Halo: Reach Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: Why did the 1-50 system get removed?
  • Subject: Why did the 1-50 system get removed?
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • of 4
Subject: Why did the 1-50 system get removed?

The Song Of Nephilim

Xenoblade <3


Posted by: SouthPoIe

Posted by: Nephilim713

Posted by: aBlueBookshelf

Posted by: Nephilim713
It was horrible is why.
Mad cuz ur stuck at a 48 yet you could get the lolReach highest rank.

You made it to where you belonged.


Nah, nobody is mad. I admit it was terrible. I do not care for a 50. Perhaps 48 is where I am at. I am not hardcore like some of you. I enjoy reach miles more than Halo 3. Is there a problem? No


You're clearly mad though. If you weren't, you wouldn't call it horrible. We've already gone over this. You don't need to be "hardcore" to be good. That's called an excuse.

Is there a problem? No, there wasn't. The 1-50 was close to perfect.


Horrible because you would rank down for getting 3rd place sometimes. Not mad. The system was just stupid sometimes.

  • 01.27.2012 9:19 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

My Level. Get on it.


Posted by: RC Clone
Nope. SouthPole isn't a person. He's the avatar of the force of tryhards everywhere. He stalks the web looking for retards to set straight. He can not be stopped by mere bans or thread locks for he shall rise anew.


Posted by: Nephilim713

Horrible because you would rank down for getting 3rd place sometimes. Not mad. The system was just stupid sometimes.


No, you were just bad sometimes. This whole time you make it seem like the system was out to get you. It was doing its job.

Also, you had to be lower than third.

  • 01.27.2012 9:37 AM PDT


Posted by: SouthPoIe

Posted by: Nephilim713

Horrible because you would rank down for getting 3rd place sometimes. Not mad. The system was just stupid sometimes.


No, you were just bad sometimes. This whole time you make it seem like the system was out to get you. It was doing its job.

Also, you had to be lower than third.


I went down for coming in 3rd quite a few times when I still played Lone Wolves.

  • 01.27.2012 9:38 AM PDT

The Song Of Nephilim

Xenoblade <3


Posted by: She Must Repent

Posted by: SouthPoIe

Posted by: Nephilim713

Horrible because you would rank down for getting 3rd place sometimes. Not mad. The system was just stupid sometimes.


No, you were just bad sometimes. This whole time you make it seem like the system was out to get you. It was doing its job.

Also, you had to be lower than third.


I went down for coming in 3rd quite a few times when I still played Lone Wolves.


This exactly.

  • 01.27.2012 9:40 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

My Level. Get on it.


Posted by: RC Clone
Nope. SouthPole isn't a person. He's the avatar of the force of tryhards everywhere. He stalks the web looking for retards to set straight. He can not be stopped by mere bans or thread locks for he shall rise anew.


Posted by: She Must Repent

I went down for coming in 3rd quite a few times when I still played Lone Wolves.


Pretty sure it was the first three. Depended on how many people were in the game though.

  • 01.27.2012 9:41 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Banned just for calling someone retarded? lolBnet mods
Duardo = retard

So you think Reach is an actual Halo game, huh? LOL
Jesus! There's a BoB in ma Falcon!

Y U POST BELOW QUOTE? :(

OT: I dont know, I really dont care either.
Posted by: CaptKrunch 96
Y U POST ABOVE QUOTE? :(

OT: Pros accounts are being hacked, I'm 100% positive about this.

Boosting in Arena and the buying and selling of accounts still occurs. Same with Inheritor accounts.

  • 01.27.2012 9:42 AM PDT

The Song Of Nephilim

Xenoblade <3

6 people.

  • 01.27.2012 9:43 AM PDT

Name's John. I'm a 21-year-old firefighter/EMT from lolhio who doubles as a die-hard Halo fan. I've been enjoying the franchise since 2001. My favorite iteration of Halo would have to be Halo 2 simply because I never got to experience the joy of a full-on Halo: CE LAN.


If you have any other questions, feel free to ask.

