The "Official" What do you want in the Halo 4 Ranking system.

[Kiroy Wolf]

I actually like the halo reach ranking system. But I agree that maybe instead have credits that is used as currency and exp which levels up. And it would make sense to only get exp in matchmaking. I think leveling up from firefight is kinda dumb.

[jstanotherguy]

By far the best decision, and I strongly hope this gets read by 343, is to bring back the halo 2 ranking system, as described in the first post.

Halo 3 was a disaster, and halo reach's ranking system is non-existent. Let's finally get something that works again.

 

Also, what about the possibility of more than 1 ranking system? Perhaps having a second one based on something else?

The more stats, the better. Make Halo the leader, the pioneer of gaming by doing things that have never been done. Make stats for group of people, stats for a person when he plays with certain others(conditional stats), etc, etc. I know I'd love to see that stuff, people would eat it up and keep them involved....I got kinda off topic...oh well, the curse of enthusiasm

[Fang]

People keep saying they like reach's ranking system, but in all honesty what ranking system? There basically is none. We need to be able to level like it was in halo 2, have separate playlists for both ranked and social that still builds to an overall experience counter as it was in halo 3, and if they wanted to keep CR to buy armor and other things then that would be fine as well.

 

As long as we have a true skill rank again then ill be happy. It gives me something to work for and actually care about winning games. If there is some incentive to win then it will improve everyone's experience. That way you dont run into a bunch of people ruining the game for their team because they don't care about winning. A large percentage of reach games are just like that because there isnt anything on the line, no matter what you get something. I understand you dont want to alienate people who arent that good but damn this isnt tee ball and not everyone deserves a trophy.

[c0nd3mn3d 666]

The system needs a hybrid...

 

Keep the use of the credits system but use them for buying armour and other items instead of levelling up.. but also use them for rank like in reach

 

have a rank of 1-50 or 1-100 on each playlist that works off skill and every game you lose you lose exp towards levelling up that playlist rank

[King of Winter]

Personally i liked the Halo 3 ranking system, but I see that Halo 2's is the better choice. It will probably be a good idea to maybe get the best of both and Halo Reach's cR. But the cR doesn't rank you up, it represents EXP and allows to buy armor like in reach, but (a little off topic) people shouldn't be allowed to buy the armor because they have enough credits. It should be shown as prestigious, and the ranking system in reach was a joke so the Armour didn't mean anything. But for example I think it should be like, (Example) for Hayabusa you need these 3 achievements, this specific rank in a specific playlist (I liked the ranking up in individual playlist) like snipers, and this amount of cR. So the if your wearing Hayabusa and all, people will be aware of your special skills, which will be sniping. My own opinion.

[King of Winter]

By far the best decision, and I strongly hope this gets read by 343, is to bring back the halo 2 ranking system, as described in the first post.

Halo 3 was a disaster, and halo reach's ranking system is non-existent. Let's finally get something that works again.

 

Also, what about the possibility of more than 1 ranking system? Perhaps having a second one based on something else?

The more stats, the better. Make Halo the leader, the pioneer of gaming by doing things that have never been done. Make stats for group of people, stats for a person when he plays with certain others(conditional stats), etc, etc. I know I'd love to see that stuff, people would eat it up and keep them involved....I got kinda off topic...oh well, the curse of enthusiasm

 

The second part of your post, that sounds amazing, i completely agree with you. I will love to see something like that.

[King of Winter]

People keep saying they like reach's ranking system, but in all honesty what ranking system? There basically is none. We need to be able to level like it was in halo 2, have separate playlists for both ranked and social that still builds to an overall experience counter as it was in halo 3, and if they wanted to keep CR to buy armor and other things then that would be fine as well.

 

As long as we have a true skill rank again then ill be happy. It gives me something to work for and actually care about winning games. If there is some incentive to win then it will improve everyone's experience. That way you dont run into a bunch of people ruining the game for their team because they don't care about winning. A large percentage of reach games are just like that because there isnt anything on the line, no matter what you get something. I understand you dont want to alienate people who arent that good but damn this isnt tee ball and not everyone deserves a trophy.

 

I completely agree with you 100%. ALOT of the games are like that, so the game gets boring and makes me lose interest. And because in Halo 3 people quit in every game and do the same, there's like no halo game right now to play.

[SixWaysToSunday]

Well what about several ranking systems designed to do show different skill sets?

I think there should 3 systems; level, rank, and rating.

