The little things a ranking system will bring

Games Halo 5: Guardians
1

Here’s some overlooked things, in my opinion, a visible competitive ranking system will bring to the next Halo title

-People will play to win the game. More people will be going for the objective (no need to have the flag non-dropable now) and less people caring about stats.

-People will use microphones more frequently. People often complain now-a-days that no one uses a mic, and that is in part due to no one caring about winning the game. In past Halo titles, people used mics all the time. It was through the constant mic usage a lot of friendships were made and it developed a sense of community.

-People will stay on the game longer to reach the goals they set for themselves.

-Gameplay will be less frustrating due to skill-based matchmaking. Sure, there is currently “hidden true-skill” but it does not work very well. I can link pages and pages of games where CSR50s in Throwdown face low ranks consistently. In fact, I believe it’s common knowledge that your CSR does not match you up against similar CSRs.

2

I think you make a pretty valid point but I’m still not so sure about mics being used more often. When I play with my friends, we would mostly use party chat, which I remember a lot of other people using too. I would like to see a return of more people using mic in game chat though. You’re right, it created good teamwork and some good online friendships. Plus, you had the whole trash talking aspect, which helped drive competition between other players.

3

Man, I really wish more people would use their mics. Seriously what happened to that? I rarely even encounter those annoying little 12 year old kids with mics anymore. Hopefully an actual ranking system would fix that.

I think all the points you made are pretty accurate. It just doesn’t make sense to me why 343 wouldn’t include a true ranking system in Halo 4, and it would make even less sense not to include one in Halo 5.

4

Visible Ranks will have negatives like:

  1. Causing excessive quitting in lobbies when encountering “elite” ranks
  2. Boosting/Cheating for rank
  3. Turning Rank grinding into a game inside the game instead of just playing the darn game
  4. Adding extra fuel for smack talking
  5. Alienating weekend gamers, average or not so good gamers, and late adopters
5

Yes, we need a good ranking system that is visible. I really loved Halo 2’s and 3’s ranking system, but many people weren’t fans. As long as the ranking system provides people a sense of teamwork then I’m fine with that.

6

> Visible Ranks will have negatives like:
>
> 1. Causing excessive quitting in lobbies when encountering “elite” ranks
> 2. Boosting/Cheating for rank
> 3. Turning Rank grinding into a game inside the game instead of just playing the darn game
> 4. Adding extra fuel for smack talking
> 5. Alienating weekend gamers, average or not so good gamers, and late adopters

  1. Disagree - people will quit if they’re losing badly. Doesn’t matter on the person rank and if the match making is actually done right, “elite” players wont be playing low level players, they will be playing there skill level like how they were in halo 3.

  2. Disagree big time - People will cheat no matter what and as I’ve said a million times, who cares if someone boost there rank. When you play them you will know they did because you will beat the snot out of them. The % of people who cheat/boost I bet is less the 5% in ANY GAME and the rest of us shouldn’t be deny in game rank because of a few people.

  3. Disagree - People who like ranking up do not see it as grinding, they see it as fun and something to look forward too.

  4. Kind of agree - but to be honest, people are going to smack talk about something (rank, K/D, your Gamerscore!!! ANYTHING!) it’s what humans have done since the start of time and a person should learn to just ignore it or use it as motivation to get better. There will always be smack talk no matter.

  5. Disagree and don’t understand at all - How would an in game rank alienate “weekend” gamers?? once again if the rank system is done the way it should be they will be playing people that are THERE rank or they will be playing in a social playlist where they obviously don’t care about rank (if 343 is smart enough to bring back rank/social playlists like halo 3 had…perfect upset)

I agree with the OP, Halo 5 needs IN GAME RANKS like how Halo 3 had them. Same kind of idea (you can only get a general by playing ranked and WINNING, not by just playing the game and showing up)

7

> Visible Ranks will have negatives like:
>
> 1. Causing excessive quitting in lobbies when encountering “elite” ranks
> 2. Boosting/Cheating for rank
> 3. Turning Rank grinding into a game inside the game instead of just playing the darn game
> 4. Adding extra fuel for smack talking
> 5. Alienating weekend gamers, average or not so good gamers, and late adopters

  1. Causing excessive quitting in lobbies when encountering “elite” ranks.

  2. Boosting/Cheating for rank

  3. Turning Rank grinding into a game inside the game instead of just playing the darn game

  4. Adding extra fuel for smack talking

  5. Alienating weekend gamers, average or not so good gamers, and late adopters

All of this stuff already happens regardless of rank. People boost for K/D instead of rank. People quit out all the time in Halo 4 if they see a good team. Trash talking and alienating others has been going on since the creation of XBL. Having ranks won’t change what’s already going on. At least ranks make people want to win.

