The competitive solution.

Games Other Halo
1

When the number of players was originally predicted and relized close to Reach’s release, a team based competitive playlist made sense, currently in my opinion the vast majority of whats left of Reach players, search alone and do not fit in that model for the competitive playlist. The current competitive player is uninterested in playing with AA in their ranked playlist and is actively attempting to have most if not all removed from Arena, a trait already imbodied by the MLG playlist, but it is not ranked. My understanding is that W/L is what counts as the majority of tabulation for rank in Arena and perhaps an easy way to attract the average player to Arena is to reward their individuality by including every AA and exchange the higher W/L value with whatever lessor weighting value K/D is currently at in Arena. Giving players personel performance more consideration in what figures as their rank would actually help foster a more competitive enviroment, being as the ranks will now more accurately represent that players skill in Arena, not who they party up with giving average players an incentive to play Arena. The current Arena player desires rank without the hindrence of AA which break competitive play in their opinion, how can everybody be pleased at the same time?

While having zero programing knowledge, so really not knowing what is cost effective, technically possible and how long it takes, that being said (not a good start LOL) I present to you, the competitive solution.

MLG: Standard Arena ranking in MLG, with ZB and no AA it appears the closest incarnation of what the current competitive player is looking for=Happy competitive player and a competitive playlist that has a solid population(conservatively 3-4 times the population currently, maybe more, maybe brings back some long lost players.)

Arena:Modified K/D dominate rank with full AA and TU settings (nerfed AL, invis) 85% bloom. Same maps, the players that are able to manipulate the spawn system for the most part will be in MLG playlist as Arena will contain AA and the current competitive player in general is not interested in gameplay with AA . Same games, with the availbility of an actual Reach competitive playlist casual players will make the jump into Arena (even if it becomes a AL, jetpack noob fest) which will have 4-5 times the population (maybe more) currently.

<mark>Every AA left out of the competitive playlists represents a portion of the casual Reach community that is most likely not going to get involved.</mark>

<mark>Alternate:As suggested by King Leonighdus another way to resolve this problem is to add Arena ranking to other playlists, TS being my preferance and removing AA from Arena would allow all players to have their desires fufilled within the two playlist. A competition that encompasses the full AA of Reach and a competition for the purest, absent of any AA it will be what they have desired since Reach’s inception. While changing default Reach, it only does so by assigning rank to what most already play, which I believe will add to the playlist not detract.(good one King)</mark>

There will be a draw of population from the standard and specialty playlist but that should be offset and then some by the Christmas influx we are about to have. While I dont know how long it would take to implement, assuming it can, if it could be done within 2 months, there is a solid chance of retaining current and impending Reach players, building further the foundation Halo as a brand has. Most likely, if you bought Reach (despite perception) you will buy 4, and if you currently play Reach or 3 or both you represent the pool of players that will most likely be one of 4’s new competitive players of the future, time to get all Reach players invested, not just Halo 3 diehards that while being phenomanal, want to keep playing Halo 3/2 like game (which is what the current and potential MLG playlist represents, but if thats what floats their boat, give it to them.)

Default Team slayer players will now have a competitive playlist that is basicly a babystep to the MLG competitive playlist, setting up a perfect three step competitive ladder. Team slayer= casuals Arena=competitive/casual MLG=competitive=golden triange of competition=Healthy next year and beyond as far as playability and longevity=profit for MS=bigger cubicles for 343 employees so they can slave away on many future Halo titles.deep breath in

2

Im not sure if I should be discouraged or satisfied that nobody responded =/

3

Welcome to the first 5 seasons of The Arena.

It failed miserably and that is why W/L was re-introduced.

K/D is a poor representation of skill especially in an Arena shooter like Halo.

K/D also has no way of determining skill in Objective matches.

4

Mandatory Halo 2’s ranking system was the best post.

5

> Welcome to the first 5 seasons of The Arena.
>
> It failed miserably and that is why W/L was re-introduced.

Worse than its doing now? Doubt it.

> K/D is a poor representation of skill especially in an Arena shooter like Halo.

Its the best single stat to determine individual performance, far better than giving W/L the most consideration.

> K/D also has no way of determining skill in Objective matches.

K/D will not be the exclusive determiner of rank, but it will count more, which in my opinion, is how it should be.

6

> > Welcome to the first 5 seasons of The Arena.
> >
> > It failed miserably and that is why W/L was re-introduced.
>
> Worse than its doing now? Doubt it.
>
>
>
> > K/D is a poor representation of skill especially in an Arena shooter like Halo.
>
> Its the best single stat to determine individual performance, far better than giving W/L the most consideration.
>
>
>
> > K/D also has no way of determining skill in Objective matches.
>
> K/D will not be the exclusive determiner of rank, but it will count more, which in my opinion, is how it should be.

