Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Reach needs a new ranking system
  • Subject: Reach needs a new ranking system
Subject: Reach needs a new ranking system

Tank beats everything!

Visit my youtube channel for Vehicular awesomeness!

I think the whole idea of the trueskill system is fatally flawed, and a new ranking system needs to be deployed in its place. The current ranking system promotes negativity and trash talking amongst the community. I think ranks in Halo Reach, should be obtained by how many games you have won. For example, lets say winning 200 games will rank you as a lieutenant, or something along those lines. It should basically be the same system that Bungie uses to classify how much experience you have per playlist.

I do not think there should be any visible skill number for other players to see. The one idea that makes sense about the trueskill system, is a hidden trueskill number. For those who do not know, you have a rank in every social playlist, it is simply invisible. I believe this is how players should be matched, but there should be more that goes into your trueskill than winning or losing games. Factors should include K/D ratio, percent of games won compared to percent of games lost, MVP, and how many games you have played in total. And these factors should apply to all of your games played, not just in one playlist.

I believe a system using these general ideas would be highly balanced and hopefully calm down some very angry Halo players.

  • 10.16.2009 6:26 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

To be honest, I say no ranks.

  • 10.16.2009 6:30 PM PDT

Tank beats everything!

Visit my youtube channel for Vehicular awesomeness!

Posted by: ujjval16
To be honest, I say no ranks.

I wouldn't mind that either :)

  • 10.16.2009 6:33 PM PDT

GT= Frost1691
No Group Invites.
Worst idea ever...http://www.bungie.net/Forums/posts.aspx?postID=8664824

Basing ranks on wins would be a terrible system in my opinion. Just because you win a game doesn't mean you actually did good in the game. You could have been carried the entire time by a person who got 20 kills and 1 death, but you got 2 kills and 10 deaths. Why should you rank up? I don't understand how the system now promotes trash talking. Can you explain that more?

  • 10.16.2009 6:55 PM PDT

Posted by: Frost1691 1691
Basing ranks on wins would be a terrible system in my opinion.

But isn't that what trueskill is in nutshell? I mean, theres more to it than that, but its all about who you win against and who you lose against.

I think the OP is saying that Halo should be like pokemon where by griding on Magicarp you can eventually get your pokemon to level 99. Which would be terrible. A linear system with no chances of going down in rank?

Hiding trueskill is one thing, but simply making exp into a rank is silly.

[Edited on 10.16.2009 7:02 PM PDT]

  • 10.16.2009 7:01 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

M=17+ Not 11

Posted by: ujjval16
To be honest, I say no ranks.

  • 10.16.2009 7:02 PM PDT

Tank beats everything!

Visit my youtube channel for Vehicular awesomeness!

Posted by: Frost1691 1691
Basing ranks on wins would be a terrible system in my opinion. Just because you win a game doesn't mean you actually did good in the game. You could have been carried the entire time by a person who got 20 kills and 1 death, but you got 2 kills and 10 deaths. Why should you rank up? I don't understand how the system now promotes trash talking. Can you explain that more?


no probelm. I'll give you a short answer and a long answer. The short answer is simply one word, or number, and that would be 50.

The long answer would be all of the threads I see in the Halo 3 forum making ridiculous claims about rank. Threads like colonels suck, only some 50's are good, and stereotypes on Generals. Also, in Halo 3 itself there are more than several screenshots that go around like "bad 50's" just trying to trash talk lower ranks. Then again, any ranking system is sure to have similar effects.

  • 10.16.2009 7:02 PM PDT

I hunt for the Prophet of Contentment, the San 'Shyumm that murdered my son, and stole his birthright, his Energy Sword. They call our species Heretics. They claim to all that our tongues sting, our words a vile poison that feeds on the unworthy. I have seen the true face of Heresy. The head of a gallant warrior lay on the ground. His neck scorched and blistered, scarred by his own blade. I shall retrieve the weapon, and drive it through that bastard's heart! Punishment for his sins is nigh.

