What kinds of ranks in halo 4?

[Constantly]

But what if you're a General but what the Reclaimer title? I think this system would work if you were able to choose which title of the three systems you wanted.

 

Either way, I agree with the OP on this. There must be a ranking system like H3. The only thing that I found wrong with it was the fact that I found myself not wanting to play certain playlists after reaching 50. Because I didn't want to lose it. I would like to be able to casually play Snipers in H3 but if I'm sitting at 49 and my buddies aren't online, no way am I playing it. But at the same time, if I knew I wasn't going to lose that 49 I'd play it just to see if I'd get lucky and get a good group.

 

I'm sure something like that would cause all kinds of problems. (people quitting) But with join-in-progress I don't really see any other way.

[Elite jbZzz]

I hope they have ranks like halo 3.

[BLiX]

Wow

[RoosterTeethFan]

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^

i really like this idea but i think no matter which list you pick both of your ranks show up all the time.

[BLiX]

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?

 

 

 

 

You are right

[D3STROYER]

I liked Halo 2's alot and wish they would use that 1-50 ranking system for ranked playlists that was in Halo 2 but use Halo 3's EXP symbol ranking for social playlists.

[TristanX11]

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.

I'll be honest I didn't really read your entire post. BUT, I agree a number system is needed.

[King of Winter]

hopefully alittle from halo 3 & 2

[The Director]

Alright, prepare for a REALLY long post.

 

The reason the Halo 3 ranking system didn't work was because it was based on w/l ratio, which meant that either you had to carry like crazy or be a team player to get a 50. The reason this ranking system was fundamentally flawed is because it penalized losing with a lost rank. You could go from 1 to 50 and back down to five in a week. The penalizing also lead to "deranking" and "boosting", which turned the entire ranking system into a lame joke. A deranker is someone who loses games to go down in the ranks just to troll the lower level players by not allowing them to rank up. A booster is someone who loses many many games intentionally so that whoever they play with will get boosted up 10-20 ranks at a time, depending on how good the booster is. For a while there was even a black market for boosters. This sort of thing is unacceptable (and also illegal by a couple of copyright laws), which is why this ranking system is no longer used.

 

As far as Halo Reach's ranking system, it too was flawed because it followed the "time played" route. Rather than rewarding ranks to exceptional players, it implemented a credit system that allowed players of mediocre skill to rise in rank. This ranking system wasn't just for Matchmaking either, campaign and other non-multiplayer gametypes also rewarded credits. This is why there are inheritors who are -30000 in matchmaking.

 

So these two ranking systems are obviously not the best choice for Halo 4. Unless, they were combined and changed a bit.

 

Here's my idea for this:

Ranking system based on levels 1-50 that is given base on individual player skill (k/d, medals, and whatnot) and a symbolized ranking system that shows time spent playing the game. This way, you know that you are in trouble if you see a lv50 Inheritor on the other team. However, the ranking system should only go negative based off of an individual player, to prevent booster accounts. There will still be derankers, but they won't affect things that much. They also shouldn't make it a one step forward two steps back type of thing for the 1-50 ranking system either, which will help against derankers. Also, armor customizations and such should be unlocked based on the symbolized rank, and symbolized rank should also be based off of skill to some level. The better you are, the more you rank up in both rank types.

 

This will appease both parties, the MLG and the Casual players, because they can both rank up, but the MLG players can still brag about how good they are without having to look up k/d ratios.

[D3STROYER]

Alright, prepare for a REALLY long post.

 

The reason the Halo 3 ranking system didn't work was because it was based on w/l ratio, which meant that either you had to carry like crazy or be a team player to get a 50. The reason this ranking system was fundamentally flawed is because it penalized losing with a lost rank. You could go from 1 to 50 and back down to five in a week. The penalizing also lead to "deranking" and "boosting", which turned the entire ranking system into a lame joke. A deranker is someone who loses games to go down in the ranks just to troll the lower level players by not allowing them to rank up. A booster is someone who loses many many games intentionally so that whoever they play with will get boosted up 10-20 ranks at a time, depending on how good the booster is. For a while there was even a black market for boosters. This sort of thing is unacceptable (and also illegal by a couple of copyright laws), which is why this ranking system is no longer used.

 

As far as Halo Reach's ranking system, it too was flawed because it followed the "time played" route. Rather than rewarding ranks to exceptional players, it implemented a credit system that allowed players of mediocre skill to rise in rank. This ranking system wasn't just for Matchmaking either, campaign and other non-multiplayer gametypes also rewarded credits. This is why there are inheritors who are -30000 in matchmaking.

 

So these two ranking systems are obviously not the best choice for Halo 4. Unless, they were combined and changed a bit.

 

Here's my idea for this:

Ranking system based on levels 1-50 that is given base on individual player skill (k/d, medals, and whatnot) and a symbolized ranking system that shows time spent playing the game. This way, you know that you are in trouble if you see a lv50 Inheritor on the other team. However, the ranking system should only go negative based off of an individual player, to prevent booster accounts. There will still be derankers, but they won't affect things that much. They also shouldn't make it a one step forward two steps back type of thing for the 1-50 ranking system either, which will help against derankers. Also, armor customizations and such should be unlocked based on the symbolized rank, and symbolized rank should also be based off of skill to some level. The better you are, the more you rank up in both rank types.

