What The Halo Community Needs in a Ranking System - Please let me know what you think!

[Behemoth]

The thing is the black market for high leveled accounts were a problem in Reach too. Sadly people bought onyx accounts/inheritor accounts. The issue can be solved very easily. Take into account the last 20-30 games. Halo 3's system was always based on, the total amount of games played per playlist. Shorten that to 20-30 games so that de-ranked accounts have no effect on you if you play with them. Adjust the system to make it easier to detect when someone has a period of multiple de-ranked games then boosting someones account afterwards. There are many possibilities but when it comes to cold hard facts, arena failed miserably. If 1-50 had some issues fix them, and let the competetive community flourish. This game needs a ranking system to keep competetive players playing. I can easily say Reach which was "social slayer" all day was not fun for me. But I think getting rid of the most games played in a playlist should be taken out. It shouldn't matter if you played more games but got better. You shouldn't get level locked at 48/49 because you got better after a few years.

[fpstactic]

deranking worked because high xp low skill players partied up with new accounts, and the system gave that party a low expected win chance, so if they did win, it would count as an exception effort on the part of the new player

 

this could be fixed by cancelling out the expexted win chance if players partied up... right?

[Ryu♥Hayabusa]

A way to fix account sales?

 

Make it so that you have to physically move the account. No recovering from different consoles. Only the same console/HDD. Problem largely fixed. Most account sales will perish. If your Xbox explodes and you can't recover it, that sucks. But if they want to get rid of the problem, don't heft it on game devs to fix it. My two cents on black market account sales.

 

It sucks for the few who get punished because their HDD explodes, but it stops sales.

[fpstactic]

whats the problem with sales?

[Ryu♥Hayabusa]

whats the problem with sales?

It's illegal and against the terms of usage for Xbox LIVE. If you are caught, your console can be banned and if you are found, you can be fined and sentenced jail-time.

[Hunterex12]

no point on ranking system on skill

 

wait nevermind

[DarknessX03]

I just hope that the other skill system is preferable..

[Sova]

I just hope they HAVE a skill system. I dont think Arena would have been so bad if they had the BR and didn't have all the lucky kills. I think we can all agree, Reach gameplay destroyed Arena because it was really hard to go Pro in any game. Most kills were amount of who got the first shot and who could spam the best.

[fpstactic]

It's illegal and against the terms of usage for Xbox LIVE. If you are caught, your console can be banned and if you are found, you can be fined and sentenced jail-time.

wow didn't know it was illegal... can't realy believe it either...

I create an account on my xbox, if I planned to sell it I would definitely use a store bought code

and then I sell the login details to someone else

if microsoft still held rights to your account, like the government does to paper money, then it could be illegal

 

care to elaborate?

[The Director]

wow didn't know it was illegal... can't realy believe it either...

I create an account on my xbox, if I planned to sell it I would definitely use a store bought code

and then I sell the login details to someone else

if microsoft still held rights to your account, like the government does to paper money, then it could be illegal

 

care to elaborate?

You can only be sentenced jail-time if you forfeit the fine. However, he is correct. It is against the terms and conditions that Microsoft has EVERYONE sign prior to making an XBL account, and breaching these = breach in contract. Microsoft does not commonly sue individual players, however, and will not commonly press charges against someone for infringing on copyright claims. Here, read the Code of Conduct.

 

http://www.xbox.com/en-US/legal/codeofconduct

[Sova]

Yeah it's definitely illegal to sell your account which is stupid because you personally paid for it by paying for the time to play on it. But that's Intellectual Property law for you... Stupid IP laws...ruin everything in marketplaces.

[Force 410]

You must have missed my previous statement.

 

Anyway, Zuko and I both weren't there to see it, but I know good and damn well how Halo 2 was. I watched many people in my family play it. It was no different from halo 3's boosting, etc. The business about Halo 2 on here is irrelevant. Because Halo 4 is a Reach and 3 Hybrid. Not 2. Just to clear that up.

 

Point taken. But we're saying that we'd like to see it go back (at least to some degree) to the way it was in H2, as it was the most successful of the Halo franchise's multiplayer experiences.

 

And I did read your post previous to replying to the person saying "don't pick on people because of age!" I read all the posts I haven't read before replying to things. And if you read my post, I point out that you did show a great sense of maturity when replying to Sova.

 

Zuko and anyone else in the world can come here and voice opinions if they want. Freedom of speech is all over the internet, and honestly, it's got a presence here too. I never saw either of us claim specifics on Halo 2's gameplay, so all of this is really getting on my nerves. You say we can't talk about it because we never played it ourselves? Nonsense. Boosting is everywhere. Our only point is that it happens, devs hate it, players hate it, and it has to be fought to allow the popular fanbase to enjoy the game. No specifics at all.

 

 

Just because you have the small group who tries to beat it doesn't mean you failed. If you beat the majority, you won.

