I have a simple question and to be honest I don’t want a debate thread here, I only want to see one side of it.
Why do some people not want a rank system? How, if you don’t care about ranks does it negatively affect you to have a rank system similar to 1-50?
I have yet to see any clear reasons from people and that’s really what I want to read, because I personally do not see another logical side of things, and I am looking for it.
Thanks in advance.
the 1-50 system was flawed, I personally want a system better but thats just me.
I’m not against a visible ranking system, by any means. I just don’t see why its absence is viewed as such a travesty to many competitive gamers. I’m honestly just indifferent to the old thing. If it’s there, great! If not, oh well. It just doesn’t affect me.
> the 1-50 system was flawed, I personally want a system better but thats just me.
He was asking for an explanation. Why was it flawed?
1-50 had problems:
So explain to me why 1-50 was good and why a different system can’t work.
No doubt did 1-50 have it’s problem. I don’t even want Halo 3s 1-50, I think it was too flawed to bring back, for the level locking and account selling that occurred because of how it was set up.
As for boosting/cheating, that occurs in games with progressive XP systems (like COD).
I don’t need a rank system to be a 1-50, but I want there to be a rank system that is not just an endless XP grab. I am VERY open to any good system that ranks based on winning and losing, going up and down.
> 1-50 had problems:
>
> 1. Cheating
> 2. Boosting
> 3. Level Locking
> 4. Account Selling.
>
> So explain to me why 1-50 was good and why a different system can’t work.
I think what the OP meant was a skill based ranking system of any kind, like 1-50.
> 1-50 had problems:
>
> 1. Cheating
> 2. Boosting
> 3. Level Locking
> 4. Account Selling.
>
> So explain to me why 1-50 was good and why a different system can’t work.
if 343 would make it visible only for you,everyone would be happy and this problems would not occur
I’m not against a 1-50 system, I just don’t think its that important as people make it out to be.
I am against the idea a lot of people have, that Halo multiplayer can only be fun with a 1-50 system and that every other alternative is whack by definition.
I don’t care about 1-50 because I don’t think a collection of pixels next to my name makes me any more competative…
I don’t care about 1-50 because the previous iteration was flawed to the point of it being really annoying.
Having to win 5 games to go up 1 level, and losing 1 ending up with 1.5 levels lost is not fair. No matter how you put it.
Besides, with the Armory I think a progression system is not only more fair (if it includes skill based factors…and double kills and the likes are just that), but also most logical. After all: it can be used to unlock everything from armor to commendation that set you new goals to unlock.
Its the best of both worlds. And that’s why I am all in for the current system.
> 1-50 had problems:
>
> 1. Cheating
> 2. Boosting
> 3. Level Locking
> 4. Account Selling.
>
> So explain to me why 1-50 was good and why a different system can’t work.
Cheating exists regardless of a ranking system IMO.
Boosting is just as bad, if not worse, with a progression system like Reach and Halo 4.
Never saw this as a problem, just means your skill rank plateaued.
Honestly if people are dumb enough to buy an account I say let them.
Yes those 4 things you listed are annoying, but they will either happen regardless or have no impact on most of the population and isn’t enough of a reason to me.
I should mention that I can live with or without a ranking system. I just don’t see any harm in there being one, and most of the reasons to NOT have one end up being insults and the like.
> 1-50 had problems:
>
> 1. Cheating
> 2. Boosting
> 3. Level Locking
> 4. Account Selling.
>
> So explain to me why 1-50 was good and why a different system can’t work.
Cheating and boosting can be fixed, just implement strict quit bans, like Gears 3 and Reach did.
Good luck trying to derank if you get banned for hours upon hours from each playlist.
Account selling can happen with any system, selling inheritors wasn’t as big as selling 50s because no one cared for the progression rank.
That solves all your problems. Just because a system has flaws doesn’t mean you scrap it altogether. That’s the Bioware mentality, ME1 had a cluttered inventory system, instead of improving or streamlining it, they removed it altogether in ME2.
That’s a bad approach. 1-50 can work, it just needs tweaking to stop boosters, and the fixes are so obvious.
