l Xenoes l Posted May 14, 2015 Report Share Posted May 14, 2015 I don't think you should be demoted for losing. Why should I go down a rank when there's 1-2 people on my team who can't pull their weight or decide to throw the game because I took the Sniper Rifle or the Rockets when they wanted them? No you shouldn't rank up though. It should be similar to how H3's ranking worked. You can only rank up so far with EXP but to get to the top you have to increase your ranked in the ranked playlists. That was pretty good at keeping similarly ranked players together. Except when boosting and deranking became a thing and selling 50's. But, it's better then just needing EXP to get to the top level. Cause then you never know how good someone is tell they play. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kowloon Posted June 5, 2015 Report Share Posted June 5, 2015 ok i've been reading some of these and I can agree and disagree in different ways but lets say this if it went by kdr the people that go negative should be demoted/losing exp those that go even wont lose exp and those that go positive will get exp. I can see this as pushing people to do better playing each and every game or it would be a waste of time for people that started playing again or just started. Let's start with this and see where it goes. More XP for winning a game: Agree. Penalized for losing: Completely disagree. Your personal skill is not the only factor that influences whether or not you win a game. The skill of the other players, the extent of cooperation and teamwork, the map itself in some cases (if you are near-invincible with a DMR but can't use a shotgun to save your life, or can rank up a sniper spree no problem but are hopeless at driving a Ghost then your ability to contribute will be influenced by the map setting), and so on all are contributing factors. A team consisting of four decent players would probably win against a team with one MLG-level player and three horrible players, for example. If you disagree with penalizing then it really wont matter if i lose 100 or 1000 times i would just stay at the same exp for weeks and i still would get the highest rank possible in a matter of hours then a skill ranking system wouldn't be needed in halo 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Orbis Posted June 9, 2015 Report Share Posted June 9, 2015 That's what people said for CoD AW... until they hated it in practice. Now everyone hates SBMM for CoD the way people hated things like custom loadouts in Halo 4. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zandre Taylor_72569 Posted June 17, 2015 Report Share Posted June 17, 2015 H2 tanking was great but I love H3 system as well even thought there slighty the same. H3 made you never wanting to lose a match it pissed you off odc who you were you were angry when you couldn't reach 50 because you didn't put in the work. It made players wanna strive for greatness, it practicaly said you weren't good enough for 50 back to the drawing board. It wasn't like Reach's or 4 were the rank meant you played the game longer than other. We need rankd that tell us how good someone is and what they did to earn it not some pointless I played the game since release date I felt no honor in my rank from those games but when I achieved a 50 in lone wolf other players knew what they were in for beginning of the match Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.