Why 1-50 should be in ALL playlists

Many new gamers have joined the FPS community since the rise of COD. COD gets alot of its success becuase anyone can pick it up play and get a few kills. Halo is like this too but one cannot deny the gulf that exists a player who has played past halos and a player who is new to the series. Playing reach and being a noble with 12 years of halo online play myself, I still get matched up with warrent officers and below in multiple playlists. I cant imagine how frustrating it is for them to be trying out a game and just keep dieing endlessly. I have heard non halo fans complain that it is difficult to kill and is frustrating because of all the counters to first shots that exist in halo unlike other mainstream FPS. While this is a very important aspect of halo, the reason why these players are feeling frustrated is becuase they are going against much higher skilled players.

1-50 in all playlists would alleviate alot of these problems. It would add incentive to make players win and increase in rank. This would leave the lower ranked new players to play amongst like skilled players and actually be able to get kills and not die relentlessly. Maybe some skilled players would make new accounts to go through the beginners but no one can doubt it would help stem the tide of experienced players against beginners.

A 1-50 ranking system would also offer something that other FPS dont have, once again making halo unique. It would also let players know where they stand so if they get trashed in a game by a 50 who starts playing another playlist they are not left there going “this dumb game makes no sense!!!” instead they willthink “wow well i guess thats what you have to expect when playing a higher skilled opponent, now let me go watch theater and see what he did”.

The 1-50 alleviates alot of ambiguity as to what kind of player your opponent is. We can all agree that halo takes much more skill than cod or BF, our rankign system should reflect that. Overall it will help match people bettereither +5 or -5 ranks from your own and allow the new players to get accustomed to the game and not be constantly obliterated by experienced players.

This system should be in all playlists, if its really only a number next to your name in a video game and meeans nothing why should we care if its there? It has clear benefits for new and old players alike. And lastly if you want to spend the game ridign aorund on a mongoose thats fine bt either do it at the lvl 10 ranks or in a custom game.

And why not have an invisible rank in ‘social’ playlists? Why have the rank at the side of your name at all? It seems just like a way for good players to feel better about themselves and for lower ranks to feel worse. Do you really expect first time Halo players to be excited about trying to rank up if they get beat by a 50 instead of just moving on to a different game? All of these are questions you’re going to get in a thread like this, all of them are also valid questions.

I’m all for competitive play, I understand why people want a ranked system and I myself want one too, but it can’t be all about rank, all the time. I played ranked playlist in Halo 3 probably 90 percent of the time, but that didn’t mean I didn’t enjoy going into BTB and messing around on a mongoose with my friend. Some people really do enjoy just going into a game and messing around to have fun, I think if we put a rank next to your name in every single playlist people who can’t get to the higher ranks will just be discouraged and stop playing. Like you said, some will see a high rank and want to be that, will strive to accomplish it and that’s great. Having both ranked 1-50, or 1-Whatever playlists, and a Social playlists where you’re always facing players of similar skill level really does seem like an obvious choice to me. It pleases the people who want ranked, it please the people who don’t want ranked, they don’t have to play the ranked playlists.

Im 100% for having 1-50 back in but i just dont think its fair to force that upon everyone. There is nothing wrong with the social/ranked split.

> Im 100% for having 1-50 back in but i just dont think its fair to force that upon everyone. There is nothing wrong with the social/ranked split.

100% agree whit Ranked/Social they had to do a game for everyone

Not many people coming from CoD or are new to Halo will like the idea of 1-50 ranking. I’ve asked plenty of people why they stopped playing Halo 3 and went to CoD and most of them said because of the ranking system. Believe it or not, it’s not as popular as you think outside of the small competitive community.

It’s just better to keep 1-50 in the Ranked, Competitive, or whatever you want to call it playlist.

1-50 is in all playlists Mike. You just cant see it (hopefully)

This is as things should be. You forget how trueskill was 100% gamed by players in Halo 3 to the point it stopped working? Or are you glossing over that fact?

