EDITED - Changed concept to points.
Instead of skill points, as I had previously, what if you could wager your spartan points? This is a work in progress, so if you have ideas to not make this playlist ready for abuse, feel free to comment.
Rules
- This is a stand-alone RANKED playlist.
- You’ll gain skill levels just as any ranked playlist.
- Wagering will be able to be done from any skill tier
- Teams will have 10 seconds before a match to wager the amount of spartan points they want to put up.
- You can wager any amount of spartan points up to the limit.
- All points wagered are deducted from your points BEFORE the match preventing anyone from chickening out or quitting during the game, or ducking out.
- The person who wagered the lowest amount of points will be used as the amount for everyone’s wager. For example, people on yours and the other team are wagering 100, others are wagering 30, but you decide to wager 10 because you aren’t so sure about how you’ll do.
- Games are typical 4 on 4 ranked matches, or even 8 on 8 BTB variant.
- Losers of the match will lose the amount of spartan points the match was wagered for.
- Winning has the same effect as winning in any other ranked play list (ie ranking up if you did good enough), allowing you to wager more points if you managed to make it to the next tier.
- Winners will also gain wagered points.
- The maximum amount of points you will be able to wager would be based on your rank.
- Ranks 1-10 will be able to wager from 1-500 points.
- Ranks 11-20 will be able to wager from 1-1250
- Ranks 21-30 will be able to wager from 1-2500
- Ranks 31-40 will be able to wager from 1-5000
- Ranks 41-50 will be able to wager from 1-10,000
All point limits would be relative to the cost of what items are available and at what price. It would suck to allow people to get items incredible easy this way.
- Losers will have a chance to vote for “Double of nothing” where a new game will be played, and wagers are doubled.
- Double or Nothing can only be done IF, and only IF everyone in the group (all 8 players in the match) have enough points to buy in again.
- If a person on any team quit or dropped, the Double or Nothing option is disabled after the match.
- If the winning team declines “Double or nothing”, or if someone leaves the lobby, then there will be no game played and teams will be sent back to search for another game.
- Double or nothing can only be decided on once with the same group of people (meaning you can’t continue pressing double or nothing after each game with the same 8 people. The amount of points would eventually sky rocket, plus someone will eventually not have enough points to buy in.
- Quitters, or dropped players during a match automatically lose the amount wagered (as they are in the pool to buy in before the match).
The point of this game is risk reward. It is to put your money with your mouth is and show what you’re made of as a higher rank.
Thoughts? Additions?
Not bad. Let’s hope we even have a 1-50 ranking system
I don’t see many people following this. Once someone gets up to that level I don’t think they’re going to want to risk their level for something that isn’t as rewarding to see. Only way I can see this working is if you actually gain more levels, and this is the only way to get past a level cap that is set for other playlists.
Instead of skill points you should be able to wager experience or spartan points.
Your rank is supposed to match you with players of equal skill, it should not be messed with in such a manner.
EDIT: I might not be fully understanding your system. Are you saying that your rank won’t get affected? I guess I need clarification. I like the idea of wagering something on matches, though.
> I don’t see many people following this. Once someone gets up to that level I don’t think they’re going to want to risk their level for something that isn’t as rewarding to see. Only way I can see this working is if you actually gain more levels, and this is the only way to get past a level cap that is set for other playlists.
^^ that
> I don’t see many people following this. Once someone gets up to that level I don’t think they’re going to want to risk their level for something that isn’t as rewarding to see. Only way I can see this working is if you actually gain more levels, and this is the only way to get past a level cap that is set for other playlists.
Well the risk would be the reason for this particular playlist. It wouldn’t be for all playlists, just this one. Some people are hyper competitive and the climb to the top is satisfying, but it’s greater staying at the top.
> > I don’t see many people following this. Once someone gets up to that level I don’t think they’re going to want to risk their level for something that isn’t as rewarding to see. Only way I can see this working is if you actually gain more levels, and this is the only way to get past a level cap that is set for other playlists.
>
> Well the risk would be the reason for this particular playlist. It wouldn’t be for all playlists, just this one. Some people are hyper competitive and the climb to the top is satisfying, but it’s greater staying at the top.
I do like the concept, but it wouldn’t be very popular. I just don’t believe it’s going to reach the number of players that you want it to, resulting in long search times for the playlist.
The dude above me made a good point too, about messing with levels. It would ruin skill gap. I could see people using the playlist as a basis of deranking as well.
> > > I don’t see many people following this. Once someone gets up to that level I don’t think they’re going to want to risk their level for something that isn’t as rewarding to see. Only way I can see this working is if you actually gain more levels, and this is the only way to get past a level cap that is set for other playlists.
