That was the whole reason I wasted countless hours of my life playing halo… The division system of Reach is just crap, bring back the 1-50 system, but also keep the social system, with rank and armor based on credits or whatever, for those who aren’t into competitive play.
Also, if I never saw bloom again, it would be awesome.
Agreed on both accounts. Arena tanked.
There is a thread were you can discuss regarding the Ranking System. Here’s the link:
Bring Back Ranking System
> There is a thread were you can discuss regarding the Ranking System. Here’s the link:
> Bring Back Ranking System
that discussion is for reach, the one here is for halo 4 so that link you provided has no real relevance.
though, this is the best solution IMHO and everyone seems to be agreeing that ranked and social should be combined.
I absolutely agree. 1-50 ranking system needs to return if the population is to ever be sustained in Halo 4. Though, an inclusion of a side progressive system, similar to the one in Reach, alongside a 1-50 system wouldn’t hurt either. That way, everyone’s happy. 
> > There is a thread were you can discuss regarding the Ranking System. Here’s the link:
> > Bring Back Ranking System
>
> that discussion is for reach, the one here is for halo 4 so that link you provided has no real relevance.
>
>
> though, this is the best solution IMHO and everyone seems to be agreeing that ranked and social should be combined.
Regardless, it is a thread were the Ranking System is being discussed (especially the 1-50 ranking system). 343 may have already stated they won’t be working on the ranking system for Reach, but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be a place were the Ranking System for Halo 4 can be discussed.
I can’t agree with the prior post… a division ranking is too broad, 1-50 or 1-100 is best one that doesn’t reset.
I can’t stand the resets because I never got a challenging match ever, I have a demanding schedule, I don’t get to play as much as some, but when I play, I want to have a difficult challenging opponent, this never happened when my rank was reset every month or even every 3 months, because when I play, I put a high amount of thought into strategy, so that while I may lack in accuracy, I make up for it by forcing my opponents into double teams, or cqc against a shot gun or long range fighting against a snipe.
> > > There is a thread were you can discuss regarding the Ranking System. Here’s the link:
> > > Bring Back Ranking System
> >
> > that discussion is for reach, the one here is for halo 4 so that link you provided has no real relevance.
> >
> >
> > though, this is the best solution IMHO and everyone seems to be agreeing that ranked and social should be combined.
>
> Regardless, it is a thread were the Ranking System is being discussed (especially the 1-50 ranking system). 343 may have already stated they won’t be working on the ranking system for Reach, but that doesn’t mean it should be a place were the Ranking System for Halo 4 can be discussed.
there is no real discussion about halo 4 and 1-50 , if there was then i would agree with you but this section is for discussion, speculation and idea’s for halo 4 and that is exactly what the OP is doing so there is nothing wrong.
besides, you’re not even a moderator…
> > > > There is a thread were you can discuss regarding the Ranking System. Here’s the link:
> > > > Bring Back Ranking System
> > >
> > > that discussion is for reach, the one here is for halo 4 so that link you provided has no real relevance.
> > >
> > >
> > > though, this is the best solution IMHO and everyone seems to be agreeing that ranked and social should be combined.
> >
> > Regardless, it is a thread were the Ranking System is being discussed (especially the 1-50 ranking system). 343 may have already stated they won’t be working on the ranking system for Reach, but that doesn’t mean it should be a place were the Ranking System for Halo 4 can be discussed.
>
> there is no real discussion about halo 4 and 1-50 , if there was then i would agree with you but this section is for discussion, speculation and idea’s for halo 4 and that is exactly what the OP is doing so there is nothing wrong.
>
> besides, you’re not even a moderator…
I may not be a moderator, but what I do is try to help keep the discussions in one single place. Instead of spamming the forums with the same thing being discussed in a another thread.
I really hope 343i is listening to all of these “bring back the 1-50 system” threads because I’d really like to see it come back in Halo 4.
