what is the ranking system in Halo 4 gonna be like, hopefully not like cod...

[antsrt]

Halo 2 was the best ranking system ever. Actually a level based on skill and winning games.

I hate this bullsht like cod where rank is based on how much you play the game and not actual skill.

BRB having a 0.80 KDR and being ranked in the top 1000
BRB sucking dik at video games, but playing 24/7 ranked in the top 100

Might not even get the game if it's like this...

[PuNjAbixxPheNoM]

lol it's like cod. But I agree with you on Halo 2 ranking system that one was my favorite. Couldn't get past a 32 without modders and people that would bridge host.

[RobbieJD]

lol it's like cod. But I agree with you on Halo 2 ranking system that one was my favorite. Couldn't get past a 32 without modders and people that would bridge host.

Is it really going to be like cod? Halo had the best ranking system out of all. Not even mad that I could barely get past 40 cause I know I'd get buttraped by anyone above it.

[Criollo]

Is it really going to be like cod? Halo had the best ranking system out of all. Not even mad that I could barely get past 40 cause I know I'd get buttraped by anyone above it.

its exaclty like cod. srs. you start off as sr1 then work your way through that by getting xp for killing and winning blah blah blah they ruined the ranking system after 3

[NegativeZero]

Agreed it's stupid, Gears of War 2 had it right in the beginning too. You were a baws if you were rank 4, rank 3 was the common ground. Rank 5(wings) were glitchers. They did the same cop out later on and it's the same for Gears 3. Brb playing against level 400s, brb chitting on them as a level 100 lol.

[SuburbanLegend]

They should have both IMO.

A CoD style so people can advance and feel good for themselves and crap and a old Halo style one for skill and competitive matchmaking.

[Driftslut]

But I agree with you on Halo 2 ranking system that one was my favorite.

Agreed!

Couldn't get past a 42 without modders and people that would bridge host.

Fixed?

[antsrt]

lol it's like cod. But I agree with you on Halo 2 ranking system that one was my favorite. Couldn't get past a 32 without modders and people that would bridge host.

fking stupid, yeah that modding/standby sht was annoying.

its exaclty like cod. srs. you start off as sr1 then work your way through that by getting xp for killing and winning blah blah blah they ruined the ranking system after 3

Yeah i seen them dorito bags with the double xp for halo and raged that it was gonna be like this

Agreed it's stupid, Gears of War 2 had it right in the beginning too. You were a baws if you were rank 4, rank 3 was the common ground. Rank 5(wings) were glitchers. They did the same cop out later on and it's the same for Gears 3. Brb playing against level 400s, brb chitting on them as a level 100 lol.

yeah that's what's stupid about it too, playing all random levels. If you have a full team that's good, you rarely have a close game

They should have both IMO.

A CoD style so people can advance and feel good for themselves and crap and a old Halo style one for skill and competitive matchmaking.

That would be ideal, an overall xp level, and one for each matchmaking category

[musclephag]

lol@people needing a number to validate themselves
video games are serious business

[amazingmuzmo]

lol@people needing a number to validate themselves
video games are serious business

Confirmed legit lvl 15 *******. Just cause you don't want everyone to see how chitty you are doesn't mean they should have removed a feature many people enjoyed. Tempted to neg.

[metafour]

Its a COD-style XP based progression system but they have stated numerous times that the matchmaking aspect will be skill-based...ie: regardless of whether or not you have a million XP, if you suck you will get matched up with others that suck.

Bungie did say the same thing about Reach ("hidden True Skill system"); but 343 actually came out recently and admitted that Reach's matchmaking system prioritized connection and was dumbed down so that it would find matches quickly and therefore sacrificed searching for balanced games.

[SuburbanLegend]

That would be ideal, an overall xp level, and one for each matchmaking category

Ya, the overall experience one would be for unlocks as well.

lol@people needing a number to validate themselves
video games are serious business

Halo plays significantly better when you play against people around your skill level. It's no fun getting owned and playing against people who can't challenge you at all is no fun either.

[Ivan7x]

meh its fukin gay that theres no 1-50

but cant do anything about it deal with it *******s

[JakeByrd]

lol@people needing a number to validate themselves
video games are serious business

Apparently this guy never played halo 2. That ranking system made for the most balanced and competitive gameplay any FPS has ever seen. Win a game by more than 50-40? You kicked some ass. I could make a new gamertag, breeze through levels 1-34 with no losses, then all of a sudden, it was difficult to get back to a 37. I know people who were legitimate 40's that could beat me 10-1 all day long 1v1. I'd do the same with most level 34's. It wasn't just a number to brag about. It was a number to match your skill with equal opponents to ensure that every matchmaking game was a match made in heaven (or hell lol) competitively speaking.

[Crush086]

I wonder if any game will ever go back to the ranking system Halo 2 and Gears had. Unfortunately there'll always be people that'll bridge host, hack, etc. to propel themselves up the leaderboards. I don't think there was anything more satisfying in online gaming than hitting 50 legitimately in H3 before they instituted that XP thing.