Hidden Trueskill, with EXP based ranks = perfect.

I know this sounds like CoD, but hey, at least there WILL be Trueskill involved to keep you playing fair games...

Basically, you earn Exp for Kills, and less for Assists, you LOSE exp for deaths, and more for betrayals/suicides.

Lets face it, less people will rage quit Halo.

It should go about:

Assist: 2xp
Kill: 5xp
Death: -1xp
Suicide: -2xp
Betrayal: -5xp

As well, Medals can help, for each medal earned, you will get +1 extra xp.

[Edited on 10.16.2009 7:07 PM PDT]

  • 10.16.2009 7:05 PM PDT

Tank beats everything!

Visit my youtube channel for Vehicular awesomeness!

Posted by: Hylebos
Posted by: Frost1691 1691
Basing ranks on wins would be a terrible system in my opinion.

But isn't that what trueskill is in nutshell? I mean, theres more to it than that, but its all about who you win against and who you lose against.

I think the OP is saying that Halo should be like pokemon where by griding on Magicarp you can eventually get your pokemon to level 99. Which would be terrible. A linear system with no chances of going down in rank?

Hiding trueskill is one thing, but simply making exp into a rank is silly.


I'm not saying you couldn't go down, quitting could have a severe affect on rank if enough of it is done. I just think it is fair if everyone can enjoy ranking up, and more fair matches.

  • 10.16.2009 7:05 PM PDT

GT= Frost1691
No Group Invites.
Worst idea ever...http://www.bungie.net/Forums/posts.aspx?postID=8664824

Posted by: Armeddragon77
Posted by: Frost1691 1691
Basing ranks on wins would be a terrible system in my opinion. Just because you win a game doesn't mean you actually did good in the game. You could have been carried the entire time by a person who got 20 kills and 1 death, but you got 2 kills and 10 deaths. Why should you rank up? I don't understand how the system now promotes trash talking. Can you explain that more?


no probelm. I'll give you a short answer and a long answer. The short answer is simply one word, or number, and that would be 50.

The long answer would be all of the threads I see in the Halo 3 forum making ridiculous claims about rank. Threads like colonels suck, only some 50's are good, and stereotypes on Generals. Also, in Halo 3 itself there are more than several screenshots that go around like "bad 50's" just trying to trash talk lower ranks. Then again, any ranking system is sure to have similar effects.
I understand what you're saying, but I think this ranking system you're suggesting would cause even more. Think about it, anybody can get to level 50 or whatever the max is. If you play Call of Duty, anybody can be a level 50. Just because they win all the time does not necessarily make them good. And what happens when everybody and they're mother is a level 50? Well even more trashtalking because the rank becomes meaningless to determine skill. People will say things like, "damn you're bad, how did you make it to level 50?" It'll be the exact same situation.

  • 10.16.2009 7:08 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Honorable Legendary Member

Registration: SPARTAN II - 144
Birth ID: Aristotle
Code Name: Aegis Alpha, ALFA, Gold 4.
Appointed to: UNSC OpSec Command, Gold Team, [AA-S1c-444977]
Specs: Psy & Telep. abilities (ONI ref. #541-2285), Explosives, CQC & Tact., Sec. Protocols, Intel. Res. & Mangmt.

Posted by: ujjval16
To be honest, I say no ranks.


That'd be sweet, actually.

  • 10.16.2009 7:09 PM PDT

Tank beats everything!

Visit my youtube channel for Vehicular awesomeness!

I understand what you're saying, but I think this ranking system you're suggesting would cause even more. Think about it, anybody can get to level 50 or whatever the max is. If you play Call of Duty, anybody can be a level 50. Just because they win all the time does not necessarily make them good. And what happens when everybody and they're mother is a level 50? Well even more trashtalking because the rank becomes meaningless to determine skill. People will say things like, "damn you're bad, how did you make it to level 50?" It'll be the exact same situation.