> > > > > There is a thread were you can discuss regarding the Ranking System. Here’s the link:
> > > > > Bring Back Ranking System
> > > >
> > > > that discussion is for reach, the one here is for halo 4 so that link you provided has no real relevance.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > though, this is the best solution IMHO and everyone seems to be agreeing that ranked and social should be combined.
> > >
> > > Regardless, it is a thread were the Ranking System is being discussed (especially the 1-50 ranking system). 343 may have already stated they won’t be working on the ranking system for Reach, but that doesn’t mean it should be a place were the Ranking System for Halo 4 can be discussed.
> >
> > there is no real discussion about halo 4 and 1-50 , if there was then i would agree with you but this section is for discussion, speculation and idea’s for halo 4 and that is exactly what the OP is doing so there is nothing wrong.
> >
> > besides, you’re not even a moderator…
>
> I may not be a moderator, but what I do is try to help keep the discussions in one single place. Instead of spamming the forums with the same thing being discussed in a another thread.
but that’s the thing, discussions about 1-50 and halo 4 are not taking place in the topic you linked to but yes, the halo 4 forums is getting spammed with “bring back 1-50” but they should be confined to just 1 or 2 topics about halo 4 and ranked and the one i think should take priority is der flatulator6s post which is the one i link to every time one of these topics pops up.
i do have my own topic on ranks but i think der flatulator6 has it done a lot better.
the problem keeping it on one page is that sometimes good ideas get lost in the fray, not saying my idea is particularly awesome, but someone may have a great idea that gets lost on page 50 of a 99 page thread
but to get back on track…
I feel a 1-50 or 1-100 ranking system needs to be strictly based on wins, but should be more like H3 in that when someone wins a game with 3 randoms it means more then playing with 3 people you know, this should also be weighted. Like if someone has only played 2 games with someone, but partied up, they should get more of a win bonus then a team that has played 100 plus games together…
If winning a game with 3 randoms is given a higher weight then winning with a team, then a good player will eventually obtain a high rank. Remember, winning isn’t everything, its the only thing.
> I really hope 343i is listening to all of these “bring back the 1-50 system” threads because I’d really like to see it come back in Halo 4.
I’ll go as far as to say, if its not in Halo 4, I won’t buy it
Agreed.
> > > > > > There is a thread were you can discuss regarding the Ranking System. Here’s the link:
> > > > > > Bring Back Ranking System
> > > > >
> > > > > that discussion is for reach, the one here is for halo 4 so that link you provided has no real relevance.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > though, this is the best solution IMHO and everyone seems to be agreeing that ranked and social should be combined.
> > > >
> > > > Regardless, it is a thread were the Ranking System is being discussed (especially the 1-50 ranking system). 343 may have already stated they won’t be working on the ranking system for Reach, but that doesn’t mean it should be a place were the Ranking System for Halo 4 can be discussed.
> > >
> > > there is no real discussion about halo 4 and 1-50 , if there was then i would agree with you but this section is for discussion, speculation and idea’s for halo 4 and that is exactly what the OP is doing so there is nothing wrong.
> > >
> > > besides, you’re not even a moderator…
> >
> > I may not be a moderator, but what I do is try to help keep the discussions in one single place. Instead of spamming the forums with the same thing being discussed in a another thread.
>
> but that’s the thing, discussions about 1-50 and halo 4 are not taking place in the topic you linked to but yes, the halo 4 forums is getting spammed with “bring back 1-50” but they should be confined to just 1 or 2 topics about halo 4 and ranked and the one i think should take priority is der flatulator6s post which is the one i link to every time one of these topics pops up.
>
> i do have my own topic on ranks but i think der flatulator6 has it done a lot better.
Well we’re in agreement. We don’t have a problem then.
