Halo 2 Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Should Halo 2 have a Ranking Sytem?
  • Subject: Should Halo 2 have a Ranking Sytem?
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2
Subject: Should Halo 2 have a Ranking Sytem?
  •  | 
  • Exalted Mythic Member

January 30, 2004 (Warthog's Day)
The Master Chief emerged from his code. After seeing his dynamically lit realtime shadow, he went back for 9 more months of development.


Behold the power of the Originals, the Gods Axeone-Neurone.

Posted by: Twelve Large
If anything, they should scrap the current carnage report. In a two team game, there should only be "two" rankings.. Winners.. And losers.

But I would stil want to see how much I helped out my team. Maybe a team page and a individual page. Switch between the two with black button.

  • 06.19.2004 9:03 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

bang bang i just humped my dog bang bang i just humped her again bang bang that was better than wacking-off bang bang i think marry him bang bang i think i'll try my hamster next bang bang yes yes i think i will bang bang i'll cya all later bang bang her i come my little hamster bang bang get ready to be hhhhuuuummmpppppeeeeddddd

[Edited on 6/19/2004 9:08:55 PM]

  • 06.19.2004 9:04 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Perhaps we could get a mathematician who could work it all out, a weighted system. I'd like to see experienced guys get no points what-so-ever, or at least hardly at all, for taking out those very far below themselves. Otherwise people would quit games with experienced players and just stick with games where everyone is unskilled just to push up their ratios.

  • 06.19.2004 9:05 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

No way, because when stats get involved people always take it WAAAAY too seriously. Than everyone starts being a dick, and the game becomes less fun.

Without Stats
I died, oh well.

With Stats
I died, -blam!-! I went down 5 ranks! -blam!- -blam!-ity -blam!-nuts!

Also some people won't shoot people ever because they have to be careful about their accuracy.

  • 06.19.2004 9:11 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

it would be way better with ranks becuase then people would try harder and it's funner to watch people suffer while u sit back and hear them begging u for a rematch

  • 06.19.2004 9:52 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

No, and here are my reasons:

1. It motivates people to find ways to cheaply go up the ranks, then they talk -blam!- to people below them and/or get everyone whinning....

2. People start making stupid statements and clain "OMG, I'm so good". Then they get obliterated by someone and you hear them whine...

3. Cheating hosts abuse their abilities to kick/ban people alot in games that have rankings on XBox Live... They kick people that do better then them and it gets rather frustraiting....

4. It's not common, but people sometimes won't allow you to play when your ranking is too low...

All of these come from other XBox Live games that include rankings in them... If they're going to add a ranking system, make it that we can disable it for us if we don't want to be apart of the ranking system.

All I want is personal stats so I can keep track of my progress... I want a very well stat record as well, like accuracy and hits with each weapon, when I tend to hit people with each weapon if I do hit at all, how many times I've killed people, how many deaths as well... My overall Accuracy percentage... and other such info like that... I also want to have an option to keeping my personal stats private or not...

  • 06.19.2004 10:14 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I think there should indeed be a ranking system, but one like someone here has already mentioned, the kind where your rank is denoted as being of certain level, NOT your numbered rank on some pointless leaderboard. I'm a fan of Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow and I absolutely love the gameplay, but cannot STAND the ranking system because it takes so much away from the enjoyment of the game. People get so consumed with their rank and how to get higher that they completely forget the whole point of the game, which is just to have fun. Mechassault's ranking system isn't any better since it's not "who is best player", it's "who spends the most time playing". It'd be awesome to have your Halo 2 multiplayer stats recorded for people to look at, but I think it'd just be a bad idea to have a leaderboard ranking system. On the other hand, I think having a tournament ranking system for team tournaments (and probably single tournaments as well) would be great since it could really BE a matter of which team (or possibly individual) is really the best, not just killed the most people. A point- or kill-based system would just bring down the fun level, but I think a ranking system based on tourney play would be great even though I personally prefer to stay away from clans.

  • 06.19.2004 10:23 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

A ranking system by itself isn't bad, it's just a matter of how you try to pull it off; case in point:

If you do it by numerical ranking, i.e. 1-100,000, you're going to have 99,999 people that are pissed off because they're not higher, not to mention the fact that the vast vast majority have never actually had a chance to play #1 (or 2-99 for that matter). The remaining person who actually IS #1 will of course be supernerd and have no life.

Perhaps a better way is an objective individual ranking that is independent of how well others play. Someone suggested this earlier essentially--use a sort of caste system to assign a nominal (naming) rank to certain players based on their ability. This might be based on things such as kill/death ratio, accuracy, type and frequency of different weapons used, grenade kills, suicides, etc, which factors in how long the person has played. For example, a person with a 10/3 kill/death ratio that has played 100 hours will be ranked lower than someone with a similar ratio who has only played 10 hours.

I mean really, how many people will ever sniff at #1 in a numerically ranked system. #1 will no doubt be the person who plays the most, or close to it. In any case, every person other than #1 will be bitter about not being #1. Instead, why not have classes of ranking which permit an indefinite number of members, again, much like someone else suggested.

The best of the best will be mad because they are lumped with just the very good; the solution to this will be to create enough "classes" to accommodate almost every skill level.

For example, "spartan" class might be 50th percentile and below. Master spartan might be 75th percentile and below. Spartan commander could be 90th percentile; spartan general 95th percentile, and Spartan Destroyer 98th percentile.

If I had a choice, just having statistics would be fine.

  • 06.19.2004 10:26 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • of 2