Skill ranks tied to main global rank.

They need to bring the Halo 3 ranking system back. Getting to max rank in these new games are almost meaningless. You shouldnt be able to get to the max rank unless you get a 50. It also makes the ranks more meaningful like you actually earned them, not this participation trophy crap. You can make the argument that oh it doesnt appeal to casuals. So? Thats just the name of the game homie you either learn the game or too bad go play cod or something. Halo has became a children’s game and as a long time halo fan thats disappointing. Make ranks have meaning.

> 2533274918350812;1:
> They need to bring the Halo 3 ranking system back.

H5 uses H3’s ranking system, so what do you mean by bringing it back? Are you referring to MCC?

> 2533274918350812;1:
> Getting to max rank in these new games are almost meaningless.

Well, getting to max rank has never had tangible meaning. It’s different to every person.

> 2533274918350812;1:
> You shouldnt be able to get to the max rank unless you get a 50.

H5 actually uses a ranking that goes past 50, so it gives more info than H3. But you can certainly still be ranked 50 in H5, it’s just called Diamond 3.

> 2533274918350812;1:
> It also makes the ranks more meaningful like you actually earned them, not this participation trophy crap.

You earn your rank either way, so I’m not sure where your dissatisfaction comes from.

> 2533274918350812;1:
> You can make the argument that oh it doesnt appeal to casuals. So? Thats just the name of the game homie you either learn the game or too bad go play cod or something. Halo has became a children’s game and as a long time halo fan thats disappointing. Make ranks have meaning.

How exactly do you make ranks have meaning? What exactly is the change you want to see?

Linked source proving H5 uses H3 ranking system.I’ll also put the full linked proof in a spoiler bubble here:

> 2533274839818445;2:
> CSR and 1-50 EquivalenciesI’ve seen some interest in knowing how Halo 5’s CSR system relates to Halo 3’s 1-50 system.
> It’s like this:
> - We use the same exact system as Halo 3 - This system gives us a 1-50 for every player like it always did - We rename those numbers like this and tell you that’s your Rank: - 1-6: Bronze - 7-18: Silver - 19-31: Gold - 32-44: Platinum - 45-50: Diamond 1-3 - Halo 3’s system actually goes above 50, but the game hid that. We use those higher numbers to add Ranks beyond 50: - 51-57: Diamond 4-6 - 58+: Onyx - Top 200 Onyx: ChampionExamples:
> - The same exact code that gave you a 43 in Halo 3 still gives you a 43 in Halo 5. We just call you Platinum now instead of 43. - The same exact code that gave you a 50 in Halo 3 still gives you a 50 in Halo 5, we just call you “Diamond 3” instead of 50. BUT, read the next example before you think too hard. - The same exact code from Halo 3 actually gave some of you a “60” in Halo 3, but it was never shown. If you were a “60” in Halo 3, you were still called a “50”. In Halo 5, we call you “Onyx” instead.Again, we literally just took the exact same system and just renamed the Ranks. No funny business here.
>
> Some of you may be thinking, “I was 50 in Halo 3 and I’m better than any Diamond”
>
> Sure, then you actually weren’t a “50” in Halo 3, you were a 65, or a 70, but Halo 3 never revealed that so you never knew.
>
> Also keep in mind:
> - Global FPS skill has increased in the last decade from just sheer numbers and playtime. - Average Halo FPS skill among players who have been playing consistently over the last decade has also increased. Many of the people you considered “20-30” 10 years ago have gotten better, and play in the 40-50 range. Some of them of caught up and even passed you. That’s life.

