Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: I know rank doesn't equate to skill
  • Subject: I know rank doesn't equate to skill
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3
Subject: I know rank doesn't equate to skill

Walk by faith. Dude. Not by sight.

I'm 51 Az, see how you feel in 4-5 years :)

  • 01.25.2012 8:01 AM PDT

I like Reach's system, but I also wish that they had a 1-50 system running concurrently with it.

  • 01.25.2012 8:02 AM PDT

Join Halo Haven for all things related to Halo 4


Tell her that If you jingle my bells, Ill promise you a white Christmas - Call Me Venom
The world can't end next month. My yogurt expires in 2013 - Princess Cadence
If Apple invented a car, would it have windows? - Xxembers


Posted by: Apocalypse
It's not the quantity of playing/practice, its the quality.


Dumping on randoms (who are most likely at least 5x worse than you/they are) all day everyday is not going to make you improve/good at the game.


Also, this

  • 01.25.2012 8:03 AM PDT

Happiness is a warm gun


Posted by: NicodemusTNT
At my age, no amount of practice will improve my reaction time and eyesight/ability to aim. That being said, Halo is still fun and I loved the H3 ranking system. There were certain ranks in H3 that were unattainable for me at my skill level, which was appropriate.


Can't teach an old dog new tricks? While I believe you can't really increase your reaction time aside from drinking lots of coffee, that doesn't mean you can't actually get better at the game if you put time into actually focusing on bettering your game. Especially considering how there are so many subtle elements that contribute to being a 'Good player' then just Reaction time and raw aiming skill.

Things like Power positioning, power weapon control and traffic control are all things that can be learned regardless of age, reaction time and aiming skill.

Theatre is your friend, and the heatmaps also can give you valuable information on traffic flows in a map, in turn telling you places you should try and control, and other places you should avoid.

[Edited on 01.25.2012 8:06 AM PST]

  • 01.25.2012 8:05 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Horse Repairman
RC RuNz the internet. Like the superintendent.

Posted by: SouthPoIe
Clone is an internet God.

Posted by: DerpRoids
RC Clone is the anti-thesis of a lurker.

Sanuel. Who sucked the color out of your Emblem?

  • 01.25.2012 8:19 AM PDT

in my eyes
rank = skill
higher rank just means more experience on the game, more experience just improves skill
seriously people saying other people suck because their like one rank higher and died more is just sad
its just common sence, even firefight is basicly practice
stop all being jealos jackasses, its a game

  • 01.25.2012 10:22 AM PDT

"It is not a goal, but a process. The process of creating the perfect world."


Posted by: xX Zawk Xx
in my eyes
rank = skill
higher rank just means more experience on the game, more experience just improves skill
seriously people saying other people suck because their like one rank higher and died more is just sad
its just common sence, even firefight is basicly practice
stop all being jealos jackasses, its a game


What? Experience is not the only type of skill, and the fact that I've seen lower ranks in Reach beat higher ranks consistently proves that. Every rank in this game runs the entire range of possible skill levels. Reach rank does not show skill, it shows time played. And it is indeed possible to play a lot of games without gaining much quality experience.

Good players who play frequently will be high rank of course, but people who do nothing except living dead, griffball, action sack etc. could also be high rank too.

Jealousy of Reach rank is not a major factor in this discussion.

Of course this applies to Reach's ranking system alone. If you were on a tangent about H2 or H3 rank, then yes those do mean something.

  • 01.25.2012 10:29 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I wish it was 1-100 and Reach ranks mixed together.

As someone would be a 90 Inheritor because they are good and also play a lot. But someone could be just an Inheritor if they never played rank, or you could be an 100 at Warrant Officer. If that makes sense.

Because then people who want them would have number ranks, they would be big enough to make it more accurate and discourage boosting, and casuals can just play for fun and still rank up.

Idk. Sounds good to me.

  • 01.25.2012 10:31 AM PDT

I like the ability of ranking up across all gametypes in Reach, but I wouldn't mind the Halo 3 system with a few modifications.

Rough idea-

Win MP match: 3 EXP
Lose MP match: 1 EXP
Complete campaign game: 2 EXP
Complete half of a campaign game: 1 EXP
Complete Firefight match with highest score: 4 EXP
Complete firefight match: 2 EXP
Complete custom game: 1 EXP

You know, if we were talking about the EXP aspect, and of course the limit of EXP would need to be raised.

[Edited on 01.25.2012 10:41 AM PST]

  • 01.25.2012 10:40 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Reach has ended my 5 year addiction to Halo. Thanks Bungie!
GOML Noob
6/1/07


Posted by: ToxicAcidsnake

Posted by: AZRAEL The Angel
"still though the fact that your highskill was 21 speaks volumes about your true skill level for H3, whereas you are the highest possible rank in halo reach, but that really says nothing about how 'Good' you are as a player."

Exacly! Thats the point! Ranks only proof the time I spend playing, not how! In Reach as in H3, with some twists...

