So I posted this on another forum but no response came into play and I just wanted to see how the community thought about it:
So lately I have really been wondering about the Halo 4 Ranking system, and after reading everything on here I got to thinking about a ranking system that might work. So I thought I would put it all on here and see if some people would either like it or dislike it and why so if you would let me explain my thought process. I was thinking of doing a bit of the mix between having it invisible and visible and also trying to base it somewhat on a “true skill” aspect. Lets start with the true skill aspect of things, lets say if the winner of the game gets 50 points and the loser of the game goes down by 30 points, then (using the reach arena type ranking) you are able to get extra points based on how well you did in that game (meaning if you were to get like an 1100 in reach you would get 11 points added to your skill), this also helps out the losers that played well that game. They go down by 30 but they can off-set that by the 11 points they got that game. (or maybe if they had a negative k/d they go down 11 points that game [just a thought]). Those points will add up and make new rankings (kind of like the halo 3 general based rankings). This will be the first ranking showing to all players, but it would be based on the certain playlist your in (IE: team slayer, MLG, Objective, ect). The second ranking would be a hidden ranking (only seen IRL by the player or players friends) in which the ranking (maybe 1-100 or something) for each playlist (meaning that each playlist you would need to get a 100 in) and those would add up to give a total “true skill” ranking. So to simplify it: you have 6 different playlists and you have a 50 in all those, you have a “true skill” ranking of 300 (meaning the total possible is 600 but you have a 300). Meaning that the true skill would only be shown to you, and the win to loss ratio would be shown to everyone else. If you remember the only reason that people bought halo 3 (50’s) was because you could “lock” a 50 in by playing a lot of games on it and it would eventually not move, meaning that when people bought them they would always keep it. But if you were to make the “general” ranking max out, then all the players would do is inevitably lose it or keep it if they are able to keep winning. Another example, lets say it takes 10,000 points to get your “general” but to max it out the points would only go to 10,200, meaning that if you dont keep winning then that general status would be lost very quickly, but you would still be able to “lock” in your overall status (which in this case was at 300). One other thing to add before I stop this ramblimg, I did hear on other interviews that they already have a skill (i think its in reach) where it will automatically tell who is projected to win or lose the game. Meaning that if the team that is supposed to win, wins, then they would get the 50 points; while if the team that is supposed to lose, wins, then they would get a bonus 70 (or more) points because they were projected to lose. (and vise verse, those that are supposed to win, lose, they go down more then 30 points) I dunno, let me know what you think, if this might be something that would/could work or not. Sorry if there was a bunch of spelling errors because I am terrible with english. Thanks for listening though and hopefullly 343 knows what they are doing, cause reach was a really big disappointment. Oh and one last thing, someone said earlier (in another forum) that the reporting system (that is on the xbox itself [report a player]) is broken and doesn’t work. I agree with this that its broken, but if it has been proven to be broken then wouldn’t 343 actually be able to write one into their own game in which you can rate the player and if necessary ban them from playing you in the future. This would help out with the trash talk a bit (or atleast the repeated trash talk) and also if you were to display the “rating” then you would be able to see if your playing with someone that other people like or dislike and you might also be able to match up with those certain types of people. Just a thought.
Woah, that is a huge text wall. Please use paragraphs.
It is too late now for any ranking system idea’s since the game is going gold in a couple of weeks I’d say. 
Better idea: 1-50
> Woah, that is a huge text wall. Please use paragraphs.
>
> It is too late now for any ranking system idea’s since the game is going gold in a couple of weeks I’d say.
Yeah your probably right I just thought of it and so I thought I would write it all down. And yeah your right its a lot to read all at once. lol sorry guys.
> Better idea: 1-50
Better idea: a working system.
> Better idea: 1-50
I really like the idea behind the “true skill” (1-50) ranking but 343 has already stated they dont want to do this for many reasons (trash talking, boosters, selling 50’s, ect) so although I agree a 1-50 would be awesome I just dont think its something they are going to do and unfortunately the community should get use to that fact. 
> > Better idea: 1-50
>
> Better idea: a working system.
The first angry Colonel has entered the thread.
I don’t think any of these people read your idea, because it is an excellent idea. That would make it balanced! 343 listen to this man! Not only about the ranking, but the player rating as well!
