HALO 4 FAN Posted April 21, 2012 Report Share Posted April 21, 2012 Tell me what kinds of ranks you think are going to be in halo 4 . Are that going to be from halo 4 or halo 3 or both Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLiX Posted April 21, 2012 Report Share Posted April 21, 2012 Both becasue i ike both Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShockGazm Posted April 21, 2012 Report Share Posted April 21, 2012 You are officially the king of pointless posting! 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLiX Posted April 21, 2012 Report Share Posted April 21, 2012 I am not trying to be mean but it is a good post if anyone has a pointless post it was that one right there 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DoctorB77 Posted April 21, 2012 Report Share Posted April 21, 2012 I say that there should be one stage above general grade 5 and that then would have 10 levels. Then it would stop. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VivaLebowski Posted April 22, 2012 Report Share Posted April 22, 2012 I dont neccasarily want a carbon copy of H3's system, but there should at least be some sort of ranking that raises up people with higher skill rather thn just credits accumulated. The levels within ranks should be based on Credit, and their should be Credit thresholds to cross for qualifying for promotion BUT at least from Colonol on or so, ranks should be also dependant on Skill. I am not trying to be mean but it is a good post if anyone has a pointless post it was that one right there Your both pointless. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D3STROYER Posted April 22, 2012 Report Share Posted April 22, 2012 I usually don't give 2 ****s about putting my input into a online forum that I'm almost sure has no influence in how they create the game but with Halo 4 on the horizon and Halo Reach being so terrible I have to try. What makes Halo is ranking system. Halo MUST have a 1-50 NUMBERED ranking system, otherwise, you have Halo Reach thats noob friendly and no matter how terrible you are, you rank up. Even if you have, lets say... 2500 games played and 0.... 0!!!!!!!! wins... you would probably be a General or higher, and thats god awful. By having a numbered ranking system you give people a reason to win. Having a numbered ranking system you even out the playlists for competive gamers. Having a numbered ranking system makes players better. Having a numbered ranking system makes Halo what it is and not CoD. I understand why Reach was more "noob friendly" like CoD, Bungie saw CoD's player count and it was tripled or more then the people playing Halo and they thought this would get their numbers up and that was a logical thought and I understand that. However, thats not the reason why people play Halo. Sure Halo 4 might have 500,000 players a day and CoD might have 2,000,000 a day but I can promise you this: If you implement 1-50 ranking system for even a few playlists, you player count will go up. I'm not saying ranking system is the only thing people want out of Halo4, there are people that just play for the story or just for fun and thats great but there are also a very very large group of people as well that need a NUMBERED 1-50 ranking for high levels of competition to give them a reason to play. Please, don't turn a blind eye to the players that want the competition over the campaign or the number next to their name over symbol ranking that you can achieve from losing games... give us a reason to want to win, give us something we fear to lose. wall-o-text #sorry /endrant. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azaxx Posted April 22, 2012 Report Share Posted April 22, 2012 I usually don't give 2 ****s about putting my input into a online forum that I'm almost sure has no influence in how they create the game but with Halo 4 on the horizon and Halo Reach being so terrible I have to try. What makes Halo is ranking system. Halo MUST have a 1-50 NUMBERED ranking system, otherwise, you have Halo Reach thats noob friendly and no matter how terrible you are, you rank up. Even if you have, lets say... 2500 games played and 0.... 0!!!!!!!! wins... you would probably be a General or higher, and thats god awful. By having a numbered ranking system you give people a reason to win. Having a numbered ranking system you even out the playlists for competive gamers. Having a numbered ranking system makes players better. Having a numbered ranking system makes Halo what it is and not CoD. I understand why Reach was more "noob friendly" like CoD, Bungie saw CoD's player count and it was tripled or more then the people playing Halo and they thought this would get their numbers up and that was a logical thought and I understand that. However, thats not the reason why people play Halo. Sure Halo 4 might have 500,000 players a day and CoD might have 2,000,000 a day but I can promise you this: If you implement 1-50 ranking system for even a few playlists, you player count will go up. I'm not saying ranking system is the only thing people want out of Halo4, there are people that just play for the story or just for fun and thats great but there are also a very very large group of people as well that need a NUMBERED 1-50 ranking for high levels of competition to give them a reason to play. Please, don't turn a blind eye to the players that want the competition over the campaign or the number next to their name over symbol ranking that you can achieve from losing games... give us a reason to want to win, give us something we fear to lose. wall-o-text #sorry /endrant. yes they had the 1-50 in Halo 3, it failed, horribly, no Halo game has ever had a good ranking system, this really needs to be addressed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
My BR iZ RusTyy Posted April 22, 2012 Report Share Posted April 22, 2012 yes they had the 1-50 in Halo 3, it failed, horribly, no Halo game has ever had a good ranking system, this really needs to be addressed. Care to expand on why you think the Halo 3 ranking system failed horribly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
