Ok, so here is an idea for a ranking system that i think will do well.
The template will be kind of like the rating system of Arena, In this instance its going to be 1-1000, or a bigger gap incase there needs to be one.
You start off at the middle of the scale, in this case 500. Every time you get a kill, you get +20 points. You die -20 points. To make it alot easier to understand, let me make a list.
Kill- +20
Death- -20
Assist- +10
Headshot- +5 points added on kill
Killed by Headshot- -5 points added on death
Betrayal- -40
Double Kill- +5
Multi-Kills- +5, +10 and so on. (ex. Triple Kill is +10and Overkills is +15)
Killing Sprees +10, +20 and so on.
Snipe- +5 added on to kill
Sniped- -5 added to death
Win- +150
Loss- -150
etc.
Of course there will be a lot more factors to this, and probably some tweaking, but this is the general idea. This is based on both on individual skill and how well you can play on a team.
At the end of the match, depending on how you do, you will either rank up or rank down, or not change at all. An example
Score:
400-600 no change
600-1000 rank up
1-400 rank down.
The ranks will be like this.
A1-10
B1-10
C1-10
D1-10
E1-10
A is highest and E is lowest. The letters represent the division and the number represents the rank within each division. it will be easier to rank up/down in the ranks but will be slightly harder to rank up/down in the divisions. this is so the matchmaking system can find the best possible matches.
The ranking will be also be based on your own rank and the rank of your opponents. These are not the final calculations but just general outline.
Tell me what you think in the comments below, and hell, maybe even send this to 343i if you think it’s good enough. Thank you! 
Good idea but I think the credit system is more suited no offense
Very inaccessible to casual players. Bad idea.
This system is meant for ranked playlists, not the social gametypes.
No offense taken, but wait, the Credit system? As in Halo Reach? Thats not a ranking system based on how good you are, thats based on how long you’ve played… This system is meant for ranked playlists to replace the old way of ranking, which is just pure win/loss ratio.
Win and losing is all that matters.
Where is your + points for a great callout?
Or pushing the other team and making two guys weak so your teammate can secure rockets?
Win/loss already accounts for k/d and assists and doing skillful things and everything else it needs to. If you do those things better than the other team, you should win. Simple.
Lets say, you search alone in the playlist. Abd you get a team that sucks and lose the match. This is so you don’t rank down just because your team sucked. Would think its fair that you get ranked down x amount of times even though you did great but your team didnt?
I stated that there will be more factors than just what i wrote. Also, YOUR rank is supposed to be based on how YOU do. of course, winning and losing does matter, but dont you think it is a bit broken if you rank down just because your other team members do bad? or you get carried to a higher rank that you dont deserve if your teammates are winning the matches for you? This system is so that if you do good/win, you rank up, and you do bad/lose, you rank down. And if you do good/lose, no change, and do bad/win, no change. This eliminates being carried by someone or being pulled down by someone.
> Lets say, you search alone in the playlist. Abd you get a team that sucks and lose the match. This is so you don’t rank down just because your team sucked. Would think its fair that you get ranked down x amount of times even though you did great but your team didnt?
Along your time in a playlist you will get no more of a skewed amount of good and bad teammates than anybody else. Nor will you match an uneven skew of good or bad opponents.
It all evens out in the end.
> I stated that there will be more factors than just what i wrote. Also, YOUR rank is supposed to be based on how YOU do. of course, winning and losing does matter, but dont you think it is a bit broken if you rank down just because your other team members do bad? or you get carried to a higher rank that you dont deserve if your teammates are winning the matches for you? This system is so that if you do good/win, you rank up, and you do bad/lose, you rank down. And if you do good/lose, no change, and do bad/win, no change. This eliminates being carried by someone or being pulled down by someone.
The problem is a lot of the stuff YOU do to win cannot be quantified.
The bigger problem of course is the impact individual ranking has on gameplay. We saw this with arena in reach. Once you start getting ranked against your teammates, teammates start to play against each other as well as the other team.
Why would I sacrifice myself to make sure my team gets the rockets when all that does is give me negative points and give my teammate some rocket kills and + points?
My teammate is one shot with sniper? Why wouldn’t I kill him and take it? That’s + points for me and - points for him.
Questions like “hmm are we winning by enough that I can melee my teammate while he tries to snipe” should never enter into your mind, but they do with an individual ranking system.