 

 

Oh, Sova, speaking of maturity, don't say Frankie is pissed because he can't beat boosters. It makes you sound...illegitimate.

 

 

 

Oh, and I lied. I actually did play Halo 2 online, but it was for a short time. I ran across boosters twice.

 

First off... whoa whoa whoa! All of a sudden you're coming out that you actually played H2 after all this time on this forum???? A little late don't ya think? So you can't rag on Sova or myself for commenting on you not playing because to our knowledge (from a very credible source speaking on your behalf - oh yes... YOU!) you had never played it.

 

Second, if you're arguing that 343/Bungie "beat the majority [of boosters]" then you're wrong. IMO, you have more people doing that with Reach because they can exploit the system. And if you're not calling that boosting, then yeah, you're right. I don't see boosting that much anymore because there's no incentive to do so in Reach. But as far as "beating the majority" goes, even if they did, that doesn't mean that they are putting out a quality product. That's like saying that because baseball players use/used steroids, we should take away the bats (I know, it's a REALLY bad analogy - sorry, can't think of a good one right now). The game wouldn't be the same; and for people who played Halo multiplayer in its hayday, that's essentially what has/is happened/happening. My best friend always says when looking back at Halo 2 vs Halo 3, ODST and Reach, "They took the crack out of Halo!" And that's what happened. They took out incentive to play by catering to the casual players (which if you need me to I'll go into the endless ways they did so) and made the game less addictive. I understand that they have a business to take care of, but like I've stated many times, I think there are ways that they can do both.

 

The post after this one had best be polite, or this thread is getting locked and warning points will be issued.

 

I apologize for being interpreted as rude if that is the case. I am not trying to be and am simply attempting to make logical and valid points both counter to and for what people may be saying. I appreciate any input on the matter of the ranking system, and I hope I haven't offended anyone. If so, please let me know and I'll be more careful and thoughtful. Sometimes, I can get very passionate about the topic at hand, and if I'm out of line, please let me know - this goes for anyone!

 

The thing is the black market for high leveled accounts were a problem in Reach too. Sadly people bought onyx accounts/inheritor accounts. The issue can be solved very easily. Take into account the last 20-30 games. Halo 3's system was always based on, the total amount of games played per playlist. Shorten that to 20-30 games so that de-ranked accounts have no effect on you if you play with them. Adjust the system to make it easier to detect when someone has a period of multiple de-ranked games then boosting someones account afterwards. There are many possibilities but when it comes to cold hard facts, arena failed miserably. If 1-50 had some issues fix them, and let the competetive community flourish. This game needs a ranking system to keep competetive players playing. I can easily say Reach which was "social slayer" all day was not fun for me. But I think getting rid of the most games played in a playlist should be taken out. It shouldn't matter if you played more games but got better. You shouldn't get level locked at 48/49 because you got better after a few years.

 

Couldn't say it better myself! Thank you for the input!

 

I think Halo 3 had it right in the sense that you had a social playlist and a ranked playlist. Made sense. I just chose to call it ranked and unranked instead and have the social/unranked playlist include a bunch more than in H3. To me, this just makes sense from a marketing standpoint because you can cater to both types of players - casual and competitive. Yeah, you're going to have trolls and boosters and derankers, etc., because that's just how human beings are (at least nowadays).

 

MAIN POINT: So instead of eliminating aspects of the game that were fun for a lot of people, 343 needs to stop being lazy and deal with them in appropriate ways - keeping track of the people who abuse the system/use illegal means. To me, it comes down to effort, and I think the competitive community has put in quite a deal of effort in letting 343 know how they feel regarding Halo's multiplayer matchmaking; and I think it's time that 343 gave that effort back in the appropriate way (not just by saying, "Hey, look how hard we worked/are working on the next Halo trilogy," but rather by openly addressing the issues brought up by these players/fans of the franchise).

[Ryu♥Hayabusa]

First off... whoa whoa whoa! All of a sudden you're coming out that you actually played H2 after all this time on this forum???? A little late don't ya think? So you can't rag on Sova or myself for commenting on you not playing because to our knowledge (from a very credible source speaking on your behalf - oh yes... YOU!) you had never played it.

Of course, people forget when they play something for only about a week. I'm sorry to have forgotten and I never "ragged" on your condescending behavior because of such, I just thought that Zuko was mature and knowledgeable enough to debate ranking systems. Heck, he himself admitted he didn't know how Halo 2 was. This argument has settled and been put down. I believe your bringing it back up is not making many happy. Let's leave it behind, and PLEASE, get back to your topic. It will only surely lead to another heated argument with bad manner. Unless you would like mods to lock it? I don't. This topic has, yet, a breath of life within it.

 

I see your point in having a skill based system, and I share your love for competition. I also like how Halo 2 and 3's systems added suspense and actual competition. But I mainly play for fun. Suffice to say, I am sad with Halo 4's Reach-like system, but I can live with it. Perhaps as long as they let us view a BPR or something in-game, we will be happy.

