Rank in Halo 2 and 3 showed who was better by getting a higher trueskill, while this wasn’t a perfect system it worked better than the cR system. Now it just takes a lot of time and no talent at all. It’s pitiful. I will be very disappointed if they put the credit system in Halo 4.
What about the armory?? i dont like the idea of credits for leveling up , but i loved the armory in halo reach. It made playing for a long time worth something. Levels and Armor should have 2 different tokens for them. The halo reach credit system for armor, and halo 3’s “skill” level system.
The only thing credits were good for were using them as currency to unlock armor.
> What about the armory?? i dont like the idea of credits for leveling up , but i loved the armory in halo reach. It made playing for a long time worth something. Levels and Armor should have 2 different tokens for them. The halo reach credit system for armor, and halo 3’s “skill” level system.
I liked Halo 2’s rank system the best, but I can see what you’re saying about the armory. I guess that could work, just take out Armor Effects, they’re annoying and if anything take away from the game.
I partial agree.
The cR system showed your playtime,not your skill but I would still implement it in the following way:
You rank up with your highest rank, just like you did in Halo 3, but you still get cR that you can buy armor with. You basically unlock things with ranks and achievements, but still buy them with cR.
Credits are not supposed to show skill. They’re given as a reward for investing time in the game. Your Arena rank was supposed to replace the 1 - 50 system as a skill indicator, but for some bizarre reason Bungie only used their new system in one small, specifically-designed set of playlists, so it never really caught on.
Credits should stay and Arena ranking should be put in every non-Social playlist.
> Credits are not supposed to show skill. They’re given as a reward for investing time in the game. Your Arena rank was supposed to replace the 1 - 50 system as a skill indicator, but for some bizarre reason Bungie only used their new system in one small, specifically-designed set of playlists, so it never really caught on.
>
> Credits should stay and Arena ranking should be put in every non-Social playlist.
I know that Credits aren’t supposed to show skill, that’s the problem. RANK IS. If Rank is affected only by Credits there’s no way of telling how good a player is. I personally don’t like Arena because I’m not competitive, and when I did used to play it I felt it was clunky and incredibly flawed. Out with the Arena, back in with the H2 ranking system and MAYBE credits for the Armory, not rank.
> Credits are not supposed to show skill. They’re given as a reward for investing time in the game. Your Arena rank was supposed to replace the 1 - 50 system as a skill indicator, but for some bizarre reason Bungie only used their new system in one small, specifically-designed set of playlists, so it never really caught on.
>
> Credits should stay and Arena ranking should be put in every non-Social playlist.
i prefer the ranked playlist in comparison to the arena. The arena didtn even determine your true rank in online game modes like the ranked playlist did, for that reason i prefer
the ranked playlist in comparison, but i still get what your trying to say.
I think there should be a credit system BUT it should be seperated from rank. People who are good at the game can get their rank up while people who don’t care about rankning up or aren’t very good at the game can still get all the armour. The only thing you should get from ranking up is a number/level/icon next to your name and maybe a credits bonus. People should be able to get all the armour from a low rank but it’ll take them longer.
That way everyone is happy.
> > Credits are not supposed to show skill. They’re given as a reward for investing time in the game. Your Arena rank was supposed to replace the 1 - 50 system as a skill indicator, but for some bizarre reason Bungie only used their new system in one small, specifically-designed set of playlists, so it never really caught on.
> >
> > Credits should stay and Arena ranking should be put in every non-Social playlist.
>
> I know that Credits aren’t supposed to show skill, that’s the problem. RANK IS. If Rank is affected only by Credits there’s no way of telling how good a player is. I personally don’t like Arena because I’m not competitive, and when I did used to play it I felt it was clunky and incredibly flawed. Out with the Arena, back in with the H2 ranking system and MAYBE credits for the Armory, not rank.
Rank should be determined purely by credits, because rank means nothing and has never meant anything, and I’m glad Bungie finally stopped pretending.
