The Only Way To Solve The Ranking Issue

Reach, like many modern games, lacked a sense of team cohesion. Everyone is out for themselves on Reach, you can have 4 different players on a team with 4 different motivations; one guy is trying to get a commendation, another needs sticky kills to complete a daily challenge, player number 3 is trying to get his K/D ratio up so his BPR doesn’t drop; this leaves the one guy playing to win at somewhat of a loss. He has 3 team mates who are all preoccupied with other elements of gameplay, because winning doesn’t matter. The problem here isn’t that winning isn’t that goal, it’s that the team as a whole doesn’t have a singular and unifying goal, which means that players are less likely to play as a team, help each other out and generally play in a more generous way because there is no reason to.

This isn’t to say that ranks don’t have there flaws, Halo 3 proved that. With the selling of accounts, derankers and players with new accounts able to zoom through the ranks, or even worse, deliberately hinder their rank so they could play low level players over and over in order to raise their stats. It had its problems, yes, but these were all a necessary evil in order to keep the peace between casual players and competitive ones.

Segregating players may not seem like a solution, but it is. The fact is, people will always have different motivations to do things and especially for why they play video games. Some people want to play for fun, some people want to play to improve their skill and there’s that one guy that always wants to team kill…but let’s not talk about him. The bottom line is that players want different things from a game and you CAN’T put them all in the same playlists and expect people not to get upset and for it not to cause problems such as the example I gave earlier. Social playlists allow people who want to relax, to have fun, to mess around a place to do so and competitive playlists offer a place for the other members of the community who want an adrenaline rush, who want team players and who want a goal in front of them that is difficult to achieve.

The fact is, that Halo has a scoreboard, your goal is to have the highest score on that scoreboard, is it not? Bottom line is that Halo has always been competitive, it wouldn’t have a scoreboard if the intention wasn’t for people to strive to be on top of it. My concern is how people get to the top of that scoreboard within a team context. It’s the means I am interested in, I want a solid, team experience, I don’t want Lone Wolf play being promoted in team gametypes and I feel I’m not alone.

I don’t think it would be a slap in the face to give players who want to play for fun a social playlist to do that in. I don’t believe any unlockables or achievements should be given for reaching certain ranks, because some people simply will not want to or be able to achieve high ranks. All achievements and unlockables should be for campaign and social playlists and play time, respectively. Spartan Points should be allocated accross the board, but no bonus given for ranked playlists and no specific armour unlocks for rank.

We should have two separate ranking systems, the Reach system, whereby you earn your rank via playtime, and a numbered ranking system, which you earn by winning games. Spartan Points should be an underlying gameplay feature that is awarded for playtime in both systems. This way, everyone will have two ranks, you can be an Inheritor in one ranking system and only a rank 20 in the other, or a rank 50 and only a sergeant in playtime. This will also allow for longevity for Halo 4, as players who max out one rank can then pursue the other if they so wish. Likelihood is, if you’ve maxed out your playtime to Inheritor levels, you should be ready to tackle the 1-50 section of matchmaking; but only if you want to and if you have your 50 in numbered ranks, you can sit back and just enjoy some Halo, working your way to Inheritor at your leisure.

I feel this is a system where everyone would be made happy and the Halo community can hopefully resolve its differences and realise we are one. We all just want a fun game. Fun for some people is driving a warthog, playing Infection, and for others, it is playing a close match with a team you can rely on.

Let’s realise that although we have different definitions of fun, the same principles apply and we all really want the same thing, just in different ways.

Discuss, flame, jump for joy or scream in anguish; just do it intelligently please.

EDIT: Also note that my Halo career has been spent Forging, playing hundreds of custom games on Halo 2 and 3, Firefighting, working towards my Halo 3 50, superbouncing, enjoying many games of Invasion, writing the occasional Fanfiction and playing through each Campaign multiple times; Halo 2 on Legendary upwards of 10 times. I am NOT just a competitive player, I sit in the middle of this issue and want all sides of this argument satisfied as completely as possible.

