Halo 3 Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: skill level to be considered good?
  • Subject: skill level to be considered good?
Subject: skill level to be considered good?

Chuck Liddell has that kind of weird, mohawk wearing, incoherent badass thing going. Frankie Edgar is like the nice guy down the street who helps you move in your furniture.

"I'm running for my life and you're in space?!"

I'm a 46, never tried for higher. I got bored with LW. I might give it a shot before Reach, though. Skill doesn't mean you have to have a 50, bud.

  • 07.24.2010 2:40 AM PDT

Posted by: Implausible
Most girls I've been with were hesitant about taking it in the mouth. But once they did most would swallow. I got tons of compliments on the taste.

I think it's because of my diet. No fast food, no alcohol and lots of fruit.

To be good, you need one 50. However, "good" is not a particularly colorful word. I would argue that if you have attained one legitimate 50, you are better than 80% of all Halo players.

But the skill gap amongst 50s is HUGE. Multiple 50s, especially those in difficult playlists (i.e. SB, Throwback, MLG) really show who is the best of the best. Right now I have ten 50s and honestly I would consider myself in the top tier of Matchmaking players.

  • 07.24.2010 2:45 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

** USMC **

About me:
I'm 20. I use to play Halo alot but never do really anymore. I'm a offline player since I have dial up. I do play online on rare events when I don't have to go to work, school, etc.


Posted by: qwertyo

Posted by: White wolf1176
My highest is a 42. I don't play online much since I have dial up. I rarely get to play.

Am I good? >.<


...You can play xbox live with Dial-up?


I go to a friend's house to play >.<
every full moon I'd say

[Edited on 07.24.2010 2:54 AM PDT]

  • 07.24.2010 2:51 AM PDT

John Weersen

People are throwing the word 'good' really easily and the word 'noob' really liberally. People saying anything below a 50 is bad obviously have no idea what they're talking about. So, you 50s were bad when you were a 49 and suddenly became pro at 50?

I'm a 28, staff captain, but am I crap? No. It's just that I never play ranked anymoe because my 28 is in Doubles and it's extremely hard to find a decent teammate or not play with a booster, and when I started playing I was crap, so the losses added up.

This is where Win/Loss ratio comes into play. You can be a really high rank but have a poor W/L ratio. Just because I'm a staff captain doesn't mean I suck. Many a time a cocky general or brigadier has underestimated me only to be killed multiple times by me.

I'm not great, definitly, but I'm good. I usually come 2nd or 3rd playing my 40-50 ranked friends.

Here's my ratings.

1-10:New at the game
10-20:Bad
20-30:Average/good
30-40:Pretty good
40-49:Really good
50:Great/dumbass booster.



[Edited on 07.24.2010 2:57 AM PDT]

  • 07.24.2010 2:55 AM PDT

Man, I miss dem Halo 3 days :'(


Posted by: qwertyo
Over 3K games overall played. I've raped most commanders, colonels and generals above me, and half the generals I played are boosters with only 600 games that suck completely. I've seen field majors, Strike commanders, and (god forbid) brigadier generals do far, far, better than most generals, unless the are five-stars.
Of course, this is talking about social playists. Ranked playists are for people with ADD or competitive problems. Except for SWAT, but I only play that because there isn't a social version. That's the one I got my thirty in.

Point: Games played matters far, far more than your rank. Rank is nothing more than your win-loss ratio in less than half of all the playists in Halo 3, which even then can be attributed to party play, luck, boosting, etcetera. The only good [s]generals[/s] players I've ever seen are ones with a few thousand games played in both social and ranked (custom doesn't count). I once saw a master sergeant dominate a whole game of rumble pit all by himself, leading the next guy (me) by fifteen kills.



Possibly one of the most BS pieces of text I have ever seen in my life. I'm struggling to find a part that actually makes any sense.

  • 07.24.2010 4:48 AM PDT

Man, I miss dem Halo 3 days :'(

People need to stop assuming that we are talking about non-legit ranks here. If we are talking LEGIT ranks, not boosted/cheated, reached your maximum potential, etc here is the list:

Note - this list is assuming the rank is in a 'respectable' playlist. Not swat, Grif, or LD. For MLG, these ranks move down a little.

1-40 : Bad. Never have a met a legit 1-40 who is good. Ever. 40 is incredibly easy to acheive, I am not that great and I have above 40 in every single current ranked playlist.

41-44 : Pretty bad, but by no means a complete idiot, and sometimes can be good.

45-46 : Sometimes good, sometimes bad. Above average.

