Solution to ranking system debate

Why not have both.

A 1-50 viewable in your service record that matches you with players of simpler skill and a leveling system so you don’t lose perks.

What does this fix, exactly?

I don’t know if you know, but the problems Frankie addressed were boosters, and account sellers.

> What does this fix, exactly?
>
> I don’t know if you know, but the problems Frankie addressed were boosters, and account sellers.

You can still sell accounts in Halo:Reach, and those things don’t ACTUALLY affect you…

I don’t see a problem to address other than the lack of skill needed in Halo:Reach’s system. Aren’t the higher ranking officers in the military, you know, better?

Well if armor and perks are unlock able by rank then ranking down would make players mad because they worked hard to get them but the 1-50 does a better job of matching players of similar skill. So with this you get balance and progression.

> Well if armor and perks are unlock able by rank then ranking down would make players mad because they worked hard to get them but the 1-50 does a better job of matching players of similar skill. So with this you get balance and progression.

Then the casual players will leave if they lose their armor which they worked hard to get is taken away and Halo would be even more of a ghost town then it currently is.

Right which is why I said progression system where you can not lose the armor and perks.

This means even if you lose you don’t lose unlocked items just your 1-50 and matched players rank.

This way new players can still get perks just by playing while they are still getting used to the game.

I have a better solution: Just put in 1-50 like in Halo 3. After all this is Halo 4 a sequel to Halo 3 not Reach.

Either that or 343 needs to create an even better system (have fun with that job 343)

> What does this fix, exactly?
>
> I don’t know if you know, but the problems Frankie addressed were boosters, and account sellers.

I was unaware that those were legitimate problems. People boost and sell accounts in other games all the time.

> I have a better solution: <mark>Just put in 1-50 like in Halo 3.</mark> After all this is Halo 4 a sequel to Halo 3 not Reach.
>
> Either that or 343 needs to create an even better system (have fun with that job 343)

Because that system had no flaws at all…right? Right? No, it did. There was the aftermentioned boosters and account sellers, there were the cases of “rank lock”, there was the problem of people getting a 50 then making a new account to get a new 50, yet imbalanced the matchmaking system by matching them up with new players who had little experience.

> > I have a better solution: <mark>Just put in 1-50 like in Halo 3.</mark> After all this is Halo 4 a sequel to Halo 3 not Reach.
> >
> > Either that or 343 needs to create an even better system (have fun with that job 343)
>
> Because that system had no flaws at all…right? Right? No, it did. There was the aftermentioned boosters and account sellers, there were the cases of “rank lock”, there was the problem of people getting a 50 then making a new account to get a new 50, yet imbalanced the matchmaking system by matching them up with new players who had little experience.

1)The amount of boosters proved that 1-50 was important to gamers. The only games who did not benefit from 1-50 was boosters themselves. When they were joined with other 40-50 users they were massacred and then slipped back down to where they belonged. Many after hacking the account or buying the account didn’t even go into the 1-50 playlists from fear of loosing their 50 rank anyway so who are they harming?

2)1-50 is iconic with Halo. To remove it will not just annoy hardcore fans but also influence old Halo 3 players who enjoyed 1-50. 1-50 is more than a system, it is a brand system only found in Halo.

3)I did also mention that 343 could come up with a better system and I would be happy.

1-50 should have come back but that’s just my opinion.

> 1)The amount of boosters proved that 1-50 was important to gamers. The only games who did not benefit from 1-50 was boosters themselves. When they were joined with other 40-50 users they were massacred and then slipped back down to where they belonged. Many after hacking the account or buying the account didn’t even go into the 1-50 playlists from fear of loosing their 50 rank anyway so who are they harming?

That still messes up the system does it not? The whole point of 1-50 and TruSkill is to be matches with your skill level, that wasn’t the case with these bought accounts.

> 2)<mark>1-50 is iconic with Halo</mark>. To remove it will not just annoy hardcore fans but also influence old Halo 3 players who enjoyed 1-50. 1-50 is more than a system, it is a brand system only found in Halo.