Oh yeah, and boot Zome.

Because Bungie let people like Sage into the company.

  • 01.27.2012 9:52 AM PDT

Posted by: SouthPoIe

Posted by: She Must Repent

I went down for coming in 3rd quite a few times when I still played Lone Wolves.


Pretty sure it was the first three. Depended on how many people were in the game though.

No, in FFA you lose TrueSkill to the people that place above you and gain TrueSkill to the people that place below you. It didn't really matter whether you finish in the top half or bottom half unless you're talking about EXP, which was not related to TrueSkill. It's possible to rank down even for coming in 2nd depending on the TrueSkill of the other people in the game. Consistently finishing in the top half over an extended period of games should result in your TrueSkill increasing (assuming that you're playing people near your skill level), but that's not always true in the case of a single game.

I thought the TrueSkill system used in H3 was great. Sure, it can be manipulated by people who care too much about a rank in a video game, but I think it's the least flawed option available.

The current Arena system works basically the same way and I think it would have been much more popular if it was implemented properly when the game was released (based on win/loss, 50/50 split between Arena and Social, more prominent display of Arena ranks, etc).

  • 01.27.2012 10:12 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Intrepid Mythic Member
  • gamertag: P3P5I
  • user homepage:

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

Copy pasta'd from another thread:

1-50 and "accurate ranking system" should never be used in the same sentence. I will explain the reasons why 1-50 should never be used as a ranking system in any future Halo as well as propose a system to replace 1-50 that far succeeds the capabilities of the 1-50 system. Feel free to agree/disagree with my argument as you please and offer criticism.

Main arguments against 1-50 systems similar to Halo 3/2
- Does not prioritize giving a player even matches
- Ranks of similar status are un-comparable due to:
a. formula for calculating ranks does not take into account the ranks of other players
b. No specific information is given about the rank you earn

The primary purpose of a ranking system should be to match players of similar skill together. Then why is it that the 1-50 system is purposefully slowed down in the initial ranks and the progression of further ranks? I trust ranking systems to match me with players of similar skill to me as fast as technically possible. 1-50 represents a grind. It is a solid fact in the Microsoft Trueskill Ranking system explanation that the Trueskill system can narrow a player's trueskill in as little as 12 games. The reason Bungie slowed down this system was to represent a grind for players. Observing your trueskill fluctuate from a 7 one game to a 29 after the next devalues the point of working towards that 50 you want. Treating the ranking system as a leveling system similar to many RPG's was one of the fatal flaws of 1-50.

Ask yourself this question: What exactly does having a 50 mean? A popular saying around many threads in Halo forums is:

"Not all 50's are good players, but all good players have 50's."

This means that the pinnacle of the ranking system, the very elite ranks given to those on the top does not accurately represent the best players. So why is this? It is because the base formula for 1-50 does not take into account nor keep record of the ranks of other players other than on a game-to-game basis. More questions to ask yourself:
a. How many 50's are there?
b. Am I the best/worst 50? Where do I stand among every other 50?
c. Did this person I am comparing myself to obtain his/her 50 in a easy/hard playlist?

1-50 does not answer any of these questions. I find it hard to believe in any ranking system that does not at least attempt to answer these questions.

The Halo 2 phenomena
Among the 1-50 supporters there is a group that calls for a Halo 2 ranking system. I never understood this train of logic because Halo 2 was even more of an annoying grind that did not prioritize even matches than Halo 3. In Bungie's own explanation of the ranking system, it is easy to tell from the charts that the system was built for a grind due to:
a. The loss factor increasing as you progress through ranks
b. The win factor decreasing as you progress through ranks
c. More experience required to reach the next rank tier

I ask again, what is the point of making the 50 that represents your true playing skill so hard to obtain? Why not give it out to the player as fast as possible so they can find even matches to have fun in?

In comparing 1-50 to the Arena, both have flaws but the Arena system is closest to perfection out of the two. With a few tweaks Arena can surpass 1-50 in every way.