Now the most you can really do is work on your k/d or something else to validate your skill. Or just troll all the time lol.

[Criollo]

I wonder if any game will ever go back to the ranking system Halo 2 and Gears had. Unfortunately there'll always be people that'll bridge host, hack, etc. to propel themselves up the leaderboards. I don't think there was anything more satisfying in online gaming than hitting 50 legitimately in H3 before they instituted that XP thing.

Now the most you can really do is work on your k/d or something else to validate your skill. Or just troll all the time lol.

online ranking for halo 3 was too easy got to 48 going in solo. in halo 2 that was never possible especially before they updated it.

[JakeByrd]

I wonder if any game will ever go back to the ranking system Halo 2 and Gears had. Unfortunately there'll always be people that'll bridge host, hack, etc. to propel themselves up the leaderboards. I don't think there was anything more satisfying in online gaming than hitting 50 legitimately in H3 before they instituted that XP thing.

Now the most you can really do is work on your k/d or something else to validate your skill. Or just troll all the time lol.

The problem with k/d, especially with objective based game types, is it ruins the gameplay for the gamer who sits between average/competitive like myself. You have so many people who do nothing but camp in odd corners hoping to pick off an easy kill. Gone are the days when the only way to rank up was being on the winning team. That environment fostered creativity and teamwork that k/d whores will never understand.

[metafour]

Apparently this guy never played halo 2. That ranking system made for the most balanced and competitive gameplay any FPS has ever seen. Win a game by more than 50-40? You kicked some ass. I could make a new gamertag, breeze through levels 1-34 with no losses, then all of a sudden, it was difficult to get back to a 37. I know people who were legitimate 40's that could beat me 10-1 all day long 1v1. I'd do the same with most level 34's. It wasn't just a number to brag about. It was a number to match your skill with equal opponents to ensure that every matchmaking game was a match made in heaven (or hell lol) competitively speaking.

Yes, but lets just say that they implemented the exact same system...except they "hid" your numerical rank from you and you also couldn't see the rank of anyone else. Would you still be pumping praise for this system? No, you'd most likely bitch about it even though it was executing flawless skill-based matchmaking. There are absolutely some benefits to a visible numerical ranking system, most notably the fact that it gives a player something to play for...but the reality is that deep-down most players dont actually value the fact that the game is matching them with players of similar skill, they value the little number beside their name that makes them feel superior to others.

[antsrt]

Apparently this guy never played halo 2. That ranking system made for the most balanced and competitive gameplay any FPS has ever seen. Win a game by more than 50-40? You kicked some ass. I could make a new gamertag, breeze through levels 1-34 with no losses, then all of a sudden, it was difficult to get back to a 37. I know people who were legitimate 40's that could beat me 10-1 all day long 1v1. I'd do the same with most level 34's. It wasn't just a number to brag about. It was a number to match your skill with equal opponents to ensure that every matchmaking game was a match made in heaven (or hell lol) competitively speaking.

h2 was the **** man, although it destroyed my social life of high school it was awesome. Beating off to the ORGE montages, was great. Still remember my highlight of beating the number 1 ranked rumble pit guy (PaCMaYnE) in rumble rifles on burial mounds. One by like 2 kills, was pumped.

[TonyJH]

fuarrkk they're making this chit too noob friendly. They really need to base the lvling systems off of skill ranks again that way you can look at a person's level and acknowledge how skilled they are, but instead now it's just about how frequently you play and if you have an outside life or not.

[JakeByrd]

Yes, but lets just say that they implemented the exact same system...except they "hid" your numerical rank from you and you also couldn't see the rank of anyone else. Would you still be pumping praise for this system? No, you'd most likely bitch about it even though it was executing flawless skill-based matchmaking. There are absolutely some benefits to a visible numerical ranking system, most notably the fact that it gives a player something to play for...but the reality is that deep-down most players dont actually value the fact that the game is matching them with players of similar skill, they value the little number beside their name that makes them feel superior to others.

I prefer to see the numbers to set goals and try to always improve my gameplay/teamwork. It's obvious that games nowadays don't use the same system when you go into any game in COD with your friends and 2 minutes in your team has constant C-130's the rest of the match and the other team has no hope.

[onelifenoregret]

Halo 2 had it pretty good but it was based off of win/loss, meaning a crappy player with three good players could still be ranked high. MW3 is garbage because it's based off of how much you play. Black Ops wasn't too bad because it was based off of score per minute. The problem with score per minute is you run into kids who just run and gun and have shyt K/Ds. You can't base a leaderboard off of K/D ratios though because then it only encourages camping. Someone needs to come up with a formula that compares all three. Win loss ratio, kill death ratio, and score per minute to come up with your ranking.

[SuburbanLegend]

The problem with k/d, especially with objective based game types, is it ruins the gameplay for the gamer who sits between average/competitive like myself. You have so many people who do nothing but camp in odd corners hoping to pick off an easy kill. Gone are the days when the only way to rank up was being on the winning team. That environment fostered creativity and teamwork that k/d whores will never understand.

