Adds nothing to the game and just punishes the players for playing your game. The argument that you want the slower player to catchup or for player not to unlock all the items is cool…on paper. In practice though it has resulted in nothing but disappointment. 343i let us play your game without unnecessary obstacles, that is all…one of the few things I ask.
But without xp limits you would reach Sr-120 in about two maybe three days tops.
how about no exp limit for a match?
its always sad going like 30 and 2 and getting the same amount as going 8 and 4 your next game
> But without xp limits you would reach Sr-120 in about two maybe three days tops.
This wouldn’t be an issue if there was a skill based, 1-50’esqe, ranking system, and a XP/cR/Exp system that never has an ending, and is only used on things from the armory.
> But without xp limits you would reach Sr-120 in about two maybe three days tops.
I honestly do not see a problem with that.
What we need, is a 1-50 ranking system again, but make it higher the longer the games been out.
Examples:
1 - 50: Launch.
1 - 75: 1 weeks after launch.
1 - 100: 1.5 weeks after previous milestone.
Etc.
> Adds nothing to the game and just punishes the players for playing your game. The argument that you want the slower player to catchup or for player not to unlock all the items is cool…on paper. In practice though it has resulted in nothing but disappointment. 343i let us play your game without unnecessary obstacles, that is all…one of the few things I ask.
I believe, its more of when cheaters exploit the game’s faults and boost their rank up. This was a major problem in Reach and that’s why restrictions need to stay, so boosters/cheaters don’t get ahead of others by earning points that they didn’t truly earn, but simply exploited the game.
> What we need, is a 1-50 ranking system again, <mark>but make it higher the longer the games been out</mark>.
>
> Examples:
> 1 - 50: Launch.
> 1 - 75: 1 weeks after launch.
> 1 - 100: 1.5 weeks after previous milestone.
> Etc.
I would also like a 1-50 ranking system back, but I don’t agree with the whole, the longer the games been out the rank increases. For a while yea, that will keep players playing, but the ultimate rank will just be unachievable. Which will then just put-off players, what needs to be set is just 1-50 or max 1-100. Even, then the 1-100 is a bit much.
> > What we need, is a 1-50 ranking system again, <mark>but make it higher the longer the games been out</mark>.
> >
> > Examples:
> > 1 - 50: Launch.
> > 1 - 75: 1 weeks after launch.
> > 1 - 100: 1.5 weeks after previous milestone.
> > Etc.
>
> I would would also like a 1-50 ranking system back, but I don’t agree with the whole, the longer the games been out the rank increases. For a while yea, that will keep players playing, but the ultimate rank will just be unachievable. Which will then just put-off players, what needs to be set is just 1-50 or max 1-100. Even, then the 1-100 is a bit much.
Yeah, true. I was just tossing ideas out.
> how about no exp limit for a match?
> its always sad going like 30 and 2 and getting the same amount as going 8 and 4 your next game
We could have a system that gives more points for performance instead of giving a large amount of points for finishing a match. But no limits for XP for the social ranking.
How about no XP or credit systems of any kind?
Yeah, I’d love that.
True-skill rank and nothing more. Perfect.
It’s annoying hearing people talk about their completely meaningless progression system rank, and it’s annoying seeing people focus on something that proves nothing.
> <mark>How about no XP or credit systems of any kind?</mark>
> Yeah, I’d love that.
>
> True-skill rank and nothing more. Perfect.
>
> It’s annoying hearing people talk about their completely meaningless progression system rank, and it’s annoying seeing people focus on something that proves nothing.
I may be a fan of Halo: Reach, but even I can agree to no exp/credit boosting of any kind.
I would also prefer if Halo: Guardians could go back to playing the game for the sake of playing the game like in Halo 3.
No limits!
> How about no XP or credit systems of any kind?
> Yeah, I’d love that.
>
> True-skill rank and nothing more. Perfect.
>
> It’s annoying hearing people talk about their completely meaningless progression system rank, and it’s annoying seeing people focus on something that proves nothing.
In reach XP was used to buy armor. So if they have me unlock armor through XP, I do not want to be told how much XP I can earn in a day.
> how about no exp limit for a match?
> its always sad going like 30 and 2 and getting the same amount as going 8 and 4 your next game
That would be really nice.
Anyways, daily XP limit shouldn’t punish those that want to keep playing a game they love. (Especially if we get a progression system like Reach’s, if not longer)
Put in a skill-based ranking sysem with visible ranks, and link armours etc into achievements.
When that came out with H3 I honestly thought that was a really good idea and (personally) the best way to unlock armours.
Why they moved away from it I’ll never understand.
~ Duck.
> But without xp limits you would reach Sr-120 in about two maybe three days tops.
That wasn’t a problem in earlier titles like Halo 3 because you still had to use effort to rank up even in social. I mean even if they stuck with cR or Halo 4 EXP they can at least try to make it a longer trip to get to max rank.
> > how about no exp limit for a match?
> > its always sad going like 30 and 2 and getting the same amount as going 8 and 4 your next game
>
> That would be really nice.
>
>
> Anyways, daily XP limit shouldn’t punish those that want to keep playing a game they love. (Especially if we get a progression system like Reach’s, if not longer)
The XP limit won’t stop people who want to play the game from playing you are right. However it creates an artificial difficulty level on ranking up via XP based system or buying unlocks.
My main concern here is with the armor unlocks, because XP rank is inaccurate.
> > > how about no exp limit for a match?
> > > its always sad going like 30 and 2 and getting the same amount as going 8 and 4 your next game
> >
> > That would be really nice.
> >
> >
> > Anyways, daily XP limit shouldn’t punish those that want to keep playing a game they love. (Especially if we get a progression system like Reach’s, if not longer)
>
> The XP limit won’t stop people who want to play the game from playing you are right. However it creates an artificial difficulty level on ranking up via XP based system or buying unlocks.
>
> My main concern here is with the armor unlocks, because XP rank is inaccurate.
Make MOST armor unlocks tied to achievements and an in-game skill rank. (a la Halo 3) There shouldn’t be any more limits IMO either, ranks based only on EXP need to die and never come back.
no experience untied to true-skill period.