> And why not have an invisible rank in ‘social’ playlists? Why have the rank at the side of your name at all? It seems just like a way for good players to feel better about themselves and for lower ranks to feel worse. Do you really expect first time Halo players to be excited about trying to rank up if they get beat by a 50 instead of just moving on to a different game? All of these are questions you’re going to get in a thread like this, all of them are also valid questions.
>
> I’m all for competitive play, I understand why people want a ranked system and I myself want one too, but it can’t be all about rank, all the time. I played ranked playlist in Halo 3 probably 90 percent of the time, but that didn’t mean I didn’t enjoy going into BTB and messing around on a mongoose with my friend. Some people really do enjoy just going into a game and messing around to have fun, I think if we put a rank next to your name in every single playlist people who can’t get to the higher ranks will just be discouraged and stop playing. Like you said, some will see a high rank and want to be that, will strive to accomplish it and that’s great. Having both ranked 1-50, or 1-Whatever playlists, and a Social playlists where you’re always facing players of similar skill level really does seem like an obvious choice to me. It pleases the people who want ranked, it please the people who don’t want ranked, they don’t have to play the ranked playlists.

Its a game higher ranks should feel more prestiged and rewarded for working hard. Some people, Including myself like getting 50s and going hard. Whats wrong with a rank next to your name if you don’t care about it?

1-50 was flawed. It was exploited countless times and caused fights and rants by eachothers ranks. It’s pointless to have it in ALL playlists.

> 1-50 was flawed. It was exploited countless times and caused fights and rants by eachothers ranks. It’s pointless to have it in ALL playlists.

Reach’s system is just as flawed. The highest rank means nothing, it only means tthat you have played a lot.

> 1-50 is in all playlists Mike. You just cant see it (hopefully)
>
> This is as things should be. You forget how trueskill was 100% gamed by players in Halo 3 to the point it stopped working? Or are you glossing over that fact?

In many cases truskill was accurate in H3. Especially in your case. Very accurate.

Cheaters/boosters is just a poor excuse to hide behind for doing poorly.

> And why not have an invisible rank in ‘social’ playlists? Why have the rank at the side of your name at all? So you know where you stand? So when a new player goes against a more expereienced player the differnce is clear and not blamed on the game. It seems just like a way for good players to feel better about themselves and for lower ranks to feel worse. You feel bad about a virtual number next to your name? Its the same thing as the reach/cod system except its based on skill and not time spent playing the game which tells you nothing about a player other than they play alot Do you really expect first time Halo players to be excited about trying to rank up if they get beat by a 50 instead of just moving on to a different game? You expect a lvl 50 to be going against a lvl 1-10??All of these are questions you’re going to get in a thread like this, all of them are also valid questions.
>
> I’m all for competitive play, I understand why people want a ranked system and I myself want one too, but it can’t be all about rank, all the time. I played ranked playlist in Halo 3 probably 90 percent of the time, but that didn’t mean I didn’t enjoy going into BTB and messing around on a mongoose with my friend. Some people really do enjoy just going into a game and messing around to have fun, custom games? why are you ruining the game for other players who are new and want a real game? Also actionsack I think if we put a rank next to your name in every single playlist people who can’t get to the higher ranks will just be discouraged and stop playing. You mean if ranks are there the game is immediatly all about ranks and not enjoying the fact you are getting fair evenly matched games? Like you said, some will see a high rank and want to be that, will strive to accomplish it and that’s great. Having both ranked 1-50, or 1-Whatever playlists, and a Social playlists where you’re always facing players of similar skill level really does seem like an obvious choice to me. It pleases the people who want ranked, it please the people who don’t want ranked, they don’t have to play the ranked playlists.

I dont see why social is even necessary, if you want to fool around that fine but do it in custom games. By you just wanting to fool around you are ruining the experience of others. Also by splitting things up into social and ranked you take a playlist and divide the population which means increased search times and worse off connections.

I dont think any casual who plays the game for fun minds not being a 50, I think the benefit of having faster search times, more even matches, and clear indications of your opponents abilities makes teh game more fun.

I mean what hurts more in a game of HS basket ball. Losing to the local rival HS team or losing against an NBA team?

besides dont you want halo to be unique?

> 1-50 was flawed. It was exploited countless times and caused fights and rants by eachothers ranks. It’s pointless to have it in ALL playlists.

The exploiters were few and far between. Just look at any H3 player distribution and 50s are in the far minority. Besides the system can be fixed. Im just saying that since halo requires much more skill than other games that skill should be displayed so new players dont have to go against the 12 year vets and be turned off from the game.

1-50 for the bulk of its matches never had 50s vs lvl 6s and even in new playlists the good players soon left the others. there can be mechanisms put in place to prevent or discourgae players to make new accounts.