> 2533274803493024;2:
> > 2533274918350812;1:
> > They need to bring the Halo 3 ranking system back.
>
> H5 uses H3’s ranking system, so what do you mean by bringing it back? Are you referring to MCC?
>
>
> > 2533274918350812;1:
> > Getting to max rank in these new games are almost meaningless.
>
> Well, getting to max rank has never had tangible meaning. It’s different to every person.
>
>
> > 2533274918350812;1:
> > You shouldnt be able to get to the max rank unless you get a 50.
>
> H5 actually uses a ranking that goes past 50, so it gives more info than H3. But you can certainly still be ranked 50 in H5, it’s just called Diamond 3.
>
>
> > 2533274918350812;1:
> > It also makes the ranks more meaningful like you actually earned them, not this participation trophy crap.
>
> You earn your rank either way, so I’m not sure where your dissatisfaction comes from.
>
>
> > 2533274918350812;1:
> > You can make the argument that oh it doesnt appeal to casuals. So? Thats just the name of the game homie you either learn the game or too bad go play cod or something. Halo has became a children’s game and as a long time halo fan thats disappointing. Make ranks have meaning.
>
> How exactly do you make ranks have meaning? What exactly is the change you want to see?
>
> Linked source proving H5 uses H3 ranking system.I’ll also put the full linked proof in a spoiler bubble here:
>
>
>
>
>
> > 2533274839818445;2:
> > CSR and 1-50 EquivalenciesI’ve seen some interest in knowing how Halo 5’s CSR system relates to Halo 3’s 1-50 system.
> > It’s like this:
> > - We use the same exact system as Halo 3 - This system gives us a 1-50 for every player like it always did - We rename those numbers like this and tell you that’s your Rank: - 1-6: Bronze - 7-18: Silver - 19-31: Gold - 32-44: Platinum - 45-50: Diamond 1-3 - Halo 3’s system actually goes above 50, but the game hid that. We use those higher numbers to add Ranks beyond 50: - 51-57: Diamond 4-6 - 58+: Onyx - Top 200 Onyx: ChampionExamples:
> > - The same exact code that gave you a 43 in Halo 3 still gives you a 43 in Halo 5. We just call you Platinum now instead of 43. - The same exact code that gave you a 50 in Halo 3 still gives you a 50 in Halo 5, we just call you “Diamond 3” instead of 50. BUT, read the next example before you think too hard. - The same exact code from Halo 3 actually gave some of you a “60” in Halo 3, but it was never shown. If you were a “60” in Halo 3, you were still called a “50”. In Halo 5, we call you “Onyx” instead.Again, we literally just took the exact same system and just renamed the Ranks. No funny business here.
> >
> > Some of you may be thinking, “I was 50 in Halo 3 and I’m better than any Diamond”
> >
> > Sure, then you actually weren’t a “50” in Halo 3, you were a 65, or a 70, but Halo 3 never revealed that so you never knew.
> >
> > Also keep in mind:
> > - Global FPS skill has increased in the last decade from just sheer numbers and playtime. - Average Halo FPS skill among players who have been playing consistently over the last decade has also increased. Many of the people you considered “20-30” 10 years ago have gotten better, and play in the 40-50 range. Some of them of caught up and even passed you. That’s life.
>
>
>

I just mean that you should have the main rank (like sr1-152) be tied to the csr. I also mean that like the xp you get in Halo 5 is only tied to how much you play the game, not how good you are. Think of Halo 3, you win a game you get an xp point, you lose a game you get nothing. The ranks hold more meaning when its like that as opposed to a system like halo 5 where you can play a game with an sr152 and they arent that good. When someone was a 5 star general in Halo 3 you can tell immediately that they were a very very skilled player. In Halo 5 when i match against an sr152 (which I cant tell that they are until the post game), theres no definite answer that theyll be good or not. A lot of sr152s that i play with end up just being average at best.