Reach is beyond saving.

Horrible design choices across the board.

Arena was the first to die right out of the gates. W/L put it on life support temporarily. No updates to the playlist buried it for good now.

7

> Mandatory Halo 2’s ranking system was the best post.

While we all have our preferances, I would think we have to work within the parameters of the ranking system in Reach, even somthing as simple as switching the value given to K/D and W/L might be a nightmare to implement once the system is allready set up. Completely redesigning a rank system for Reach is not going to happen, neither will inserting rank systems from previous games.

8

If I knew the ratings were sorted by K/D I would hog the shotty and rockets every chance I got and I would crouch like no other. I wouldn’t help my teammates because my reasons not to (I might get killed/if I stay here, I’ll almost surely get another kill before I die) would far outweigh my reasons to (I may get a kill).

As a 1% Onyx player I can say with confidence that this is exactly how I, and many others who wanted to rank up would play.

If I knew the ratings were sorted by W/L I would not play nearly as selfishly. I would support my teammates much more, because on a high level (or even an average level) if you do not use teamwork (finishing kills/putting shots in) then you will simply lose much more often than if you did.

As a 1% Onyx player I can say with confidence that this is exactly how I play, and so does every one else on this level. If they didn’t nobody good would play with them (because having a selfish player decreases teamwork, which decreases your chances of winning).

Moral of the story:

K/D rankings necessarily encourage selfish play at the expense of winning (as there is no incentive to win.)

W/L rankings necessarily encourage teamwork, even if it is at the expense of K/D (as there is no incentive not to risk your life trying to help get the Win). Teamwork is the biggest factor in winning games.

There really should be no argument against this. The logic is sound.

9

> > > Reach is beyond saving.
> >
> > When did you figure that out, game 1000, game 2000, game 3000? Maybe when you get to 4000 games you will finally be able to pry the disc out of your XboX and switch over to the ultra balanced CoD.
> >
> > Horrible design choices across the board.
>
> Works for me and apparently you.
>
>
>
> > Arena was the first to die right out of the gates. W/L put it on life support temporarily. No updates to the playlist buried it for good now.
>
> Ever thought perhaps it was the changes that were implemented up until now that caused most people to leave? Of coarse not, that would be crazy to think, bungie just didnt listen enough, if they would have, the Arena would have much more people now. Except every time I hear the current Arena player talk about what needs to be done to make Arena better, its to remove another AA, AA are what set Reach apart from other games. Whatever AA is stript away represents a portion of the community that is basicly being told, this isnt the place for you. That strangly does not seem like a good way to get Reach players involved in a competitive Reach playlist.

10

Arena needs Banshees
/thread

11

> Mandatory Halo 2’s ranking system was the best post.

I agree to this post…i think arena should have use it! but oh well!

12

> If I knew the ratings were sorted by K/D I would hog the shotty and rockets every chance I got and I would crouch like no other. I wouldn’t help my teammates because my reasons not to (I might get killed/if I stay here, I’ll almost surely get another kill before I die) would far outweigh my reasons to (I may get a kill).

Whatever playstyle works for you, but thats not the way I play even when I search random (95% of the time) and really the population does not support a competitive playlist for team play. At this point, its a not drawing anybody and the competitive players main idea is to remove jetpack. This will only serve to take another Reach specific trait out of a Reach competitive play list. How is this attracting Reach players to the playlist?

> As a 1% Onyx player I can say with confidence that this is exactly how I, and many others who wanted to rank up would play.

As a 1% onyx player you must see that the playlist is completely empty and Arena players are starting to have no competition. Arena players have had far more input into how to make that playlist successful then any other player and the results speak for themselves.

> If I knew the ratings were sorted by W/L I would not play nearly as selfishly. I would support my teammates much more, because on a high level (or even an average level) if you do not use teamwork (finishing kills/putting shots in) then you will simply lose much more often than if you did.

While learning about your personel playstyle is awesome, it hardly demonstrates how to make Arena a more populated playlist, its just another lesson from the competitive player on how to make the gameplay more balanced, competitive and symmetrical, which has added 0 players to the competitive Reach playlist. Sorry dems the facts =/

> As a 1% Onyx player I can say with confidence that this is exactly how I play, and so does every one else on this level. If they didn’t nobody good would play with them (because having a selfish player decreases teamwork, which decreases your chances of winning).

Ironicly, nobody is playing with you guys, perhaps you have been to busy telling everybody how to make Arena the super populated hotbed for competition it is today.