Main arguments for the proposal of a new ranking system: The Arena's successor
- Divisional system answers questions that 1-50 could not
- Purer Trueskill system prioritizes even matches
- More flexible of a system
- Ranks based on current skill of entire population

When you get a division, answering the question of "Where do I stand among other players of similar skill, and in effect the entire other population?" is a great advantage for the Arena to have. You are able to accurately tell whether your gold division placement is better than another player's gold division placement by looking at the percentages within that division.

The Arena's largest advantage is that its ranks are based on the current skill of the entire population. This means that if a player really proves him/herself to be good, they skyrocket through the ranks which results in the ranks of those players he/she passed to decrease. There can never be more than a certain percentage of the Arena population in a division at a time, which emphasizes fighting for your rank.

Arena prioritizes matching players evenly with its reliance on a more pure form of Trueskill. That means your rank progression through Trueskill no longer looks like:

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6...

And looks more like:

1, 7, 19, 27, 35, 32

Which means the system is able to put players in games where their opponents are more evenly skilled faster. Of course this requires that the Arena population be large enough to support this ranking system which was one of the main reasons for its demise in Reach.

As we saw with the past and current Arena system, the formula for calculating people's divisions can be changed drastically. It is possible to change the Arena system to reward purely individual exploits or team efforts and everything in between. 1-50 is only able to record the outcome of the game, and is very inflexible in that regard.

The main reason why many players don't like the Arena system is its seasonal system where everyone's ranks reset after the season. This is understandable, but unfortunately there is no way around the problem (that I am aware). The Arena needs to reset people's ranks to:
a. Accurately provide an up-to-date leaderboard of who is currently the best
b. Make sure people don't reach the upper divisional placements and sit on their rank by not playing, making it impossible for players below these "sitters" to rank up.

Besides, if the gametypes and maps are balanced enough few would worry about playing a few dozen games in the playlist they love in order to get placed in a division. I believe this issue stems more from the playlist choices themselves (gametypes/maps) than the ranking system itself.

The changes I would make to the Arena ranking system would be:
a. Visible division across all playlists.
b. Even more specific ranks (i.e. 37th percentile Onyx, special rank for being the absolute best)
c. Ability to see how many players are in each division and how many players were given a division.
d. Ability to see what playlist a player received their division in.
e. Incentives for getting ranked like Cr bonuses or special armor/nameplates.

With these changes I believe the Halo ranking system can be revolutionized.

  • 01.27.2012 10:12 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I think it was removed mainly because Bungie wanted to try a new formula for ranking, in order to keep people playing. Some people when they got their 50's in a playlist woul stop playing it. In order to stop this they created the Arena.

A playlist that was supposed to be a home for all the "try-hards" and competetive people. However all we got was Team Slayer. I don't really think there was a real reason other than not being able to impliment the Arena system for differn't playlists.

No one really knows to be honest.

  • 01.27.2012 10:23 AM PDT


Posted by: Destiny 7
Because people were making money off it.


because people dont sell inheritors right?

  • 01.27.2012 10:43 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Fabled Legendary Member
  • gamertag: tsujen
  • user homepage:

Inheritor #156 :p


Posted by: B1G 4L 2K7

Posted by: Destiny 7
Because people were making money off it.


because people dont sell inheritors right?

How many Inheritor accounts have you seen sold?

  • 01.27.2012 10:47 AM PDT


Posted by: tsujen

Posted by: B1G 4L 2K7

Posted by: Destiny 7
Because people were making money off it.


because people dont sell inheritors right?

How many Inheritor accounts have you seen sold?


i have seen a few sold like 5 but i have also seen alot of ranks like legend and above getting sold also.

  • 01.27.2012 10:59 AM PDT

It didn't. It's just the matching restrictions were laxed, and you can't see the number. Endless replayability? How? Get a 50. Super. That's it.

Arena gives you truly endless replayability- constantly improving on your number, and you have to earn it again. Far superior.

Most of all? There is no logical argument for being able to see the numbers next to your name. I don't even see one for putting it in your service record, though I suppose that's a bit better.