> the problem keeping it on one page is that sometimes good ideas get lost in the fray, not saying my idea is particularly awesome, but someone may have a great idea that gets lost on page 50 of a 99 page thread
>
> but to get back on track…
>
> I feel a 1-50 or 1-100 ranking system needs to be strictly based on wins, but should be more like H3 in that when someone wins a game with 3 randoms it means more then playing with 3 people you know, this should also be weighted. Like if someone has only played 2 games with someone, but partied up, they shouldn’t get more of a win bonus then a team that has played 100 plus games together…
>
> If winning a game with 3 randoms is given a higher weight then winning with a team, then a good player will eventually obtain a high rank. Remember, winning isn’t everything, its the only thing.
yea, that makes sense because it is harder to win with randoms against teams when it is team vs team.
though, how it displayed doesn’t really matter, it can be 1-50, division, milatary rank, anything because they are all based on the same formula just displayed differently.
just a little note, i know when people think of divisions they think of seasons but these are actually 2 seperate idea’s combined together.
I would say, It has to be numerical because at the top, it gets pretty muddled, and there was a huge difference between a 45, 47, 49, and 50 as far a skill in H3.
and I am talking about someone who legitimately achieved all of these respective ranks…
> <mark>the problem keeping it on one page is that sometimes good ideas get lost in the fray, not saying my idea is particularly awesome, but someone may have a great idea that gets lost on page 50 of a 99 page thread</mark>
>
> but to get back on track…
>
> I feel a 1-50 or 1-100 ranking system needs to be strictly based on wins, but should be more like H3 in that when someone wins a game with 3 randoms it means more then playing with 3 people you know, this should also be weighted. Like if someone has only played 2 games with someone, but partied up, they should get more of a win bonus then a team that has played 100 plus games together…
>
> If winning a game with 3 randoms is given a higher weight then winning with a team, then a good player will eventually obtain a high rank. Remember, winning isn’t everything, its the only thing.
You don’t need to worry about it much. 343 is keeping an eye on the forums looking for feedback. But just a tip, try to leave your feedback at the corresponding threads were they’re discussing your concerns next time.
Threads created multiple times that discuss the same thing being done in other threads are considered spam and will be locked.
> I would say, It has to be numerical because at the top, it gets pretty muddled, and there was a huge difference between a 45, 47, 49, and 50 as far a skill in H3.
>
> and I am talking about someone who legitimately achieved all of these respective ranks…
numerical it doesn’t matter, as i said, it could be differently but still resemble the same thing because at the end of the day, it is all comes from the same formula just displayed differently.
what i never understood is why there was such big difference between players that are 45-50 when at a lower rank it wasn’t as big.
well, halo 3’s rank meaning was really all over the place, you could come across bad 50’s who got there legitimately while coming across a 30 who destroyed everyone so i wouldn’t really be using halo 3 as a good example,
> > <mark>the problem keeping it on one page is that sometimes good ideas get lost in the fray, not saying my idea is particularly awesome, but someone may have a great idea that gets lost on page 50 of a 99 page thread</mark>
> >
> > but to get back on track…
> >
> > I feel a 1-50 or 1-100 ranking system needs to be strictly based on wins, but should be more like H3 in that when someone wins a game with 3 randoms it means more then playing with 3 people you know, this should also be weighted. Like if someone has only played 2 games with someone, but partied up, they should get more of a win bonus then a team that has played 100 plus games together…
> >
> > If winning a game with 3 randoms is given a higher weight then winning with a team, then a good player will eventually obtain a high rank. Remember, winning isn’t everything, its the only thing.
>
> You don’t need to worry about it much. 343 is keeping an eye on the forums looking for feedback. But just a tip, try to leave your feedback at the corresponding threads were they’re discussing your concerns next time.
> Threads created multiple times that discuss the same thing being done in other threads are considered spam and will be locked.
i know you are trying to be helpfull and all but.
do you really expect people to look back like 10 pages to find another topic on ranks?
if it isn’t on the first page then they will most likely go and create a new topic instead of searching for another topic on the same idea in which to post his idea.