Overall this is more of a benefit to the new players who dont want to be oblitereated like they are in reach today.

Just a few nights ago i went into BTB and my team was filled with colonel and below with guests and we fought a team of forunners. How is this fun and how does this not turn new players off?

its not about showing off, its about clarity and fair match ups that make the game accessable to new players.

@Artillaryy

And nothing is wrong with that, I too like having rank, with the rank displayed. I just don’t think it should be forced. The reason I’m against having ranked in every playlist because not only the good players will care about their rank, some lower levels will too. But as I said, not all of those lower levels will look at the rank system and want to strive to achieve the highest rank, some will look at it and get discouraged and maybe move on to a different game. What’s the harm in giving them playlists where a number isn’t always plastered to the side of their name, where they can go and play without the stress of gaining rank?

And of course we can do this same argument over and over again, as has been done many times on this forum. And now that I think about it, you were probably talking about the first questions in my post. Those are all questions that I have read on the forums, I should have said that they weren’t exactly where I stand on the whole subject.

@Mike

At your first and third sentences in the response, I only said that because you had the point of a 50 jumping to a new playlist and playing against a newer players, so, do you expect a level 50 to play against 1-10? And no, I don’t feel bad about a virtual number next to my name, but some might, also, a skill based ranking system would be completely different from CoD or Reach, so that point about someone feeling bad in those games is moot. And I agree, I’ll give you the point that I should I shouldn’t mess around in social, having fun trying to snipe off a mongoose, but wouldn’t you rather have it happen in a social playlist instead of a ranked playlist where how some people choose to play can directly affect your rank? And again, no, it doesn’t make it all about rank, but for a lot of people their rank would mean a lot to them, not everyone but some, both good and bad. I just honestly don’t see the harm in giving people a place to play where they don’t have to see a rank next to their name. I still want fair, balanced games. If every playlist was ranked I honestly wouldn’t mind, I’d still play, and if their is ranked and social I’d play ranked most if not all the time, but I’m just trying to think about the community as a whole. I do want Halo to be unique, I really do, and I’m all for Ranked, like I’ve said many times, I just think that if we could add someone simple like a social playlist to make more people happy is better than losing some players. I understand that you don’t think casual players would care, but some would, and in situations like this you have to think about everyone.

> @Artillaryy
>
> And nothing is wrong with that, I too like having rank, with the rank displayed. I just don’t think it should be forced. The reason I’m against having ranked in every playlist because not only the good players will care about their rank, some lower levels will too. But as I said, not all of those lower levels will look at the rank system and want to strive to achieve the highest rank, some will look at it and get discouraged and maybe move on to a different game. What’s the harm in giving them playlists where a number isn’t always plastered to the side of their name, where they can go and play without the stress of gaining rank?
>
> And of course we can do this same argument over and over again, as has been done many times on this forum. And now that I think about it, you were probably talking about the first questions in my post. Those are all questions that I have read on the forums, I should have said that they weren’t exactly where I stand on the whole subject.
>
> @Mike
>
> At your first and third sentences in the response, I only said that because you had the point of a 50 jumping to a new playlist and playing against a newer players, so, do you expect a level 50 to play against 1-10? New playlists come up from time to time and people are all lvl 1. So in that situation a 50 would possibly play a lower ranked player. The point is to remove the ambiguity. And no, I don’t feel bad about a virtual number next to my name, but some might, also, a skill based ranking system would be completely different from CoD or Reach, so that point about someone feeling bad in those games is moot. No the difference in COD and halo is that halo is a much harder game to play against people who have been playing for a long time. I myself have been playign for over a decade. Its not fair and not fun for a person who just picked up the halo franchise to play me, but it happens all the time. In cod its essentially hide and seek, whoever sees each other first and thats it. Due to halos steep learnign curve its far more important for new players to go against other new players and not expereienced players. 1-50 prevents new players from having to play the more expereinced players and allows them a fair and even match. The h3 system needs the kinks worked out so new accounts and derankers are stopped but the basis is important. No one likes to lose or get creamed by players that are way more advanced. And I agree, I’ll give you the point that I should I shouldn’t mess around in social, having fun trying to snipe off a mongoose, but wouldn’t you rather have it happen in a social playlist instead of a ranked playlist where how some people choose to play can directly affect your rank? Well the rank would discourage people from doing it outside of a custom game and eventually people who habitually do it wont be playign the people who care to win/play the game as intended . And again, no, it doesn’t make it all about rank, but for a lot of people their rank would mean a lot to them, not everyone but some, both good and bad. I just honestly don’t see the harm in giving people a place to play where they don’t have to see a rank next to their name. 1) splits population 2) increases search times 3)makes matchups ambiguous 4) expereinced players still face new players as clearly dseen in reach. I still want fair, balanced games. If every playlist was ranked I honestly wouldn’t mind, I’d still play, and if their is ranked and social I’d play ranked most if not all the time, but I’m just trying to think about the community as a whole. I do want Halo to be unique, I really do, and I’m all for Ranked, like I’ve said many times, I just think that if we could add someone simple like a social playlist to make more people happy is better than losing some players. I understand that you don’t think casual players would care, but some would, and in situations like this you have to think about everyone.

