fresh new ranking system

[Cooliest]

My idea would kind of work as achievements do. I have stated this in another thread, I saw this ranking type in another video game. Basically the things you achieve rank you up or down. So lets say to rank up from the "first" level to the "second" level you would have to get 10 headshots. simple. But then as you progress the achievements are more difficult and there may be multiple for 1 level, so from level "49" to "50" you would have to kill 100 enemies with sniper headshots, complete campaign on heroic, and splatter 10 enemies in a warthog. Something like this. If this makes sense.

 

Halo: Reach's experience works how it would in a RPG you pretty much gain experience points and "level up" So ya. that's my thoughts.

[DangerousCP]

Bring back halo 2 ranking system or at least 3 leave out garbage reach

[IxNFCTxLEGEND]

This is how u fix the 1-50 system. Just make it were u can only team up or play with players near ur skill. Like if u are playing with a 45 in team slayer and ur friend is a lvl 30 in that playlist then a message will pop up saying u can't play with tht player! And it will get rid of most derankers. Everyone is happy. Oh and u can add that *** credit system to unlock things

 

This is how u fix the 1-50 system. Just make it were u can only team up or play with players near ur skill. Like if u are playing with a 45 in team slayer and ur friend is a lvl 30 in that playlist then a message will pop up saying u can't play with tht player! And it will get rid of most derankers. Everyone is happy. Oh and u can add that *** credit system to unlock things

yes but gaming is also about playing with your friends if you cant play with your friends than it just gets boring too much competive isnt always a good thing

 

My idea for a ranking system is there is two things, skill, and rank. Rank will help you go up and unlock items like reach, skill will be based on how well you do in a game vs whether you win or lose. Sorry but if you have a crappy team you shouldnt lose skill because you had a 3 kd but still lost. Skill will pair you up with people nwith similar skill. If your skill is 50 and you are playing with your friend who has a skill of one have the lowest skill you can play with be 40. This will allow people to play with similar ranks with those exceptions.

[Epyon Pilot]

Patches....there's always patches...

 

What if players earned more by killing/winning against players better than they are, like a lvl 42 against a 48 and so forth?

That would give aspiring players something to look forward to while moving up in rank/exp.

[Force 410]

My idea would kind of work as achievements do. I have stated this in another thread, I saw this ranking type in another video game. Basically the things you achieve rank you up or down. So lets say to rank up from the "first" level to the "second" level you would have to get 10 headshots. simple. But then as you progress the achievements are more difficult and there may be multiple for 1 level, so from level "49" to "50" you would have to kill 100 enemies with sniper headshots, complete campaign on heroic, and splatter 10 enemies in a warthog. Something like this. If this makes sense.

 

Halo: Reach's experience works how it would in a RPG you pretty much gain experience points and "level up" So ya. that's my thoughts.

 

But the problem there is that this does not measure skill - it just "measures" your ability to complete tasks.

 

The reason I say "measures" is because I don't know how they would measure it exactly... would you have to do it in a certain number of games? Before dying x amount of times? etc... It's too helter skelter to really work. I mean, yeah, they could set those parameters for it, but again, that doesn't measure how good you are overall, but rather that you can complete specific tasks. It's a very similar thought process that goes along with the daily/weekly challenges in Reach. I appreciate the thought, but I'm just fairly certain that it's not what the competitive community is looking for. And if you are, that's why you have Halo: Reach - do go complete some challenges to earn credits that signify nothing.

 

yes but gaming is also about playing with your friends if you cant play with your friends than it just gets boring too much competive isnt always a good thing

 

My idea for a ranking system is there is two things, skill, and rank. Rank will help you go up and unlock items like reach, skill will be based on how well you do in a game vs whether you win or lose. Sorry but if you have a crappy team you shouldnt lose skill because you had a 3 kd but still lost. Skill will pair you up with people nwith similar skill. If your skill is 50 and you are playing with your friend who has a skill of one have the lowest skill you can play with be 40. This will allow people to play with similar ranks with those exceptions.

yes but gaming is also about playing with your friends if you cant play with your friends than it just gets boring too much competive isnt always a good thing

 

My idea for a ranking system is there is two things, skill, and rank. Rank will help you go up and unlock items like reach, skill will be based on how well you do in a game vs whether you win or lose. Sorry but if you have a crappy team you shouldnt lose skill because you had a 3 kd but still lost. Skill will pair you up with people nwith similar skill. If your skill is 50 and you are playing with your friend who has a skill of one have the lowest skill you can play with be 40. This will allow people to play with similar ranks with those exceptions.

 

This latter part about how people will be matched up sounds very similar to H3. Good idea, but it's been done and stated it seems. Please define it a little more maybe. And your point about rank vs skill is just semantics. I stated that concept in my original post. I do appreciate the input and hopefully you can explain in a bit more detail