Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Poll [14 votes]: Which ranking system?
  • Poll [14 votes]: Which ranking system?
Subject: Halo Reach matchmaking system

Poll: Which ranking system?  [closed]
H3:  43%
(6 Votes)
H2:  57%
(8 Votes)
Total Votes: 14

Better be like the halo 2 system. The h2 system was good, but then they changed in halo 3 and it sucks.

For those who didnt play h2, there was no trueskill, and exp went towards your level.
You could see how many games you were away from your next level and a 5 win streak would always level you up, but 5 loses would also level you down so consistency was still vital.

I was a level 46 in slayer in h2 and there was no way i would matched with anyone at level 38 or higher and have to say "ffs how did you get this level". In halo 3 thats the biggest problem for me.

When h3 first came out it was equivalent to a h2 40. after a month it became =38, then after a few more months a h2 34 could get a 50. Now its like a h2 30 can get it!

Ridiculous, im tired of playing mlg at level 43 and having terrible teammates. Dont say 'get a team' because in H2 you could go in by yourself and have reliable teammates, i went from 41-44 by myself.

So please make the reach system more like h2 an NOTHING like h3 system. If players are bad then they should get stuck at level 20. tough!!! Making 50 something anybody can achive is stupid for too many reasons for me to mention.

  • 06.12.2009 8:02 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member
  • gamertag: Food62
  • user homepage:

What about the inbred house potatoes?!


.

How about no ranking system whatsoever.

  • 06.12.2009 8:41 AM PDT

Um...the game doesn't just give you a 50, I can't get 45, so by your idea I must really suck.

  • 06.12.2009 8:50 AM PDT

*College *Programming *Gaming

I started Starori games in 2011.

No one has the right to take the life of another.

You should have put no ranking system as third choice.

  • 06.12.2009 9:03 AM PDT

No ranking would be bad because bad players would play with good ones.

  • 06.12.2009 9:06 AM PDT

*College *Programming *Gaming

I started Starori games in 2011.

No one has the right to take the life of another.

Posted by: Cookerly91
No ranking would be bad because bad players would play with good ones.

Well like I said in a post before. Halo: CE did not have any ranking system and if you played it online (XBConnect) then you would have experienced Halo for what it was...playing for fun and sharing each others custom maps and whatnot.

[Edited on 06.12.2009 9:15 AM PDT]

  • 06.12.2009 9:13 AM PDT

Posted by: MasterStevo16
Posted by: Cookerly91
No ranking would be bad because bad players would play with good ones.

Well like I said in a post before. Halo: CE did not have any ranking system and if you played it online (XBConnect) then you would have experienced Halo for what it was...playing for fun and sharing each others custom maps and whatnot.

Yes but playing competitively is fun rather than playing unranked MM customs. IMO

[Edited on 06.12.2009 9:20 AM PDT]

  • 06.12.2009 9:19 AM PDT

Posted by: Food63
How about no ranking system whatsoever.

Agreed, ranking is just lame.

  • 06.12.2009 9:30 AM PDT

UnitedBands.net

My band and artist networking/information site. Check it out!

we need prestige mode lol

  • 06.12.2009 9:44 AM PDT

Clearly because the desktop uses a 3 prong plug and a laptop uses a 2 prong plug, the microwave will fill your car with tostitos better

Posted by: Food63
How about no ranking system whatsoever.


Then your pretty much guaranteed unfair matches every time.

Unless your alluding to hidden ranks which I totally would support. It would mean way less idiots on these forums bragging about the 50's they bought or boosted to. Plus its just a number anyways. But I would prefer the H2 ranking system hidden rank or not.

  • 06.12.2009 10:02 AM PDT