47-49 : Usually good.

50 : Good.

  • 07.24.2010 4:56 AM PDT

You're not good at Halo either.


Posted by: kantk2008
People are throwing the word 'good' really easily and the word 'noob' really liberally. People saying anything below a 50 is bad obviously have no idea what they're talking about. So, you 50s were bad when you were a 49 and suddenly became pro at 50?

I'm a 28, staff captain, but am I crap? No. It's just that I never play ranked anymoe because my 28 is in Doubles and it's extremely hard to find a decent teammate or not play with a booster, and when I started playing I was crap, so the losses added up.


Firstly, getting a 50 is step one. Just because you are a 50 doesn't earn you the title of good player. The reason people see anything below a 50 as bad is because they are so much better than other 50s that anyone who isn't a 50 must be bad. General logic eh, what can ya do?

Also, if you are a 28 at the game you are terrible at the game. End of. In fact < 45s are so bad at this game it is actually mind blowing to spectatae them, it is somewhat unbelievable that a player can be so bad at the game and not realise just how bad they are at it.

<3

  • 07.24.2010 5:09 AM PDT

Well I only consider someone good if they are 45+. If you are less than that I assume it will be an easy win.

However, there are a lot of bad 45's/50's who really dont know how to play in team games and will get beaten by other, more organised teams.

I have 3 50's, 2 48's and a 47 and one of the 48's is in MLG and I would consider myself good but nothing more - there are a lot of incredibly good players on this game.

  • 07.24.2010 5:57 AM PDT

IMO, several 50s to be considered good.

Preferably those that you play on.

  • 07.24.2010 6:13 AM PDT

Posted by: ღMidnight Hawk2ღ
Everyone is entitled to their own wrong opinion.


I'm part of the Bungie.net Minecraft group/server called SeptaCrafters
We're a Bungie.net group that goes to our very own Bungie server. Most players are from the Halo community either off Bungie itself or through word to Halo friends.

Ive met people that don't play ranked at all who can still do better then a lvl 30. So rank doesn't matter.


Im a 44 in LW, once i get a 45 ill probable just stop and get my 50 in doubles. Once i get a 50 i have no clue what ill do. I guess i could get all my ranks up to a 40.

  • 07.24.2010 7:25 AM PDT

Yo.

Let's say some MLG pro goes and makes a second account, and they start at level 1 and kick your ass. Does that not make them good? Your rank tells nothing about your actual skill. Maybe you just like to dick around a lot, and not sure your true skill.

  • 07.24.2010 7:30 AM PDT

Posted by: Baph117
Some asses just aren't worth the trouble.

No one gives a -blam!- what skill you are. You only worry to kill and win, as if someone over 12 years old gives a -blam!- if you are a 50.

  • 07.24.2010 7:37 AM PDT

John Weersen


Posted by: BandicootIsWhite

Posted by: kantk2008
People are throwing the word 'good' really easily and the word 'noob' really liberally. People saying anything below a 50 is bad obviously have no idea what they're talking about. So, you 50s were bad when you were a 49 and suddenly became pro at 50?

I'm a 28, staff captain, but am I crap? No. It's just that I never play ranked anymoe because my 28 is in Doubles and it's extremely hard to find a decent teammate or not play with a booster, and when I started playing I was crap, so the losses added up.

Firstly, getting a 50 is step one. Just because you are a 50 doesn't earn you the title of good player. The reason people see anything below a 50 as bad is because they are so much better than other 50s that anyone who isn't a 50 must be bad. General logic eh, what can ya do?

Also, if you are a 28 at the game you are terrible at the game. End of. In fact < 45s are so bad at this game it is actually mind blowing to spectatae them, it is somewhat unbelievable that a player can be so bad at the game and not realise just how bad they are at it.

<3


lol, thanks for reminding me why I stay in the flood and not come here, because of such narrow-minded trolls like you.

I like how you generalize anyone under 40 as bad. You've made my day XD

I'm not going to argue with you, there's no point. Whatever floats your boat. I'm happy where I am and I'm enjoying the game and don't give a -blam!- about the arrangement of pixels on my screen.

kthxbai.

  • 07.24.2010 7:55 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

San Antonio Spurs|||Rocafella 4ever Hov 4 life
Welcome to Havana Smoking Cubana’s with Castro in cabanas
Viva Mexico Cubano Dominicano, all the plugs that I know
Driving Benzes with no benefits
Not bad, huh, for some immigrants?
Build your fences, we digging tunnels
Can’t you see we gettin money up under you?

