Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: My thoughts on a ranking system.... for Reach
  • Subject: My thoughts on a ranking system.... for Reach
Subject: My thoughts on a ranking system.... for Reach

As it stands we all know how bad the second accounters are and the self-serving players who say it is so easy to get General in a few days. Honestly, if you have an unreal connection that gives you host 99% of the time there is no way you can't hit 50.

The current system rewards those with just that and defecates in the face of all other deserving players. Most of those Generals would not be Generals if they played in a LAN where latency does not favor their connection. I say scrap it all together. Remove it.

Rank should not be based off of some arbitrary numbers that honestly make little to no since. Sig and MU. True skill is a crock of crap when players can pitch perfections showing obvious superior skills and loose rank.

Rank should be experience based only. If you play a lot and earn a lot of experience you should be rewarded with higher ranks. Not win a few games and call it good. Make keeping your account worth it. That would stop all second accounters in their tracks. Your skill is not something that can be measured by numbers, but only by experience.

I use GOW as an example of a system that has promise. I am not saying GoW is better than HALO, but at least you don't see players dropping their accounts every month for a second or third or so on just to make it to General. You need a huge amount of experience to get to level 100.

I say make HALO: Reach have a similar system that rewards players for keeping their accounts and playing for long periods of time. Make it reasonably attainable for any player willing to take the time to reach General allowed to earn it. Like the exp rank system they have added to the H3 playlists. Except make it far more than 500 exp to make it to general.

This would also remove the,"I am a low level having to play against high levels and it is not fair" problems we see currently. As the match making would only match you up against players with relatively close exp levels. I.e. players of the same exp rank and only those players.

Since these are video GAMES everything should be attainable by the player. Not just some specific players that learn how to exploit things in the game. Or modify the game play and consider themselves better than everyone else just because they excel at that type of game play.

The fact that you are playing against other players with the soul goal to win means you can not remove the competitiveness in the game. So arguing that competitive players "need" to play that way and are different from casual players is utter BS. We all play with the primary goal to win. And if we put in the time than we should earn the rank.


Thoughts?

  • 11.02.2009 3:42 PM PDT

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstien

Agreed. Experience is experience regardless of win or lose. You take something out of every game and the only way you could lose experience should be by avoiding the game itself - AKA quiting. Players can view your stats in order to gauge your ability themselves.

  • 11.02.2009 3:48 PM PDT

We got Jackals in the courtyard!

i like the experience idea but i think a game still needs the ranking system, just not halo 3's broken one. I think that you should be ranked according to how you personnally do in a game.

I think the game should take in the amount of deaths and kills. say for example you were in a Team slayer game. you picked up a BR and got a running riot. you then died a few times. end of the game you were 18-4, but your team lost 50-46. You shoould gain xp and a rank up, even though you lost. i think games would be alot more fair then because you would be playing against people that play a similiar game as you, not people who bought or boosted.

(not that all 50s do that).. Im a 47 and whoop my friend who is legitly a 50. my other friend who is also a legit 50 could tool on me. i also think level cap should be raised to 100 or 99 for more variation.

Think in CoD4 (the only CoD game ive ever played) how you are rewarded match xp. that would be kill if done in halo. say you win a game, you get 3 xp, you lose, you get 2 xp. you quit you lose 1 xp. i think that is pretty fair.

I also like how in Halo 2 it was significantly harder to rank up. Ive never even seen anyone above a 40. maybe thats just because i go back and play when halo 3 has been out for 2 years, but occasionally i see 30s. my own rank is like a 16 or something and im not bad. in halo 3 i could get to a 16 in like 5 games. in halo 2 it takes much longer.

thats my idea.

  • 11.02.2009 4:12 PM PDT

You are an
█▀▀ ░█▀█ ░█ ░█▀▀ ░░█▀▀ ░█▀█ ░█ ░█
█▀▀ ░█▀▀ ░█ ░█ ░░░░█▀▀ ░█▀█ ░█ ░█
▀▀▀ ░▀ ░░░▀ ░▀▀▀ ░░▀ ░░░▀░▀ ░▀ ░▀▀▀ ▀
NOOB!