> I’m not against a visible ranking system, by any means. I just don’t see why its absence is viewed as such a travesty to many competitive gamers. I’m honestly just indifferent to the old thing. If it’s there, great! If not, oh well. It just doesn’t affect me.
because its fun for me,i dont think i would have played halo 2 and halo 3 for such a long time and with such a passion if there wasnt the 1-50 system
> > 1-50 had problems:
> >
> > 1. Cheating
> > 2. Boosting
> > 3. Level Locking
> > 4. Account Selling.
> >
> > So explain to me why 1-50 was good and why a different system can’t work.
>
> 1. Cheating exists regardless of a ranking system IMO.
>
> 2. Boosting is just as bad, if not worse, with a progression system like Reach and Halo 4.
>
> 3. Never saw this as a problem, just means your skill rank plateaued.
>
> 4. Honestly if people are dumb enough to buy an account I say let them.
>
> Yes those 4 things you listed are annoying, but they will either happen regardless or have no impact on most of the population and isn’t enough of a reason to me.
>
> I should mention that I can live with or without a ranking system. I just don’t see any harm in there being one, and most of the reasons to NOT have one end up being insults and the like.
please tell it 343 and tattoo that on their -Yoinks!- 
> No doubt did 1-50 have it’s problem. I don’t even want Halo 3s 1-50, I think it was too flawed to bring back, for the level locking and account selling that occurred because of how it was set up.
>
> As for boosting/cheating, that occurs in games with progressive XP systems (like COD).
>
> I don’t need a rank system to be a 1-50, but I want there to be a rank system that is not just an endless XP grab. I am VERY open to any good system that ranks based on winning and losing, going up and down.
If you don’t necessarily want the ranking system to be 1-50 and admit it has flaws,then why bring it up? It’s amazing how many of you say you want 1-50 to have people point out its flaws. Then you guys turn around and say “well it doesn’t have to be 1-50 I just want a system that shows skill and works”.
As for your remark saying people boost and cheat in a progression system, yes they do. But who cares? In has zero affect on matchmaking where as boosting and cheating in a “skill” system completely muddies the water and does affect it.
I’m not against a ranking system, I am mostly against the attitudes it produces. I can’t tell you how many times on Bungie.net when someone would post in the forums about something relating to Halo 3 and they were flamed for “Not having the right rank to talk about the game”. I get the idea behind such a statement, experiences comments and opinions are valuable, but on the boards, everyone gets a say in the matter.
Either than that, go for 1-50. I won’t care for it, but I know others will.
> > > 1-50 had problems:
> > >
> > > 1. Cheating
> > > 2. Boosting
> > > 3. Level Locking
> > > 4. Account Selling.
> > >
> > > So explain to me why 1-50 was good and why a different system can’t work.
> >
> > 1. Cheating exists regardless of a ranking system IMO.
> >
> > 2. Boosting is just as bad, if not worse, with a progression system like Reach and Halo 4.
> >
> > 3. Never saw this as a problem, just means your skill rank plateaued.
> >
> > 4. Honestly if people are dumb enough to buy an account I say let them.
> >
> > Yes those 4 things you listed are annoying, but they will either happen regardless or have no impact on most of the population and isn’t enough of a reason to me.
> >
> > I should mention that I can live with or without a ranking system. I just don’t see any harm in there being one, and most of the reasons to NOT have one end up being insults and the like.
>
> please tell it 343 and tattoo that on their -Yoinks!-
haha who knows if they’d listen to me. The only weird thing about me saying that is I wasn’t rank obsessed in Halo 3, I never broke out of the 30 range but the 1-50 system didn’t bother me one bit and I see no reason not to have it other than the fact that games these days like to dangle new ranks/unlocks in front of gamers as much as possible so developers are going to the progression system to satisfy the ADHD gamer.
> > 1-50 had problems:
> >
> > 1. Cheating
> > 2. Boosting
> > 3. Level Locking
> > 4. Account Selling.
> >
> > So explain to me why 1-50 was good and why a different system can’t work.
>
> 1. Cheating exists regardless of a ranking system IMO.
>
> 2. Boosting is just as bad, if not worse, with a progression system like Reach and Halo 4.
>
> 3. Never saw this as a problem, just means your skill rank plateaued.
>
> 4. Honestly if people are dumb enough to buy an account I say let them.
