increasingly more challenging to the point where you will be winning/losing games constantly and will hold your rank stable until you improve and then you will go up. It will also be a Key factor in determining your overall rank.

If you become inactive in the Ranked area of the game your rank will slowly decrease so you need to keep on top of it! This will stop players from simply reaching 50 and abandoning ranked.

XP based ranking system

Xp can be gained simply by playing a game. even if you lose you will receive xp because that is essentially what you are gaining “EXPERIENCE” your knowledge of the game becomes improved and you still learn even if you lose so you will be rewarded for you time. You will gain extra xp for Kills, and all of the medals will contribute to you gaining xp, the harder the medal the more xp you will get. Its a simple based ranking system that rewards players for having fun! And a little more if you do a good job as well! You can’t derank or lose xp it all adds up together for your total experience. Instead of Halo 3s ranking system of 1xp if you win and nothing if you lose. your are simply rewarded for playing the game more you play the quicker you will gain xp and level up.

Overall Rank Calculation

Your overall rank should be will be shown in an old school militarized ranking system like in Halo: Reach or Halo 3 (people enjoy looking at named ranks with badges it looks so much better than just a number if you tank anything away from this comment 343i let it be named ranks!). Start at recruit and work you way up with the Xp gap getting increasingly more difficult to obtain.

So the problem we have no is balancing both the Ranked and social XP system which both represents skill & player experience. the first few ranks for example recruit to warrant officer will require no ranked level. however as you proceed to the higher ranks you will be required to obtain specific Ranked levels (and you must keep those levels) in order to reach higher ranks. for example:

Recruit - Sargent = Ranked 1
Warrant officer = Ranked 5
Lieutenant = Ranked 10
Captain = Ranked 15
Lt/ Colonel = Ranked 20
Major = Ranked 25
Commander = Ranked 30
Colonel = Ranked 35
Field Marshal = Ranked 40
Brigadier = Rank 45
General = Rank 50

Yes ok, its a lot like Halo 3s ranking system but it was a great representation players dedication and skill. Each rank would also require a specific amount of experience like you can’t simply get to rank 50 and become a general you will also need Xp. Now for those players who arn’t pro at the game but play a lot of social then each rank would include grades. if you are stuck at say rank 35 and just can’t get higher then it can be frustrating. So say the requirement for colonel is 150,000 xp. Grade 2 would require 250k xp then 500k xp then 650k xp which would increase the grade. This would show people that even though you arn’t a pro player you have had a lot of experience playing the game. An say if you rank up to field marshal afterwards and you have 700k xp then you will automatically be boosted to Field Marshall grade 2 for example.

And to be honest they don’t have to stop there increase the ranked to 100 and add some crazy ranks like Spartan Grade 1 or Inheritor like reach those where crazy hard ranks to get and would keep people playing for months!

I do like the current ranked system even though there are some flaws. But personally i wish they would keep it for Professional Arena only!

A few other ideas for ranks

Would be awesome to have 3 slots on your spartan Armour to see medals displayed on your character. Like if you reach a perfection you can have a perfection mark. you could even display your Waypoint forum rank on there! If you participated in a Halo tournamnet you could get a mark for that also. Its just an idea.

> 2533274796457055;6:
> > 2606994427173321;5:
> > Agreed. If we lose because another player drops out why do I get penalized too??? Of course we lost! It’s impossible to win CTF or strongholds with only two or three players!
>
>
> Because the emphasis is on TEAM play. Ideally you should be playing with a full team. I know that’s not always possible but there’s tons of people that look for teammates on here so that’s an option.

Here’s the problem, and it’s so obvious that it almost shouldn’t need to be stated: The emphasis is on TEAM play, but you’re ranking people as INDIVIDUALS. If you’re going to rank people as individuals, your emphasis needs to be on INDIVIDUAL play.

The point is that you go out, buy a game, put it in your console, start to play… and that’s all you should need to do. You shouldn’t have to go on some Internet hunt looking for other players who match your skill level and can coordinate their schedules with you and then THAT is how the game company decides which ranking system to use.

Long idea, you must have been thinking a bout that for a while. Some interesting thoughts though.

Why would we go back to Halo 3 Ranking system? It was broken completely, ESPECIALLY after playing a few hundred games. You would get stuck at a rank, we’ll say 45, play 10 matches, dominate the other team, get the highest score on your team and never go up. The next game, you lose 49-50, go 20-4 on your team and you lose a rank. That’s BS and I can’t believe people want that back.