With or with out ranks you won’t change the general attitude of those who play this game. These negatives will always exist, but at least ranks will give us fair games.

8

> 5. Alienating weekend gamers, average or not so good gamers, and late adopters

So alienating the competitive community seems right then?

I want to clear things up:
Everyone would benefit from a ranked system. Why?
Well the competitive players have a playground to grind the game and casuals will have their casual playground. (If we assume it’s like Halo 3)

I could write page over page about this topic and about 90% of people playing Halo at least since Halo 3 share this opinion and the player numbers underline my thesis.

9

> Man, I really wish more people would use their mics. Seriously what happened to that?

What happened? More and more Online players who have the mind set that thinks trash talk is OK, and everyone LOVES being trashed in voice chat.

> I rarely even encounter those annoying little 12 year old kids with mics anymore.

Yes, because they either started playing Halo when they’re 12, and now they’re in their 15s, or 20s, or they’re like everyone else and tired of hearing people give them crap for their voices.

> Hopefully an actual ranking system would fix that.

I don’t think an actual ranking system will fix the lack of mic users, to fix that, you need to root out the problem of why they don’t speak, and change/fix that to get more people to use voice. Halo 3 had a ranking system that people believe was an actual ranking system, and yet, there was a good amount of people who will not speak.

Now, my question to you is: What is an actual ranking system? What’s the definition of a ranking system?

Last time I checked, the last two Halo games had ranking systems, in their own right. Halo 4’s is more similar to what people want in a ranking system, it’s just not visible in game, and it’s only visible through waypoint.

> It just doesn’t make sense to me why 343 wouldn’t include a true ranking system in Halo 4, and it would make even less sense not to include one in Halo 5.

Why does every single Halo game need a ranking system? Halo CE had no ranking system, it only had a post game carnage report. And yet the PC version of Halo CE still has a strong player base, even after over 10 years after it’s release.

But I will agree that the next Halo title should have a ranking system, not because it’d make sense, but because it’d be something to keep the competitive players happy.

Just as a heads up, don’t go saying “Well people need to have thicker skin”, Thicker skin isn’t the answer, never was, never will be, and telling people to have “thicker skin” is insulting to them. I could sit here and tell you guys to suck it up when it comes to the lack of ranking system, and tell you that you should get over it cause it’ll never happen, but that’d just piss you guys off, and you wouldn’t accept that answer. So telling people to “get thicker skin” shouldn’t be anyone’s answer to the reason’s why they don’t use mics.

10

> I don’t think an actual ranking system will fix the lack of mic users, to fix that, you need to root out the problem of why they don’t speak, and change/fix that to get more people to use voice. Halo 3 had a ranking system that people believe was an actual ranking system, and yet, there was a good amount of people who will not speak.

There was more people using mics in Halo 3 than any other Halo game. People wanted to win the game, as there was a competitive ranking system, so they plugged in their mics. If you deny this, you must not have played Halo 3 very much.

> Now, my question to you is: What is an actual ranking system? What’s the definition of a ranking system?
>
> Last time I checked, the last two Halo games had ranking systems, in their own right. Halo 4’s is more similar to what people want in a ranking system, it’s just not visible in game, and it’s only visible through waypoint.

Yeah, the last two Halo games had “ranking systems”. I specifically said competitive and visible, however. You can continue to nitpick I guess, but it is obviously implied that the ranking system I want is visible in-game. Most people think Reach and Halo 4’s systems were bad and that is why the terminology has developed the way it has. It is why people say “Halo 5 needs a ranking system” even though Halo 4 and Reach had them-- they were so bad people don’t even consider them ranking systems! And that nullifies your last point, about people wanting the non-visible Halo 4 CSR system. But I’ll continue to argue it anyways.

Saying that Halo 4’s is more similar to what people want in a ranking system is undeniably incorrect I cannot fathom how much you are wrong. That’s why the game’s population went from 200k to 20k players in less than a year, right? The current system has no replay value. People sure came surging back for the CSR through Waypoint, though, right? Oh wait, they didn’t, and the population continues to suffer.