Yeah, I also like the Call of Duty Ranking system. I think they should add prestiging. Except a lot more levels. That way it makes for MUCH less General remakes and many more people devoted to actually playing. Making the Halo ranking system MUCH better. People, save this thread. This deserves a pinnage.

  • 11.02.2009 4:16 PM PDT

"Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind." - Albert Einstien

Posted by: K K CASEY
I think the game should take in the amount of deaths and kills. say for example you were in a Team slayer game. you picked up a BR and got a running riot. you then died a few times. end of the game you were 18-4, but your team lost 50-46. You shoould gain xp and a rank up, even though you lost. i think games would be alot more fair then because you would be playing against people that play a similiar game as you, not people who bought or boosted.

While that seems to make sense the problem is that people then wouldn't even need to help their team in order to rank up. More people would be busy fighting their team for kills in order to get a higher rank. If this system were to work, there would still need to be a higher reward for doing well and helping your team win or else the game will be even worse off.

Posted by: K K CASEY
i also think level cap should be raised to 100 or 99 for more variation.

I agree. I feel that higher level caps are better for FPS rankings. It allows for more varied levels and more integrated pairing with less level stagnation. Perhaps even getting rid of the level cap altogether might be good, but that would take a much bigger retooling.

Posted by: K K CASEY
I also like how in Halo 2 it was significantly harder to rank up. Ive never even seen anyone above a 40. maybe thats just because i go back and play when halo 3 has been out for 2 years, but occasionally i see 30s. my own rank is like a 16 or something and im not bad. in halo 3 i could get to a 16 in like 5 games. in halo 2 it takes much longer.

Halo 2 was significantly harder to rank up in. There was even an update that reset ranks because of it. I personally never got farther than level 29, which was high in halo 2. Most people were either under 30 or above 40, mostly due to the heavy use of mods, glitches, and standby.

  • 11.02.2009 4:19 PM PDT

I think the COD ranking system made for an enjoyable experience with the game that actually made sense, and Bungie should take a few hints from it.

*puts on flame suit*

  • 11.02.2009 4:29 PM PDT

I am Field Master Avu Med 'Telcam, Servant of the Abiding Truth, and I have many brothers.

A god who creates tools is still a god. It is not for us to impose qualifications upon the divine or presume to guess its intentions.

EXP based Ranking system would be much better and more effective.

  • 11.02.2009 4:53 PM PDT

Skill based rank is garbage. Bungie proved they are not able to make a system that works right in that respect. If they did I would not have lost rank when I earned a perfection....

How do you reward the flag carrier vs. the flag stopper vs. the enforcer/defender. Or the bomb carrier vs. the bomb planter? Or the lead killer vs. the bullet magnet/decoy? Or the hog driver vs. the gunner? If you wanted to make your experience go up off of what you do than each medal you put up, every head shot, every assist, every kill, every betrayal and so on would have to be taken into account.

I say keep it simple. That makes it less likely to be abused since it is much easier to watch over. You win you go up exp, you lose you gain nothing, you quite out you lose exp. The point is to eliminate second accounters and host advantage Generals and reward those players who spend the actual serious time playing the game. Not bog the system down with an enormous amount of detail.

We must remember this is HALO not GoW or COD. So though their systems work well in those games, HALO needs one that works with its style of gameplay. Not a rehash of someone elses system.

  • 11.02.2009 4:55 PM PDT

Yeah agreed. I think it also needs more small awards to aim for e.g. a perfection on a certain map to gain an extra piece of armour. Or something along those lines.