> I don’t think any of these people read your idea, because it is an excellent idea. That would make it balanced! 343 listen to this man! Not only about the ranking, but the player rating as well!
well thanks man I appreciate it.
> > > Better idea: 1-50
> >
> > Better idea: a working system.
>
> The first angry Colonel has entered the thread.
Lol, okay, I have a 45 on this account and a 50 on my other, but that doesn’t matter because with all the boosting, and kicking people offline rank means absolutely NOTHING in Halo 3! A player no matter how good can get a 50 in 20 games with either someone kicking the other team offline, or just boosting. While someone good that plays legit can’t because of the ones boosting and booting offline. Why do you back up a broken system? It makes no sense.
Edit: BTW, just because I don’t like the system doesn’t mean I’m bad, plenty other 50s will also say they don’t like it. And I just checked, you don’t even have a 50, why is that? Is that because you were facing boosters and booters? Or you just bad? Not so great getting called bad by someone who knows absolutely nothing about you playstyle or skill, right? The sooner you realize rank means nothing, the better.
China called…
They told me to tell you to have a very nice day.
> > > > Better idea: 1-50
> > >
> > > Better idea: a working system.
> >
> > The first angry Colonel has entered the thread.
>
> Lol, okay, I have a 45 on this account and a 50 on my other, but that doesn’t matter because with all the boosting, and kicking people offline rank means absolutely NOTHING in Halo 3! A player no matter how good can get a 50 in 20 games with either someone kicking the other team offline, or just boosting. While someone good that plays legit can’t because of the ones boosting and booting offline. Why do you back up a broken system? It makes no sense.
>
> Edit: BTW, just because I don’t like the system doesn’t mean I’m bad, plenty other 50s will also say they don’t like it. And I just checked, you don’t even have a 50, why is that? Is that because you were facing boosters and booters? Or you just bad? Not so great getting called bad by someone who knows absolutely nothing about you playstyle or skill, right? The sooner you realize rank means nothing, the better.
Why is it that in every single forum there is always the guys that turn this stuff into a -Yoink!- contest?!?!? Both of you just need to relax and actually answer the question that this forum was created for, would you like or dislike the type of ranking that was described at the top?
> > Better idea: 1-50
>
> Better idea: a working system.
Whaaaa. Hating on mah Halo 2 ranking system?!?
> > > > Better idea: 1-50
> > >
> > > Better idea: a working system.
> >
> > The first angry Colonel has entered the thread.
>
> Lol, okay, I have a 45 on this account and a 50 on my other, but that doesn’t matter because with all the boosting, and kicking people offline rank means absolutely NOTHING in Halo 3! A player no matter how good can get a 50 in 20 games with either someone kicking the other team offline, or just boosting. While someone good that plays legit can’t because of the ones boosting and booting offline. Why do you back up a broken system? It makes no sense.
>
> Edit: BTW, just because I don’t like the system doesn’t mean I’m bad, plenty other 50s will also say they don’t like it. And I just checked, you don’t even have a 50, why is that? Is that because you were facing boosters and booters? Or you just bad? Not so great getting called bad by someone who knows absolutely nothing about you playstyle or skill, right? The sooner you realize rank means nothing, the better.
I’d seriously LOVE to see you try to get a 50 in 20 games even while cheating.
In response to the 1-50 system being flawed though, why not fix it instead of just throwing away a great system?
> > > > > Better idea: 1-50
> > > >
> > > > Better idea: a working system.
> > >
> > > The first angry Colonel has entered the thread.
> >
> > Lol, okay, I have a 45 on this account and a 50 on my other, but that doesn’t matter because with all the boosting, and kicking people offline rank means absolutely NOTHING in Halo 3! A player no matter how good can get a 50 in 20 games with either someone kicking the other team offline, or just boosting. While someone good that plays legit can’t because of the ones boosting and booting offline. Why do you back up a broken system? It makes no sense.
> >
> > Edit: BTW, just because I don’t like the system doesn’t mean I’m bad, plenty other 50s will also say they don’t like it. And I just checked, you don’t even have a 50, why is that? Is that because you were facing boosters and booters? Or you just bad? Not so great getting called bad by someone who knows absolutely nothing about you playstyle or skill, right? The sooner you realize rank means nothing, the better.
