Ranking, what should it be?

So ranks for a lot of people are important in Halo and it always seems hard to have approval from everyone. My personal favourite type of ranking is just plain Truskill but I like the idea of having more than one type of rank system.

I think there should be separate ranks for campaign, Firefight and custom games (assuming Halo 4 has all of these) these ranks however should be based on EXP alone. While matchmaking is based on Truskill. These ranks should unlock items for that game mode. For example your Firefight rank would unlock Firefight voices etc.

What do you guys think the ranking system should be like?

Why on earth would you put ranks in customs?

Combining Halo 3 and Reachs way of ranking would be ideal. Allowing a visible trueskill division in every playlist, and a 1-50 rank based in W/L for ranked playlists! The credit/EXP system in reach also seems to get the job done nicely.

What i would want added is a second title next to your EXP rank that can be unlocked through achievments, challenges, or commendations! As an example complete the a challenge of 10 sniper kills in a row and unlock the title SNIPER, or 5 assasination in one game and unlock title NINJA. This would allow us to see a persons playstyle or specialty!

The custom game ranking should be something based on the amount of time spent playing, not anything based on wins or loses.

Halo 4 ranking should be 1-50. Simple as that and no Custom Game ranks because that would be dumb.

Credits as EXP and buying stuff, 1-50 as your ranking. Easy.

This is what I would do:

Every rank is based upon milestones; there are certain requirements that need to be completed in order to rank up. There are still credits that are earned during every game, but these credits no longer dictate rank. They’re only important for purchasing things from the Armoury.

Here’s a couple of examples of how this would work:

> Recruit
> Requirements: Complete a game in any game mode.
> Reward: 1,000 credits
>
> Private, Grade 1
> Requirements: Win 10 multiplayer matchmaking games. Get 1 ordinance kill.
> Reward: 2,000 credits
>
> Sergeant, Grade 1
> Requirements: Win 25 multiplayer matchmaking games. Get 100 precision weapon kills. And complete Campaign on at least Normal Difficulty.
> Reward: 5,000 credits
>
> Captain, Grade 1
> Requirements: Win 50 multiplayer matchmaking games. Get 250 headshots. And complete Campaign on at least Heroic Difficulty.
> Reward: 10,000 credits
>
> Colonel, Grade 1
> Requirements: Win 100 multiplayer matchmaking games. Get 100 sticky kills. And complete Campaign on at least Legendary Difficulty.
> Reward: 25,000 credits
>
> General, Grade 1
> Requirements: Win 500 multiplayer matchmaking games. Get an Extermination. Claim all hidden skulls. Find all terminals.
> Reward: 50,000 credits

Obviously this was put together very quickly just now. But if a lot of time was put into it, there could be a lot more balance between rank requirements. And the requirements could generally be better thought out. There could even be alternative methods of attaining a new rank depending upon play style. And if that idea was elaborated upon, whichever requirements you followed to get to the rank after Gunnery Sergeant could decide whether you become a First Sergeant or Master Sergeant, for example. Ranking would have the potential to become less linear.

I’d love it if Reach and 3’s ranking were combined. 3’s for ranked, Reach’s for social, and they would be two different independent ranks.

> This is what I would do:
>
> Every rank is based upon milestones; there are certain requirements that need to be completed in order to rank up. There are still credits that are earned during every game, but these credits no longer dictate rank. They’re only important for purchasing things from the Armoury.
>
> Here’s a couple of examples of how this would work:
>
>
>
> > Recruit
> > Requirements: Complete a game in any game mode.
> > Reward: 1,000 credits
> >
> > Private, Grade 1
> > Requirements: Win 10 multiplayer matchmaking games. Get 1 ordinance kill.
> > Reward: 2,000 credits
> >
> > Sergeant, Grade 1
> > Requirements: Win 25 multiplayer matchmaking games. Get 100 precision weapon kills. And complete Campaign on at least Normal Difficulty.
> > Reward: 5,000 credits
> >
> > Captain, Grade 1
> > Requirements: Win 50 multiplayer matchmaking games. Get 250 headshots. And complete Campaign on at least Heroic Difficulty.
> > Reward: 10,000 credits
> >
> > Colonel, Grade 1
> > Requirements: Win 100 multiplayer matchmaking games. Get 100 sticky kills. And complete Campaign on at least Legendary Difficulty.
> > Reward: 25,000 credits
> >
> > General, Grade 1
> > Requirements: Win 500 multiplayer matchmaking games. Get an Extermination. Claim all hidden skulls. Find all terminals.
> > Reward: 50,000 credits
>
> Obviously this was put together very quickly just now. But if a lot of time was put into it, there could be a lot more balance between rank requirements. And the requirements could generally be better thought out. There could even be alternative methods of attaining a new rank depending upon play style. And if that idea was elaborated upon, whichever requirements you followed to get to the rank after Gunnery Sergeant could decide whether you become a First Sergeant or Master Sergeant, for example. Ranking would have the potential to become less linear.