  • 11.02.2009 5:02 PM PDT

hola!

i think the first 2 paragraphs are i lil biased. i have a crappy connection and im a 45 i worked my way up to there and rarely did i ever encounter a game lost due to lag or latency.
and skill lvl is different then exp. you could play a million games and people will still be better then you. the goal is not to reach 50 but to place you with players just as good as you. your skill tells you how you compare to everyone els. and you do gain exp when you play alot of games although it wont be writen on your service record. the more you play the better you get, the better you get the more games you win, the more games you win the higher your rank goes.

  • 11.02.2009 5:49 PM PDT

i have a crappy connection and im a 45 i worked my way up to there and rarely did i ever encounter a game lost due to lag or latency

Well sounds like luck favored you. Must be nice to not have latency issues. Doesn't seem like your connection is that crappy now doesn't it?

I however, have used many ISPs and have seen a direct change in playability with the different regions. My current ISP, the best money can buy here in the great state of montana, has far more latency issues than what I had when I lived in Washington state. And I am 50 feet from the fiber optic hub across the street. I have a higher download and upload than I had when I was in Washington State, but my ping is horrible. You may not have problems cause your internet may not be as crappy as you think.

Latency has a direct influence on how your skill is determined with the current system. Those with the best connection get host. Everything goes through their set up. So those connected to that set up are not only battling the skills of the host they are also battling the set up itself with the latency it may or may not provide. The host may win the game online, but if it were a LAN and your shot connected without having to lead them the Host may not get that lucky.

Yes I am for server side gaming.

the more you play the better you get, the better you get the more games you win, the more games you win the higher your rank goes.

This holds true if you keep the same provider and the latency stays consistent. With my idea, what you said makes even more sense. Those that are the best will go up faster. Those that aren't wont win as much, but wont be put up against those that are obviously superior and can still gain something from the actual experience. The point is to eliminate second accounters and such.

The fact that the end game is to win in and of itself hold the competitiveness intact. MLG play list is all I need to establish that. No need to cater to those players by making the game harder for the average joe when you can specifically create a playlist for that soul propose.


the goal is not to reach 50 but to place you with players just as good as you. your skill tells you how you compare to everyone els

If the goal is to not reach 50 then why even have a ranked playlist at all? Secondly, if the goal is to not reach 50 than it would be no big loss if it was taken out. You spend to much time worrying about skills and not enough about playing a GAME.

I admit I am competitive and hate to lose like most everyone who plays this game weather they admit it or not. But as it stands this game is just not n00b friendly at all. I have tried to get many of my other friends to enjoy HALO, but with players running secondary accounts they kick the crap out of them and make them hate the game. My goal is simply to make it so everyone can have a good time and get good at the game at their own pace. If they invest serious amounts of time to attain that high rank through exp than one would think that they would have developed the skills to compete with those that are there.

Removing the skill based rank system and implementing an experience based system that rewards longevity allows those that are better to separate themselves from the cannon fodder noobs and allows the noobs to grow and develope without being totally smashed on. And 1 exp per game makes no sence to me either. So do away with that and give us a resonable amount of points to equate for the actual experience we are receiving in gameplay. I would like to see it take closer to six months to a year of consistant play to attain general. Not a few days on a one month account.

Lets face it, there are some players that will never be as good as other players no matter how hard they try. To punish them buy forcing them to play these advanced players who create alternate accounts is BS. So check the crappy skill system at the dog house and give us somthing worth earning.

[Edited on 11.02.2009 7:01 PM PST]

  • 11.02.2009 6:58 PM PDT

Latency is not that big of an issue.

  • 11.02.2009 7:06 PM PDT

hola!

Posted by: Stelios010
i have a crappy connection and im a 45 i worked my way up to there and rarely did i ever encounter a game lost due to lag or latency

Well sounds like luck favored you. Must be nice to not have latency issues. Doesn't seem like your connection is that crappy now doesn't it?

I however, have used many ISPs and have seen a direct change in playability with the different regions. My current ISP, the best money can buy here in the great state of montana, has far more latency issues than what I had when I lived in Washington state. And I am 50 feet from the fiber optic hub across the street. I have a higher download and upload than I had when I was in Washington State, but my ping is horrible. You may not have problems cause your internet may not be as crappy as you think.