>
> I’d seriously LOVE to see you try to get a 50 in 20 games even while cheating.
>
> In response to the 1-50 system being flawed though, why not fix it instead of just throwing away a great system?
It’s very possible getting a 50 in less than 20 games in doubles (with the right boosting account). I had someone added who got a 50 in 13 games of team doubles thanks to a booster. If you doubt I can do that myself, that’s just you trying to say I’m bad, so I’ll ignore that being as we’ve never played a single game together.
It’s a good post, but unfortunately no one, especially the Devs, will take it seriously or read it until you put in place some paragraphs instead of a huge wall of text.
So I posted this in another part of the forum but since soo many people asked to have paragraphs I thought I would re-type it and make it a bit easier on the eyes. (yes I know it’s way too late for 343 to make any of these changes but I really did think it was a great idea for them to use and I just wanted to see if everyone else thought the same)
So lately I have really been wondering about the Halo 4 Ranking system, and after reading everything on here I got to thinking about a ranking system that might work. So I thought I would put it all on here and see if some people would either like it or dislike it and why so if you would let me explain my thought process.
I was thinking of doing a bit of the mix between having it invisible and visible and also trying to base it somewhat on a “true skill” aspect. Let’s start with the true skill aspect of things,: let’s say if the winner of the game gets 50 points and the loser of the game goes down by 30 points, then (using the reach arena type ranking) you are able to get extra points based on how well you did in that game (meaning if you were to get like an 1100 in reach you would get 11 points added to your skill), this also helps out the losers that played well that game. They go down by 30 but they can off-set that by the 11 points they got that game. (Maybe if they had a negative k/d they go down 11 points that game [just a thought]). Those points will add up and make new rankings (kind of like the halo 3 general based rankings). This will be the first ranking showing to all players, but it would be based on the certain playlist you’re in (IE: team slayer, MLG, Objective, ECT).
The second ranking would be a hidden ranking (only seen IRL by the player or players friends) in which the ranking (maybe 1-100 or something) for each playlist (meaning that each playlist you would need to get a 100 in) and those would add up to give a total “true skill” ranking. So to simplify it: you have 6 different playlists and you have a 50 in all those, you have a “true skill” ranking of 300 (meaning the total possible is 600 but you have a 300). Meaning that the true skill would only be shown to you, and the win to loss ratio would be shown to everyone else.
If you remember the only reason that people bought halo 3 (50’s) was because you could “lock” a 50 in by playing a lot of games on it and it would eventually not move, meaning that when people bought them they would always keep it. But if you were to make the “general” ranking max out, then all the players would do is inevitably lose it or keep it if they are able to keep winning.
Another example, let’s say it takes 10,000 points to get your “general” but to max it out the points would only go to 10,200, meaning that if you don’t keep winning then that general status would be lost very quickly, but you would still be able to “lock” in your overall status (which in this case was at 300).
One other thing to add before I stop this rambling, I did hear on other interviews that they already have a skill (I think it’s in reach) where it will automatically tell who is projected to win or lose the game. Meaning that if the team that is supposed to win, wins, then they would get the 50 points; while if the team that was supposed to lose, wins, then they would get a bonus 70 (or more) points because they were projected to lose. (and vise verse, those that are supposed to win, lose, they go down more than 30 points)
I don’t know, let me know what you think, if this might be something that would/could work or not. Sorry if there was a bunch of spelling errors because I am terrible with English. Thanks for listening though and hopefully 343 know what they are doing, because reach was a really big disappointment.
Oh and one last thing, someone said earlier (in another forum) that the reporting system (that is on the Xbox itself [report a player]) is broken and doesn’t work. I agree with this that its broken, but if it has been proven to be broken then wouldn’t 343 actually be able to write one into their own game in which you can rate the player and if necessary ban them from playing you in the future. This would help out with the trash talk a bit (or at least the repeated trash talk) and also if you were to display the “rating” then you would be able to see if your playing with someone that other people like or dislike and you might also be able to match up with those certain types of people. Just a thought.
So many words!
Though really if halo 4 is going to have any ranked or skill games arena will have to make a big step up
Paragraphs…
Independent skill and progression ranks with the option to hide them and your stats.