Level shows how long you have been playing the game, an experienced based system like Reach where anything and everything increases your level.

Rank is an overall numerical player ranking that shows the individual skill. Kills, assists, objective playing (like flag capping, defending, or assisting) add to this numerical value while deaths and betrayals subtract.

Rating is based on each playlist and shows how much you win. Based on the Halo 2 system but using Z-A, this strictly shows how much you win in the playlist and therefore how "good" you are at the playlist.

 

Each of these systems have their own weaknesses and strengths, but I believe putting them together will really create a good picture of each player's skill.

[MajorHaloPrime]

Keep The reach Ranking system, its fun ffs. the whole lvl 50 thing on halo 3 was terrible, i wont buy it if its got that ranking system on it.

[upton889]

HeroDanny, I have a son your age so don't talk down to the adults around here. As One stated, you lost...move on. My working knowledge base of Halo and all related Blam! engines, and Live API's was acquired as the culmination of many many years or Halo modding and reverse engineering. As for your comment about being a CoD player, yes I do play CoD with my son on occasion, but Halo has and always will be my passion. Your short sighted views about the recent Halo title really show your inability to appriciate anything Halo, no matter how askew from cannon or engine base it may be.

 

As for the ranking systems, they are all flawed. it does not take reverse engineering to figure that part out, only a simplistic understanding or why and how you get matched up with certain players via their service record and matchmaking filters.

 

And btw, why would I want to talk to you over XBL? Do you have something to contribute to the mod scene? Or are you simply trying to lure me into a chat session where you can TRY, to humiliate and trash talk me in real time, instead of here, where you will most certaintly fail and prove yourself to be a sniveling troll?

 

Back to the main topic at hand now. If you all really want a true measure of skill in terms of a ranking system, I have thought up, mathmatically written out and almost with 100% certainty layed out a good foundation on what should be calculated into a true measur a skill....

 

A.) List of target specific ratios.. (H/M- Hit-miss ratio)

1. Headshot misses and hits (anything above "Z" axis of head marker that misses or hits.

2. Body shot misses and hits (same as above)

3. Strafing. When strafing and incoming shots are within "said" distance, it counts as an evade.

4. Assists. (self explanitory).

 

B.) All weapon usage stats, used to pair people based on which weapon they excell with in accordance to H/M ratio

 

C.) Kill Death Ratio goes here.

 

D.) Vehicle kills/deaths. (Shows how well you kill and stay alive while using a vehicle. Helps determine good drivers)

 

E.) Vehicle Kills/death actual. (Shows what vehicles you excell in taking out, and vice versa)

 

F.) Team Scoring and stopping. (This one is used accross all team types and helps show his is better offensive or defensive)

 

So now that you have a quick list of my many, you can start to then apply ratio's and factor in a point system to increase rank. As the stats above prove, you simply can't just stand around and AFK, nor Lonewolf it or betray to get anywhere. Everything you do in the game is accounted for and reflective of the amount of points you receive per match based on the match. SO say your ratios for a match fall beyond a certain percentage, you lose rank points based on a percentage lost scale. To clarify, it would be similar to this...

 

1 to 5% ratio loss meaning kill/death or hit miss = 1 point lost

6 to 10% equals 2 points lost

and so on for the remainder of numbers.

 

Also can be applied to the opposite, where you recieve points for + ratios...

 

I will try to illistrate it below...

 

Lets say you just finished a rumble slayer match. Your stats were as follows...

 

Kills= 25

Deaths= 12

 

Weapons used:

Rockets= 4 misses, 3 hits

DMR = 128 hits, 150 misses

Frags= 3 hits, 1 miss

Plasmas= 2 hits, 2 misses

 

vehicles used:

H-Turret: hits=72, misses=128

 

Now we calculate the percentages of each section...

 

KILL DEATH= 25/12 x 100*= 208 spread

MISSES HITS= 209/284 x 100 = -73.59 spread

 

Now we take the spreads and you get... 208 + 73.59 / 0.2 = 56.3% Then take that 56.3 and see where it falls into the points aquired catagory.

N

ow obviously this was done real quick, but it illistrates how a schema of this type would ultimately show a player's true skill and really make them work for it. not just winning, but hold them accountable for every single action they take. You could even go further, and have a betrayal count as a 10% overall point deduction in the end for those who betray a lot for stuff. But again, as this points out, you would have to play in every playlist as focusing on single playlists would not yeild you enough points alone to really get you up in rank. You could go one step further, and force players to do other playlists by giving them no points until 5 playlists in each catagory is completed. So if you play 5 rumble slayer, you could not earn more points for rumble slayer until you do a set of 5 on a specified or available playlist. This alone would prevent the Reach mtachmaking boosters and boosters alike from cheating their way up in rank.