> 2533274803493024;2:
> > 2533274918350812;1:
> > They need to bring the Halo 3 ranking system back.
>
> H5 uses H3’s ranking system, so what do you mean by bringing it back? Are you referring to MCC?
>
>
> > 2533274918350812;1:
> > Getting to max rank in these new games are almost meaningless.
>
> Well, getting to max rank has never had tangible meaning. It’s different to every person.
>
>
> > 2533274918350812;1:
> > You shouldnt be able to get to the max rank unless you get a 50.
>
> H5 actually uses a ranking that goes past 50, so it gives more info than H3. But you can certainly still be ranked 50 in H5, it’s just called Diamond 3.
>
>
> > 2533274918350812;1:
> > It also makes the ranks more meaningful like you actually earned them, not this participation trophy crap.
>
> You earn your rank either way, so I’m not sure where your dissatisfaction comes from.
>
>
> > 2533274918350812;1:
> > You can make the argument that oh it doesnt appeal to casuals. So? Thats just the name of the game homie you either learn the game or too bad go play cod or something. Halo has became a children’s game and as a long time halo fan thats disappointing. Make ranks have meaning.
>
> How exactly do you make ranks have meaning? What exactly is the change you want to see?
>
> Linked source proving H5 uses H3 ranking system.I’ll also put the full linked proof in a spoiler bubble here:
>
>
>
>
>
> > 2533274839818445;2:
> > CSR and 1-50 EquivalenciesI’ve seen some interest in knowing how Halo 5’s CSR system relates to Halo 3’s 1-50 system.
> > It’s like this:
> > - We use the same exact system as Halo 3 - This system gives us a 1-50 for every player like it always did - We rename those numbers like this and tell you that’s your Rank: - 1-6: Bronze - 7-18: Silver - 19-31: Gold - 32-44: Platinum - 45-50: Diamond 1-3 - Halo 3’s system actually goes above 50, but the game hid that. We use those higher numbers to add Ranks beyond 50: - 51-57: Diamond 4-6 - 58+: Onyx - Top 200 Onyx: ChampionExamples:
> > - The same exact code that gave you a 43 in Halo 3 still gives you a 43 in Halo 5. We just call you Platinum now instead of 43. - The same exact code that gave you a 50 in Halo 3 still gives you a 50 in Halo 5, we just call you “Diamond 3” instead of 50. BUT, read the next example before you think too hard. - The same exact code from Halo 3 actually gave some of you a “60” in Halo 3, but it was never shown. If you were a “60” in Halo 3, you were still called a “50”. In Halo 5, we call you “Onyx” instead.Again, we literally just took the exact same system and just renamed the Ranks. No funny business here.
> >
> > Some of you may be thinking, “I was 50 in Halo 3 and I’m better than any Diamond”
> >
> > Sure, then you actually weren’t a “50” in Halo 3, you were a 65, or a 70, but Halo 3 never revealed that so you never knew.
> >
> > Also keep in mind:
> > - Global FPS skill has increased in the last decade from just sheer numbers and playtime. - Average Halo FPS skill among players who have been playing consistently over the last decade has also increased. Many of the people you considered “20-30” 10 years ago have gotten better, and play in the 40-50 range. Some of them of caught up and even passed you. That’s life.
>
>
>

Also i just dont like the names of the ranks in Halo 5. I literally have no desire to get to 147 to 148. They need to have cool names tied to them (ie: mythic, 5 star general, inheritor, noble, sargeant, corporal, etc). The sr ranks arent just boring but they are just lazy.

<mark>Firstly, please don’t post consecutively. Just edit your post if you want to add more info, thank you :)</mark>

> 2533274918350812;3:
> > 2533274803493024;2:
> > > 2533274918350812;1:
> > > Snip
>
> I just mean that you should have the main rank (like sr1-152) be tied to the csr.

This leads to players capping off early. Not every player can be a 1337 Champion, so that would mean every player that’s below champion would likely reach their limit early. I remember being very dissatisfied with this system in H3- my skill capped out at either 41 or 43 and after a few months of playing the game my rank was forever determined and unable to be changed.

Gatekeeping these ranks is a bad idea, leaving them open and just tied to time spent in game gives players a reason to come back- especially players that aren’t interested in ranks or ranked gameplay.

> I also mean that like the xp you get in Halo 5 is only tied to how much you play the game, not how good you are.

Yes it is. Why would it need to be capped by skill? Are you telling me that I shouldn’t have the right to grind to 152 because I’ve never hit champion status? Why do you need two different ranks tied to skill? Surely they should be different.

> Think of Halo 3, you win a game you get an xp point, you lose a game you get nothing.

Yeah, I hated that system since it capped me very early.

> The ranks hold more meaning when its like that as opposed to a system like halo 5 where you can play a game with an sr152 and they arent that good.

The ranks do not hold more meaning like that, you just prefer them that way as an individual. 152s don’t need to be good, they’re being rewarded for sticking with the game and grinding the game- facets that have no relation to skill level.

> When someone was a 5 star general in Halo 3 you can tell immediately that they were a very very skilled player.

Again I find myself in disagreement with you. Most of the 5 star generals I knew got there by asking a talented Halo friend to get them to 50. I can guarantee you that I saw a LOT of 5 star generals in H3 that I was better than, and I was never anything more than average. Account selling and boosting were rampant in the H3 days because the ranks didn’t reset.

> In Halo 5 when i match against an sr152 (which I cant tell that they are until the post game), theres no definite answer that theyll be good or not.
> A lot of sr152s that i play with end up just being average at best.

Why do you need to guarantee 152s have reached a certain threshold of skill? If you’re playing ranked, then you can rest assured the matchmaking system has attempted to find you enemies of near equal skill. That’s what the matchmaking system is for- not the 152 moniker.

> Also i just dont like the names of the ranks in Halo 5.

See this is the verbiage I believe you intend to use for the entirety of your post. When you say “ranks have more meaning with X” you intend to say “I don’t like the ranking system in H5.”