Most games organize K by gametype. If it isn't deathmatch, it doesn't matter; then Win:Loss is the show of skill.

[amazingmuzmo]

Halo 2 had it pretty good but it was based off of win/loss, meaning a crappy player with three good players could still be ranked high. MW3 is garbage because it's based off of how much you play. Black Ops wasn't too bad because it was based off of score per minute. The problem with score per minute is you run into kids who just run and gun and have shyt K/Ds. You can't base a leaderboard off of K/D ratios though because then it only encourages camping. Someone needs to come up with a formula that compares all three. Win loss ratio, kill death ratio, and score per minute to come up with your ranking.

Halo 2 style was the best because eventually the bad player will hold back the three other players from increasing rank. Thus they would have to leave the bad kid at his appropriate rank and play with equally skilled players to reach their true lvls

[Crush086]

online ranking for halo 3 was too easy got to 48 going in solo. in halo 2 that was never possible especially before they updated it.

I don't think I got above 37 in H2, something like that. Once you hit the mid 30s or so the hackers were in every game.

The problem with k/d, especially with objective based game types, is it ruins the gameplay for the gamer who sits between average/competitive like myself. You have so many people who do nothing but camp in odd corners hoping to pick off an easy kill. Gone are the days when the only way to rank up was being on the winning team. That environment fostered creativity and teamwork that k/d whores will never understand.

I agree, it's just one of the few things you see people mention when it comes to being good. Like in BO when they had the public stat cards, you'd be in a lobby and hear "oh his k/d is too high, back out" and you'd eventually get put into games with terrible people who don't give a crap about k/d or winning/losing at all and you'd steamroll them. It was always hard to actually get consistent competitive public matches because nobody ever wanted to play a full lobby of high k/d people.

[JoshSP1985]

FPS games should build games based off rankings EVEN IF HITS HIDDEN.

I rage so hard when I'm the best player in a lobby by leaps and bounds but my team looses because the other team is average and I have 2 people on my team going 3 and 30 feeding the other team kill streaks all game. It's bad when in a domination you would be better off playing 4v6 because of how bad some people are.

[JoshSP1985]

I don't think I got above 37 in H2, something like that. Once you hit the mid 30s or so the hackers were in every game.


I agree, it's just one of the few things you see people mention when it comes to being good. Like in BO when they had the public stat cards, you'd be in a lobby and hear "oh his k/d is too high, back out" and you'd eventually get put into games with terrible people who don't give a crap about k/d or winning/losing at all and you'd steamroll them. It was always hard to actually get consistent competitive public matches because nobody ever wanted to play a full lobby of high k/d people.

I was legit 37 in H2, but yes you couldn't go higher due to cheaters. If no one was cheating then the levels would spread out some.

I remember getting ranked against legit pros from time to time due to being high enough. I'm sure most of those guys bridged host though which is more of hacker prevention instead of cheating even though they would get host advantage.

[antsrt]

I was legit 37 in H2, but yes you couldn't go higher due to cheaters. If no one was cheating then the levels would spread out some.

I remember getting ranked against legit pros from time to time due to being high enough. I'm sure most of those guys bridged host though which is more of hacker prevention instead of cheating even though they would get host advantage.

my host advantage was redic. BR 4 shotting across colossus/midship/etc. with ease

[CoreMaster75]

I hit 48 legit in Team Slayer. Never realized how good it was, I had a slow connection too. It was a lot easier once you got a solid group of players and teamed up to kick some ass. I quit and went to COD after my stress levels went through the roof from halo 2. I only got to be the host a couple of times, advantage is crazy. Most of the time I was on the other side of the advantage, brb getting the first shot in and still getting killed anyway.

BRB win 6 games in a row, must be just one more game till 49!!!!
BRB lose 1 game 50-49, back down to 47.

[Criollo]

I don't think I got above 37 in H2, something like that. Once you hit the mid 30s or so the hackers were in every game.


I agree, it's just one of the few things you see people mention when it comes to being good. Like in BO when they had the public stat cards, you'd be in a lobby and hear "oh his k/d is too high, back out" and you'd eventually get put into games with terrible people who don't give a crap about k/d or winning/losing at all and you'd steamroll them. It was always hard to actually get consistent competitive public matches because nobody ever wanted to play a full lobby of high k/d people.

I was legit 37 in H2, but yes you couldn't go higher due to cheaters. If no one was cheating then the levels would spread out some.

I remember getting ranked against legit pros from time to time due to being high enough. I'm sure most of those guys bridged host though which is more of hacker prevention instead of cheating even though they would get host advantage.

i got to around 42-43 before i stopped. i played with MoB bck in the day legit 45's everywhere u look we would go in clan matches at night and literally never lose. still couldnt get above that rank in slayer tough i know them so close to lvling feels and host advantage. id get it once in awhile and it was so retarded how everything was so strong brb shotgun tw mile away 4 shotting across the map like i have aimbot. man i miss those good ol days