 

Technically, Reach would have been great by your standards if BPR was your rank. Yes? I believe that would have been great, seeing it in-game as your rank. If they matched you based on BPR, you'd be especially happy. Yes? Well, since we don't know every last thing, perhaps we WILL get to see some skill ranking in-game. Maybe its buried in menus like post-game carnage, but it could be there. Let's have some hopes, eh? I'm sure you already had hopes, but let's keep them and not claim and blame Reach at every turn. Let's look ahead.

[Rizotic]

they need a skill based ranking system in this game.. and not the supposed one thats is in reach cause that **** dont work, at all... its like i can play that game and perform at a lvl 50 and i get 30s on my team.. this would never happen in h3 match making which is why i though matchmaking in h3 was a good solid experience, unlike reach where i can only play 5 games before getting bored and getting off..

 

just my two cents, but if there is no skill system that is comparable to h3 or h2 then h4s matchmaking will be like reach and the population will dwindle 6months to a year after its release..

 

dont get me wrong though i still cant wait for it to come out.

[Ryu♥Hayabusa]

they need a skill based ranking system in this game.. and not the supposed one thats is in reach cause that **** dont work, at all... its like i can play that game and perform at a lvl 50 and i get 30s on my team.. this would never happen in h3 match making which is why i though matchmaking in h3 was a good solid experience, unlike reach where i can only play 5 games before getting bored and getting off..

 

just my two cents, but if there is no skill system that is comparable to h3 or h2 then h4s matchmaking will be like reach and the population will dwindle 6months to a year after its release..

 

dont get me wrong though i still cant wait for it to come out.

Ranks based on skill do help, I agree. But if they make the whole experience, you need to try something else. I can play Reach for 12 hours straight during summer and never get bored of playing. I enjoy the gameplay more than the icon next to my name. It's disappointing to see a n00b have a higher rank than I, but when I get in the lobby and start playing, I get really pumped and excited to play. Don't get me wrong, I like seeing my efforts ranked effectively, but the ranks don't mean the difference between a good game and a bad one in my eyes.

I see ranks as the reward for doing good. While the gameplay is the whole point. Like awards on this site. The point of the site is to socialize. But you get rewards for being a good member.

[stompdown]

If no visible number rank is implemented into the ranking system, we should be punished in other ways. Perhaps losing a great deal of xp and whatever armor you unlocked after losing a match. I still play ranked halo 3 to this day. Could I have played halo 3 this long if only the social playlists were available? Heck no I would have moved on to BF3 or COD at that point. IMO hidden skill based systems in halo bore the hell out of me, which is why I skipped reach. The competitive community simply wants to be punished for losing games, and know that we were punished.

[Sova]

Errr, I'm surprised this thread is still somewhat active. I thought we kind of beat the issue to a dead pulp. Guess not. Anyway, my way of seeing it:

 

If Halo 4 doesn't have a visible ranking system like that of Halo 2 then I see many competitive players moving on to the next big thing. Halo multiplayer was always built around 4v4 gameplay and this is why it became so competitive. The difference in interest between 4v4 and something like Big Team is the atmosphere and the incentive to win a game. In BTB it really didn't matter all too much what you did so long as you were immersed in the combat. In contrast, 4v4 you had a huge role, it mattered what you did every step of the way. Visible rank made your actions all the more important because you knew that if you lost a game you would be matched up with terrible people over and over. Basically CoD and BF3 are games that have huge followings and are amazing to play because they simulate warfare on a grandscale (or at least try to) but Halo is different. It was always different and should always be different. Halo, in my own metaphor and perspective, seems to be more of a sport than a simulation of combat. It's who can react, who can outmaneuver, who can get the best of the person they are up against. This I think is what's at heart of the gameplay and is enhanced by a skill based ranking system.

 

I know a lot of people just like to enjoy the game and I really do get that. Heck, that's why I play Battlefield 3 a lot. But for people who play MLG or gamebattles or even just people like me who want to play competitively at a very high and intense level, we want to be continually matched up against these people and have something to fight for. I like the nail biter games that come down to the 49-49 cliffhanger where the next kill matters THAT much more. In a skill-based system that 1 kill could determine your "rank". But in a progression only system that last kill doesn't hold the same weight.

 

All I'm saying, as a highly competitive player, is that this skill-based system needs to resemble at least somewhat Halo 2's own system or else I'm going to hang the game up on a shelf come next Spring in place of something that offers me what I want. I'm not making an ultimatum and in no way will I judge the game completely on the ranking system itself, but I can guarantee me and countless others will lose interest in the game fast if they don't have something in place that appeases us.

 

Best of luck come Nov. 6th. Btw, I hope while you all are out buying the game that some of you who are of legal age will be voting!