Not if the higher ranks were much harder to obtain.

[Edited on 10.16.2009 7:13 PM PDT]

  • 10.16.2009 7:13 PM PDT

GT= Frost1691
No Group Invites.
Worst idea ever...http://www.bungie.net/Forums/posts.aspx?postID=8664824

I'm sure you already know the details behind the TrueSkill system, but I decided to post this anyway.
Explanation of the TrueSkill system
As you can see, it's based on who you beat and how you do compared to the other players. I think it's definitely more representative of your actual skill in the game. If you do win, but you end up with a negative k/d ratio, then you most likely will not rank up. Also, if you lose but you have the highest score and overall best stats, your chances of ranking up increase. In your system, you would rank up if you win no matter how you do and I don't really think that's fair.

Posted by: Armeddragon77
[quote]I understand what you're saying, but I think this ranking system you're suggesting would cause even more. Think about it, anybody can get to level 50 or whatever the max is. If you play Call of Duty, anybody can be a level 50. Just because they win all the time does not necessarily make them good. And what happens when everybody and they're mother is a level 50? Well even more trashtalking because the rank becomes meaningless to determine skill. People will say things like, "damn you're bad, how did you make it to level 50?" It'll be the exact same situation.

Maybe. But I'm not sure how they would do that. I guess we'll just have to wait and see.

[Edited on 10.16.2009 7:16 PM PDT]

  • 10.16.2009 7:14 PM PDT
  • gamertag: BJRSCJ
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Mack117
Posted by: ujjval16
To be honest, I say no ranks.


Yah! Bungie should take out ranks and revamp everything. But it needs a catchy name... Social?

Sure, people can see your high score, but if you don't like ranked anyway, just stay in social with a high skill of one. Halo would be ridiculous without ranks. Why would you ever want to play a game that is solely based on EXP? How boring and demoralizing is that? You know you're better than someone else, but they play more than you. That's just dumb. Bungie has given us the best of both worlds with ranked and social.

You people are the reason "C's" don't mean "average" anymore, and why we give kids happy faces for positive self-evaluation of their work. If you fail at something, just take it like everyone else. Especially in Halo, what's the big deal if someone has a higher number than you?

[Edited on 10.16.2009 7:22 PM PDT]

  • 10.16.2009 7:19 PM PDT

Tank beats everything!

Visit my youtube channel for Vehicular awesomeness!

Posted by: Frost1691 1691
I'm sure you already know the details behind the TrueSkill system, but I decided to post this anyway.
Explanation of the TrueSkill system
As you can see, it's based on who you beat and how you do compared to the other players. I think it's definitely more representative of your actual skill in the game. If you do win, but you end up with a negative k/d ratio, then you most likely will not rank up. Also, if you lose but you have the highest score and overall best stats, your chances of ranking up increase. In your system, you would rank up if you win no matter how you do and I don't really think that's fair.


I am quite familiar with the system, but thanks for posting it for others. I am not concerned with who you beat, but more of who you get matched up against, and that is why it would be fair. I'm not sure though, I guess there are a lot more factors that could contribute.

  • 10.16.2009 7:20 PM PDT
  • gamertag: R0SS15
  • user homepage:

I think they should base it on kills

  • 10.16.2009 7:26 PM PDT

Marine Corps.
Semper Fi.

Posted by: Wikked Navajoe
My problems [with Reach] are basically just full parties, mlg, and people who go out of their way not to get killed.

Posted by: ujjval16
To be honest, I say no ranks.


Keep in mind Bungie has a huge hardcore community to cater to. There may be more "Weekend Warriors" that play Halo, but hardcore players play more often.

There will be ranks and balanced multiplayer. I do not see it changing all that much from Halo 3 matchmaking.

Why change what has been working? In terms of a ranking system, I am sure they will adopt a new one.