People going 'oh because people don't like being told they're bad' are jackasses and/or idiots. So meh.

  • 01.27.2012 11:03 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: burritosenior

You haven't played a single game of Arena.

  • 01.27.2012 11:06 AM PDT


Posted by: Destiny 7
Because people were making money off it.
this.and that is why there will not be 1-50 in halo 4.

honestly tho i don't care that people boost. id rather still have a 1-50

  • 01.27.2012 11:21 AM PDT


Posted by: P3P5I


With these changes I believe the Halo ranking system can be revolutionized.


I'd much rather have the Halo 3 rank system back than some dumb arena system where my rank would be temporary. I played arena in the reach beta and said 'never again'. I hated it from the start and have not played it in retail since I knew it would suck.

If Halo is going to have a successful ranking system the rank needs to be permanent (not go away after a month) and needs to appear in any playlist ranked or social next to your name like Halo 3 did.

I wouldn't find any other reason to care about ranked if it wasn't somewhat similar to halo 3's. Also, halo 3's ranks are far superior to Reach's. I think the Onyx rank and the progressive system ranks in reach are silly looking and stupid. Why would I want a moon for a rank when i could have a cool Brigadier symbol or 5 Star general rank of halo 3? Even Halo 3's recruit symbol looks better than all of reach's ranks lol.

I can only hope Halo 4 has cool ranks that people will want to obtain. Reach was everything and more wrong when it came to a failed ranking system. As someone who plays countless hours of ranked in halo 3 I was never so turned off by a ranking system than reach's.

  • 01.27.2012 6:41 PM PDT

Same reason move speed was reduced.

Same reason bloom was added.

Same reason Armor Lock was added.

It's so bad players don't think they're bad.

  • 01.27.2012 6:55 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

Explain to me what you guys mean 1-50 ranking system, I'm not trolling its just when you're saying that, it sounds like your saying reach has more than 50 ranks, which it doesn't, so please enlighten me.

  • 01.27.2012 8:20 PM PDT


Posted by: Swagbag101
Explain to me what you guys mean 1-50 ranking system, I'm not trolling its just when you're saying that, it sounds like your saying reach has more than 50 ranks, which it doesn't, so please enlighten me.


1-50 is the ranking system of trueskill used in halo 3. It had 50 levels of trueskill starting at 1 and went to 50. The more wins you got the higher your trueskill, the more losses the lower it went. It was a visibale number next to your gamertag as well. If you won and lost a lot at a certain point you would slowly get stuck at a certain level. Though if you started to improve you will gain a higher level but it would take longer.

1-50 was genius imo. Most players that didn't like the 1-50 were those that couldn't get to the top and thought it wan't fair because they couldn't get there. The system was never intended to be an elitist system but everyone made it out to be that way.

It was merely meant to place players within similar skill levels to the matches you had were fun and competitive for your level of skill. Instead the whole rank bashing started, then second accounts, and so on.

ahh I love the history of Halo 3 and ranking system. I remember all the days watching the halo 3 forums as all of this went on. Quite an interesting thing to see happen to the population of halo fans lol.

  • 01.27.2012 8:33 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: A 3 Legged Goat
Because players didn't like being told they were bad.


Yup. Bungie outright said this.

  • 01.27.2012 8:45 PM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

I'm listeni- Oh wait I don't give a -blam!- what you have to say.


Posted by: Nephilim713

Posted by: She Must Repent

Posted by: SouthPoIe

Posted by: Nephilim713

Horrible because you would rank down for getting 3rd place sometimes. Not mad. The system was just stupid sometimes.


No, you were just bad sometimes. This whole time you make it seem like the system was out to get you. It was doing its job.

Also, you had to be lower than third.


I went down for coming in 3rd quite a few times when I still played Lone Wolves.


This exactly.
If there are less than 6 players you are in the lower half of the scoreboard and go down.

  • 01.27.2012 8:50 PM PDT

  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • of 4