You don’t have to solely look at numbers, either. Look at the numerous Waypoint polls that have been conducted and the consensus of the community. If you really think it is what people want, you must be ignorant.

In addition, it is incredibly broken because:
-You don’t match up against similar CSRs
-Quitting the match completely negates the game counting against your rank
-People can boost their rank using Guests, as the system gives a much more powerful win if there is a Guest on your team. You don’t even need an actual person to be a guest-- you just plug in an AFK controller and attempt to win. If you don’t? Just quit out! Because you won’t lose your CSR.

11

> Visible Ranks will have negatives like:
>
> 1. Causing excessive quitting in lobbies when encountering “elite” ranks
> 2. Boosting/Cheating for rank
> 3. Turning Rank grinding into a game inside the game instead of just playing the darn game
> 4. Adding extra fuel for smack talking
> 5. Alienating weekend gamers, average or not so good gamers, and late adopters

  1. There is already excessive quitting. People have no incentives to stay in games that they are losing or may be outnumbered in, and this problem is exacerbated by JiP. Also, there are no disincentives for quitting.

  2. Many in this community have offered viable solutions to the problem of boosting/cheating. Example: Rank Decay.

  3. Why people chose to play the game, and what they chose to focus their efforts on does not matter to anyone but the individual player.

  4. I’m sorry, is competition now a bad thing? Do we have to suppress our human nature when we play online just to make sure no one gets offended?

  5. Again, solutions have been offered before. Example: ranked and social playlists.

12

> There was more people using mics in Halo 3 than any other Halo game. People wanted to win the game, as there was a competitive ranking system, so they plugged in their mics. If you deny this, you must not have played Halo 3 very much.

You’re right, in a way, I didn’t start playing Halo 3 until a year or two after it’s release.

But when I did play, there wasn’t a lot of talkative people with mics.

Also, how would people wanting to win be a reason to plug in their mics? People can still win without using mics.

> Yeah, the last two Halo games had “ranking systems”. I specifically said competitive and visible, however. You can continue to nitpick I guess, but it is obviously implied that the ranking system I want is visible in-game. Most people think Reach and Halo 4’s systems were bad and that is why the terminology has developed the way it has. It is why people say “Halo 5 needs a ranking system” even though Halo 4 and Reach had them-- they were so bad people don’t even consider them ranking systems! And that nullifies your last point, about people wanting the non-visible Halo 4 CSR system. But I’ll continue to argue it anyways.

It doesn’t nullifies my point, just because a group wants visible ranking, doesn’t mean there isn’t a group out there who don’t want visible ranking. You might as well just come out and say “my opinion is fact, and any opposing opinions are invalid because they disagree with me”

> Saying that Halo 4’s is more similar to what people want in a ranking system is undeniably incorrect I cannot fathom how much you are wrong. That’s why the game’s population went from 200k to 20k players in less than a year, right? The current system has no replay value. People sure came surging back for the CSR through Waypoint, though, right? Oh wait, they didn’t, and the population continues to suffer.

Wait… So people don’t want a 1-50 ranking system that’s based on skill, like K/D, W/L? Or is it they don’t want a 1-50 ranking system that is based on playlist/gametype, instead of a general 1-50 rank across the board?

I’m not saying that CSR is the ranking system people want based on population of the game, because the reasons behind the loss or lack of population aren’t 100% because of lack of visible 1-50 ranking, or any ranking system for that matter, there’s hundreds of reasons as to why people stopped playing Halo, and we can’t sit here and blindly say “People left because there was no visible 1-50 skill based ranking system!”. I’ve heard that excuse many times before for many different reasons.

Now I’m not saying that some didn’t leave because of lack of ranking system of their choice, BUT, I’m not going to agree that it’s the ONLY reason people left, or that it’s the reason for 100% of the people leaving.

Now, with that said, I still think the CSR ranking system that Halo has, is a good ranking system, BECAUSE it’s not a general ranking system, it ranks people based on gametypes, a rank 45 in CTF will be ranked with another person who is ranked 45 in CTF, and not someone who is rank 45 because he/she plays nothing but FFA slayer. You want players who want to win when you play? You want to be matched with other players who can win in said gametypes you’re playing, when you’re playing them. I’m not denying that there shouldn’t be visible ranking systems, I think there should be visible ranking systems. BUT that does not mean that Halo 4’s CSR ranking system will ALWAYS be a non visible ranking system because that’s SET IN STONE. Which is NOT the way we should think when we’re talking ranking systems. NOTHING about CSR is set in stone, the next Halo title could have a newer, improved version of CSR that is visible in game, and I bet some of you competitive players will praise it more than Halo 2’ ranking system.

