i’m not asking for this to be the only system in place. this could work hand in hand with the point system. but until someone points out a legitmate reason as to why it should NOT be in halo 4, i will continue to ask for it. i will continue to want to be challenged. the fact that i never got my 50 in h3 shows how much i want this in h4. casuals have all the playlists they could ever want. why should i get the shaft for actually wanting to test out my skill. ive been destroyed by top leaderboard guys in h3, but did i beg bungie to get rid of the ranked playlists, no! i trained with my clan (SIA) until i got better, and granted i never got my 50 but i could of if i played from day 1. so my question is this, why should I be alienated by the game that used to encourage me to be better.
edit: 3 things to improve on the system.
1 ban people with sockpuppet accounts
2 no deranking but rank gets lock if they continuously do bad on purpose, only improves if the stats do or put a deranking cap where you can only derank 10 levels and get locked
3 kick idle boosters based on inactivity
this stuff should of been added in h3 but bungie doesn’t even bother with updates
edit:
4: rank decay. after 14 days of inactivity, your rank will decay, making selling 50’s obsolete. this ads an extra degree of effort to maintain your rank. and if a noob purchases his account, he will be forced to maintain it and derank
> there is NO reason to have 1-50.
>
> there is EVERY reason to have a NEW TYPE OF RANKING that is more reflective of skill and achievements in the game.
thats funny, i can think of plenty of reasons as to why it should be here. but you can check the multitude of threads already listing those reasons.
black market, players will boost accounts to 50 and sell them on the black market for money, parents would purchase the accounts for their kids when they beg for it because the kid wants to try and prove to his friends that his totaly awesome at the game.
Don’t get me wrong, there absolutely needs to be a skill based ranking system to motivate people to improve, but DEFINiTELY NOT 1-50 is VERY LIMITING…and flawed.
…and I could care less about arguments/threads for 1-50 … thanks.
I would be fine with the 1-50 system but I really want a system that matches me with people of the same skill level. Having matchs with just random skill levels sucks its not fun for anyone. 1-50 did an okay job with this but so many people abused that system it didn’t always work.
> Starscream? The real one? Is that you?
>
> And a 1-50 or similar is necessary. If you don’t like it.
>
> PLAY SOCIAL.
>
> Which is all Reach is anyway, so why are you complaining? Jealous?
>
> You know that there are just as many people that abuse the cR system in Reach ad there are boosters in H3.
>
> There will always be cheaters! No matter what.
>
> Who cares if someone bought their 50? When you beat them you laugh and then play your next game.
I have heard the “selling accounts” argument used as a counter argument to implementing 1-50. How does someone buying a 50 affect anyone else in any way? I would rather have a fake 50 on my team who is not as good as his rank suggests than an AFKer who just sits there for credits.
The next argument is derankers. Easy fix is make to make certain ranks you cannot dip below. Say every ten ranks (10, 20, 30, 40).
The next argument is ranks encourage cheating by network manipulation. The solution is dedicated servers.
With those three points in mind I would be interested to see what other reasons people have to not want 1-50. Thanks for reading.
> black market, players will boost accounts to 50 and sell them on the black market for money, parents would purchase the accounts for their kids when they beg for it because the kid wants to try and prove to his friends that his totaly awesome at the game.
>
> there you go, a solid reason not to have 1-50.
all of which do not break the game at all due to the fact that sold account users dont play to maintain their 50’s and derankers are easy to spot and can be reported. its just as easy to do all this in reach with boosting and selling inheritor accounts.
> I have heard the “selling accounts” argument used as a counter argument to implementing 1-50. How does someone buying a 50 affect anyone else in any way? I would rather have a fake 50 on my team who is not as good as his rank suggests than an AFKer who just sits there for credits.
>
> The next argument is derankers. Easy fix is make to make certain ranks you cannot dip below. Say every ten ranks (10, 20, 30, 40).
>
> The next argument is ranks encourage cheating by network manipulation. The solution is dedicated servers.
>
> With those three points in mind I would be interested to see what other reasons people have to not want 1-50. Thanks for reading.
me too, it seems that to many casuals on this forum are afraid of getting exposed as badkids again
> > black market, players will boost accounts to 50 and sell them on the black market for money, parents would purchase the accounts for their kids when they beg for it because the kid wants to try and prove to his friends that his totaly awesome at the game.
> >
> > there you go, a solid reason not to have 1-50.
>
> all of which do not break the game at all due to the fact that sold account users dont play to maintain their 50’s and derankers are easy to spot and can be reported. its just as easy to do all this in reach with boosting and selling inheritor accounts.
the idea behind 1-50 is to show off how good you are and tell you where abouts you are on the skill gap, if it can be easily boosted then it completely breaks the entire point behind it making it useless, it damages gameplay from bad players matching good players because of boosted and bought 50s not acutally being good, de-rankers ruining the experience for other players …
its also a stupid buisness decision to use something that causes people to make money off of it … you don’t get money out of it but the person makes a big profit, all profits should go to the property holder but that will never happen and can potentially cost you money as well.