Yah the true problem I have with time based ranks is not how it impairs my judgment on another players skill, but rather, the effect it has on the mindset of the player. As I said before, when it was 1-50, people actually tried hard to win, as a loss not only meant no experience, but your true-skill would go down meaning you would have to try even harder to get your rank up.

I miss the tension that this kind of mindset presents, how tough the matches can be, and how players reallly tried to work as a team and win.

I remember when I finalllly got my 50 in H3, it took FOREVER (I was a brig general with over 5000 xp before I got my 50) it took 13 wins in a row on my 49 to get a 50 in team slayer. The matches were tense (I was playing solo) but when I won that last match, and got my 50, that was such a good feeling, and the journey to 50 is something I never could replicate in reach, and is probably one of the reasons I've moved on to other games.


Exactly.

I just got my LW's 50 after 4 years. Every 1st placing made me so anxious to see if I would finally get that 50. When I did, like you said, that was a feeling that will never be replicated in Reach.

H3 still keeps my interest, mainly because if the ranking system.

  • 01.25.2012 11:21 AM PDT

Happiness is a warm gun


Posted by: So Slick

Posted by: ToxicAcidsnake

Posted by: AZRAEL The Angel
"still though the fact that your highskill was 21 speaks volumes about your true skill level for H3, whereas you are the highest possible rank in halo reach, but that really says nothing about how 'Good' you are as a player."

Exacly! Thats the point! Ranks only proof the time I spend playing, not how! In Reach as in H3, with some twists...

Yah the true problem I have with time based ranks is not how it impairs my judgment on another players skill, but rather, the effect it has on the mindset of the player. As I said before, when it was 1-50, people actually tried hard to win, as a loss not only meant no experience, but your true-skill would go down meaning you would have to try even harder to get your rank up.

I miss the tension that this kind of mindset presents, how tough the matches can be, and how players reallly tried to work as a team and win.

I remember when I finalllly got my 50 in H3, it took FOREVER (I was a brig general with over 5000 xp before I got my 50) it took 13 wins in a row on my 49 to get a 50 in team slayer. The matches were tense (I was playing solo) but when I won that last match, and got my 50, that was such a good feeling, and the journey to 50 is something I never could replicate in reach, and is probably one of the reasons I've moved on to other games.


Exactly.

I just got my LW's 50 after 4 years. Every 1st placing made me so anxious to see if I would finally get that 50. When I did, like you said, that was a feeling that will never be replicated in Reach.

H3 still keeps my interest, mainly because if the ranking system.


Lone wolves I always found to be very tricky to rank up in, it felt like I would not be confident in my play style, and a lot of times would play sloppy out of fear of the other players outpacing me in terms of kills.

Still, sooooo much better then the nonsense we have in reach with rumble pit

  • 01.25.2012 11:49 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I don't like the current rank system at all, but when I do see a few Reclaimers, Inheritors, Novas or whatever in the lobby I might check their Service Record, Commendations and K/D career in MM real quick. A high K/D and Crackshot/One Shot Commendations translates to a serious threat. High K/D and maxed Mobile Asset is usually just a BTB scrub/party booster, and some Inheritor/Forerunner with 10-20k MM kills is a FF kid, generally terrible. With a few pushes of a button you can usually figure out just how good.

I think for Halo 4 the rank system should be playlist oriented. 1-50, sure. But by the playlist specifically. And when I say playlist I guess I mean game type as well ... Campaign, Firefight (Solo, Doubles, Limited, Arcade) then the MM types like Swat, BTB, Snipers, whatever else. I imagine they're going to bring back a playlist-based rank system for Halo 4, but 343 should take into account just how big a deal FF has become. Or, after they fix the AFK issue, they can watch it die with Halo 4 and not waste their time with it on Halo 5.

  • 01.25.2012 12:14 PM PDT

Hi.

Posted by: Sanuel Jackson
You can't just practice something that much and then still suck at it.
Counter-evidence: Me; specifically my Halo 3 record.

I just never learned.

  • 01.25.2012 12:14 PM PDT

The Song Of Nephilim

Xenoblade <3

I like the Reach system. I just hate that halo caters to boosters all the time.

  • 01.25.2012 12:16 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: Sanuel Jackson
You can't just practice something that much and then still suck at it. Idk, maybe that's just me.


It's not just you, but many play this game just to play it. They aren't concerned with strategy or learning all the weapons strengths, the timing of the power weapons so they always pick them up.

I used to -blam!- about some things with this game, then wound up playing Swat where the game is fast paced and everybody is jumping around like kangeroos. A few hundred games of Swat later I went back into Squad Slayer and figured out that sprinting around the map and jumping like a kangeroo 24/7 helped me stay alive and avoid the nade spam going on at my ankles. Not to mention my aim with the DMR improved tremendously because it's all I used.

I didn't start playing Swat to get better throughout MM, though. I just played it for something different, and benefited.