But you’re obviously going to tell me that I’m Dead wrong, and that you can’t fathom how wrong I am, EVEN tho I just layed out MY reasons as to why I think Halo 4’s CSR is better than Halo 2’s flawed ranking system.

> You don’t have to solely look at numbers, either. Look at the numerous Waypoint polls that have been conducted and the consensus of the community. If you really think it is what people want, you must be ignorant.

Again, people want Halo 2’s 1-50 ranking system, NOT the progressive ranking system. BUT What is Halo 4’s CSR ranking system? Is it not a version of 1-50? But instead of one single overall rank for all gametypes, isn’t it a rank for each gametype you play?

> -You don’t match up against similar CSRs

That’s because of the fact that the ranking system isn’t based with in Halo 4’s game engine, it’s based in Waypoint, and wasn’t added until AFTER the game was released, past the point where they could of coded the matchmaking system to match players of similar CSRs. BUT AGAIN: CSR’s set up is not set in stone for future games.

> -Quitting the match completely negates the game counting against your rank

Ok, did I ever say the CSR ranking system was a PERFECT ranking system? No, I said it was a good ranking system, a better ranking system than Halo 2’s, BUT NEVER a perfect ranking system. Also, again: CSR’s set up is not set in stone for future games.
So how do you fix this issue of your’s? RECODING! Recode the ranking system so other people quitting does not damage YOUR ranking, just THEIR ranking.

> -People can boost their rank using Guests, as the system gives a much more powerful win if there is a Guest on your team. You don’t even need an actual person to be a guest-- you just plug in an AFK controller and attempt to win. If you don’t? Just quit out! Because you won’t lose your CSR.

Gee… And this is different from Halo 2’s or Halo 3’s ranking system? There has always been boosting in EVERY GAME! And there always will be boosting at some level, in some form.

But you can always do some recoding to change how the ranking system reacts to certain things, like having guest accounts. It’s not perfect, BUT it’s a step in the right direction than just forgoing a ranking system, and sticking with a progressive ranking system.

13

> You’re right, in a way, I didn’t start playing Halo 3 until a year or two after it’s release.
>
> But when I did play, there wasn’t a lot of talkative people with mics.
>
> Also, how would people wanting to win be a reason to plug in their mics? People can still win without using mics.

Sigh, your lack of Halo knowledge is evident. “How would people wanting to win be a reason to plug in their mics?” Really? It’s called communication-- call outs. Simple things such as “they’re pulling our flag, running it through green.” Honestly, I’m not going to try and argue with somebody on this topic who started playing in 2009 and didn’t play enough to observe this simple fact. Obviously people can win without mics, but you are more likely to if they are plugged in, so people did more frequently than any other Halo game.

> It doesn’t nullifies my point, just because a group wants visible ranking, doesn’t mean there isn’t a group out there who don’t want visible ranking. You might as well just come out and say “my opinion is fact, and any opposing opinions are invalid because they disagree with me”

There might be a group who does not want visible rankings, sure. But where are they and their threads supporting their opinions? By looking at the terminology we can conclude that the group I am apart of is much bigger and should be heavily more considered. I think this argument is weak-- we do not listen to the minority simply because there is one.

> I’m not saying that CSR is the ranking system people want based on population of the game, because the reasons behind the loss or lack of population aren’t 100% because of lack of visible 1-50 ranking, or any ranking system for that matter, there’s hundreds of reasons as to why people stopped playing Halo, and we can’t sit here and blindly say “People left because there was no visible 1-50 skill based ranking system!”. I’ve heard that excuse many times before for many different reasons.

Unless they say they left because of specifically the ranking system, and they have. Come on, “hearing that excuse” for many different reasons should have been obvious enough surely? The popular threads and videos, such as Eli’s, all irrelevant? Obviously not everyone left because of ranks but it was a huge factor as ranks have kept people playing in not just past Halo games, but games in general. I think you need to learn your community a bit better and stop searching for confirmation bias in regards to peoples’ opinions on wanting visible ranks.

