Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
LeandroTrooper

The best ranking system for Halo

Recommended Posts

Reach did have a "ranking system." The best one in my opinion. It rewarded players for repeated play with ranks that were easy to understand and obtain. One of my buddies has always terrible at Halo but played Reach more than any because of his rank.

 

What Reach didn't have is a skill rating system. Yes, H2 and H3 tied the rank to the skill system but it does not have to be that way. The flaw with that arrangement is players purchase games with the expectation of beating or completing them, this includes multi player. This is the reason people boosted or bought a 50 in H3, they didn't feel they got their money's worth out of the game until they had gotten everything.

 

The ideal skill rating system, while visible, must operate more behind the scenes. The purpose of skill rating is proper matchmaking, nothing more. If you want to talk about league play, that's a while different story.

  • Upvote (+1) 1
  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Reach did have a "ranking system." The best one in my opinion. It rewarded players for repeated play with ranks that were easy to understand and obtain. One of my buddies has always terrible at Halo but played Reach more than any because of his rank.

 

What Reach didn't have is a skill rating system. Yes, H2 and H3 tied the rank to the skill system but it does not have to be that way. The flaw with that arrangement is players purchase games with the expectation of beating or completing them, this includes multi player. This is the reason people boosted or bought a 50 in H3, they didn't feel they got their money's worth out of the game until they had gotten everything.

 

The ideal skill rating system, while visible, must operate more behind the scenes. The purpose of skill rating is proper matchmaking, nothing more. If you want to talk about league play, that's a while different story.

It wasn't a Ranking system, it was a Progression system. A system that is based solely on time played doesn't deserve to be called a Ranking system, IMO.

 

A Ranking system should match you vs your similar skill, Reach did not accomplish that at all. One game you could be playing 4 pros, the next you could be playing BobbingSofa763 and his 3 guests. 

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

It wasn't a Ranking system, it was a Progression system. A system that is based solely on time played doesn't deserve to be called a Ranking system, IMO.

 

A Ranking system should match you vs your similar skill, Reach did not accomplish that at all. One game you could be playing 4 pros, the next you could be playing BobbingSofa763 and his 3 guests.

 

Give someone a rank and it's a ranking system. Have you seen how the military promotes people these days? It's based solely on time. (Don't try to argue it's not, I have 3 brothers in the military - one is a Captain in the Marines)

 

But the issue that people have a problem with is the SKILL system. If someone can never make it past private then they cheat or stop playing. No reason someone can't be a General and suck at Halo, just have his skill represented with a number somewhere else.

Share this post


Link to post

Give someone a rank and it's a ranking system. Have you seen how the military promotes people these days? It's based solely on time. (Don't try to argue it's not, I have 3 brothers in the military - one is a Captain in the Marines)

 

But the issue that people have a problem with is the SKILL system. If someone can never make it past private then they cheat or stop playing. No reason someone can't be a General and suck at Halo, just have his skill represented with a number somewhere else.

Lmao, you're comparing Halo to the actual Military. Two COMPLETELY different things.

 

My point is that yes, Reach did feature 'Ranks' but you earned them based on games played, not your skill level, whereas pretty much every other game that has a Ranking system it based on skill, not time.

Share this post


Link to post

 

My point is that yes, Reach did feature 'Ranks' but you earned them based on games played, not your skill level, whereas pretty much every other game that has a Ranking system it based on skill, not time.

Right, I acknowledged that in my post. I guess you didn't read it before replying 3 times.

 

But the OP asked abut a RANKING system - not a SKILL system. Or can you not see the difference. I'm not advocating for a player's skill rating to be based on time played, that would defeat the purpose. Why I wonder is why people want their rank to be determined by their skill. That serves no purpose but to discourage players. I thought we wanted a higher population.

  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Right, I acknowledged that in my post. I guess you didn't read it before replying 3 times.

 

But the OP asked abut a RANKING system - not a SKILL system. Or can you not see the difference. I'm not advocating for a player's skill rating to be based on time played, that would defeat the purpose. Why I wonder is why people want their rank to be determined by their skill. That serves no purpose but to discourage players. I thought we wanted a higher population.

 

 

Lmao, you're comparing Halo to the actual Military. Two COMPLETELY different things.

 

My point is that yes, Reach did feature 'Ranks' but you earned them based on games played, not your skill level, whereas pretty much every other game that has a Ranking system it based on skill, not time.

 

Oh I definitely asked for Skill System. I thought it was kinda obvious because most of us call it Ranking System. 

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Right, I acknowledged that in my post. I guess you didn't read it before replying 3 times.

 

But the OP asked abut a RANKING system - not a SKILL system. Or can you not see the difference. I'm not advocating for a player's skill rating to be based on time played, that would defeat the purpose. Why I wonder is why people want their rank to be determined by their skill. That serves no purpose but to discourage players. I thought we wanted a higher population.

A Ranking system should be based and determined by a players skill, nothing else. It would only discourage a minority of players, and you can't make everyone happy.

 

I don't know how you can say that people wanting their rank to be determined by their skill serves no purpose. Social comparison. Everyone does it, it's human.