> >
> > Well the risk would be the reason for this particular playlist. It wouldn’t be for all playlists, just this one. Some people are hyper competitive and the climb to the top is satisfying, but it’s greater staying at the top.
>
> I do like the concept, but it wouldn’t be very popular. I just don’t believe it’s going to reach the number of players that you want it to, resulting in long search times for the playlist.
>
> The dude above me made a good point too, about messing with levels. It would ruin skill gap. I could see people using the playlist as a basis of deranking as well.
Yeah I can definitely see that happening. It would just scream abuse hehe.
why dont you change it to spartan points, something that doesn’t affect rank…
then that would be awesome.
> why dont you change it to spartan points, something that doesn’t affect rank…
>
> then that would be awesome.
Hmm, the difficult part, in both using skill points and spartan points, is abuse. I guess if you disabled 8 man parties it would work.
Wow why don’t we just make it easier to de-rank. Experience points would be a much better option to wager.
> Wow why don’t we just make it easier to de-rank. Experience points would be a much better option to wager.
You are correct, sir. I’m thinking on how that scheme would work with points instead of skill. I mean who should be allowed to wager, if it would be based on their skill level range, and how much they’d be allowed to wager.
Edited to change from skill points to spartan points. Tell me what you think.
It sounds really fun but just one question. So does all the wagered points go into a pool and the winning team gets all the points in the pool and those points and distributed among the team. And if this is what you mean then, how will the points be distrubted?? evenly or based off how well they played?
> It sounds really fun but just one question. So does all the wagered points go into a pool and the winning team gets all the points in the pool and those points and distributed among the team. And if this is what you mean then, how will the points be distrubted?? evenly or based off how well they played?
Yes, the points would then be distributed to the winning team, or remaining team, at the end of the match. HOW it would be distributed is up in the air. I think the fairer thing to do when it comes to distribution would to distribute according to who did better for the team to get a win. I think it would encourage people to really work together and try to earn an even cut.
This would be pretty sick.
> EDITED - Changed concept to points.
>
> Instead of skill points, as I had previously, what if you could wager your spartan points? This is a work in progress, so if you have ideas to not make this playlist ready for abuse, feel free to comment.
>
> Rules
>
> - This is a stand-alone RANKED playlist.
> - You’ll gain skill levels just as any ranked playlist.
> - Wagering will be able to be done from any skill tier
> - Teams will have 10 seconds before a match to wager the amount of spartan points they want to put up.
> - You can wager any amount of spartan points up to the limit.
> - All points wagered are deducted from your points BEFORE the match preventing anyone from chickening out or quitting during the game, or ducking out.
> - The person who wagered the lowest amount of points will be used as the amount for everyone’s wager. For example, people on yours and the other team are wagering 100, others are wagering 30, but you decide to wager 10 because you aren’t so sure about how you’ll do.
> - Games are typical 4 on 4 ranked matches, or even 8 on 8 BTB variant.
> - Losers of the match will lose the amount of spartan points the match was wagered for.
> - Winning has the same effect as winning in any other ranked play list (ie ranking up if you did good enough), allowing you to wager more points if you managed to make it to the next tier.
> - Winners will also gain wagered points.
> - The maximum amount of points you will be able to wager would be based on your rank.
> - Ranks 1-10 will be able to wager from 1-500 points.
> - Ranks 11-20 will be able to wager from 1-1250
> - Ranks 21-30 will be able to wager from 1-2500
> - Ranks 31-40 will be able to wager from 1-5000
> - Ranks 41-50 will be able to wager from 1-10,000
> All point limits would be relative to the cost of what items are available and at what price. It would suck to allow people to get items incredible easy this way.
> - Losers will have a chance to vote for “Double of nothing” where a new game will be played, and wagers are doubled.
> - Double or Nothing can only be done IF, and only IF everyone in the group (all 8 players in the match) have enough points to buy in again.
> - If a person on any team quit or dropped, the Double or Nothing option is disabled after the match.
> - If the winning team declines “Double or nothing”, or if someone leaves the lobby, then there will be no game played and teams will be sent back to search for another game.
> - Double or nothing can only be decided on once with the same group of people (meaning you can’t continue pressing double or nothing after each game with the same 8 people. The amount of points would eventually sky rocket, plus someone will eventually not have enough points to buy in.
> - Quitters, or dropped players during a match automatically lose the amount wagered (as they are in the pool to buy in before the match).
>
> The point of this game is risk reward. It is to put your money with your mouth is and show what you’re made of as a higher rank.
>
> Thoughts? Additions?
Im never the one to do this and I REALLY don’t mean to, but this reminds me of COD’s wager system. Trust me, I know the two games are COMPLETELY different and I don’t thin Halo 4 is becoming CoD, it just reminds me of an altered version of wager matches.
Oh boy, here come the flamers.