No I think 1-50 is better

> This is what I would do:
>
> Every rank is based upon milestones; there are certain requirements that need to be completed in order to rank up. There are still credits that are earned during every game, but these credits no longer dictate rank. They’re only important for purchasing things from the Armoury.
>
> Here’s a couple of examples of how this would work:
>
>
>
> > Recruit
> > Requirements: Complete a game in any game mode.
> > Reward: 1,000 credits
> >
> > Private, Grade 1
> > Requirements: Win 10 multiplayer matchmaking games. Get 1 ordinance kill.
> > Reward: 2,000 credits
> >
> > Sergeant, Grade 1
> > Requirements: Win 25 multiplayer matchmaking games. Get 100 precision weapon kills. And complete Campaign on at least Normal Difficulty.
> > Reward: 5,000 credits
> >
> > Captain, Grade 1
> > Requirements: Win 50 multiplayer matchmaking games. Get 250 headshots. And complete Campaign on at least Heroic Difficulty.
> > Reward: 10,000 credits
> >
> > Colonel, Grade 1
> > Requirements: Win 100 multiplayer matchmaking games. Get 100 sticky kills. And complete Campaign on at least Legendary Difficulty.
> > Reward: 25,000 credits
> >
> > General, Grade 1
> > Requirements: Win 500 multiplayer matchmaking games. Get an Extermination. Claim all hidden skulls. Find all terminals.
> > Reward: 50,000 credits
>
> Obviously this was put together very quickly just now. But if a lot of time was put into it, there could be a lot more balance between rank requirements. And the requirements could generally be better thought out. There could even be alternative methods of attaining a new rank depending upon play style. And if that idea was elaborated upon, whichever requirements you followed to get to the rank after Gunnery Sergeant could decide whether you become a First Sergeant or Master Sergeant, for example. Ranking would have the potential to become less linear.

I agree, but I think combined with the 1-50 system to get higher ranks, like above Colonel. I don’t know the inner workings of the 1-50 system, but I think it should not only take into account the number of kills, but also the 1-50 level of the other player.

Alternate Titles would be nice as well, like getting 10 Perfections, or 10 Killionaires would be high enough goals to have. You could also say that two, or three, of the titles would require two of the medal in the same game, depending on the metal.

How about removing all plausible multiplayer goals altogether; rank, monetary values, achievements, ect.
The multiplayer would never have to suffer from any of the issues like they used to.

I-50 is all we need.