Now, for people claiming quitters, yeah that happens, I would certainly suggest finding like-minded people and play with them. If you’re on this forum, you have the capability of finding a group of people. Spartan Companies, Forum users, anything will help you there.

This is a team game, you shouldn’t go up for YOU doing well, you need to do well AND win with your TEAM.

I don’t want to level up based on Experience. That means ANYONE could be at the max level and I would be playing people who were way too good or way too bad, simply based on amount of time played.

This tier system is where the world has been for the last 5 years. Halo caught up to it and MS’s TrueSkill ranking is a beautiful thing. It makes teams FAIRLY even. If you have someone go 3 - 20, they may have had a rough game or they were letting a friend play, can’t rule that out.

I agree they should of stuck with Reach ranking system

I like that the ranking system works on wins and not kills, captures, etc. But the team placement definitely needs some big changes. Im tired of leading my team in every single way and getting a big L because they either aren’t very good or they quit leaving the team down 1 or 2 guys just ready for the slaughter in objective based modes. I think possibly keeping a winning team(obviously not talking about fireteams) together until they lose might improve this rather than switching solo players into a new team every single match. Or even keeping teams together for 3 matches before disbanding them. I do however like a different opponent every time it keeps it fresh for sure. Long story short the ranking system would work much better with better player matching.

A few thoughts:

First:
Is everyone forgetting that Reach had BPR? Battle Proficiency Rating? BPR was what determined who you played against. 100 being the highest. And it takes a lot of things into account; KD ratio, W/L ratio, betrayals, quits, etc. And it was awesome. It was never visible in game and you had to find it here on Halo Waypoint. Seriously people? Go to Service Record - Halo: Reach, then click on “More Stats” or something like that to view it. I loved Reach’s system. I ranked up with time/experience (with what I thought was cool military ranks) - showing how much I put into the game, but then my BPR went up or down based on my actual performance in Matchmaking. The way it should be. So, please, people that are saying Reach’s ranking system was trash because all it did was show how much you played, go back and look at your BPR. That’s what tells you how good you are. And if you want to see how good someone is while in game, just look at their service record and at their KD ratio. That will tell you 9 times out of 10 if that player is decent (although I KNOW it’s not always accurate). Also, when people know about BPR, they don’t freak out when there’s a few Inheritors because they know that doesn’t mean you’re a good player (but probably at least experienced, given the time dedication to the game, but not always good).

Second:
I would also have to say that being a student, working full time, and having a wife doesn’t grant me a lot of time to hook up with friends to coordinate gaming times. Thus I play solo 9 times out of 10. And on top of that, I hate having a mic in because I hate playing with whiny 13 year olds that scream profanities into their mic and sound like a 6 year old girl. Sorry not sorry.

Third (lastly):
I would agree with a lot of people on here that your W/L ratio shouldn’t be a solo determinant of your rating. You could get lucky and play with really good players and win while having a .5 KD ratio, thus ranking up to Diamond and Onyx. It should go back to a system that takes everything into account - KD, W/L, Betrayals, Quits, etc… because that’s how we know who’s truly good, right?