  • 10.16.2009 7:42 PM PDT

How to spell "space"?

S-P-ACE! SPACE!

Posted by: Frost1691 1691
Basing ranks on wins would be a terrible system in my opinion. Just because you win a game doesn't mean you actually did good in the game. You could have been carried the entire time by a person who got 20 kills and 1 death, but you got 2 kills and 10 deaths. Why should you rank up? I don't understand how the system now promotes trash talking. Can you explain that more?

5 think Halo should remove the ranking system. It just made online more competitive, and less casual. Video games are here to have fun, relax, and get a few headshots. Not to make thousands a year on your only talent (coughcough TSquared coughcough).

  • 10.16.2009 7:50 PM PDT

Tank beats everything!

Visit my youtube channel for Vehicular awesomeness!


5 think Halo should remove the ranking system. It just made online more competitive, and less casual. Video games are here to have fun, relax, and get a few headshots. Not to make thousands a year on your only talent (coughcough TSquared coughcough).

Again, I think Halo would be much more enjoyable with a casual ranking system, something difficult but not impossible. But no ranking system sounds like it would work just fine as well. Oh, and you somehow manage to type "5" instead of "I."

  • 10.17.2009 7:42 AM PDT

Tank beats everything!

Visit my youtube channel for Vehicular awesomeness!


You people are the reason "C's" don't mean "average" anymore, and why we give kids happy faces for positive self-evaluation of their work. If you fail at something, just take it like everyone else. Especially in Halo, what's the big deal if someone has a higher number than you?

I don't think it is a big deal at all, but when I suffer from verbal abuse and constant spamming from angry 50's and what not, I start to wonder if a ranking system is really worth it. Do you really only play Halo for ranks? When I bought Halo 3 I was counting on how entertaining it would be, not that I wanted to be a high rank and brag about it, same goes for ODST. Ranks are just excuses for angry players to trash talk.

  • 10.17.2009 7:47 AM PDT

The ranking system is fine, get a life.

  • 10.17.2009 7:56 AM PDT

Posted by: Fos Tis Krisis
Hidden Trueskill, with EXP based ranks = perfect.

I know this sounds like CoD, but hey, at least there WILL be Trueskill involved to keep you playing fair games...



An Exp ranking system is not a ranking system it is a leveling system and are completely different when one has to consider matchmaking, and it is exactly like call of duty/battlefield/etc. Because every game on the 360 with online play somehow incorporates true skill into its matchmaking.


Factors should include K/D ratio, percent of games won compared to percent of games lost, MVP, and how many games you have played in total. And these factors should apply to all of your games played, not just in one playlist


Their is a fatal flaw with this. What about objective games where killing the team isn't the only thing to determine skill. While it would be nice to add other factor in the sheer number of factor a game with as much variety as halo has would create a cumbersome equation for true skill that would require different settings for different gametypes for it to make logical sense.

  • 10.17.2009 7:57 AM PDT

i think bungie should just make a system where it takes anyone who thinks their superior to someone because of their rank and punches them in the face.

  • 10.17.2009 8:27 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

From: KaTaNaSaMuRaI09
To: KaTaNaSaMuRaI09

1 month forum ban notice

If there were no ranks you can't get all the great armor :(.

[Edited on 10.17.2009 1:19 PM PDT]

  • 10.17.2009 1:18 PM PDT

Here’s what Luke had to say about the differences in treatment between the Spartans and Elites in Reach:

“Instead of piece-by-piece customization like the Spartans, Elite customization is a full model swap with models selected from the various Elite classes appearing throughout the Campaign. There are all kinds of reasons for this, not the least of which is our continued emphasis on the Spartan as your identity in Reach.”

I wouldn't mind EXP insignias, similar to a Gears of War system where you get credit for each unit of damage you deal, represented by a military insignia for captain, etc.

  • 10.17.2009 1:21 PM PDT