 

Twinreaper, while I'm VERY new to the forum, I see that you're obviously no stranger to Halo or this forum and I definitely respect you and your opinion. Having said this I respectfully disagree with you, simply for the fact that Halo is more than a game of statistics. It's also about having savvy of the game, using teamwork, a willingness to win, among other intangibles. Certain things that can't be measured by statistics, which is why, in my opinion, Halo 2 had the best system because it was straight forward and based on wins and losses (which is what everything boils down too). Look forward to discussing this and future topics with you.

[ShockGazm]

The ranking structure should be inbetween Halo 2 and 3. Of course, anything 343i would like to add to make it better would be great aswell. =P

[SavagewoIf]

i would like to see a rank (exp) system along with a skill (1-50) system, like you gain exp no matter the playlist or win/lose but your skill only goes up if your winning games and goes down when you lose more, obviously the skill system would be separate for each playlist. Kind of like Halo 3 but obviously not as broken. This way it would keep the hardcore AND casual gamers happy. basically just make it a mix of halo 2 and Reach

[Herodanny]

i would like to see a rank (exp) system along with a skill (1-50) system, like you gain exp no matter the playlist or win/lose but your skill only goes up if your winning games and goes down when you lose more, obviously the skill system would be separate for each playlist. Kind of like Halo 3 but obviously not as broken. This way it would keep the hardcore AND casual gamers happy. basically just make it a mix of halo 2 and Reach

 

I can live with that, as long as there is the 1-50 I am happy.

[Siimple x King]

Ranking system with levels like halo 3, it is competitive that way, it is what makes halo different than all other games.

[Twinreaper]

Ranking systems don't make games competative. The individual player makes a game competative. There are many other great games out there that make better use of many different systems. We all love Halo, but don't go overboard and say it is more competative by nature, because it is not.

[Skittlze]

Ranking systems don't make games competative. The individual player makes a game competative. There are many other great games out there that make better use of many different systems. We all love Halo, but don't go overboard and say it is more competative by nature, because it is not.

 

Yaaaaaaaaaaa... look at CoD its competetive but not on a team level. In CoD people care more about their individual stats than how the team does. When your working towards a rank as a team then you want the team to win so your rank goes up even if that means supporting your team instead of being the allstar every game

[Fang]

Ranking systems don't make games competative. The individual player makes a game competative. There are many other great games out there that make better use of many different systems. We all love Halo, but don't go overboard and say it is more competative by nature, because it is not.

 

Id have to disagree. Ranking systems do make games more competitive the same way any goal worth achieving does. Not to sound mean but judging from a lot of your other posts you dont seem to care all that much about the multiplayer aspect of halo anyways so i dont think you really have a grasp of what its actually like in the mindset of a competitive gamer. Nothing wrong with being more Story oriented as halo has a great campaign but i dont believe you are an accurate representation of the multiplayer populace.

 

Having something to work towards that can only be obtained by playing well and winning makes us try harder. In reach it doesnt matter because eventually you can get any rank and any amount of CR as long as you keep playing. So why care about winning or playing well? For your own satisfaction? Sure thats great but most casual players arent as bothered by lackluster performance with nothing on the line. You are right when you say that individual players make a game competitive. Unfortunately the halo fan base has became lazy since everything has just been handed to them. So i think its time to go back to a system where we have to put in a little more effort to reach our goals.

[upton889]

Ranking systems don't make games competative. The individual player makes a game competative. There are many other great games out there that make better use of many different systems. We all love Halo, but don't go overboard and say it is more competative by nature, because it is not.

 

And I agree, the ranking system isn't fully what makes Halo competitive, but it is a factor. Players ultimately produce the competition but the ranking system gives a little extra "boost" of motivation for a lot of players and it definitely makes the multiplayer more interesting.