> Now, with that said, I still think the CSR ranking system that Halo has, is a good ranking system, BECAUSE it’s not a general ranking system, it ranks people based on gametypes, a rank 45 in CTF will be ranked with another person who is ranked 45 in CTF, and not someone who is rank 45 because he/she plays nothing but FFA slayer. You want players who want to win when you play? You want to be matched with other players who can win in said gametypes you’re playing, when you’re playing them. I’m not denying that there shouldn’t be visible ranking systems, I think there should be visible ranking systems. BUT that does not mean that Halo 4’s CSR ranking system will ALWAYS be a non visible ranking system because that’s SET IN STONE. Which is NOT the way we should think when we’re talking ranking systems. NOTHING about CSR is set in stone, the next Halo title could have a newer, improved version of CSR that is visible in game, and I bet some of you competitive players will praise it more than Halo 2’ ranking system.

Do you not realize that is not how Halo 4 CSR works, but rather Halo 2/3’s? Thanks for helping me. Halo 4, in no playlist, pairs you up to similar CSRs on purpose. A rank 45 in CTF will not be matched up against another 45. This is how it works in Halo 2 and 3, however. A level 12 in Team Slayer in Halo 3 will match others their level in Team Slayer. In Doubles, if they are a 40, though, they will match around 40.

I am advocating for a visible ranking system. If Halo 4’s system was in Halo 5, but visible, it would still have many flaws-- the biggest being it doesn’t match you against similar CSRs. An improved version, sure, might be good. What are you getting at, though? I don’t hate CSR because it is called CSR-- I hate it for the broken mechanics. If they remove them, great, I’ll like it.

> Again, people want Halo 2’s 1-50 ranking system, NOT the progressive ranking system. BUT What is Halo 4’s CSR ranking system? Is it not a version of 1-50? But instead of one single overall rank for all gametypes, isn’t it a rank for each gametype you play?

Why do you continue to beat around the bush? Is it because you are wrong? People DO NOT LIKE THE implementation of Halo 4 CSR. Saying that Halo 4’s 1-50 CSR is the solution and questioning why people do not play it because "it is like Halo 2’s system (it’s what you’re implying) is face-palming. It’s because Halo 4’s CSR is nothing like Halo 2’s 1-50 system.

Again, we are faced with a lack of Halo knowledge. Halo 3 and 2 had playlist ranks too, besides social playlists. Your overall rank, the highest number rank you have achieved, was displayed on your service record. You are acting like Halo 4 was the first game to do this and should be praised as a result.

> Ok, did I ever say the CSR ranking system was a PERFECT ranking system? No, I said it was a good ranking system, a better ranking system than Halo 2’s, BUT NEVER a perfect ranking system. Also, again: CSR’s set up is not set in stone for future games.
> So how do you fix this issue of your’s? RECODING! Recode the ranking system so other people quitting does not damage YOUR ranking

Yep, the most easily abused system that does not even match people against similar ranks is better than Halo 2’s [sarcasm]. Obviously recoding will solve many of the issues I have, and I am indirectly suggesting them to recode things by having the suggestions I do in the Original Post. Continue to talk about obvious things, though, please.

> Gee… And this is different from Halo 2’s or Halo 3’s ranking system? There has always been boosting in EVERY GAME! And there always will be boosting at some level, in some form.

It is different because it is way easier to do in Halo 4. It is the first Halo game where you can achieve boosting by yourself and not another person. I’d say that is a substantially larger problem. In Halo 3, you at least had to win legit games to get boosted in Team Based playlists-- in Halo 4 if you do not win you can quit. So yes, there are differences, ones that completely break the system. Also, if there was boosting in past games, shouldn’t it have been eliminated by now? How is Halo 4’s problem of boosting okay just because it is in “every game”?

14

I personally don’t care about credit systems, but I understand that many people like them. I have no problem with credits systems being in the game, as long as they only contribute to cosmetic things, and as long as a true-skill ranking system is also included.

Videogames have stopped focusing on winning because of these stupid credit systems. Achievements are also to blame for some of the bizarre play-styles people are using.

I want nothing more than to have a true-skill ranking system brought back into Halo. It was exciting trying to get to that next level, and the bragging rights that come with it are also more credible than the credit systems of modern shooters.
Those 49-49 matches were palm-sweating, adrenaline rushes. I miss that.

There should be no achievements in true-skill playlists, other than ones that focus on reaching certain ranks within them.
“Reach rank 35”, “Reach rank 50”, etc. None of this “stick 10 people in one ranked match” garbage that causes people to play unorthodoxly.

