Ranking system VS Progression system.

Hypothetically speaking, if there was only going to be one or the other which would YOU prefer?

Ranking system- (something similar to H3/H2 but improved by being more consistent)
Progression system- (like Reach’s ranks i.e general/inheritor/recruit)

I would like a ranking system. But everything is going to be a progression system nowadays because it rewards everyone now.

A ranking system would be better. If they could change it up a bit, it would be nice.

But we know there is going to be both though.

From what I heard it’s going to be more of a progression system.

I would love a ranking system that is based purely off wins, and winning consistently.

For example, lets just assume its a 1-50 system.

WIN 2 times in a row and rank up. This should be the only requirements for ranking up, regardless of playing with friends or solo. Halo is a team based shooter and you shouldn’t be penalized for playing with your friends. By ranking up for every 2 wins in a row you would have to play well consistently.

LOSE 2 times in a row and rank down. This way you don’t suffer by having one bad game. You would just have to restart you win streak again.

This seams the simplest way to rank up that makes sense and is consistent. It also would let you know EXACTLY what you need to do in order to progress.

A great Ranking system
Can help make or break the longevity of a game .

Although its been made clear that Halo 4 will have Both styles

I like have to work for my Rank not just AFK all day to hit max Rank .

> I would love a ranking system that is based purely off wins, and winning consistently.
>
> For example, lets just assume its a 1-50 system.
>
> WIN 2 times in a row and rank up. This should be the only requirements for ranking up, regardless of playing with friends or solo. Halo is a team based shooter and you shouldn’t be penalized for playing with your friends. By ranking up for every 2 wins in a row you would have to play well consistently.
>
> LOSE 2 times in a row and rank down. This way you don’t suffer by having one bad game. You would just have to restart you win streak again.
>
> This seams the simplest way to rank up that makes sense and is consistent. It also would let you know EXACTLY what you need to do in order to progress.

You should really consider bad teammates and afkers, it shouldn’t be based on win/loss, but on Personal stats.

> You should really consider bad teammates and afkers, it shouldn’t be based on win/loss, but on Personal stats.

Already tried that with the first half dozen seasons for Arena.

What resulted was griefing. Players hogging power weapons, ignoring teamates, even going so far as to kill teamates damaged by enemies to ensure they had a higher score.

I prefer ranking systems. I don’t see why we can’t have both though a progression system by itself in Halo will not suffice.

> Hypothetically speaking, if there was only going to be one or the other which would YOU prefer?
>
> Ranking system- (something similar to H3/H2 but improved by being more consistent)
> Progression system- (like Reach’s ranks i.e general/inheritor/recruit)

There’s nothing wrong with both. Progression system in Reach had nothing to do with pairing up players in Matchmaking. It’s entirely possible to fight an inheritor on the first match if that guy played nothing but Firefight(though it is entirely improbable since that would take forever).

Reach’s search for trueskill was too wide, with a bigger imphesis on getting matches going. Add guests into the equation and all but one playlist is a Social match.

Bungie stated that the Progressive system was never meant to be a measurement of skill all the way back to the Public Beta. 343i wants to continue the trend, though with an emphesis on winning instead of participation, in Halo 4. It’s a welcomed system with no real downsides to the game.

The trueskill system just needs to do its job, and pair people up with similar skill to avoid frustration and boredom to players.

> There’s nothing wrong with both.

I would like to challenge that.

The problem with including both is what happened with Reach: Players ignored the Arena system. It’s arguable that the other failings of Arena brought it down but in my mind fixing those would only lessen the severity of the problem.

Including a ranking system (ala H2/H3) is only going to set up player expectations for disappointment and give them false hope.

I think that the smartest thing for the producers of this this game to do would be to have a progression system where the gear that each player unlocks should be rewarded based off of accumulated experience via killing enemies and getting medals (essentially by playing the game.)