I’m glad bungie thought this was a good idea and used it for halo 3

I don’t know though because I, like you, also sit in between social and ranked. But two different ranking systems? Plus to me, to be Inheritor was like a no life thing, everybody was racing there. It all depends though on the games replay ability because Halo 3 I could play for hours on end, but Reach on the other hand felt like the same thing over and over.

The difference between a 19 Inheritor and 50 Warrant Officer lol I think that’s the idea your getting at. (Sorry its almost 3am now and skimming has become my primary way of determining the information presented haha

Doesn’t bother me I’ll still have my 50 :smiley:

> I don’t know though because I, like you, also sit in between social and ranked. But two different ranking systems? Plus to me, to be Inheritor was like a no life thing, everybody was racing there. It all depends though on the games replay ability because Halo 3 I could play for hours on end, but Reach on the other hand felt like the same thing over and over.

It would be similar to Halo 3 with the update, where you would have separate EXP per playlist and that would determine a separate rank from your numbered one. It’s similar to how HaloTracker has a Trueskill for all of your playlists, if they can do it, surely 343 can as well? Both ranks would be separate yes, but like with Reach, as long as you played the game you would at least get promoted in one ranking system, if you wanted a numbered rank though, you could do that too.

Have the Halo 3 EXP system for rank and the Halo Reach credits for purchasing armour.

This sums up my feelings on the issue almost perfectly. I’ve never seen any reason why the casual and competitive crowds can’t both have almost everything they want. At this point, given what we know about Halo 4 so far, it’s pretty much up to how they decide to structure the playlists. Just look at what they’ve announced for both sides so far:

Competitive Changes:
Faster movement
More responsive strafe
Higher jumping
No bloom
Hitscan weapons

Casual Changes:
Return of armor abilities
Weapon drops
Sprint as a baseline ability
Custom loadouts
A no doubt large selection of custom game options

All the building blocks are there for everyone to get what they want, I have no doubt. A dual ranking system like you’ve described seems like an obvious solution, giving rewards for both the time you invest in the game, and your performance. I know some people see this as ‘segregating’ the player base, but there is nothing keeping them apart but their own choice of what playlists to join. There is nothing stopping a casual player from stepping into ranked matches if he decides to check out a more competitive experience, and nothing stopping an MLG player from dropping into the action sack playlist to blow off some steam every now and then.

In short, 343i seems to have a pretty solid grasp on what both the competitive and casual communities want out of a Halo game. All that’s left is to deliver on it, and I think they’ve set themselves up nicely to do so.

> Have the Halo 3 EXP system for rank and the Halo Reach credits for purchasing armour.

You have spartan points for purchasing stuff. I think they are doing away with the credits and inheritor system. The rank and exp system can work for rank in Halo 4, the spartan points are a currency and I don’t think it should have anything to do with rank but game completion. So whether youwin or lose you earn spartan points as long as you finish the game.

My ideal vision:

  • FFA/Team: Weekly/monthly/overall - leaderboards, based on kill per minutes, Party restrictions. Individual ranks.

> My ideal vision:
>
> - FFA/Team: Weekly/monthly/overall - leaderboards, based on kill per minutes, Party restrictions. Individual ranks.

I diagree with leaderboards, they seem to promote stat boosting/hacking more than the Halo 3 system did. Leaderboards on most games have to be taken with an enormous pinch of salt, because they are more than likely false.

Also, just because a player gets a lot of kills doesn’t make them a good player. They may get 10 deaths to every kill, it also doesn’t account for objective gametypes where having the most kills doesn’t mean your team, or you, performed well during the game. Wins/losses has its flaws, but it strikes an equal balance between objective gametypes and slayer gametypes as far as judging how well a team performed. Players can use their K/D ratio to assess how good they are personally, where their actual rank would be based on team performance.

A 1v1 and/or Lone Wolf ranked playlist would also work for players who would rather be judged personally rather than in a team context. I see no reason for leaderboards to be introduced into Halo as people who really care about that can use Halo Tracker to determine their supposed place in the world/country.