yep. Ranking system is mess
I hate ranking not based on individuals.
If i go 30-5 i want rank if my team cant get 20 kills between 3 how is that my fault??
The idea thus far, is that we teach and play with members of all tiers, it is so we all are reminded that competitive play isnât so much that people better their own team, rather that we must all work for the shared and desirable goal, to win. Watch/Rewatch The Fall of Reach and look how John-117 fails his team. Not a great first impression. We all need to learn to be tolerable of those who score less, because that one sucky player used to be you at a given time.
anyone who thinks the reach ranking system was good does not understand competitive halo. just because you played 1000 games of halo doesnât mean you should be able to have a high tier rank. only way to obtain a high rank would be to play good and win games. on my second account i reached level 40 within 20 games. so youâre saying just because you deserve the rank 15 you should have level 40 because you played a lot? because trust me if they had the reach system in halo 3 i would have gladly destroyed most of the people who had a lot of games but lacked the skill to earn that rank. everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but when it comes to a competitive ranking system i have to strongly disagree with the reach system
> 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
We have a progression system in Halo 5. Thatâs what your SR rank is.
1 vs 4 only for my scumbag teammates fakkk!!!
nice
Just Halo 3âs Ranking system in Halo 5 would be the best, nuff said!
> 2533274817492720;425:
> anyone who thinks the reach ranking system was good does not understand competitive halo. just because you played 1000 games of halo doesnât mean you should be able to have a high tier rank. only way to obtain a high rank would be to play good and win games. on my second account i reached level 40 within 20 games. so youâre saying just because you deserve the rank 15 you should have level 40 because you played a lot? because trust me if they had the reach system in halo 3 i would have gladly destroyed most of the people who had a lot of games but lacked the skill to earn that rank. everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but when it comes to a competitive ranking system i have to strongly disagree with the reach system
Reach had a skill based ranking system in itâs arena playlists. It was based on individual play rather than team play though. I thought it was a good idea at the time but it made people play more selfishly and there was little team work. It didnât work. Halo 5 has the perfect system IMO. Your individual play determines your starting rank then it is like H2 and H3 after that.
No
> 2533275018405562;429:
> Just Halo 3âs Ranking system in Halo 5 would be the best, nuff said!
We pretty much have that in Halo 5. It is just represented by divisions and tiers instead of a 1-50 number. I like it. The preliminary games get you quickly to your skill level in rank and you go from there.
Dude I feel ya!
> 2533274868385683;424:
> The idea thus far, is that we teach and play with members of all tiers, it is so we all are reminded that competitive play isnât so much that people better their own team, rather that we must all work for the shared and desirable goal, to win. Watch/Rewatch The Fall of Reach and look how John-117 fails his team. Not a great first impression. We all need to learn to be tolerable of those who score less, because that one sucky player used to be you at a given time.
The problem is even if you are trying to communicate and work with your team, you canât guarantee that they will do the same and if they go 4-15 its not always a problem you can solve by working together with your teammate not to mention when a player did terrible but their team won for them, they get placed in a higher rank which sucks both for the player and for that players teammates because the player will continuously get killed by far more skilled players and that players teammates wonât enjoy having that teammate on their team. You should get promoted or demoted based on your individual skill.
I think the rankings just need an adjustment like if a player drops fro the team your csr shouldnât suffer the unfair judgment of a two v four match
While I donât think the Ranking System is horrible by any means. I was big into Halo 3 and loved how competitive it was. Competition is what made it fun. When Reach came out, I stopped playing. Something about Experience based Ranking ruined Halo for me, so much so that I didnât even bother to buy Halo 4. Now Halo 3 wasnât perfect, especially with Deranking/Boosting Exploits but I feel for the most part it was superior to the rest. It wasnât very common for me to have unfair matches. Most were very fair and balanced teams. My only wish is that there was a way that they could integrate k/d into each Win and Loss. Sometimes itâs not your fault that you end up with a teammate that goes -15 and while the rest of you play a good game and suffer the loss. While I think that you should still result in possibly ranking down due to a loss, I think that your k/d should determine how quickly. Same thing goes for winning. A High k/d ratio in your win should give you a slight boost in ranking up. Once again, this is all just my opinion but Iâm personally fed up with the âparticipation trophyâ mentality that has become of halo. You should only gain experience for the games you win. You should only rank up if you win. Letâs make halo competitive again.
> 2533274817492720;425:
> anyone who thinks the reach ranking system was good does not understand competitive halo. just because you played 1000 games of halo doesnât mean you should be able to have a high tier rank. only way to obtain a high rank would be to play good and win games. on my second account i reached level 40 within 20 games. so youâre saying just because you deserve the rank 15 you should have level 40 because you played a lot? because trust me if they had the reach system in halo 3 i would have gladly destroyed most of the people who had a lot of games but lacked the skill to earn that rank. everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but when it comes to a competitive ranking system i have to strongly disagree with the reach system
The Reach rank you refer to wasnât skill based, but experienced based and that experienced based rank had zero effect on the skill-based matchmaking (SBMM) that was occurring in that game. Also, Reach featured an overall skill rank of sorts called Battle Proficiency Rating (BPR) that could be found when you searched your stats on the website; Iâm not sure how BPR related in regards to your TrueSkill levels which dictate all of the SBMM thatâs occurring over Xbox Live and in pretty much all the Halo games. Not to mention, Reach had the Arena which was meant to be a seasonal ranking playlist that provided you a more accurate representation of your competitive skill rank; though, many people didnât like the change from what they had grown use to so it got a lot of hate.
That is so true i know i do -Yoink- some games but most of the time im at the top of the leaderboard
Maybe they shouldâve left ranking out. Seems like no matter what they do, no one is happy.
> 2533274928407707;438:
> That is so true i know i do -Yoink- some games but most of the time im at the top of the leaderboard
Me. All the way. lol