I played over 4000 H2 games, over 2000 H3 games, and… 144 H4 games. There was just nothing enticing about H4. The MP resembled nothing about what made Halo so great.
Rank is one thing it lacked, and the imbalanced randomness was another.

15

Having a good ranking system that is balanced and fair. And matches the same skilled players together increases the qualities of games. Games are much closer and not just one sided.

Having a visible ranked system should be a must.

I like Halo 3 system where it had an overall rank for each playlist and your current rank. An improvement on this would be great.

16

> I personally don’t care about credit systems, but I understand that many people like them. I have no problem with credits systems being in the game, as long as they only contribute to cosmetic things, and as long as a true-skill ranking system is also included.
>
> Videogames have stopped focusing on winning because of these stupid credit systems. Achievements are also to blame for some of the bizarre play-styles people are using.
>
> I want nothing more than to have a true-skill ranking system brought back into Halo. It was exciting trying to get to that next level, and the bragging rights that come with it are also more credible than the credit systems of modern shooters.
> Those 49-49 matches were palm-sweating, adrenaline rushes. I miss that.
>
> There should be no achievements in true-skill playlists, other than ones that focus on reaching certain ranks within them.
> “Reach rank 35”, “Reach rank 50”, etc. None of this “stick 10 people in one ranked match” garbage that causes people to play unorthodoxly.
>
> I played over 4000 H2 games, over 2000 H3 games, and… 144 H4 games. There was just nothing enticing about H4. The MP resembled nothing about what made Halo so great.
> Rank is one thing it lacked, and the imbalanced randomness was another.

Totally agree.

And if the True Skill system is accurate, then a skill game of all players only ranked 10 play each other should have the same palm-sweating, adrenaline rushes as a game of players ranked 50.

Evenly matched teams that are palm-sweating, adrenaline rushes are the best, win or lose.

If 343 can return this which was nearly every game of Halo 2/3. Then I think we are all going to be happy. Does not matter if your only a level 10 or level 50.

17

^ Very true. True-skill is not only an exciting ladder to climb, but it makes most pairings evenly matched. Loved it.

18

> Sigh, your lack of Halo knowledge is evident. “How would people wanting to win be a reason to plug in their mics?” Really? It’s called communication-- call outs.

Oh, lack of Halo knowledge!? Who are you say I’m lacking Halo knowledge!? I didn’t know you was my stalker who knows my entire Halo history! Still not everyone wants to communicate. Also don’t need call outs to win. And that’s not lack of Halo knowledge, that’s based on personal experience! Halo is not the ONLY video game on the planet, NOR is the Xbox the ONLY gaming platform! I’ve been playing games on the PC longer than the Xbox has been around.

> I’m not going to try and argue with somebody on this topic who started playing in 2009 and didn’t play enough to observe this simple fact.

Well I’m glad I’m not that person, CAUSE I’ve been playing longer than 2009, Try since 2003 or 4 with Halo Combat Evolved on the PC, then Halo Custom Edition, then Halo 2 on the PC, then Halo 3 in late 2008. I’ve played EVERY HALO GAME, I haven’t played a lot of Halo 4, mostly because I have this thing called a LIFE, out side of gaming, one that’s more demanding than sitting on my butt trying to out rank every single kid on the internet, in a video game.

> Obviously people can win without mics, but you are more likely to if they are plugged in

Plugged in or not, doesn’t matter, most times I have my mic plugged in, but I’m in party chat, most of my friends are the same, been this way since the late days of Halo 3.

> There might be a group who does not want visible rankings, sure. But where are they and their threads supporting their opinions? By looking at the terminology we can conclude that the group I am apart of is much bigger and should be heavily more considered. I think this argument is weak-- we do not listen to the minority simply because there is one.

And who says You’re the majority? Because you’re here on these forums with large numbers of people pointing out you want ranks? I’m sorry, I didn’t realize that this was the ONLY Halo themed forums on the internet, and I didn’t realize the whole player base of Halo through out the years is located on these forum boards. [/sarcasm] *In case you didn’t get the hint, I was very sarcastic in my last post at a few points.

> Unless they say they left because of specifically the ranking system, and they have. Come on, “hearing that excuse” for many different reasons should have been obvious enough surely? The popular threads and videos, such as Eli’s, all irrelevant? Obviously not everyone left because of ranks but it was a huge factor as ranks have kept people playing in not just past Halo games, but games in general. I think you need to learn your community a bit better and stop searching for confirmation bias in regards to peoples’ opinions on wanting visible ranks.