I dont think all the playlists being ranked would make people leave the game. On teh contrary I think more fair matchups would bring more people to play. There needs to be a playlist for guests and such to play and how that would work I dont know, but I do know its not fun for people who just picked up the game to play against teams of very expereienced players and I see that happen everyday in reach.

> > 1-50 was flawed. It was exploited countless times and caused fights and rants by eachothers ranks. It’s pointless to have it in ALL playlists.
>
> Reach’s system is just as flawed. The highest rank means nothing, it only means tthat you have played a lot.

I’ve spent 48 days of play time in reach. I’d like that to be recognized, even if I don’t like the typical gametypes and attitudes of players in ranked. I don’t see why we can’t have both, but I think that might be the direction they’re going with “spartan points”. Just sounds like “cR+” to me.

1-50 should be brought back. But only for ranked playlist.

> 1-50 is in all playlists Mike. You just cant see it (hopefully)
>
> This is as things should be. You forget how trueskill was 100% gamed by players in Halo 3 to the point it stopped working? Or are you glossing over that fact?

When I searched 50 high in Halo 3 I got a challenge more often than I do in Reach with playlists where I have 300+ games and win percentages above 95%.

I’d rather have the “trueskill rank” invisible.

At the same time, go with something similar to the arena ranks. It can be 1-50 or something like that. However, if you do not play that playlist, eventually someone will pass you and you go down. This does NOT reset after a period of time.

This will cause “Boosting” to be ineffective as that will only work for a period of time. This will also keep players playing that playlist, instead of staying away from it. It will make it so that the top rank IS special because hardly anyone will have it, and players will still get matched up with others.

I’m all for something that players can strive for, but a number that doesn’t degrade isn’t the answer. It loses value after time, and is possible for people to cheat their way to it. I do NOT want them to use something that is meant to be paired up with others to be the trophy.

> > > 1-50 was flawed. It was exploited countless times and caused fights and rants by eachothers ranks. It’s pointless to have it in ALL playlists.
> >
> > Reach’s system is just as flawed. The highest rank means nothing, it only means tthat you have played a lot.
>
> I’ve spent 48 days of play time in reach. I’d like that to be recognized, even if I don’t like the typical gametypes and attitudes of players in ranked. I don’t see why we can’t have both, but I think that might be the direction they’re going with “spartan points”. Just sounds like “cR+” to me.

You’d have butter bars to show for it in Halo 3. If you’re not a “ranked” type of guy then don’t let your rank worry you.

> 1-50 is in all playlists Mike. You just cant see it (hopefully)
>
> This is as things should be. You forget how trueskill was 100% gamed by players in Halo 3 to the point it stopped working? Or are you glossing over that fact?

people will exploit any MM system. as long as there is something to achieve, people will be willing to do whatever it takes to break it in order to get a favorable outcome for themselves. 1-50 is no different.

and really, if you are going to talk trash about something, at least suggest alternatives.

1-50 in halo 3, while needing some improvement in a few areas, was still INFINITELY better than the NONEXISTENT matchmaking that reach has.

also, your accusation that it was 100% ‘gamed’ is completely false. clearly you are exaggerating, but you arent even remotely close. i got to level 50 on my first account just fine, and i didnt need any boosting or w/e to get me there, either. heck, i mostly went in solo till level 46 or so. de-ranking could be dealt with easily in a new 1-50 system, as could second accounting, as could boosting.