> > I have heard the “selling accounts” argument used as a counter argument to implementing 1-50. How does someone buying a 50 affect anyone else in any way? I would rather have a fake 50 on my team who is not as good as his rank suggests than an AFKer who just sits there for credits.
> >
> > The next argument is derankers. Easy fix is make to make certain ranks you cannot dip below. Say every ten ranks (10, 20, 30, 40).
> >
> > The next argument is ranks encourage cheating by network manipulation. The solution is dedicated servers.
> >
> > With those three points in mind I would be interested to see what other reasons people have to not want 1-50. Thanks for reading.
>
> me too, it seems that to many casuals on this forum are afraid of getting exposed as badkids again
you do understand that casual does not mean bad kid?
bad kid is a hardcore player that is bad at the game but refuses to accept it, a casual player is a very broad term but does not define how good the player is but wrather what intrests them as a player.
A more complete version of the Arena system would be better. Make it based on winning, FFA scoring and ranking promotes campy and selfish play. Extend the season lengths to at least 6 months, 3 is too short. Add more incentive to playing ranked playlists by having rank exclusive armor (not saying have the H3 system, where you can’t rank up w/o reaching so-and-so a level, I’m saying have a few pieces of armor that can only be unlocked by reaching a certain level in a ranked playlist). Add the system to more playlists.
> > > I have heard the “selling accounts” argument used as a counter argument to implementing 1-50. How does someone buying a 50 affect anyone else in any way? I would rather have a fake 50 on my team who is not as good as his rank suggests than an AFKer who just sits there for credits.
> > >
> > > The next argument is derankers. Easy fix is make to make certain ranks you cannot dip below. Say every ten ranks (10, 20, 30, 40).
> > >
> > > The next argument is ranks encourage cheating by network manipulation. The solution is dedicated servers.
> > >
> > > With those three points in mind I would be interested to see what other reasons people have to not want 1-50. Thanks for reading.
> >
> > me too, it seems that to many casuals on this forum are afraid of getting exposed as badkids again
>
> you do understand that casual does not mean bad kid, bad kid is a hardcore player that is bad at the game but refuses to accept it, a casual player is a very broad term but does not define how good the player is but wrather what intrests them as a player.
you know what i mean though, im tired of casuals trying convince me that there’s no need for a ranking system for a game that brought competitive gaming to its peak
> A more complete version of the Arena system would be better. Make it based on winning, FFA scoring and ranking promotes campy and selfish play. Extend the season lengths to at least 6 months, 3 is too short. Add more incentive to playing ranked playlists by having rank exclusive armor (not saying have the H3 system, where you can’t rank up w/o reaching so-and-so a level, I’m saying have a few pieces of armor that can only be unlocked by reaching a certain level in a ranked playlist). Add the system to more playlists.
this is a reasonable alternative but i would suggest getting rid of the seasons. having your rank reset is redundant and defeats the purpose of getting better. all in all, there has to be some form of skill based rank that is visible to everyone and has mulitple ranked playlists for it
> you know what i mean though, im tired of casuals trying convince me that there’s no need for a ranking system for a game that brought competitive gaming to its peak
actually, the casuals need the ranking system to keep them playing, but, it has to be activity based and not skill based, skill based ranking system will just frustrate them causing them to quit and move to different games, activity based where they can get to the rank at the end of the day regardless will keep them playing because they know they can reach it want to too unlock more customization, but, the customization has to effect gameplay to get them addicted to it otherwise they will just get bored of it eventually, reachs being a prime example of how customization not effecting gameplay causes players to get bored, CoD is a prime example of how customization effecting gameplay keeps them hooked.
i personally think that a skill based system should be in halo4 but it shouldn’t be a main part of it, just a seperate system that is visible along system the main activity based system, this way competitive players have there motivation and casuals have their addiction.
> > you know what i mean though, im tired of casuals trying convince me that there’s no need for a ranking system for a game that brought competitive gaming to its peak
>
> actually, the casuals need the ranking system to keep them playing, but, it has to be activity based and not skill based, skill based ranking system will just frustrate them causing them to quit and move to different games, activity based where they can get to the rank at the end of the day regardless will keep them playing because they know they can reach it want to too unlock more customization, but, the customization has to effect gameplay to get them addicted to it otherwise they will just get bored of it eventually, reachs being a prime example of how customization not effecting gameplay causes players to get bored, CoD is a prime example of how customization effecting gameplay keeps them hooked.
>
> i personally think that a skill based system should be in halo4 but it shouldn’t be a main part of it, just a seperate system that is visible along system the main activity based system, this way competitive players have there motivation and casuals have their addiction.
so why cant we have two ranking systems like h3, that way both sides are happy. thats the problem i have with the midset of a casual player, they belive everything should be catered to them. with ranked and social, you get the best of both worlds. casuals get everything you mentioned and competitive players can get the skill based experience they’re looking for