Latency has a direct influence on how your skill is determined with the current system. Those with the best connection get host. Everything goes through their set up. So those connected to that set up are not only battling the skills of the host they are also battling the set up itself with the latency it may or may not provide. The host may win the game online, but if it were a LAN and your shot connected without having to lead them the Host may not get that lucky.

Yes I am for server side gaming.

the more you play the better you get, the better you get the more games you win, the more games you win the higher your rank goes.

This holds true if you keep the same provider and the latency stays consistent. With my idea, what you said makes even more sense. Those that are the best will go up faster. Those that aren't wont win as much, but wont be put up against those that are obviously superior and can still gain something from the actual experience. The point is to eliminate second accounters and such.

The fact that the end game is to win in and of itself hold the competitiveness intact. MLG play list is all I need to establish that. No need to cater to those players by making the game harder for the average joe when you can specifically create a playlist for that soul propose.


the goal is not to reach 50 but to place you with players just as good as you. your skill tells you how you compare to everyone els

If the goal is to not reach 50 then why even have a ranked playlist at all? Secondly, if the goal is to not reach 50 than it would be no big loss if it was taken out. You spend to much time worrying about skills and not enough about playing a GAME.

I admit I am competitive and hate to lose like most everyone who plays this game weather they admit it or not. But as it stands this game is just not n00b friendly at all. I have tried to get many of my other friends to enjoy HALO, but with players running secondary accounts they kick the crap out of them and make them hate the game. My goal is simply to make it so everyone can have a good time and get good at the game at their own pace. If they invest serious amounts of time to attain that high rank through exp than one would think that they would have developed the skills to compete with those that are there.

Removing the skill based rank system and implementing an experience based system that rewards longevity allows those that are better to separate themselves from the cannon fodder noobs and allows the noobs to grow and develope without being totally smashed on. And 1 exp per game makes no sence to me either. So do away with that and give us a resonable amount of points to equate for the actual experience we are receiving in gameplay. I would like to see it take closer to six months to a year of consistant play to attain general. Not a few days on a one month account.

Lets face it, there are some players that will never be as good as other players no matter how hard they try. To punish them buy forcing them to play these advanced players who create alternate accounts is BS. So check the crappy skill system at the dog house and give us somthing worth earning.


theres an option i use its called "search for good connection" it works.

also fix your connection if it bugs you so much? mines crap bro, TRUST ME. skills just a number. it points to how skilled you are. its ment to be adjusted the better you get. and lateny is different then lag. you prolly know that already :P

  • 11.02.2009 7:17 PM PDT

Well, what is it then when I am shooting at someone and they disappear only to assassinate me? If that isn't latency then I am lost on the meaning. So I continue and ask, what is it when I toss a grenade and it never goes off? What is it when I slice a sword, hear the hit sound, see the sparks, but die by a shotgun that was fired a full second after the fact and visa versa I fire the shotgun and get cut up when the shotgun was fired first? What is it when I shoot a rocket that never actually fires? What is it when I have a red dot in my sniper scope only to miss completely, but if I lead by a full head length or more without the red dot I get the head shot? It is a big deal when the best you have available to you just simple is not good enough.....

Server side games would elimenate that as well. Latency does effect your skill though when shots that should hit don't and you lose because of it.

  • 11.02.2009 7:18 PM PDT

hola!

thats lag. thats couse by numerous factors, mostly due to bad connections. latency is the period it takes for one xbox to send a signal to another. latency isnt your problem. its lag. if your games lag alot then its your connection that need to be fixed. your also causing other players to suffer from your connection.

  • 11.02.2009 7:28 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.”

as an EXP system that doesn't affect matches?

Sounds pretty good. Just make sure that when you quit, you don't gain any EXP and lose a variable amount based on how much EXP you have.