I personally prefer the numbers, simply because I don’t know what order the military ranks are. For some reason it’s difficult for me to remember the order so I’m always guessing. Numbers are nice and straightforward.

> I literally have no desire to get to 147 to 148. They need to have cool names tied to them (ie: mythic, 5 star general, inheritor, noble, sargeant, corporal, etc). The sr ranks arent just boring but they are just lazy.

So if 147 were named “Noble” and 148 were named “Inheritor” you’d be more inclined to grind? Because they’re not numbers? To each their own!

I think they should keep them separated.
Players who aren’t very good (ie me and most other players) shouldn’t be locked out of progression.
That said, I do think that there should be some special benefits for being high rank (emblems, nameplates, armors etc)

ETA: The point of progression is not to emphasize skill but to give a player a long term reason to return to the game. Skill level should return, obviously, but it should remain separate unless you want the non-competitive fans to drop the game in 6 months

> 2533274846978810;6:
> I think they should keep them separated.
> Players who aren’t very good (ie me and most other players) shouldn’t be locked out of progression.
> That said, I do think that there should be some special benefits for being high rank (emblems, nameplates, armors etc)
>
> ETA: The point of progression is not to emphasize skill but to give a player a long term reason to return to the game. Skill level should return, obviously, but it should remain separate unless you want the non-competitive fans to drop the game in 6 months

We don’t want anyone to drop the game period =[

> 2533274803493024;5:
> Firstly, please don’t post consecutively. Just edit your post if you want to add more info, thank you :slight_smile:
>
>
> > 2533274918350812;3:
> > > 2533274803493024;2:
> > > > 2533274918350812;1:
> > > > Snip
> >
> > I just mean that you should have the main rank (like sr1-152) be tied to the csr.
>
> This leads to players capping off early. Not every player can be a 1337 Champion, so that would mean every player that’s below champion would likely reach their limit early. I remember being very dissatisfied with this system in H3- my skill capped out at either 41 or 43 and after a few months of playing the game my rank was forever determined and unable to be changed.
>
> Gatekeeping these ranks is a bad idea, leaving them open and just tied to time spent in game gives players a reason to come back- especially players that aren’t interested in ranks or ranked gameplay.
>
>
> > I also mean that like the xp you get in Halo 5 is only tied to how much you play the game, not how good you are.
>
> Yes it is. Why would it need to be capped by skill? Are you telling me that I shouldn’t have the right to grind to 152 because I’ve never hit champion status? Why do you need two different ranks tied to skill? Surely they should be different.
>
>
> > Think of Halo 3, you win a game you get an xp point, you lose a game you get nothing.
>
> Yeah, I hated that system since it capped me very early.
>
>
> > The ranks hold more meaning when its like that as opposed to a system like halo 5 where you can play a game with an sr152 and they arent that good.
>
> The ranks do not hold more meaning like that, you just prefer them that way as an individual. 152s don’t need to be good, they’re being rewarded for sticking with the game and grinding the game- facets that have no relation to skill level.
>
>
> > When someone was a 5 star general in Halo 3 you can tell immediately that they were a very very skilled player.
>
> Again I find myself in disagreement with you. Most of the 5 star generals I knew got there by asking a talented Halo friend to get them to 50. I can guarantee you that I saw a LOT of 5 star generals in H3 that I was better than, and I was never anything more than average. Account selling and boosting were rampant in the H3 days because the ranks didn’t reset.
>
>
> > In Halo 5 when i match against an sr152 (which I cant tell that they are until the post game), theres no definite answer that theyll be good or not.
> > A lot of sr152s that i play with end up just being average at best.
>
> Why do you need to guarantee 152s have reached a certain threshold of skill? If you’re playing ranked, then you can rest assured the matchmaking system has attempted to find you enemies of near equal skill. That’s what the matchmaking system is for- not the 152 moniker.
>
>
> > Also i just dont like the names of the ranks in Halo 5.
>
> See this is the verbiage I believe you intend to use for the entirety of your post. When you say “ranks have more meaning with X” you intend to say “I don’t like the ranking system in H5.”
>
> I personally prefer the numbers, simply because I don’t know what order the military ranks are. For some reason it’s difficult for me to remember the order so I’m always guessing. Numbers are nice and straightforward.
>
>
> > I literally have no desire to get to 147 to 148. They need to have cool names tied to them (ie: mythic, 5 star general, inheritor, noble, sargeant, corporal, etc). The sr ranks arent just boring but they are just lazy.
>
> So if 147 were named “Noble” and 148 were named “Inheritor” you’d be more inclined to grind? Because they’re not numbers? To each their own!