> Moral of the story:
>
> K/D rankings necessarily encourage selfish play at the expense of winning (as there is no incentive to win.)
>
> W/L rankings necessarily encourage teamwork, even if it is at the expense of K/D (as there is no incentive not to risk your life trying to help get the Win). Teamwork is the biggest factor in winning games.
>
> There really should be no argument against this. The logic is sound.

Being lectured by Arena players who have been stomping their feet to get a playlist selfishly stript of as many things that dont mesh with their playstyle, about selfishness, is strange. Every AA removed from the competitive playlist represents a portion of Reach’s community that has been dis-invited to Reaches competitive playlist, by competitive players that hate the game of Reach. Logic would dictate that you dont get to be referee of the same game you are a player in, but this seems to have been the trend for the last year and now you got an empty playlist and the ideas coming out of the competitive community are not bringing in players. Time for a change, logic, get some

13

> Arena needs Banshees
> /thread

How bout 8 and we can watch really awesome video of them doing back flips the whole game.

14

there is no “competitive” solution since you can’t make a game competitive.

15

> there is no “competitive” solution since you can’t make a game competitive.

Complete disagreement, the current system is a mix-up of Halo 3 and Reach, which was a result of the hardcore Halo 3 competitive player that got changes THEY wanted, then still left.Leaving a playlist that is not unusable by anyone except a couple thousand players.

Now we got the same type of suggestions coming from the same type of player and they are trying to convince everyone that if we just take more Reach out of Reach we will have a Halo game that is “balanced” and “competitive”. Sorry, you guys had your chance and the results of every change that you guys wanted, was an empty competitive playlist, with an equelly long list of tweeks needed to make it balanced.

Time for you guys to share the toys and acknowledge that over the last year, while having the biggest say on changes made and actually getting some of them, your ideas have failed.

Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me.

This Halo fan does not believe the ideas about removing AA has amounted to a single player staying or being attracted to Reach.

16

> > there is no “competitive” solution since you can’t make a game competitive.
>
> Complete disagreement, the current system is a mix-up of Halo 3 and Reach, which was a result of the hardcore Halo 3 competitive player that got changes THEY wanted, then still left.Leaving a playlist that is not unusable by anyone except a couple thousand players.
>
> Now we got the same type of suggestions coming from the same type of player and they are trying to convince everyone that if we just take more Reach out of Reach we will have a Halo game that is “balanced” and “competitive”. Sorry, you guys had your chance and the results of every change that you guys wanted, was an empty competitive playlist, with an equelly long list of tweeks needed to make it balanced.
>
> Time for you guys to share the toys and acknowledge that over the last year, while having the biggest say on changes made and actually getting some of them, your ideas have failed.
>
> Fool me once, shame on me.
> Fool me twice, shame on me.
>
> This Halo fan does not believe the ideas about removing AA has amounted to a single player staying or being attracted to Reach.

that is the whole problem, they are trying to do the impossible.

you can’t make a game competitive because it isn’t the game that is competitive, it is the players, so trying to make a game competitive is just never ever going to work because you are trying to find a solution to nothing.

17

> > > there is no “competitive” solution since you can’t make a game competitive.
> >
> > Complete disagreement, the current system is a mix-up of Halo 3 and Reach, which was a result of the hardcore Halo 3 competitive player that got changes THEY wanted, then still left.Leaving a playlist that is not unusable by anyone except a couple thousand players.
> >
> > Now we got the same type of suggestions coming from the same type of player and they are trying to convince everyone that if we just take more Reach out of Reach we will have a Halo game that is “balanced” and “competitive”. Sorry, you guys had your chance and the results of every change that you guys wanted, was an empty competitive playlist, with an equelly long list of tweeks needed to make it balanced.
> >
> > Time for you guys to share the toys and acknowledge that over the last year, while having the biggest say on changes made and actually getting some of them, your ideas have failed.
> >
> > Fool me once, shame on me.
> > Fool me twice, shame on me.
> >
> > This Halo fan does not believe the ideas about removing AA has amounted to a single player staying or being attracted to Reach.
>
> that is the whole problem, they are trying to do the impossible.
>
> you can’t make a game competitive because it isn’t the game that is competitive, it is the players, so trying to make a game competitive is just never ever going to work because you are trying to find a solution to nothing.

The problem=empty playlist, the solution=somthing other than listening to the same players that have been screaming for the last year. You understand what Im saying and must just be bored, because semantics arguments are the least productive discussion people can have.