> > This is what I would do:
> >
> > Every rank is based upon milestones; there are certain requirements that need to be completed in order to rank up. There are still credits that are earned during every game, but these credits no longer dictate rank. They’re only important for purchasing things from the Armoury.
> >
> > Here’s a couple of examples of how this would work:
> >
> >
> >
> > > Recruit
> > > Requirements: Complete a game in any game mode.
> > > Reward: 1,000 credits
> > >
> > > Private, Grade 1
> > > Requirements: Win 10 multiplayer matchmaking games. Get 1 ordinance kill.
> > > Reward: 2,000 credits
> > >
> > > Sergeant, Grade 1
> > > Requirements: Win 25 multiplayer matchmaking games. Get 100 precision weapon kills. And complete Campaign on at least Normal Difficulty.
> > > Reward: 5,000 credits
> > >
> > > Captain, Grade 1
> > > Requirements: Win 50 multiplayer matchmaking games. Get 250 headshots. And complete Campaign on at least Heroic Difficulty.
> > > Reward: 10,000 credits
> > >
> > > Colonel, Grade 1
> > > Requirements: Win 100 multiplayer matchmaking games. Get 100 sticky kills. And complete Campaign on at least Legendary Difficulty.
> > > Reward: 25,000 credits
> > >
> > > General, Grade 1
> > > Requirements: Win 500 multiplayer matchmaking games. Get an Extermination. Claim all hidden skulls. Find all terminals.
> > > Reward: 50,000 credits
> >
> > Obviously this was put together very quickly just now. But if a lot of time was put into it, there could be a lot more balance between rank requirements. And the requirements could generally be better thought out. There could even be alternative methods of attaining a new rank depending upon play style. And if that idea was elaborated upon, whichever requirements you followed to get to the rank after Gunnery Sergeant could decide whether you become a First Sergeant or Master Sergeant, for example. Ranking would have the potential to become less linear.
>
> I agree, but I think combined with the 1-50 system to get higher ranks, like above Colonel. I don’t know the inner workings of the 1-50 system, but I think it should not only take into account the number of kills, but also the 1-50 level of the other player.
>
> Alternate Titles would be nice as well, like getting 10 Perfections, or 10 Killionaires would be high enough goals to have. You could also say that two, or three, of the titles would require two of the medal in the same game, depending on the metal.

Sure, skill levels could be another requirement. :wink:

Halo 4 should use divisions for EVERY playlist like Halo Reach does for The Arena. There should also be NO seasons but like The Arena in Halo Reach, if you don’t play for a while you may get knocked back a division. The playlists should be divided into to groups, Ranked and Social. Both groups will use divisions but Ranked will only match players who are in the same divisions. Social will match players with anyone.

There should also be an EXP system similar to Halo 3.

> Halo 4 should use divisions for EVERY playlist like Halo Reach does for The Arena. There should also be NO seasons but like The Arena in Halo Reach, if you don’t play for a while you may get knocked back a division. The playlists should be divided into to groups, Ranked and Social. Both groups will use divisions but Ranked will only match players who are in the same divisions. Social will match players with anyone.
>
> There should also be an EXP system similar to Halo 3.

No… 1-50 is better. Arena Failed and so did Reach

Raw trueskill only, and not the tweaked one from Halo 3, but the one from Halo 2 for ranked. Then there should be a pure exp based ranking system for social, but it should also only be based on wins. This would quarantee that everyone tries to win. Maybe there could even be exp rewards if your team wins the match fast or with big point difference, in CTF for example a 3-1 or 3-0. This would actually encourage people to go for the objective and protect their own.

> Why on earth would you put ranks in customs?

this.

actually no. lets do it. i wanna see a bunch of idiots boost their custom games rank LOL! HAHAHAHAHAHA

“you wanna play -insert fun, non serious gametype-?”

“NO DUDE, im a level 50 in customs, and i dont wanna lose it”

LOL!

as for ranking, the best ranking system would be as follows

FIRST AND FOREMOST, it would be 100% invisible. you should also have an option to toggle who can see your stats, between friends / anyone / no one. lots of people troll each other about stats, and this would alleviate this problem.

from there, use any ranking system that pairs up like-skilled people together. be that 1-50, or whatever. doesnt matter.

I love how Reach’s ranking system goes into much more depth as to where you stand competitively. Having a 50 was great and all, but after seeing so many others have one as well, it kinda just got dull. I mean, there’s only a handful of top 1% Onyx players (30-40). I’d feel much more accomplished being one of those people. I’m top 15% as of right now. The only problem is… there has to be more incentive for getting that far. A visual rank or even a leaderboard (it gets annoying having to go to HaloCharts all the time). An in-game Arena leaderboard consisting of all players and where they stand will promote more competition. Sadly, this will also promote cheating. I’ve already been lag-switched once just recently. Not too bad compared to Halo 2/3 lol.

So yeah. Something like Reach’s ranking system but with visual representation.

NO CREDITS!!! Make it exp with a 1-50 true skill system.

> Credits as EXP and buying stuff, 1-50 as your ranking. Easy.

I fully support this.