> 2533274832649822;212:
> I much preferred Halo 3s ranking system. I came up with my own idea for a ranking system which incorporates the modern Halo 5’s with Halo 3’s:
>
> There are 2 ranking systems that add to an overall rank and should include a separate Pro hardcore arena playlist like we have now with the system we have now like Halo reach did.
>
> 1 - 50 Competitive Ranked playlist
>
> The arena system should go back to the good old 1 - 50 system. You shouldn’t be judged over 10 games because luck is a factor of this and unfairly rank people. You stat at 1 and each game you level up depending on your individual skill, and the outcome of the match also determines a boost to your rank. Each rank slowly increases the rank gap but not by an insane amount like double every time. but it will ensure constant winning and good player skill will be highly rewarded and those who play bad won’t receive anything
>
> Top player, based on KDA ratio, will revive 4 points towards there next rank, second would be 3, 3rd would be 2 and 4th would be 1. That would leave 4 players on a stand still and would not receive individual player xp keeping there rank how it is and leaving it down to weather they won or lost. Then if your team wins you revive an extra 2 points. if you lose you revive -2 points. By doing this you ensure that if you come out of the game as a MVP you will still get a small boost if your team looses. here is an example end game chard
>
> Red Team - Winners
> Player 1 = 2nd place = 3xp + 2 = 5
> Player 2 = 4th place = 1xp + 2 = 3
> Player 3 = 5th place = 0xp + 2 = 2
> Player 4 = 7th place = 0xp + 2 = 2
>
> Blue Team - Losers
> Player 5 = 1st place = 4xp - 2 = 2
> player 6 = 3rd place = 2xp - 2 = 0
> Player 7 = 6th place = 0xp - 2 = -2
> Player 8 = 8th place = 0xp - 2 = -2
>
> I understand the flaws that maybe you could carry a player if you had a good enough team. But it would be a very slow process for them and if you lose they will go right back down making the prior game you won pointless and time wasting which people won’t enjoy doing.
>
> They could even disguise the rank 1 - 50 system to something more pleasant like iron 1- 10, bronze 1 - 10, silver 1 - 10, gold 1 - 10, platinum 1 - 10. just to make it more pleasant to look at rather than just a number. This Rank would pair you up with players the same rank so it would get increasingly more challenging to the point where you will be winning/losing games constantly and will hold your rank stable until you improve and then you will go up. It will also be a Key factor in determining your overall rank.
>
> If you become inactive in the Ranked area of the game your rank will slowly decrease so you need to keep on top of it! This will stop players from simply reaching 50 and abandoning ranked.
>
> XP based ranking system
>
> Xp can be gained simply by playing a game. even if you lose you will receive xp because that is essentially what you are gaining “EXPERIENCE” your knowledge of the game becomes improved and you still learn even if you lose so you will be rewarded for you time. You will gain extra xp for Kills, and all of the medals will contribute to you gaining xp, the harder the medal the more xp you will get. Its a simple based ranking system that rewards players for having fun! And a little more if you do a good job as well! You can’t derank or lose xp it all adds up together for your total experience. Instead of Halo 3s ranking system of 1xp if you win and nothing if you lose. your are simply rewarded for playing the game more you play the quicker you will gain xp and level up.
>
> Overall Rank Calculation
>
> Your overall rank should be will be shown in an old school militarized ranking system like in Halo: Reach or Halo 3 (people enjoy looking at named ranks with badges it looks so much better than just a number if you tank anything away from this comment 343i let it be named ranks!). Start at recruit and work you way up with the Xp gap getting increasingly more difficult to obtain.
>
> So the problem we have no is balancing both the Ranked and social XP system which both represents skill & player experience. the first few ranks for example recruit to warrant officer will require no ranked level. however as you proceed to the higher ranks you will be required to obtain specific Ranked levels (and you must keep those levels) in order to reach higher ranks. for example:
>
> Recruit - Sargent = Ranked 1
> Warrant officer = Ranked 5
> Lieutenant = Ranked 10
> Captain = Ranked 15
> Lt/ Colonel = Ranked 20
> Major = Ranked 25
> Commander = Ranked 30
> Colonel = Ranked 35
> Field Marshal = Ranked 40
> Brigadier = Rank 45
> General = Rank 50
>
> Yes ok, its a lot like Halo 3s ranking system but it was a great representation players dedication and skill. Each rank would also require a specific amount of experience like you can’t simply get to rank 50 and become a general you will also need Xp. Now for those players who arn’t pro at the game but play a lot of social then each rank would include grades. if you are stuck at say rank 35 and just can’t get higher then it can be frustrating. So say the requirement for colonel is 150,000 xp. Grade 2 would require 250k xp then 500k xp then 650k xp which would increase the grade. This would show people that even though you arn’t a pro player you have had a lot of experience playing the game. An say if you rank up to field marshal afterwards and you have 700k xp then you will automatically be boosted to Field Marshall grade 2 for example.
>
> And to be honest they don’t have to stop there increase the ranked to 100 and add some crazy ranks like Spartan Grade 1 or Inheritor like reach those where crazy hard ranks to get and would keep people playing for months!
>
> I do like the current ranked system even though there are some flaws. But personally i wish they would keep it for Professional Arena only!
>
> A few other ideas for ranks
>
> Would be awesome to have 3 slots on your spartan Armour to see medals displayed on your character. Like if you reach a perfection you can have a perfection mark. you could even display your Waypoint forum rank on there! If you participated in a Halo tournamnet you could get a mark for that also. Its just an idea.

You have some great ideas here.
I also liked the halo 3 rank system and i think 343i can do something to implement it in halo 5. Personally i liked your last idea of displaying some medals on your character.

I think it s good