Later Halo perhaps. We all managed to have plenty of rank-free fun in Halo: CE LAN parties.

> 3)I did also mention that 343 could come up with a better system and I would be happy.
>
> 1-50 should have come back but that’s just my opinion.

Not in it’s broken state.

> I have a better solution: Just put in 1-50 like in Halo 3. After all this is Halo 4 a sequel to Halo 3 not Reach.
>
> <mark>Either that or 343 needs to create an even better system</mark> (have fun with that job 343)

That might be our only hope at this point. I have no clue what 343 is planning, but the new ranking system better be good. I don’t want to be disappointed after all this waiting…

> Well if armor and perks are unlock able by rank then ranking down would make players mad because they worked hard to get them but the 1-50 does a better job of matching players of similar skill. So with this you get balance and progression.

Nope, 1-50 does nothing to match people of similar skill. True skill does, and although it can be manifested as 1-50, it’s more then that. Halo 3 had strict true skill which gave less “random” matches and more even teams, 1-50 played no part.
Reach more or less skipped true skill to make MM faster, which gave horrible matches, although adding visible 1-50 wouldn’t do anything, you’ll still meet the same people. Not to mention that 1-50 was so heavily manipulated 12 could meat 50s in MM and crush them.

> That still messes up the system does it not? The whole point of 1-50 and TruSkill is to be matches with your skill level, that wasn’t the case with these bought accounts.

As I mentioned the boosters almost always slipped back down the rankings and if they didn’t then they were often good enough to pose a challenge to 40-50 level gamers. If 343 want to prevent unfair teams they should increase methods to track hackers (if this is possible).

Furthermore Halo is no longer as popular as it used to be meaning that less people are likely to buy accounts and hack the system.

> Later Halo perhaps. We all managed to have plenty of rank-free fun in Halo: CE LAN parties.

Over 30% of all current Halo Reach players have never played Halo CE (until anniversary was released which ran using the Reach MM anyway). Nearly all Halo players have experienced Halo 3 and 1-50. 1-50 means a lot to Halo players from CE and later on in the series - even you cannot deny the uproar of Halo fans when 1-50 was dropped in Reach and now in Halo 4.

> Not in it’s broken state.

If 343 want to ‘tweak’ 1-50 be my guest. If 343 want to design a better system which is also as simple and effective as 1-50 go ahead. But 343 have already annoyed lots of Halo fans and this decision has only made things worse for them.

I do not want to see Halo 5 have a lower budget than Halo 4. I do not want Halo 5 to be classed as anything less than a triple A game

I posted this in another thread today right about the time it got old.

> > I am all ears for better ways to keep competitive higher skilled players invested without a VRS though, That is if you know any that would appease the competitive community.
>
> Out of all the “We Need a 1-50 System Or Else I Won’t Play” threads that I have seen, this is the first time someone has actually stated the real question: What (other than actual competition) would keep competitive higher skilled players invested?
>
> OK. Obviously you want some sort of visual indication of your individual skill, which in itself is a tall order given that Halo is a team game. Each release of a Halo game publishes more stats than the last. There are apparently even more stats that are not published. Which stats determine, or help determine, individual skill?
>
> Win/Loss? That’s a team dependent statistic. Kill/Death? I would be tempted to consider that one if it was only calculated for ranked matches. BPR? Not by itself but maybe it could be a modifier?
>
> How about average score?
>
> The one thing that is absolutely true about every Halo match is that each indivual in the match gets a score. Unless there is something else that I’m not aware of, this is the best indicator of individual performance in a given match. Whether your team wins or loses you get an individual score. After every match you can see how well, or how badly, each player in the game performed.
>
> So, if you’re that guy that always carries your team, especially with randoms, you are technically the most skilled player. Even if your team lost you still showed the best overall performance. Doesn’t even really matter how you did it, but you couldn’t do it by AFKing, camping, hiding, or any other form of non-participation.
>
> What if your average individual score was tracked and you were given some sort of visible “rank”? A number or some sort of symbol?
>
> Would this work, or at least be a starting point?