But as a coexisting engine, they NEED to implement the Halo 2 numbers ranking system where you receive numbers up to level 43 and then symbols up until 50 that is only attainable by winning games consistently. I think I speak for millions of people when I say that the reason so many played Halo 2 every day and never got bored of it was because of this number system in the competitive playlists. Clicking on someone’s name and seeing their rank really spoke volumes about the players that they were, and I would much rather see a number branded next to everyone’s name that displayed their true skill level rather than a ranking symbol that represented how long that individual has played for.

I was also a little overwhelmed by how long it took to unlock all of the armor and achieve the highest rank. No matter how good you were, you had to play the game all day stressing to meet the cap for the day. It honestly was more of a chore than it was enjoyment. Knowing that you had to team up with good people and actually communicate to win games and rank up was a hell of a lot more fun that anything I have ever done in Halo Reach.

I am not a fan of the arena season ranking systems, and frankly I think that a lot of the Halo community was disappointed by it. I am a competitive player and I had absolutely no desire to succeed in the arena playlist knowing that no one could see my rank unless they had looked in up in my player report, and also that my rank would be deleted at the end of the season.

BRING BACK THE HALO 2 RANKING SYSTEM!!!
PLEASEEEEE!

For anyone who needs a reminder, here is what the numbers looked like.
http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/111/h2ranks.jpg

Why can’t we have both like Halo 3.

I thought that was great.

If it has to be one of the two, take back the Halo 2 numbers ranking system based off of wins and pair people up according to their level. That’s fair, and everyone would enjoy it.

http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/111/h2ranks.jpg

Also, make the numbers look like this. ^

> > I would love a ranking system that is based purely off wins, and winning consistently.
> >
> > For example, lets just assume its a 1-50 system.
> >
> > WIN 2 times in a row and rank up. This should be the only requirements for ranking up, regardless of playing with friends or solo. Halo is a team based shooter and you shouldn’t be penalized for playing with your friends. By ranking up for every 2 wins in a row you would have to play well consistently.
> >
> > LOSE 2 times in a row and rank down. This way you don’t suffer by having one bad game. You would just have to restart you win streak again.
> >
> > This seams the simplest way to rank up that makes sense and is consistent. It also would let you know EXACTLY what you need to do in order to progress.
>
> You should really consider bad teammates and afkers, it shouldn’t be based on win/loss, but on Personal stats.

No. The game being based off of personal stats does not make the game fun at all. It simply makes everyone fight about who gets the power weapons and cause people to break coordination to steal kills and rank up faster. If you are concerned with afkers and bad players, then don’t go into a team slayer ranked match-made game by yourself. Get on a team and show your hard work and dedication to the game by earning a ranking rather than farming one for months. This is Halo, a competitive first person team shooter game, not some stupid role playing game where everyone’s goal is to unlock all of the armor and still play the game poorly. The best part about Halo is that they had a playlist solely dedicated to those casual players: Social Slayer. Keep it that way, or I can assure you the game will not have my business.

> If it has to be one of the two, take back the Halo 2 numbers ranking system based off of wins and pair people up according to their level. That’s fair, and everyone would enjoy it.
>
> http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/111/h2ranks.jpg
>
> Also, make the numbers look like this. ^

I remember being afraid of people with 30 and above. With Reach people with high ranks usually suck

none of the above?

> > There’s nothing wrong with both.
>
> I would like to challenge that.
>
> The problem with including both is what happened with Reach: Players ignored the Arena system. It’s arguable that the other failings of Arena brought it down but in my mind fixing those would only lessen the severity of the problem.
>
> Including a ranking system (ala H2/H3) is only going to set up player expectations for disappointment and give them false hope.

I would like to know why the reason for arena being unpopular was having both a progression and skill based rank…

> > If it has to be one of the two, take back the Halo 2 numbers ranking system based off of wins and pair people up according to their level. That’s fair, and everyone would enjoy it.
> >
> > http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/111/h2ranks.jpg
> >
> > Also, make the numbers look like this. ^
>
> I remember being afraid of people with 30 and above. With Reach people with high ranks usually suck

So true

Reach rank = time played NOT SKILL

HALO 2&3 Rank = Skill + some time played