>
> Yes those 4 things you listed are annoying, but they will either happen regardless or have no impact on most of the population and isn’t enough of a reason to me.
>
> I should mention that I can live with or without a ranking system. I just don’t see any harm in there being one, and most of the reasons to NOT have one end up being insults and the like.
> I’m not against a ranking system, I am mostly against the attitudes it produces. I can’t tell you how many times on Bungie.net when someone would post in the forums about something relating to Halo 3 and they were flamed for “Not having the right rank to talk about the game”. I get the idea behind such a statement, experiences comments and opinions are valuable, but on the boards, everyone gets a say in the matter.
>
> Either than that, go for 1-50. I won’t care for it, but I know others will.
There seems to be this weird gap between the labeled “competitive” and “casual” crowd. Once someone puts another member in one of those boxes the chances of canned responses aimed at that particular group come flying out of the woodwork.
> > No doubt did 1-50 have it’s problem. I don’t even want Halo 3s 1-50, I think it was too flawed to bring back, for the level locking and account selling that occurred because of how it was set up.
> >
> > As for boosting/cheating, that occurs in games with progressive XP systems (like COD).
> >
> > I don’t need a rank system to be a 1-50, but I want there to be a rank system that is not just an endless XP grab. I am VERY open to any good system that ranks based on winning and losing, going up and down.
>
> If you don’t necessarily want the ranking system to be 1-50 and admit it has flaws,then why bring it up? It’s amazing how many of you say you want 1-50 to have people point out its flaws. Then you guys turn around and say “well it doesn’t have to be 1-50 I just want a system that shows skill and works”.
>
> As for your remark saying people boost and cheat in a progression system, yes they do. But who cares? In has zero affect on matchmaking where as boosting and cheating in a “skill” system completely muddies the water and does affect it.
I brought it up saying I wanted something similar to it. There’s a difference between wanting something, and wanting something similar to that thing. I have said I want a rank system that serves the same function that the 1-50 does, but can be enacted differently. I know there were flaws, especially with the Halo 3 system, so I am happy to see an improved system, that has the same goal, but is improved and enacted in whatever form 343i sees fit. No where did I just say it has to be 1-50.
Cheating doesn’t affect me in a progressive system? Sure it does, I go into a game and someone has mods or network hacking, and I have to either wait for the game to end, and get little or no XP. Which means the game got me nothing. Or I can quit and work towards a quit ban. It has the same affect really…in the end, unless 343i can stop cheating, it doesn’t matter what the experience/rank system is.
> > No doubt did 1-50 have it’s problem. I don’t even want Halo 3s 1-50, I think it was too flawed to bring back, for the level locking and account selling that occurred because of how it was set up.
> >
> > As for boosting/cheating, that occurs in games with progressive XP systems (like COD).
> >
> > I don’t need a rank system to be a 1-50, but I want there to be a rank system that is not just an endless XP grab. I am VERY open to any good system that ranks based on winning and losing, going up and down.
>
> If you don’t necessarily want the ranking system to be 1-50 and admit it has flaws,then why bring it up? It’s amazing how many of you say you want 1-50 to have people point out its flaws. Then you guys turn around and say “well it doesn’t have to be 1-50 I just want a system that shows skill and works”.
>
> As for your remark saying people boost and cheat in a progression system, yes they do. But who cares? In has zero affect on matchmaking where as boosting and cheating in a “skill” system completely muddies the water and does affect it.
People cheated in competitive MM with Reach too, AFKing it up and getting 1000cR a game wasn’t uncommon. That screws with who they get matched with.
Plus if cheating is so easy, it makes the progression ranking redundant, who cares if you’re an inheritor when you boosted all the way there in FF?
Ranks are there for a reason, and it’s to reward better players for their time playing but also is meant to be somewhat of a metric of skill.
1-50 rewards consistent winning, progression systems reward consistent PLAYING, one’s a time sink and one is a matter of skill and win consistency.
1-50s only flaw was deranking, which was caused by quitting, HMMMM HOW TO COUNTER THAT?
Severe quit bans in ranked playlists where 1-50 is prevalent.
Simple fix to the biggest flaw, without derankers the system is perfect.