I see where youre coming from man. Dont get me wrong I didnt get a very high skill level back in Halo 3 but idk man I just think that it would be better for Halo. It was a unique system that works best for Halo and its only in Halo. You hardly see that system in any other shooter. Yes it would be a pain in the -Yoink- to get your skill level up to get to max rank but isnt max rank supposed to be more of a challenge as opposed to a grind? The numbers are boring my guy. Wouldn’t it be awesome to say that oh wow look at me I have title (5 star general, inheritor, etc) as opposed to hey looook at me im a number.

> 2533274846978810;6:
> I think they should keep them separated.
> Players who aren’t very good (ie me and most other players) shouldn’t be locked out of progression.
> That said, I do think that there should be some special benefits for being high rank (emblems, nameplates, armors etc)
>
> ETA: The point of progression is not to emphasize skill but to give a player a long term reason to return to the game. Skill level should return, obviously, but it should remain separate unless you want the non-competitive fans to drop the game in 6 months

I know what you mean dude but it just makes the ranks hold more significance to them. If the casual isnt going to stay for long to get the skill rank up why do you expect them to stay for the grind?

> 2533274918350812;8:
> I see where youre coming from man. Dont get me wrong I didnt get a very high skill level back in Halo 3 but idk man I just think that it would be better for Halo. It was a unique system that works best for Halo and its only in Halo. You hardly see that system in any other shooter.

Tying ranks to skill has nothing specifically to do with Halo, and attaching fiction-y words when military ranks are depleted isn’t Halo specific either. You hardly see that system in any other shooter because it’s just not a great system.

> Yes it would be a pain in the -Yoink- to get your skill level up to get to max rank but isnt max rank supposed to be more of a challenge as opposed to a grind?

Straightforwardly and bluntly, no. The max SR not supposed to be a skill based challenge- it reflects how much time is spent in game and is thusly a representative of grind.

> The numbers are boring my guy. Wouldn’t it be awesome to say that oh wow look at me I have title (5 star general, inheritor, etc) as opposed to hey looook at me im a number.

I definitely get where you’re coming from and can see how you’d prefer this, but I do prefer numbers for their simplicity. When someone tells me they’re a 125 in H5 I know what that means. When someone tells me they’re a Mythic or Nova in Reach, it has no meaning because I don’t know which one is higher or what that represents. I have a hard enough time keeping the military ranks straight, keeping the made up fiction-y names straight is even harder.

> 2533274918350812;9:
> > 2533274846978810;6:
> > I think they should keep them separated.
> > Players who aren’t very good (ie me and most other players) shouldn’t be locked out of progression.
> > That said, I do think that there should be some special benefits for being high rank (emblems, nameplates, armors etc)
> >
> > ETA: The point of progression is not to emphasize skill but to give a player a long term reason to return to the game. Skill level should return, obviously, but it should remain separate unless you want the non-competitive fans to drop the game in 6 months
>
> I know what you mean dude but it just makes the ranks hold more significance to them. If the casual isnt going to stay for long to get the skill rank up why do you expect them to stay for the grind?

Casual fans play because their having fun, they don’t want to stress over competitive rank all the time (especially if they’re not very good). The progression system isn’t the reason they’ll return to the game, but ut will definitely give them an extra incentive and a long term goal which will keep the game in their minds. For instance, if they really want to unlock a specific piece of armor which you get at a certain level. That being said, I do agree with you that the military ranks look cooler than simply numbers running from 1 to 152.

Seeing as Infinite MP is going to ve free to play, the system we’re going to see is likely going to be a Battle Pass thing with seasons, so I don’t know what that really means for progression

> Again I find myself in disagreement with you. Most of the 5 star generals I knew got there by asking a talented Halo friend to get them to 50. I can guarantee you that I saw a LOT of 5 star generals in H3 that I was better than, and I was never anything more than average. Account selling and boosting were rampant in the H3 days because the ranks didn’t reset.

THIS!!!

For the love of God I hope that 343 keep the regular Season resets (and the bias for a loss to drop your CSR).

The account abuse that happened in the ‘good old’ days was a disaster.

As for the XP ranks; Agree that it should be time commitment and not skill based. Not that fussed over number vs military rank - but I remember being completely ambivalent to the ranks - I knew when someone was higher than me (because I hadn’t been there) but I had no idea how far ahead they were. I guess the simplicity in a number is that the gap is quite obvious.