> Win and losing is all that matters.
>
> Where is your + points for a great callout?
>
> Or pushing the other team and making two guys weak so your teammate can secure rockets?
In reality I’d understand for objective game types just to count for wins, but not for slayer. The point of the game is to get to 50 kills the fastest, no matter how you get them. So the more kills your contribute the better.
> > Win and losing is all that matters.
> >
> > Where is your + points for a great callout?
> >
> > Or pushing the other team and making two guys weak so your teammate can secure rockets?
>
> In reality I’d understand for objective game types just to count for wins, but not for slayer. The point of the game is to get to 50 kills the fastest, no matter how you get them. So the more kills your contribute the better.
No, not at all.
Some guy could sit back on your side all game hogging sniper, doing horribly with it while providing no assistance and get a high amount of kills and good k/d.
Hell he could be 100% the reason you lose a game and go like 15-2.
> > I stated that there will be more factors than just what i wrote. Also, YOUR rank is supposed to be based on how YOU do. of course, winning and losing does matter, but dont you think it is a bit broken if you rank down just because your other team members do bad? or you get carried to a higher rank that you dont deserve if your teammates are winning the matches for you? This system is so that if you do good/win, you rank up, and you do bad/lose, you rank down. And if you do good/lose, no change, and do bad/win, no change. This eliminates being carried by someone or being pulled down by someone.
>
> The problem is a lot of the stuff YOU do to win cannot be quantified.
>
> The bigger problem of course is the impact individual ranking has on gameplay. We saw this with arena in reach. Once you start getting ranked against your teammates, teammates start to play against each other as well as the other team.
>
> Why would I sacrifice myself to make sure my team gets the rockets when all that does is give me negative points and give my teammate some rocket kills and + points?
>
> My teammate is one shot with sniper? Why wouldn’t I kill him and take it? That’s + points for me and - points for him.
>
> Questions like “hmm are we winning by enough that I can melee my teammate while he tries to snipe” should never enter into your mind, but they do with an individual ranking system.
Thats a good point, but winning and losing still counts alot in this system. How about making win/loss count more? And making betrayals -150 points or having the inability to rank up if you have a betrayal? Maybe getting more points for assists and saving a teammate from dying? Or give you points for giving a teammate a power weapon? Of course there will be a way to prevent boosters from exploiting this. How about making deaths slightly less punishing so you can make sacrifices once in a while? I think this is a good system, but I want people to improve on it and make it better instead of just blowing it off. Thats the main reason i posted it here on the forums. So instead of saying it won’t work, tell me what would could be changed to make it work.
you shouldn’t have to rank down you should only rank up
> you shouldn’t have to rank down you should only rank up
What? no. That was Reach’s system. Did it work well? No. Worst system of any Halo game. If you have been progessively getting better or worse, you shouldn’t be playing with people who are better or worse than you, it just ruins the experience. People want a challenge(not easy), but not so much that they get dominated every game.
It sounds alot like the formula arena originally used, except a kill was worth 3x more than a death would penalize you, to promote playing aggressively instead of camping to keep a high K/D. Another issue with your system is penalizing a player for getting killed by a headshot, you shouldn’t be penalized for something you have no control over.
On the bright-side, your system is alot easier for players to relate to. The arena rating system in reach had too many unknown variables, your rating would randomly increase/decrease throughout the course of the game, and you could never tell by how much a kill or assist or death was going to affect your rating, it seemed to be a random amount each time, I think it used percentage values which are too difficult to calculate in your head.
> It sounds alot like the formula arena originally used, except a kill was worth 3x more than a death would penalize you, to promote playing aggressively instead of camping to keep a high K/D. Another issue with your system is penalizing a player for getting killed by a headshot, you shouldn’t be penalized for something you have no control over.
>
> On the bright-side, your system is alot easier for players to relate to. The arena rating system in reach had too many unknown variables, your rating would randomly increase/decrease throughout the course of the game, and you could never tell by how much a kill or assist or death was going to affect your rating, it seemed to be a random amount each time, I think it used percentage values which are too difficult to calculate in your head.
Thanks for the feedback! One of the only nice comments on this topic. Yes, it does seem the deaths count as too much, and being killed by headshot shouldnt count. I was thinking at the time that you could control that, by crouching or strafing enough. But i realized thats flawed :/. If you have any more ideas to add to this feel free to say so!