18

> > > > there is no “competitive” solution since you can’t make a game competitive.
> > >
> > > Complete disagreement, the current system is a mix-up of Halo 3 and Reach, which was a result of the hardcore Halo 3 competitive player that got changes THEY wanted, then still left.Leaving a playlist that is not unusable by anyone except a couple thousand players.
> > >
> > > Now we got the same type of suggestions coming from the same type of player and they are trying to convince everyone that if we just take more Reach out of Reach we will have a Halo game that is “balanced” and “competitive”. Sorry, you guys had your chance and the results of every change that you guys wanted, was an empty competitive playlist, with an equelly long list of tweeks needed to make it balanced.
> > >
> > > Time for you guys to share the toys and acknowledge that over the last year, while having the biggest say on changes made and actually getting some of them, your ideas have failed.
> > >
> > > Fool me once, shame on me.
> > > Fool me twice, shame on me.
> > >
> > > This Halo fan does not believe the ideas about removing AA has amounted to a single player staying or being attracted to Reach.
> >
> > that is the whole problem, they are trying to do the impossible.
> >
> > you can’t make a game competitive because it isn’t the game that is competitive, it is the players, so trying to make a game competitive is just never ever going to work because you are trying to find a solution to nothing.
>
> The problem=empty playlist, the solution=somthing other than listening to the same players that have been screaming for the last year. You understand what Im saying and must just be bored, because semantics arguments are the least productive discussion people can have.

the solution is very very simple, make the game FUN, every other game that has succeeded at this has become competitive, even those fun kiddy games are competitive(lol!), a fun game is a “competitive” game because the people who choose to play the game are the ones who are competitive and they choose to play the game because it is fun.

now, what the competitive crowd are doing to reach is bathing in nostalgia, they are trying to break a perfectly good game just so they can get the enjoyment they want, not out of good gameplay or balanced maps, but because of nostalgia.

19

Nearly all my Halo 3 buddies quit playing because of Arena’s silly rating system.
Individual stats promotes selfish play. You can’t even begin to imagine how many times people got betrayed for power weapons under the old system (and even though it has been removed for 9 months, there are still people who do this in ignorance).

As someone who now searches alone 80% of the time, I still support W/L.

The fact of the matter is that your record evens out in the long-run, regardless of “bad teammates” or other nonesense excuses. It may take more games but you will get the ranking you deserve eventually, the only barrier being 2s tricking at extremely high levels.

Arena is like a 2-ton concrete slab standing up on a few toothpicks… and W/L is one of those toothpicks. Take it away again and it would have crumbled to a population of 100 long ago. The only reason it lasted as long as it did with the old system is because people knew how absurd it was and that it would get changed.

At this point, it’s just a matter of hoping for Halo 4 to come around.

20

I’m going to post this quote for you:

> Q: I bought a 360 for my son for Xmas, and both of us have become seriously addicted to Halo 3 on XBox Live, particularly Team Slayer matches. Basing the skill change only on the team performance yields pretty counterintuitive results. For example, I often play a string of team slayer games where I am MVP (Most Valuable Player), which means I outscore everyone. But if my team loses those games, I gain no skill. Then, I can play poorly, but if my team wins I gain skill. This lack of feedback from individual performance is frustrating and makes your skill level beholden to the performance of the rest of your team, which is usually not under your control unless you explicitly team up with friends
>
> A: Great that you are enjoying your 360 and Halo 3.
>
> The question you are asking has indeed been raised by quite a few people and we had many discussions about it. However, we always return to our point of view that in a team game the only way to assess someone’s skill towards the team objective is to consider the team objective only. Any auxiliary measurements such as number of flags carried, number of kills, kill-death spread, etc, all have the problem that they can be exploited thereby compromising the team objective and hence the spirit of the game. If flag carries matter, players will rush to the flag rather than defend their teammates or their own flag. Some may even kill the current flag carrier of their own team to get the flag. If it is number of kills, people will mindlessly enter combat to maximise that metric. If it is K-D spread they may hold back at a time when they could have saved a team mate. Whichever metric you take, there will be people trying to optimise their score under that metric and this will lead to distortions.
>
> Another problem is, of course, that we would like to use the skill ratings for matchmaking. The current system essentially aims at a 50:50 win loss ratio for each team. It is unclear, how individual skill ratings based on individual achievements would change the calibration of such a system.
>
> Of course, one might use a weighted combination of team and individual measurements. However, whenever individual measurements enter the equation there will be trouble, maybe less trouble if the weight is less, but that is not really good enough.
>
> Microsoft Research

This hypothesis was borne out beautifully by the gameplay witnessed in the first five seasons of Arena: players were selfish power weapon and kill-whores. Not above assisting in the death of teammates simply to make their own rating relatively higher.