> 2533274803493024;2:
> > 2533274918350812;1:
> > They need to bring the Halo 3 ranking system back.
>
> H5 uses H3’s ranking system, so what do you mean by bringing it back? Are you referring to MCC?
>
>
> > 2533274918350812;1:
> > Getting to max rank in these new games are almost meaningless.
>
> Well, getting to max rank has never had tangible meaning. It’s different to every person.
>
>
> > 2533274918350812;1:
> > You shouldnt be able to get to the max rank unless you get a 50.
>
> H5 actually uses a ranking that goes past 50, so it gives more info than H3. But you can certainly still be ranked 50 in H5, it’s just called Diamond 3.
>
>
> > 2533274918350812;1:
> > It also makes the ranks more meaningful like you actually earned them, not this participation trophy crap.
>
> You earn your rank either way, so I’m not sure where your dissatisfaction comes from.
>
>
> > 2533274918350812;1:
> > You can make the argument that oh it doesnt appeal to casuals. So? Thats just the name of the game homie you either learn the game or too bad go play cod or something. Halo has became a children’s game and as a long time halo fan thats disappointing. Make ranks have meaning.
>
> How exactly do you make ranks have meaning? What exactly is the change you want to see?
>
> Linked source proving H5 uses H3 ranking system.I’ll also put the full linked proof in a spoiler bubble here:
>
>
>
>
>
> > 2533274839818445;2:
> > CSR and 1-50 EquivalenciesI’ve seen some interest in knowing how Halo 5’s CSR system relates to Halo 3’s 1-50 system.
> > It’s like this:
> > - We use the same exact system as Halo 3 - This system gives us a 1-50 for every player like it always did - We rename those numbers like this and tell you that’s your Rank: - 1-6: Bronze - 7-18: Silver - 19-31: Gold - 32-44: Platinum - 45-50: Diamond 1-3 - Halo 3’s system actually goes above 50, but the game hid that. We use those higher numbers to add Ranks beyond 50: - 51-57: Diamond 4-6 - 58+: Onyx - Top 200 Onyx: ChampionExamples:
> > - The same exact code that gave you a 43 in Halo 3 still gives you a 43 in Halo 5. We just call you Platinum now instead of 43. - The same exact code that gave you a 50 in Halo 3 still gives you a 50 in Halo 5, we just call you “Diamond 3” instead of 50. BUT, read the next example before you think too hard. - The same exact code from Halo 3 actually gave some of you a “60” in Halo 3, but it was never shown. If you were a “60” in Halo 3, you were still called a “50”. In Halo 5, we call you “Onyx” instead.Again, we literally just took the exact same system and just renamed the Ranks. No funny business here.
> >
> > Some of you may be thinking, “I was 50 in Halo 3 and I’m better than any Diamond”
> >
> > Sure, then you actually weren’t a “50” in Halo 3, you were a 65, or a 70, but Halo 3 never revealed that so you never knew.
> >
> > Also keep in mind:
> > - Global FPS skill has increased in the last decade from just sheer numbers and playtime. - Average Halo FPS skill among players who have been playing consistently over the last decade has also increased. Many of the people you considered “20-30” 10 years ago have gotten better, and play in the 40-50 range. Some of them of caught up and even passed you. That’s life.
>
>
>

I have a hard time thinking Diamond 3 is a 50? Is it really that low? I mean most players can sleep diamond 4 soft cap in every playlist. Getting a 50 was really difficult I figured 1600 onyx would be moreso a 50.

> 2533274825726490;13:
> I have a hard time thinking Diamond 3 is a 50? Is it really that low? I mean most players can sleep diamond 4 soft cap in every playlist. Getting a 50 was really difficult I figured 1600 onyx would be moreso a 50.

Flexing much?

Back in the real world… only about 20% of the population is Diamond or above. So mid-diamond would be considerably less than half of that.

So being a ‘50’ is still an achievement (which at least is earnt nowadays as opposed to purchased off ebay).

