There is a HUGE disagreement among the community over whether skill ranking should be visible or not. The only win-win scenario I see is to split the playlists in half. One half has visible rank, the other has invisible rank.
To cater to the pro-invis-rank, several things must be done. First, make all ranks invisible in social playlists. No looking at progressive rank, k/d, w/l, or anything that shows any resemblance of skill. Second, make it possible to mute people instantly by highlighting their name and pressing left bumper (to quench bragging).
For the people that want visible rank, have playlist specific rank and rev up the ban hammer to maximum power. Whenever you are searching for a game, a list of things that will get you temporarily/perm banned should show up occasionally. Things like consistent quitting, deleveling, boosting, modding, etc. the community must always be reminded.
Also, I think there should be incentive to play a playlist after you reach max rank. Maybe a decay system where your rank goes down one for every week you don’t play it. This would stop the buying and selling of accounts and stop people from completely quitting a playlist once max rank is achieved.
Why does one side have to win and one side have to lose? I’m sure there is a way to compromise and cater to both sides of the issue.
> The only win-win scenario I see is to split the playlists in half. One half has visible rank, the other has invisible rank.
>
> To cater to the pro-invis-rank, several things must be done. <mark>First, make all ranks invisible in social playlists. No looking at progressive rank, k/d, w/l, or anything that shows any resemblance of skill</mark> I can kind of agree there, but it;s removing what you might see as a personal challenge to over-come somebody who may be better than you. Second, make it possible to mute people instantly by highlighting their name and pressing left bumper (to quench bragging).
>
> <mark>For the people that want visible rank, have playlist specific rank and rev up the ban hammer to maximum power</mark> What’s the purpose in revving up the ban-hammer in a play-list where rank is visible? Going to ban somebody for trash-talking because you’re blow them?. Whenever you are searching for a game, a list of things that will get you temporarily/perm banned should show up occasionally. Things like consistent quitting, deleveling, boosting, modding, etc. the community must always be reminded.
>
> Also, I think there should be incentive to play a playlist after you reach max rank. Maybe a <mark>decay system where your rank goes down one for every week you don’t play</mark>That’s asinine, considering that some people just lose Gold on the spot. it. This would stop the buying and selling of accounts and stop people from completely quitting a playlist once max rank is achieved.
>
> <mark>Why does one side have to win and one side have to lose?</mark> I’m sure there is a way to compromise and cater to both sides of the issue.
If one side wins and one loses, that’s a good game. Killing in an objective-based game is the point to getting to the objective. You can’t have both teams win because then that’s breaking a basic game mechanic.
> > The only win-win scenario I see is to split the playlists in half. One half has visible rank, the other has invisible rank.
> >
> > To cater to the pro-invis-rank, several things must be done. <mark>First, make all ranks invisible in social playlists. No looking at progressive rank, k/d, w/l, or anything that shows any resemblance of skill</mark> I can kind of agree there, but it;s removing what you might see as a personal challenge to over-come somebody who may be better than you. Second, make it possible to mute people instantly by highlighting their name and pressing left bumper (to quench bragging).
> >
> > <mark>For the people that want visible rank, have playlist specific rank and rev up the ban hammer to maximum power</mark> What’s the purpose in revving up the ban-hammer in a play-list where rank is visible? Going to ban somebody for trash-talking because you’re blow them?. Whenever you are searching for a game, a list of things that will get you temporarily/perm banned should show up occasionally. Things like consistent quitting, deleveling, boosting, modding, etc. the community must always be reminded.
> >
> > Also, I think there should be incentive to play a playlist after you reach max rank. Maybe a <mark>decay system where your rank goes down one for every week you don’t play</mark>That’s asinine, considering that some people just lose Gold on the spot. it. This would stop the buying and selling of accounts and stop people from completely quitting a playlist once max rank is achieved.
> >
> > <mark>Why does one side have to win and one side have to lose?</mark> I’m sure there is a way to compromise and cater to both sides of the issue.
>
> If one side wins and one loses, that’s a good game. Killing in an objective-based game is the point to getting to the objective. You can’t have both teams win because then that’s breaking a basic game mechanic.
youve completely misunderstood what I said in the OP. this isn’t about winning or losing matches. It’s about appeasing both people that want tank to be visible and rank to be invisible.
> I can kind of agree there, but it;s removing what you might see as a personal challenge to over-come somebody who may be better than you
The whole point of social is to remove the competitive nature of the game.
> What’s the purpose in revving up the ban-hammer in a play-list where rank is visible? Going to ban somebody for trash-talking because you’re blow them?
This makes no sense. You don’t get banned for trashtalking. The reason the banhammer needs to be more effective is to stop incredibly bad cheating methods such as DDoS attacks.
And no, you don’t stop cheating by removing skill based ranking, Halo Reach is proof of that.
> That’s asinine, considering that some people just lose Gold on the spot.
It’s not “asinine”, it’s actually the perfect solution to problems that had no real effect but lots of people cried about. To add to it, you should only lose at most 10 levels to prevent being able to derank simply by not playing.
> You can’t have both teams win because then that’s breaking a basic game mechanic.
Missing the point and by quite some distance.
Instead of only having the system cater to casuals who don’t like the game telling everyone they aren’t as good as they imagine they are, the system can leave their skill completely anonymous (social) while letting competitive players have what they want (ranked).
It is the perfect solution and one of the many reasons Halo 3 is still far superior compared to Reach.
> > I can kind of agree there, but it;s removing what you might see as a personal challenge to over-come somebody who may be better than you
>
> The whole point of social is to remove the competitive nature of the game.
>
>
>
> > What’s the purpose in revving up the ban-hammer in a play-list where rank is visible? Going to ban somebody for trash-talking because you’re blow them?
>
> This makes no sense. You don’t get banned for trashtalking. The reason the banhammer needs to be more effective is to stop incredibly bad cheating methods such as DDoS attacks.
>
> And no, you don’t stop cheating by removing skill based ranking, Halo Reach is proof of that.
>
>
> > That’s asinine, considering that some people just lose Gold on the spot.
>
> It’s not “asinine”, it’s actually the perfect solution to problems that had no real effect but lots of people cried about. To add to it, you should only lose at most 10 levels to prevent being able to derank simply by not playing.
>
>
>
>
> > You can’t have both teams win because then that’s breaking a basic game mechanic.
>
> Missing the point and by quite some distance.
>
> Instead of only having the system cater to casuals who don’t like the game telling everyone they aren’t as good as they imagine they are, the system can leave their skill completely anonymous (social) while letting competitive players have what they want (ranked).
>
> It is the perfect solution and one of the many reasons Halo 3 is still far superior compared to Reach.
thanks for shutting him down. It’s a little hard to deal with quotes on an iPhone.