Please put the Halo 3 Ranking system back

Please put the Halo 3 Ranking system back, it is what keeps the game alive for me and any competetive player. That ranking system was the only system I have ever seen in my life where you can (for the most part) tell how good somebody is by there rank. Other games just do play alot = high rank. The competitiveness of ranked matches were amazing.
It is honestly all the matters to me in the end because it is a goal of everyone to get a high of trueskill rank as they possible can. PLEASE PUT IT BACK!

Also Id say not make going down as bad as going up. By that I mean (and this is really out of context with how the system works, but you get the point) If you win a game, your rank goes up by normal, lose a game, and your rank goes down by like 4/5 of what it normally would. That would be a small change but enough that even people who aren’t GB allstars can work there way up (or atleast have a better chance to)

I agree, but not the halo 2 ranking system. Halo 2 only rewarded players by wins, and did not subtract XP from losses, halo 3’s was superior.

How about true medals?

Agree’d.

Halo 3’s True Skill system was perfect. It separated the Good from the bad, and even today when i show people my 50’s on many different accounts they respect me and know what it means to be a 50.

The best thing they can do is have the True skill system with a separate rank system that unlocks things in the armory, the way it did in Reach.
^ example

I play a game of MLG, my team wins and i do well.
I am awarded my 1exp point, and my increase in True Skill rank.
BUT am also awarded “X” amount of “Armory exp” for how well I did during the game.

I think it would be good that way.

> Halo 2 only rewarded players by wins

That’s how it should be.

> Agree’d.
>
> Halo 3’s True Skill system was perfect. It separated the Good from the bad, and even today when i show people my 50’s on many different accounts they respect me and know what it means to be a 50.
>
> The best thing they can do is have the True skill system with a separate rank system that unlocks things in the armory, the way it did in Reach.
> ^ example
>
> I play a game of MLG, my team wins and i do well.
> I am awarded my 1exp point, and my increase in True Skill rank.
> BUT am also awarded “X” amount of “Armory exp” for how well I did during the game.
>
> I think it would be good that way.

Love it

k

This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not flame or attack other members.

*Original post. Click at your own discretion.

> I agree, but not the halo 2 ranking system. Halo 2 only rewarded players by wins, and did not subtract XP from losses, halo 3’s was superior.

Are you a -Yoink!-???

I think halo 3 was much better then halo 2s because if you dont go down when you lose, then all you have to do is play alot and it basically just the halo: reach sytem in a new form

> I agree, but not the halo 2 ranking system. Halo 2 only rewarded players by wins, and did not subtract XP from losses, halo 3’s was superior.

Lol superior. I guess if you count many flaws superior then ok.

Anything but “credits”

HALO 2 RANKING > HALO 3

BUT ANYTHING THAN CREDITS!

Only thing bad about halo 3 was that it was too easy to get a 50… There were way too many 50’s… made it nothing special.

> Anything but “credits”

Credits will be part of the game if we still buy armor

i actually think Halo 3s ranking system was unfair. Unless you were playing FFA, the ranks were based on your TEAM’s performance. you could be max ranked, and have litterally 0 MM kills. its extremely unfair.

Not saying Reach has a good ranking system either. i do like the experience bar opposed to the 1 xp per win. but i think the credits should be earned based off of kills, not slotmachines and just playing the game. id say 50-100 cR per kill? ~10 cR per medal. extra 200 cR for winning. then the ranks would be perfect, then its no longer based off of game time, or team wins

I completely agree. Halo 3’s ranking system was the most rewarding, addicting, intense multiplayer experience I’ve ever had. In team games you only ranked up for the win, so it created this atmosphere where pretty much everyone you played with (even if you didn’t know them) were all working towards the same goal, to get the win. Pretty much all of the matches were close, and intense. I can’t even remember the last time I’ve played more than 2 close matches in a row in any game since Halo 3. The most fun I’ve ever had in a video game was playing ranked matches in Halo 3. The lack of a decent ranking system is why I hardly played Reach.

With that being said there were a few problems with the ranking system in Halo 3. The first was cheaters. These are the people that you would encounter at the higher ranks who would employ various network manipulations to get unfair wins against better players. This could easily be solved by having ranked matches on dedicated servers so that the cheaters cannot host the games. The second problem was that people would often get stuck on levels, and have an extremely hard time moving up or down. This could be fixed by allowing them to reset their rank in a given playlist every 3 months or so (any more and it could become a problem.

If those two fixes were done then Halo 4 would have the most addicting, fun, mulitplayer experience of any game out there right now. And I bet that the online community would rival or even surpass that of COD.

guys, check my thread please for a way True Skill can support Progressive ranking. its called “true skill or No true skill?”

> i actually think Halo 3s ranking system was unfair. Unless you were playing FFA, the ranks were based on your TEAM’s performance. you could be max ranked, and have litterally 0 MM kills. its extremely unfair.
>
> Not saying Reach has a good ranking system either. i do like the experience bar opposed to the 1 xp per win. but i think the credits should be earned based off of kills, not slotmachines and just playing the game. id say 50-100 cR per kill? ~10 cR per medal. extra 200 cR for winning. then the ranks would be perfect, then its no longer based off of game time, or team wins

God no, please no…

Individual ranking in a team game just doesnt work, thats why they took it out in Reach Arena.

i agree

> i actually think Halo 3s ranking system was unfair. Unless you were playing FFA, the ranks were based on your TEAM’s performance. you could be max ranked, and have litterally 0 MM kills. its extremely unfair.
>
> Not saying Reach has a good ranking system either. i do like the experience bar opposed to the 1 xp per win. but i think the credits should be earned based off of kills, not slotmachines and just playing the game. id say 50-100 cR per kill? ~10 cR per medal. extra 200 cR for winning. then the ranks would be perfect, then its no longer based off of game time, or team wins

It’d be very hard for someone that sucks and can’t get any kills in 45-50 high to be able to get to 50. Even if you’re getting boosted, you have to be at least decent to good to get to 50, unless you’re just lucky.

H3’s system was the best in my opinion, but 343i needs to make it impossible to boost to 50, besides selling accounts. People will always sell accounts.

> H3’s system was the best in my opinion, but 343i needs to make it impossible to boost to 50, besides selling accounts. People will always sell accounts.

It’s extremely easy to stop people selling accounts.

If you don’t play, your rank drops. Highest skill only shows current highest skill.