> 2533274846978810;11:
> > 2533274918350812;9:
> > > 2533274846978810;6:
> > > I think they should keep them separated.
> > > Players who aren’t very good (ie me and most other players) shouldn’t be locked out of progression.
> > > That said, I do think that there should be some special benefits for being high rank (emblems, nameplates, armors etc)
> > >
> > > ETA: The point of progression is not to emphasize skill but to give a player a long term reason to return to the game. Skill level should return, obviously, but it should remain separate unless you want the non-competitive fans to drop the game in 6 months
> >
> > I know what you mean dude but it just makes the ranks hold more significance to them. If the casual isnt going to stay for long to get the skill rank up why do you expect them to stay for the grind?
>
> Casual fans play because their having fun, they don’t want to stress over competitive rank all the time (especially if they’re not very good). The progression system isn’t the reason they’ll return to the game, but ut will definitely give them an extra incentive and a long term goal which will keep the game in their minds. For instance, if they really want to unlock a specific piece of armor which you get at a certain level. That being said, I do agree with you that the military ranks look cooler than simply numbers running from 1 to 152.
>
> Seeing as Infinite MP is going to ve free to play, the system we’re going to see is likely going to be a Battle Pass thing with seasons, so I don’t know what that really means for progression

I think itll be kinda lame honestly. I mean its not a huge deal breaker but all im saying is that it can all be better. Its honestly just underwhelming and unsatisfying as it is now. Bungie set a standard and 343 are kinda just going their own way. Dont get me wrong i appreciate 343 and glad that halos still around but it can all be so much better.

> 2585548714655118;14:
> > 2533274825726490;13:
> > I have a hard time thinking Diamond 3 is a 50? Is it really that low? I mean most players can sleep diamond 4 soft cap in every playlist. Getting a 50 was really difficult I figured 1600 onyx would be moreso a 50.
>
> Flexing much?
>
> Back in the real world… only about 20% of the population is Diamond or above. So mid-diamond would be considerably less than half of that.
>
> So being a ‘50’ is still an achievement (which at least is earnt nowadays as opposed to purchased off ebay).

Not flexing. I would argue that the iron-onyx system is boring and its taken directly from other shooters as opposed to the original 1-50 system. Yeah its the same but the names are lame. Its more satisfying in my opinion to get to a 15 or a 20 or a 25 and watch your number go up as opposed to a copy pasted rank system from league of legends.

> 2533274918350812;15:
> > 2533274846978810;11:
> > > 2533274918350812;9:
> > > > 2533274846978810;6:
> > > > I think they should keep them separated.
> > > > Players who aren’t very good (ie me and most other players) shouldn’t be locked out of progression.
> > > > That said, I do think that there should be some special benefits for being high rank (emblems, nameplates, armors etc)
> > > >
> > > > ETA: The point of progression is not to emphasize skill but to give a player a long term reason to return to the game. Skill level should return, obviously, but it should remain separate unless you want the non-competitive fans to drop the game in 6 months
> > >
> > > I know what you mean dude but it just makes the ranks hold more significance to them. If the casual isnt going to stay for long to get the skill rank up why do you expect them to stay for the grind?
> >
> > Casual fans play because their having fun, they don’t want to stress over competitive rank all the time (especially if they’re not very good). The progression system isn’t the reason they’ll return to the game, but ut will definitely give them an extra incentive and a long term goal which will keep the game in their minds. For instance, if they really want to unlock a specific piece of armor which you get at a certain level. That being said, I do agree with you that the military ranks look cooler than simply numbers running from 1 to 152.
> >
> > Seeing as Infinite MP is going to ve free to play, the system we’re going to see is likely going to be a Battle Pass thing with seasons, so I don’t know what that really means for progression
>
> I think itll be kinda lame honestly. I mean its not a huge deal breaker but all im saying is that it can all be better. Its honestly just underwhelming and unsatisfying as it is now. Bungie set a standard and 343 are kinda just going their own way. Dont get me wrong i appreciate 343 and glad that halos still around but it can all be so much better.

Bungie set a standard? Reach had no competitive rank at all. The fact that they got it right once (and that’s debatable) is not setting a standard when you do the exact opposite in your “swan song”. As far as I’m concerned, Reach did more damage to Halo than any other game, but that has little to do with this post

I respect your opinion regarding the progression system being more satisfying if it requires skill (I guess so seeing a high leveled player would be more impressive?) but I think most people do not benefit from that format. Getting stuck on a low level and being constantly reminded of how average/bad of a player you are will not keep casuals coming back. That’s why the ranks should stay separate - seeing a Diamond will stay impressive no matter what (and perhaps special nameplates and emblems and armors will enhance that further) but other players should still have a way to level up and unlock cosmetics

> 2533274918350812;16:
> > 2585548714655118;14:
> > > 2533274825726490;13:
> > > I have a hard time thinking Diamond 3 is a 50? Is it really that low? I mean most players can sleep diamond 4 soft cap in every playlist. Getting a 50 was really difficult I figured 1600 onyx would be moreso a 50.
> >
> > Flexing much?
> >
> > Back in the real world… only about 20% of the population is Diamond or above. So mid-diamond would be considerably less than half of that.
> >
> > So being a ‘50’ is still an achievement (which at least is earnt nowadays as opposed to purchased off ebay).
>
> Not flexing. I would argue that the iron-onyx system is boring and its taken directly from other shooters as opposed to the original 1-50 system. Yeah its the same but the names are lame. Its more satisfying in my opinion to get to a 15 or a 20 or a 25 and watch your number go up as opposed to a copy pasted rank system from league of legends.