Only non 50s will think that rank means nothing when actually it is a really good indicator of skill

  • 07.24.2010 7:56 AM PDT

Feel free to message me about anything!

ITT: 50s get hard over numbers.
OT: I think the Level system is flawed. Boosters, Second Accounts, etc. I'm a 34 (Never tried to get higher, ranked bores me) and I can honestly say I'm better than 30% of higher ranked players. Even on Halo Charts (if this means anything) I was 1000 in the United Kingdom. I play this game for fun, not for numbers, it's about time people remember that.

  • 07.24.2010 7:58 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

San Antonio Spurs|||Rocafella 4ever Hov 4 life
Welcome to Havana Smoking Cubana’s with Castro in cabanas
Viva Mexico Cubano Dominicano, all the plugs that I know
Driving Benzes with no benefits
Not bad, huh, for some immigrants?
Build your fences, we digging tunnels
Can’t you see we gettin money up under you?


Posted by: T3hMadman
ITT: 50s get hard over numbers.
OT: I think the Level system is flawed. Boosters, Second Accounts, etc. I'm a 34 (Never tried to get higher, ranked bores me) and I can honestly say I'm better than 30% of higher ranked players. Even on Halo Charts (if this means anything) I was 1000 in the United Kingdom. I play this game for fun, not for numbers, it's about time people remember that.

Lol. You say rank means nothing then you bring up halocharts rank, you say the ranking system is flawed then you bring up halocharts rank which is a ridiculously flawed system. How does rank bore you? The gametypes arre the same as the social ones. Team BRs in social is no different than team BRs in ranked. People who like to play ranked also play for fun, their idea of fun is playing with people of comparable skill, not guests who can't move and shoot at the same time.

  • 07.24.2010 8:07 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Why do all these low ranks always bring in bought/boosted 50s into the conversation?

And no, 35s are not good. There are barely any decent 40-44's out there.

Please, just stop trying to say you wreck 50s yet can get destroyed by strike commanders and staffys. Also 50s, are better than brig gens.

  • 07.24.2010 9:59 AM PDT

Below 47 is bad. 47-49 can be good, but could never be considered good. You have to be a 50 if you can be considered as good. Its a shame that 50 is reachable for so many different tiers of players but whatever I guess.

  • 07.24.2010 10:05 AM PDT

Posted by: Baph117
Some asses just aren't worth the trouble.

Why is everyone racist with the ones that are not 50? I know a lot of brigadiers and colonels that have defeated 1 on 1 a lot of 50s. The term "good" is a little harder to explain. A good player is the one that adapts to all maps, weapons and can kill besides the skill/rankfof him/her and the enemy.

A good player is a one that can kill people more than he is kill, BR well, snipe well... Stop the 50s trollin and dont cut my head 50s trolls.

  • 07.24.2010 10:20 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Nerdgamer14
Why is everyone racist with the ones that are not 50? I know a lot of brigadiers and colonels that have defeated 1 on 1 a lot of 50s. The term "good" is a little harder to explain. A good player is the one that adapts to all maps, weapons and can kill besides the skill/rankfof him/her and the enemy.

A good player is a one that can kill people more than he is kill, BR well, snipe well... Stop the 50s trollin and dont cut my head 50s trolls.


I doubt you have friends who are colonels that can beat 50s in 1v1's.

  • 07.24.2010 10:30 AM PDT

You're not good at Halo either.

Posted by: Cewpar
From an unbias view point- I'd say if you have a 40 in anything other than LWs you can consider yourself a good halo 3 player.

If you're a 50 you're better than atleast 90% of the player base. How can that be the cut off? 90% of the player base doesn't suck, they just suck compared to 50s.


I kind of have to agree with this.

  • 07.24.2010 10:41 AM PDT

Posted by: Baph117
Some asses just aren't worth the trouble.

Hijos de su madre ya me cargo el payaso con su racismo che generales de mierda.

  • 07.24.2010 10:53 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

-I <3 SIP
-xL00sE Tr1GGeRx
~Snipers get more head.

______ ____(˜˜˜||˜˜˜˜||˜˜˜˜˜)_∏______
--------____.`=====.-.~:________\___|================[oo]
|_|||___/___/_/~```|_|_|_|``(o)----------<)

50.

  • 07.24.2010 10:55 AM PDT

Posted by: Baph117
Some asses just aren't worth the trouble.

Mis bolas con los generales y 50s. A la verga con generales.

  • 07.24.2010 10:57 AM PDT