 

This will appease both parties, the MLG and the Casual players, because they can both rank up, but the MLG players can still brag about how good they are without having to look up k/d ratios.

 

^ Agreed

[ishotthepilot]

Alright, prepare for a REALLY long post.

 

The reason the Halo 3 ranking system didn't work was because it was based on w/l ratio, which meant that either you had to carry like crazy or be a team player to get a 50. The reason this ranking system was fundamentally flawed is because it penalized losing with a lost rank. You could go from 1 to 50 and back down to five in a week. The penalizing also lead to "deranking" and "boosting", which turned the entire ranking system into a lame joke. A deranker is someone who loses games to go down in the ranks just to troll the lower level players by not allowing them to rank up. A booster is someone who loses many many games intentionally so that whoever they play with will get boosted up 10-20 ranks at a time, depending on how good the booster is. For a while there was even a black market for boosters. This sort of thing is unacceptable (and also illegal by a couple of copyright laws), which is why this ranking system is no longer used.

 

As far as Halo Reach's ranking system, it too was flawed because it followed the "time played" route. Rather than rewarding ranks to exceptional players, it implemented a credit system that allowed players of mediocre skill to rise in rank. This ranking system wasn't just for Matchmaking either, campaign and other non-multiplayer gametypes also rewarded credits. This is why there are inheritors who are -30000 in matchmaking.

 

So these two ranking systems are obviously not the best choice for Halo 4. Unless, they were combined and changed a bit.

 

Here's my idea for this:

Ranking system based on levels 1-50 that is given base on individual player skill (k/d, medals, and whatnot) and a symbolized ranking system that shows time spent playing the game. This way, you know that you are in trouble if you see a lv50 Inheritor on the other team. However, the ranking system should only go negative based off of an individual player, to prevent booster accounts. There will still be derankers, but they won't affect things that much. They also shouldn't make it a one step forward two steps back type of thing for the 1-50 ranking system either, which will help against derankers. Also, armor customizations and such should be unlocked based on the symbolized rank, and symbolized rank should also be based off of skill to some level. The better you are, the more you rank up in both rank types.

 

This will appease both parties, the MLG and the Casual players, because they can both rank up, but the MLG players can still brag about how good they are without having to look up k/d ratios.

 

I like the thought that you put into your post, but I disagree with your conclusion. Halo is a TEAM game. If people are ranked up based on individual accomplishments, such as medals or k/d, then that will greatly encourage camping/stat whoring/power weapon hogs/bad teamwork. In this system people will be awarded for grabbing sniper and rockets instead of distributing them effectively among teammates. Not only that, but instead of going for the objective and risking death, the player will be encouraged to stay back and let others go for the flag while he stays back picking people off.

 

So, with that system we would be stuck with bad teamates and derankers (which i dont believe you can get rid of). Stat whores would make the competitive experience much worse than just derankers. In my opinion, they should stick with the Halo 2 system and add on the Reach exp system as a side for the more casual players. Or they should go with the Starcraft 2 ranking system, which I've heard good things about.

[KyoKusagani1999]

Never cared too much for Titles. All I care about Rank Related is placement online. Good Matchups are a first priority for any serious player!

[HALO 4 FAN]

Thanks for all the comments

 

[D3STROYER]

Thanks for all the comments

 

You're welcome. This is something that was really needing to be addressed and brought to 343 Industries eyes.

[BLiX]

This Topic is OLD HALO 3 FAN LOL

[Notch]

Don't think just becuz I am notch that I don't play halo! I want some of halo reach ranks and some new ones I already know that the highest halo 4 rank is omega and 2nd highest is alpha

[rentless]

Don't think just becuz I am notch that I don't play halo! I want some of halo reach ranks and some new ones I already know that the highest halo 4 rank is omega and 2nd highest is alpha

 

And you know this how?

I personally hope they don't have ranks, Just skill levels. More time playing to rank up isn't skill!

[upton889]

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

 

I think there's going to be a Halo 3 style system with credits AND a win-to-rank-up type of system. 343 will do it right because too much of the community has disagreed with the whole Halo Reach ranking system.

[Killer K34]

halo 3 had a good idea of a system but lack to being very specific to certain people in the halo communite, it should be a mix of halo 3 and reach. were you can only reach the highest levels by winning but if your a forger and alls you do is forge for months you should get some reward for that or for the people with bad connections, it need to just be more of a variety of the community

[upton889]

halo 3 had a good idea of a system but lack to being very specific to certain people in the halo communite, it should be a mix of halo 3 and reach. were you can only reach the highest levels by winning but if your a forger and alls you do is forge for months you should get some reward for that or for the people with bad connections, it need to just be more of a variety of the community

 

Agreed. As long as they have a system that includes credits for the long term ranks (forerunner, inheriter, etc.) AND wins for playlist ranks (1-50 or some other numerical system) that'll be awesome.