I’m not saying Eli’s post is irrelevant, I just want to point out we shouldn’t be throwing numbers and excuses around to win an argument, I’m not about to believe the majority of those who left, left because of just ranks, nor because ranks was one of the reasons. Not every single player is going to jump onto a forum board and post a “I’m leaving for these reasons” thread, not every single person is going to vote in one single poll, stating their reasons for leaving.

Also, I think you need to learn about Halo a little more, Halo CE on the PC didn’t have ranks, Halo 2 on the PC had ranks in match making, but most people played in “customs”, where there is no ranks. not too sure about H2V, but Halo PC still has a strong player base. not every MP game out there has ranks, let alone what Halo players call “a true ranking system”.

> Yep, the most easily abused system that does not even match people against similar ranks is better than Halo 2’s [sarcasm]

>.> The concept behind it is BETTER than Halo 2’s current ranking system.

> Obviously recoding will solve many of the issues I have, and I am indirectly suggesting them to recode things by having the suggestions I do in the Original Post.

Ok, just so we’re clear on things.

Also, I’m not questioning YOUR History in Halo, so don’t go questioning mine, I might lack in some knowledge on this subject, BUT, I’m not the ONLY one in this argument who is lacking in the knowledge department.

Do you realize, that the only thing I had a problem with about your OP was the idea around the lack of mic use? Ranking system, I’ve only pointed out my opinion on who I think Halo 2’s General rank isn’t a correct way to rank/match players together for EVERY gametype, and that the concept behind a 1-50 ranking system that ranks people in each gametype/play list. I’m not denying flaws in Halo 4’s system, I’m not even denying flaws in Halo 2’s ranking system, I wouldn’t be so dull as to do that. Plus if Halo 5 was released with a exact carbon copy of Halo 2’s ranking system, I would not care, I’d still post my opinion stating that that ranking system is flawed, and point out that I feel that the concept behind Halo 2’s CSR system is better. (BTW I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT HALO 4’S ABILITY TO MATCH PLAYERS OF SIMILAR CSR, QUIT ACTING AS IF I’M NOT AWARE OF THAT ISSUE).

19

> Visible Ranks will have negatives like:
>
> 1. Causing excessive quitting in lobbies when encountering “elite” ranks
> 2. Boosting/Cheating for rank
> 3. Turning Rank grinding into a game inside the game instead of just playing the darn game
> 4. Adding extra fuel for smack talking
> 5. Alienating weekend gamers, average or not so good gamers, and late adopters

  1. happens on a progressive rank too, oddly enough the most quitting i’ve seen playing halo online in terms of proportion of quitters is in halo 4, some games i’ve gone through 3 teams worth of enemies, the lack of penalty for quitting + JiP is more of a reason to quit than being overwhelmed by a rank.

  2. boosting happens for a broken ranking system (H3) where it is easy to reach the top. too hard or too much incentive and players will cheat to get to the top, either way no matter how balanced there will be cheaters however here are much better ways to organise a ranking system than what is featured in halo.

  3. what is play the darn game? i think h3 is a broken game with a terrible matchmaking system and many flawed and stupid weapon mechanics (br spread, melee lunge, many slow clunky underpowered weapons) yet it remains my favourite halo game purely because of the custom game experience, a game inside a game. ce, h2 and reach v7 i enjoyed much more for the vanilla experience, however the way you could tailor your experience to your liking in many different niche ways is something from h3 that was its biggest selling point for me.

4.and your point is…? people who smack talk will smack talk as long as there is competition and competitors, having competition in a competitive multiplayer experience (ranked) is necessary.

  1. nope, as a person who occasionally spawn trapped in btb h2, h3 and reach, the motivations of pubstompers are quite clear, stomp pubs, a ranking system incentivises people who want competition, removing tryhards and many good players from social MM.
20

> Oh, lack of Halo knowledge!? Who are you say I’m lacking Halo knowledge!? I didn’t know you was my stalker who knows my entire Halo history! Still not everyone wants to communicate. Also don’t need call outs to win. And that’s not lack of Halo knowledge, that’s based on personal experience! Halo is not the ONLY video game on the planet, NOR is the Xbox the ONLY gaming platform! I’ve been playing games on the PC longer than the Xbox has been around.

how does that refute the benefits of communication?