[Silent Meta]

They NEED to bring back the halo 2 ranking system,

-(level 1-10) Win 2 games LEVEL up (lose 2 rank down)

-(level 11-20) Win 3 games LEVEL up (lose 3 rank down)

-(level 21-30) Win 4 games LEVEL up (lose 4 rank down)

-(level 31-40) Win 5 games LEVEL up (lose 5 rank down)

-(level 41-50) Win 6 games LEVEL up (lose 6 rank down)

 

 

Here's a hypothetical situation

Say you rank to level 25, you are here (24 - - - - I - - - - 26)

Say you win a game on your 25 now you are here (24 - - - - - I - - - 26)

Now Say you lose 2 games in a row.... (24 - - - I - - - - - 26)

 

So I hope you understand, that level 25 will have to win 5 games to become 26, or that 25 will have to loose 3 games to become a 24.

 

That level 25 could go on 343.com (or whatever the website is) and they can check how close they are to their next rank (with a progress bar)

 

LIKE IN HALO 2

Like what i posted earlier that WILL be too unstable, armor is said to do something, say a level 45 or so has the best armor for there rank, then they decide to derank by ruining games for everyone else trying to rank up causing them to rank down while the one willingly ranking down goes to fight less exp people with that armor, it will not work correctly, people you need to think of everything that can go wrong.

[Fang]

Like what i posted earlier that WILL be too unstable, armor is said to do something, say a level 45 or so has the best armor for there rank, then they decide to derank by ruining games for everyone else trying to rank up causing them to rank down while the one willingly ranking down goes to fight less exp people with that armor, it will not work correctly, people you need to think of everything that can go wrong.

 

 

lol what?

[KAC 361]

I like Reach, keep out the competitive number garbage.

[Jablonzo]

Made an account just to reply to this topic. The ranking system for Halo 4 needs to incorporate all the best features of the past 3 games. First of all, competitive 1-50 ranks need to come back, similar to Halo 2. Trueskill should not be used at all, for anything. Halo 2 had a great competitive ranking system, easy to rank up at first, then progressively harder. If you lose too much, your rank goes down, if you win enough, your rank goes up. Very simple yet quite effective. Showing a progress bar, like Halo 2, would be a great way to visualize how many games are needed to go up(or down). THIS KEEP PEOPLE PLAYING YOUR GAME, HENCE BETTER SALES FOR MAP PACKS!

 

Social/unranked games could just be done like Reach. Have a hidden skill rank for to get fair matches(assuming reach does this, I don't know) and visually show a rank that goes up but not down. The more you play, the higher your rank, be it Military or Numerical or whatever. To make this more popular, you could call the playlist something other than unranked/social. Call it linear or whatever, I don't know, but the small % of Halo players that want a ranking system like COD can get their fix here.

 

Bottom line is that H4 NEEDS ranks 1-50, where losing too many matches can make you lose your level.

[Zamio]

Made an account just to reply to this topic. The ranking system for Halo 4 needs to incorporate all the best features of the past 3 games. First of all, competitive 1-50 ranks need to come back, similar to Halo 2. Trueskill should not be used at all, for anything. Halo 2 had a great competitive ranking system, easy to rank up at first, then progressively harder. If you lose too much, your rank goes down, if you win enough, your rank goes up. Very simple yet quite effective. Showing a progress bar, like Halo 2, would be a great way to visualize how many games are needed to go up(or down). THIS KEEP PEOPLE PLAYING YOUR GAME, HENCE BETTER SALES FOR MAP PACKS!

 

Social/unranked games could just be done like Reach. Have a hidden skill rank for to get fair matches(assuming reach does this, I don't know) and visually show a rank that goes up but not down. The more you play, the higher your rank, be it Military or Numerical or whatever. To make this more popular, you could call the playlist something other than unranked/social. Call it linear or whatever, I don't know, but the small % of Halo players that want a ranking system like COD can get their fix here.

 

Bottom line is that H4 NEEDS ranks 1-50, where losing too many matches can make you lose your level.

 

Am I the only one who thinks its retarded that people should lose rank because they lost a game? I used my time to get to that rank, why should it go down because I couldent beat that guy?

[haloman 2]

I really don't care what rank halo 4 will have even though I would prefer the halo reach ranks but that's my opinion.

[Jablonzo]

Am I the only one who thinks its retarded that people should lose rank because they lost a game? I used my time to get to that rank, why should it go down because I couldent beat that guy?

 

What's retarded is that you can't read. I suggested they also have ranks that cannot go down in a different set of playlists, for the minority of Halo players that want a COD-like system. To placate people like you, they could do the Halo 3 thing where your ranks could fluctuate up and down, but your highest rank always remained somewhere in your profile.