  • 01.25.2012 12:24 PM PDT

chances are I don't care who you are or what you say.

true, the more you play the better you should be, and maybe those kids are better than when they started playing (or the run FF all day)

  • 01.25.2012 12:25 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Intrepid Mythic Member
  • gamertag: P3P5I
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Achronos
It isn't our shiznit anymore.

If one can become "good" at a game by simply practicing ad nauseam, is that game truly skillful?

  • 01.25.2012 12:33 PM PDT

Posted by: P3P5I
If one can become "good" at a game by simply practicing ad nauseam, is that game truly skillful?
That applies to many things in life. The more you do it, the better you'll become at it. If you spend a lot of your free time shooting stuff, you're going to get good at shooting. If you spend a lot of your free time golfing, you're going to get good at golfing. Maybe not professional level, but still very proficient.

  • 01.25.2012 12:37 PM PDT

"You are who you dare"

You owe it to yourself to get out and be someone. Get to work!

-Leader of The Citadel


Posted by: P3P5I
If one can become "good" at a game by simply practicing ad nauseam, is that game truly skillful?


Such questions rank up there with "What is the meaning of life?" and "Where do we go when we die?"

....


Really P3P5I. Did you just...did I just read...

WOW.

*punches computer screen*

[Edited on 01.25.2012 12:37 PM PST]

  • 01.25.2012 12:37 PM PDT

I'm going to invade your heart like a barn swallow high on milk chocolate and grandma love.

Fairness is only possible within the limited powers of man. Elsewhere, there is only chance.

Thus I refute thee.

Same.

  • 01.25.2012 12:43 PM PDT

Forget it man, and get with the countdown. Shake this square world and blast off for Kicksville.

Reach host ranking algorithm: (a*quit_percentage + b*isMexican + c*(1/KDR) + d*hasGuest) * 100
where a > b = d > c

Posted by: Sanuel Jackson
That applies to many things in life. The more you do it, the better you'll become at it. If you spend a lot of your free time shooting stuff, you're going to get good at shooting. If you spend a lot of your free time golfing, you're going to get good at golfing. Maybe not professional level, but still very proficient.

Yes, and no.

Consider playing the guitar. If you practice constantly, you'll probably improve. But just as important as how much you practice (probably more important, actually), is how you practice. Without studying appropriate resources and analysing your playstyle, your practice can be very inefficient, and often people will learn bad habits (and then struggle to overcome those bad habits the with the brute force application of more practice time). Consequently I see people who've played the guitar for years and have poor physical technique and no understanding of music theory. Playing Smoke on the Water for hours every day will probably not equip you to cover, say, Joe Satriani's discography.

No amount of AR rushing and pummelling will make you into a good player, even if you do it to Inheritor. Effective practice is the application of insight and self-analysis, not just time.

[Edited on 01.25.2012 12:53 PM PST]

  • 01.25.2012 12:50 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Intrepid Mythic Member
  • gamertag: P3P5I
  • user homepage:

Posted by: Achronos
It isn't our shiznit anymore.

^ A good point

Posted by: Sanuel Jackson
Posted by: P3P5I
If one can become "good" at a game by simply practicing ad nauseam, is that game truly skillful?
That applies to many things in life. The more you do it, the better you'll become at it. If you spend a lot of your free time shooting stuff, you're going to get good at shooting. If you spend a lot of your free time golfing, you're going to get good at golfing. Maybe not professional level, but still very proficient.
I suppose my question was geared more towards the professional level. What is your bar for good players? Map knowledge, accuracy, teamwork, a level head in the heat of battle that can make split-second decisions based on analyzing all parts of the battlefield, right? Knowledge, accuracy, and teamwork can be learned, but how do you acquire or improve the last point? Excluding the professional level, are there some gaming traits that just can't be acquired through practice or improved upon considerably?

Posted by: AquaBlader
Really P3P5I. Did you just...did I just read...
I am a scientist, not a philosopher. :)

[Edited on 01.25.2012 12:53 PM PST]

  • 01.25.2012 12:51 PM PDT

Firefight all day everyday typically doesn't help your MM skills all that much.

  • 01.25.2012 12:53 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:


Posted by: AcidThe Wraith
I wish it was 1-100 and Reach ranks mixed together.

As someone would be a 90 Inheritor because they are good and also play a lot. But someone could be just an Inheritor if they never played rank, or you could be an 100 at Warrant Officer. If that makes sense.

Because then people who want them would have number ranks, they would be big enough to make it more accurate and discourage boosting, and casuals can just play for fun and still rank up.

Idk. Sounds good to me.


*Cough*This*Cough*

  • 01.25.2012 1:09 PM PDT

I dont not like the way the ranking system is now. It reminds me of Call of duty(I hated that game) and also it took skill to reach a high rank in Halo 3 unless you bosted.

Sure it had it flaws like taking for ever to update, and easly cheated, but if they updated the system i much reather have, the true skill system

  • 01.25.2012 1:11 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • of 3