I like GOW2's system, because it gives points equivalent to the damage you deal.

  • 11.02.2009 7:32 PM PDT

skills just a number. it points to how skilled you are. its ment to be adjusted the better you get.

If that is to be true, then Bungies' current system has never been more broke. I pitched a perfection a while back on guardian. It was team dubs and we won 25 to 7. ( I am not bragging I am using this as an example) We both lost rank after the game. We had won enough games that the catch up factor was not applicable. The skill gap was horrible. We destroyed the poor guys. Our skill was obviously much better, but we were punished instead of rewarded. I actually stopped playing HALO and ran over to HALO wars for a length of time because of it. Had I of just stay at my current rank at the time it would not have been a problem, but we lost rank for winning with obvious higher skill and that set us off. All we ever got from bungie was trueskill nonsence. How does that work when the true skill was displayed, but we loose rank? It is now the primary reason I enjoy social games far more than ranked. Losing something I played hard to earn is frustrating. I say the current system is garbage. With this idea it gets rid of that flaw and also rids us of multi accounters.

The problem with the "search for best connection" is it takes the host away from my games. I am stuck battling the system and not the player. I have to rethink all my strategies on the fly (each game is totally different) and the things that would normally work in a non lag environment just don't work. Latency is directly influenced by lag. Latency, lag and packet loss are all connected.

  • 11.02.2009 7:35 PM PDT

But lag interrupts latency. That is why it is lag. but that is driving away from my initial point here. And I have been harsh warned to stay on topic of my own threads...

In the end the current true skill system does not function right. With an exp system then it is simply, you win you go up, you lose you stay put or you drop out you go down.

[Edited on 11.02.2009 7:39 PM PST]

  • 11.02.2009 7:38 PM PDT

hola!

once again. its your connection that needs to be fixed sweetheart. a fixed connection leads leads to less lag. lag is seperate from latency. latency will always exist wile lag can be reduced. lateny is rarely ever a problem unless you live in australia or some distant country. if you fix you connection then lag wont be a problem either. then you can no longer blame your lack of skill on latency that was never your problem in the first place. im 45 and someon is a 20, if you put us together then most likely i would win (not that im bragging) thats not wrong. social has an invisible skill rank also. it just dosnt have that pretty number there to show off. your highest is a 43. your there for a reason, if you want a 50 then you need the make that final push and get just a lil bit better.

  • 11.02.2009 8:52 PM PDT

hola!

youll have your amazing wins and then youll have your losses. your win/lose ratio is suppost to 50/50 dont complain if more then win. youll bounce back up

  • 11.02.2009 9:02 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

One day... I am gonna grow wings... A chemical reaction... Hysterical and useless... hystecial and let down and hanging around... crushed like a bug in the ground.

I quite like the HAlo 3 ranking system but maybe you could choose ranks depending on your playstyle. Aka Choosing beetwen Master Seargent and Gunnery Sergeant

  • 11.02.2009 9:53 PM PDT

manuel gutierrez

you guy are all bad look if you want exp go to social.And dont take Br out it take skill to it.if bungie take out H3 ranking system a lot of people wont buy it and they wont make money off the game and I will not buy that game.Bungie you made odst the worst game out there.But i like some of the people ideas out there i have real good ideas bungie if u want to sell your game more just tell me if u want to know

  • 11.02.2009 10:16 PM PDT

Outside? But thats where... light is.
Aussie, and proud of it...(I DON'T BRIDGE!!!!)
I fought recon, didn't t-bag. I. AM. GOD.

4 Games in a row, 2 perfections, 3 running Riots, 1 Rampage, 1 overkill
First Game
26th of August

Completely agreed, obviously true-skill still needs to affect how games are found.

Also, we should do the Halo 2 system of ranking in a game (BTB: 16 places, first place could be in the losing team if he has the most kills/objective placements)
PS: I think that's what Halo 2 was, can't really remember

  • 11.02.2009 10:21 PM PDT