Beside your rank, there should be some sort of skill assessment. The Arena system got one thing right in that it only put the top % of players into the top group. With 1-50, anybody who had the free time to grind could reach the top rank, making it effectively meaningless. Halo 4 should combine the two methods.
I hated the credit system all around it is to much like every other game… Halo needs to be halo and stop trying to flow with every one else .yes people may like the armory but i liked how it was in halo 3 when u unlocked armor by getting achievements. Achievements were actually worth getting in halo 3 for that purpose. and i was playing a rank noble who had a 0.48 K/D so credit system does not show skill whatsoever. But in halo 3 i could not get past high skill of 45 even though i wan 16 games in a row on team doubles with a friend and i did not go up once so if 343 does go back to that system i hope they fix some bugs within it.
> Now it just takes a lot of time and no talent at all. It’s pitiful.
The only thing pitiful is that by going back to 1-50 that the rest of the population who can’t reach 50 is given nothing to do.
IMO Credits should be in Halo 4. But only as currency for buying armor parts. Ranking up should have an xp system where you earn an xp for each match you win. And in ranked games should have the 1-50 system from Halo 2 and 3
Just make credits non-impacting on rank, put reach’s variants are free starting armory
I’d much rather have reach’s credits than halo 2/3’s 1-50.
In reach Cr is NOT supposed to show skill, merely dedication and effort put into the game. And that’s fine since there’s the arena where those ranks show skill levels ( and in great detail too with top % of groups) unfortunately it isn’t very popular, but it’s there.
In halo 3, i got to level 45 in about 4-5 days after the game came out. Then for the next 3 years, my rank never changed. Sorry but i really can’t be -Yoinked!- with such a dull system when right around the corner we have CoD games that make playing in multiplayer very rewarding ( too rewarding some might say).
Obviously reach’s credits can definitively be improved, but it’s a starting block.
I agree, rank should be based off skill, armor should be earned like it was in H3 but there should be MUCH more armor variety then any Halo has had yet.
> Rank in Halo 2 and 3 showed who was better by getting a higher trueskill, while this wasn’t a perfect system it worked better than the cR system. Now it just takes a lot of time and no talent at all. It’s pitiful. I will be very disappointed if they put the credit system in Halo 4.
Hello, Caps, and I agree.
Credits are good for armor in that they allow anyone to obtain customizations via effort. Customizations are just cosmetic, so there’s no need for a kind of “skill gap” for them; may as well open them to everyone. However, credits are a terrible ranking system; something based on actual skill is absolutely needed for all functional aspects of the game.
> However, credits are a terrible ranking system; something based on actual skill is absolutely needed for all functional aspects of the game.
It’s a good thing we have TrueSkill matching players in the background rather than pairing people up based on their coesmetic ranks.
Or did I miss the wit again?
> > However, credits are a terrible ranking system; something based on actual skill is absolutely needed for all functional aspects of the game.
>
> It’s a good thing we have TrueSkill matching players in the background rather than pairing people up based on their coesmetic ranks.
>
> Or did I miss the wit again?
When I said “functional”, I meant it in a more general sense than matching. I’d list visible 1-50 as “functional” rather than “cosmetic”.
Of course, IIRC Reach’s skill-matching parameters are also extremely weak by default. That should not be the case in Halo 4.
> When I said “functional”, I meant it in a more general sense than matching. I’d list visible 1-50 as “functional” rather than “cosmetic”.
Visible ranks then attached to the nameplate?
I would be fine with that if a cR type rank was given equal weighting.
I would also prefer not to have a number based rank seeing as how it kills the immersion.
> Of course, IIRC Reach’s skill-matching parameters are also extremely weak by default. That should not be the case in Halo 4.
I’m partial to going back to the Social/Ranked hoppers of H3. We just don’t need a social SWAT just because we have a ranked SWAT.