Interesting. I would imagine the majority of people would find unique categories named after precious minerals more exciting than just arbitrary numbers going up. The fact that the bronze–silver–gold–platinum progression shows up in video games over decades and various genres can’t be for no reason (which is to say, LoL is far from the first game to come up with the scheme, and the scheme will probably outlive all of the games it appears in today). Not to mention of course that the perceived value of bronze, silver, and gold is deeply ingrained in our culture.

Of course, I have no way of confirming this belief. And I admit that I have a bias since I do think ranks with unique pictures and meaning are more interesting and more exciting than plain numbers. For transparency purposes, I’d prefer if everyone saw their skill rating and not just Onyx and up players, but I think also giving players more concrete and interestingly named ranks along with some nice visuals is a good way to motivate players to increase their rank.

I think the best ranking system would be incorporating aspects from various Halo games.

My preferences would be to have a seasonal ranking system such as Halo 5 that resets with seasons (and everyone’s profile will have a visible lifetime highest ranking listed in their profile for any bragging rights). Have an overall progressive rank that’s over the life of your profile and doesn’t reset (ie 1-150; I kind of prefer military ranks but I don’t care either way. Maybe Reach style with military ranks and the final ranks being Halo titles [ie Inheritor]). Then put in playlist specific progression ranks (both ranked and social) like Halo 3 added towards the end. So you can show how much you play a specific playlist, regardless of rank or skill.

> 2533274846978810;17:
> > 2533274918350812;15:
> > > 2533274846978810;11:
> > > > 2533274918350812;9:
> > > > > 2533274846978810;6:
> > > > > I think they should keep them separated.
> > > > > Players who aren’t very good (ie me and most other players) shouldn’t be locked out of progression.
> > > > > That said, I do think that there should be some special benefits for being high rank (emblems, nameplates, armors etc)
> > > > >
> > > > > ETA: The point of progression is not to emphasize skill but to give a player a long term reason to return to the game. Skill level should return, obviously, but it should remain separate unless you want the non-competitive fans to drop the game in 6 months
> > > >
> > > > I know what you mean dude but it just makes the ranks hold more significance to them. If the casual isnt going to stay for long to get the skill rank up why do you expect them to stay for the grind?
> > >
> > > Casual fans play because their having fun, they don’t want to stress over competitive rank all the time (especially if they’re not very good). The progression system isn’t the reason they’ll return to the game, but ut will definitely give them an extra incentive and a long term goal which will keep the game in their minds. For instance, if they really want to unlock a specific piece of armor which you get at a certain level. That being said, I do agree with you that the military ranks look cooler than simply numbers running from 1 to 152.
> > >
> > > Seeing as Infinite MP is going to ve free to play, the system we’re going to see is likely going to be a Battle Pass thing with seasons, so I don’t know what that really means for progression
> >
> > I think itll be kinda lame honestly. I mean its not a huge deal breaker but all im saying is that it can all be better. Its honestly just underwhelming and unsatisfying as it is now. Bungie set a standard and 343 are kinda just going their own way. Dont get me wrong i appreciate 343 and glad that halos still around but it can all be so much better.
>
> Bungie set a standard? Reach had no competitive rank at all. The fact that they got it right once (and that’s debatable) is not setting a standard when you do the exact opposite in your “swan song”. As far as I’m concerned, Reach did more damage to Halo than any other game, but that has little to do with this post
>
> I respect your opinion regarding the progression system being more satisfying if it requires skill (I guess so seeing a high leveled player would be more impressive?) but I think most people do not benefit from that format. Getting stuck on a low level and being constantly reminded of how average/bad of a player you are will not keep casuals coming back. That’s why the ranks should stay separate - seeing a Diamond will stay impressive no matter what (and perhaps special nameplates and emblems and armors will enhance that further) but other players should still have a way to level up and unlock cosmetics

Halo reach was a spinoff. It wasnt halo 4. 343 should of built of halo 3. 343 didnt make halo, they are inheriting it.