> Well I’m glad I’m not that person, CAUSE I’ve been playing longer than 2009, Try since 2003 or 4 with Halo Combat Evolved on the PC, then Halo Custom Edition, then Halo 2 on the PC, then Halo 3 in late 2008. I’ve played EVERY HALO GAME, I haven’t played a lot of Halo 4, mostly because I have this thing called a LIFE, out side of gaming, one that’s more demanding than sitting on my butt trying to out rank every single kid on the internet, in a video game.

doesn’t take long to be good at halo. all people complaining don’t like h4 so they aren’t playing, they also have lives. yawn typical “i have a life” counterpoint

> Plugged in or not, doesn’t matter, most times I have my mic plugged in, but I’m in party chat, most of my friends are the same, been this way since the late days of Halo 3.

yet again you haven’t refuted his argument of the benefits of communication or his hypothesis as why competitive play increases the use of mics

> And who says You’re the majority? Because you’re here on these forums with large numbers of people pointing out you want ranks? I’m sorry, I didn’t realize that this was the ONLY Halo themed forums on the internet, and I didn’t realize the whole player base of Halo through out the years is located on these forum boards. [/sarcasm] *In case you didn’t get the hint, I was very sarcastic in my last post at a few points.

what forums? list the forums that are majorly against a visible ranking system with actual articulate arguments, or just any tbh.

> I’m not saying Eli’s post is irrelevant, I just want to point out we shouldn’t be throwing numbers and excuses around to win an argument, I’m not about to believe the majority of those who left, left because of just ranks, nor because ranks was one of the reasons. Not every single player is going to jump onto a forum board and post a “I’m leaving for these reasons” thread, not every single person is going to vote in one single poll, stating their reasons for leaving.
>
> Also, I think you need to learn about Halo a little more, Halo CE on the PC didn’t have ranks, Halo 2 on the PC had ranks in match making, but most people played in “customs”, where there is no ranks. not too sure about H2V, but Halo PC still has a strong player base. not every MP game out there has ranks, let alone what Halo players call “a true ranking system”.

i agree with not throwing around numbers, but how many people have you seen were against ranks during h3 or h2 and not the manipulation of a ranking system?

CE had competition. many lobbies for CE PC are searching for competition or muck around customs, that isn’t a debate for no ranking system as there is no MM, just customs. H2PC was meh, remember how console h2 was really populated and h2pc wasn’t in comparison? h2pc was desirable because of its customs (and lack of halo 2 online after it shutting down).

> >.> The concept behind it is BETTER than Halo 2’s current ranking system.

then explain your reasoning or don’t bother mentioning it >.> that’s like me saying automatics improve competitive play, it could, but without reasoning my sentence isn’t proving anything or validating my point is it?

> Also, I’m not questioning YOUR History in Halo, so don’t go questioning mine, I might lack in some knowledge on this subject, BUT, I’m not the ONLY one in this argument who is lacking in the knowledge department.

if that is so then where have you disproved him? oh you haven’t? well that’s just slander.

> Do you realize, that the only thing I had a problem with about your OP was the idea around the lack of mic use? Ranking system, I’ve only pointed out my opinion on who I think Halo 2’s General rank isn’t a correct way to rank/match players together for EVERY gametype, and that the concept behind a 1-50 ranking system that ranks people in each gametype/play list. I’m not denying flaws in Halo 4’s system, I’m not even denying flaws in Halo 2’s ranking system, I wouldn’t be so dull as to do that. Plus if Halo 5 was released with a exact carbon copy of Halo 2’s ranking system, I would not care, I’d still post my opinion stating that that ranking system is flawed, and point out that I feel that the concept behind Halo 2’s CSR system is better. (BTW I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT HALO 4’S ABILITY TO MATCH PLAYERS OF SIMILAR CSR, QUIT ACTING AS IF I’M NOT AWARE OF THAT ISSUE).

learn to read. h2 and h3s system have separate ranked playlists not one spanning across all, he even mentions this. no you aren’t denying flaws in h2s system nor are you mentioning these flaws. it seems that you are unaware of that issue as you can’t explain h4 csr nor explain OR IDENTIFY the ranking systems that you are arguing against.

i think it would be good to take a leaf out of your book and improve your sentence structuring and your ability to argue a point, they’re pretty essential LIFE skills that are required in business, employment and just communication in general.