daddyxx23 Posted April 22, 2012 Report Share Posted April 22, 2012 yes they had the 1-50 in Halo 3, it failed, horribly, no Halo game has ever had a good ranking system, this really needs to be addressed. HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHH it failed horribly???????? the game having over a millllion population for almost 3 years isnt failing to me. Maybe reaches 400k for less then a year is a little bit more of a fail but idk you seem to know what your talking about Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D3STROYER Posted April 22, 2012 Report Share Posted April 22, 2012 I thought Halo 3's ranking system was pretty good. I liked Halo 2's even more but, I did enjoy 3. However, Reach cR ranking system fails on a level thats par to none. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLiX Posted April 22, 2012 Report Share Posted April 22, 2012 It still thing that halo 3 ranking was good but i also like reach to Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D3STROYER Posted April 22, 2012 Report Share Posted April 22, 2012 The reason I hate Reach's ranking is that as long as you play you rank up... Hellen Keller could be a top rank in reach with time... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zuko 'Zarhamee Posted April 22, 2012 Report Share Posted April 22, 2012 You shouldn't only rank up by winning. If you get more kills than deaths, then you should still get closer to ranking up. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
D3STROYER Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 I wish that was possible but it just wouldn't work. People would abuse that system some how. Get a few kills then camp leaving 3v4 (if playing 4's) or like in doubles 1 person can hide easy. I just think It would have to be set like the old systems. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fzdw11 Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 You shouldn't only rank up by winning. If you get more kills than deaths, then you should still get closer to ranking up. I've been saying this for a while. Strictly wins is not the way to go. You win? You get XP. Add in a positive K/D to a match? Extra XP. Killed an enemy flag carrier? Extra XP. Captured a flag? Extra XP, etc. You lose? You don't receive or you lose XP. Negative K/D? Lose XP. Let the enemy capture a flag uncontested? Lose XP. Let them control a hill for as long as it's in position? Lose XP. It doesn't need to add a lot (or take away a lot), but something more than just wins and loses. Sure, if you performed well, maybe you don't lose as much, but you still lose. This way wins and loses still matter, but if your team loses and you go +15 K/D, you aren't as penalized (or gain a minor amount of XP) towards your next rank/skill level, etc. I wish that was possible but it just wouldn't work. People would abuse that system some how. Get a few kills then camp leaving 3v4 (if playing 4's) or like in doubles 1 person can hide easy. I just think It would have to be set like the old systems. Any system can be abused. How do you feel about what I explained above? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
My BR iZ RusTyy Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 @fzdw11 Your system is in my opinion more fair, but still open hugely to abuse. For example if you only get XP for capturing a flag, but not for protecting the flag carrier then I can see alot of people betraying the flag carrier in order to capture the flag themselves. You could reward the entire team for the flag cap, or have a more strict penalty for betraying, like losing more XP then a flag cap is worth, but then what about accidental betrayals? Argh! Maybe if the enemy hits the flag carrier and you kill him/her you gain XP for protecting the flag carrier? I doubt there's a perfect system but H3's and Reach's systems are far from it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fzdw11 Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 Maybe if the enemy hits the flag carrier and you kill him/her you gain XP for protecting the flag carrier? I doubt there's a perfect system but H3's and Reach's systems are far from it. This. But it would need to be about equal to capturing a flag, otherwise what's stopping the betraying anyway? Or you add in both the betrayal losing XP and this. Like I said though, any system can be abused. It's finding a balanced system that can't be abused as much that's what's difficult, because let's face it, somebody will always find a way to work this system to their advantage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
My BR iZ RusTyy Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 This. But it would need to be about equal to capturing a flag, otherwise what's stopping the betraying anyway? Or you add in both the betrayal losing XP and this. Like I said though, any system can be abused. It's finding a balanced system that can't be abused as much that's what's difficult, because let's face it, somebody will always find a way to work this system to their advantage. Ok so say you get 500XP for capturing a flag, and 500XP for protecting the flag carrier and you lose 1000XP for a betrayal, then maybe 350XP for a normal kill and 100XP for an assist Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skys Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 If they continue the halo reach ranking..itll be a little disapointing..But they do need to make a couple final ranks almost impossible to get. only for elite players. Like TRUE SKILL STATS RANKS. Like maybe you're a 50 in 4 or more playlists..example persay. And when you reach 50 in a couple you progress past a rank like inheritor. Do i make sense? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fzdw11 Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 I see what you're getting at, Skys. Ok so say you get 500XP for capturing a flag, and 500XP for protecting the flag carrier and you lose 1000XP for a betrayal, then maybe 350XP for a normal kill and 100XP for an assist Something to that effect, but I would limit giving credit for kills and assists. Strictly needs to be K/D, otherwise it starts becoming like Reach's system, and very few people want that. For example, you have a positive K/D at the end of a game? +100 XP. You have a negative K/D at the end of a game? -100 XP. Your team wins? +200 XP. Your team loses? -200 XP. Something along those lines, so you still have the incentive to win, but even if you don't, if you do enough to try and help your team to win (positive K/D, capturing flags, etc), you still have a chance to improve your true skill ranking, because you are better than that loss would show. Is it still possible to have negative XP at the end of a game? Absolutely. But again, it can be abused. Perform badly to derank, and then tear up on new players. Or you don't derank, and it just takes you that much longer to rank up. Hm. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flawless Cowboy Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 Damn, D3STROYER... you really are impassioned about this, arn't you. I can respect your opinion on this, because at the end of the day, it is just an opinion For my part, I liked the Halo 3 ranking system. Even though I found it hard to progress (because i'm not that good at MP), it was still a challenge & somthing to fight towards. However, I didn't really like the constant feeling of unease if I gave the opposition too many kills, which would lead to me feeling like I had let my mates down. Which meant I found myself spending more & more of my games in a state of paranoia! Now, I also like the ranking system in Reach. While a lot of players feel let down by the lack of constant challenge, I found it to be a relief, & could play my game in my own way. The addition of Firefight contributing towards your rank is also a bonus for me. What I lose out in MP, I can gain in FF. Also, to draw a comparison between the two games... When Halo 3 launched, we had an official ranked global ranking system, & xp points for the social side of the games. As time went on, the rankings split to full global ranked, & social ranked. Where you could achieve you rank 50 in social by means of attrition, rather than just relying on the often disheartening global rank. I can only assume that this social ranking proved to be popular, & that could well be one of the reasons why Bungie decided to use this system in Reach. I'd like to think that there'd be enough room in Halo 4 to support everyone's preferences. Maybe not to the degree that we'd all like, but at least enough for us to be able to accept it without too much belly aching. Another thing to bear in mind, is that games are made to appeal to EVERYONE, & not just a minority. So I would imagine that the ranking system in Halo 4 could well reflect this. But like I said... I hope we can all get a little bit of what we'd like from Halo 4, at least Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VivaLebowski Posted April 23, 2012 Report Share Posted April 23, 2012 I just want a system back where by me and my bud will say "oh sh!t" when we get matched with a max rank in doubles...being matchmade with a max rank in Reach is much less dramatic than Halo 3. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panda Posted April 24, 2012 Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 A visible 1-50 rank in each ranked playlist with a linear progression system like in Reach overall. I liked being able to aim for certain ranks to unlock things, but the challenge of obtaining a certain skill level adds to the competitive nature. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigMartin58 Posted April 24, 2012 Report Share Posted April 24, 2012 One that I came up with mixes halo 3's AND reach's ranking systems... The way it would work it would be like two different ranking systems, in one. One for competitive gamers and one for casual gamers. The casual ranks would be based on how MUCH you play Halo 4, just like in halo reach. The competitive ranks would be based on how WELL you play (skill), like in halo 3. You could distinctively tell the difference between the two because if you were a casual gamer the ranks you would get would be different from what you would get if you were a competitive gamer (obviously). For example: Competitive Ranks: Recruit (Starting Rank): Skill Level 1-2 Private: Skill Level 2-5 Sargent: Skill Level 5-10 Warrant Officer: Skill Level 10-20 Lieutenant: Skill Level 20-50 Major: Skill Level 50-100 Lt. Colonel: Skill Level 100-250 Colonel: Skill Level 250-500 Vice General: Skill Level 500-1000 General (Highest Skill Rank): Skill Level 1000^ Casual Ranks: (Exp stands for Experience Points, which are pretty much the same thing as credits in Halo Reach, but with no monetary value) Recruit (Starting Rank): EXP 1-500 Apprentice: EXP 500-1000 Corporal: EXP 1000-2000 Gunnery Sargent: EXP 2000-5000 Captain: EXP 5000-10,000 Commander: EXP 10,000-20,000 Brigadier: EXP 20,000-50,000 Precursor: EXP 50,000-100,000 Reclaimer: EXP 100,000-1,000,000 Forerunner(Highest Experience Rank): EXP 1,000,000^ Mixed Ranks: (For those who play both) Recruit (Starting Rank): EXP 1-500 + Skill Level 1-2 First Class: EXP 500-1000 + Skill Level 2-5 Specialist: EXP 1000-2000 + Skill Level 5-10 Staff Sargent: EXP 2000-5000 + Skill Level 10-20 Major of the UNSC: EXP 5000-10,000 + Skill Level 20-50 Petty Officer: EXP 10,000-20,000 + Skill Level 50-100 Admiral: EXP 20,000-50,000 + Skill Level 100-250 UNSC Chief: EXP 50,000-100,000 + Skill Level 250-500 Didact: EXP 100,000-1,000,000 + Skill Level 500-1000 Master Chief (Highest Rank Possible): EXP 1,000,000^ + Skill Level 1000^ 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.