 

Your mindset is exactly how the Reach Progression system turned out, how did that work out for the population?

 

Players who are easily discouraged by having a low rank due to their low skill should be playing social. Ranked playlists are for the people who want to get better, not having the highest skill based rank would motivate them to reach that rank, or a certain goal.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

What do you think is the best ranking system for Halo? A modified version of Halo 2? a more extended version of Halo 3? A more detailed and worked ranks such as H:Reach Arena? CSR harder with only wins/losses? Maybe all combined?

 

Discuss!

 

And if this topic gets locked... I seriously will stop posting topics. Seems like I only post dumb stuff :(

 

Nope, the word skill isn't mentioned here once. I'm not arguing semantics either. While a proper skill system for matchmaking purposes is obviously needed the competitive community needs to realize that displaying that skill as a player's only form of achievement in matchmaking does scare players away.

Share this post


Link to post

A Ranking system should be based and determined by a players skill, nothing else. It would only discourage a minority of players, and you can't make everyone happy.

 

I don't know how you can say that people wanting their rank to be determined by their skill serves no purpose. Social comparison. Everyone does it, it's human.

 

Your mindset is exactly how the Reach Progression system turned out, how did that work out for the population?

 

Players who are easily discouraged by having a low rank due to their low skill should be playing social. Ranked playlists are for the people who want to get better, not having the highest skill based rank would motivate them to reach that rank, or a certain goal.

 

It discourages a lot of players or intimidates them into the ghetto of "social" gametypes.

 

There can still be the comparison you crave, it would be your skill rating. It would of course also be visible in game. You can't make a justification for combining the two other than it's been done that way before.

 

The Reach progression system is not what hurt it's population and you know that. It was the lack of a skill system. Just because a progression system is present does not mean a skill system can't be.

 

And straight up fuck that saying bad kids should be playing social only. That's an elitist attitude. In addition, social playlists aren't ranked and only lead to stomping. A good skill system will rate the bad kids and pair them up with each other. If there was a way to do that without a stigma of having a low rank it would be better for everyone.

 

The reason people push so hard for the rank being tied to skill is the same reason I'm arguing against it - fragile egos.

  • Downvote (-1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

It discourages a lot of players or intimidates them into the ghetto of "social" gametypes.

 

There can still be the comparison you crave, it would be your skill rating. It would of course also be visible in game. You can't make a justification for combining the two other than it's been done that way before.

 

The Reach progression system is not what hurt it's population and you know that. It was the lack of a skill system. Just because a progression system is present does not mean a skill system can't be.

 

And straight up fuck you for saying bad kids should be playing social only. That's an elitist attitude. In addition, social playlists aren't ranked and only lead to stomping. A good skill system will rate the bad kids and pair them up with each other. If there was a way to do that without a stigma of having a low rank it would be better for everyone.

 

The reason people push so hard for the rank being tied to skill is the same reason I'm arguing against it - fragile egos.

Yeah no, I want a visible skill-based ranking system please and thank you.  Yes,  I want to have an idea of how good someone is just by glancing at them in the post-game lobby.  No need to hide that shit, and honestly no ranking system deters people far more than having one.  Did you not hear about everyone complaining that reach didn't have a ranking system? I want to be able to work towards new goals that other people can see as well.  And when we say "ranking system" what we mean is "skill-based ranking system".  That is supposed to be understood, you are just being pedantic.

  • Upvote (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Yeah no, I want a visible skill-based ranking system please and thank you.  Yes,  I want to have an idea of how good someone is just by glancing at them in the post-game lobby.  No need to hide that shit, and honestly no ranking system deters people far more than having one.  Did you not hear about everyone complaining that reach didn't have a ranking system? I want to be able to work towards new goals that other people can see as well.  And when we say "ranking system" what we mean is "skill-based ranking system".  That is supposed to be understood, you are just being pedantic.

 

Firstly, I never once said I don't want a visible skill based system in place. I'm pretty sure no one has actually read my posts at this point.

 

But as to the desire to check how good someone is by glancing at the post game lobby - here's a question for everyone.

 

If a skill ranking system works properly, shouldn't you only be paired against people of your exact skill rating? Thus eliminating the need to check your opponent's skill rank every game?

 

 

 

The desire to check your pairings would go away shortly with a system that actually worked - once you realized you are a 41 and only ever play other 41s it would seem dumb to check it over and over. This is the same flaw with the ELO system, it has calculations to change points awarded based on the skill of your opponent. But that is because it's inherently flawed (at least as far as Halo, works great for Chess - far different play environment) because it allows pairings outside of your skill.

Share this post


Link to post

It discourages a lot of players or intimidates them into the ghetto of "social" gametypes.

 

There can still be the comparison you crave, it would be your skill rating. It would of course also be visible in game. You can't make a justification for combining the two other than it's been done that way before.

 

The Reach progression system is not what hurt it's population and you know that. It was the lack of a skill system. Just because a progression system is present does not mean a skill system can't be.

 

And straight up fuck you for saying bad kids should be playing social only. That's an elitist attitude. In addition, social playlists aren't ranked and only lead to stomping. A good skill system will rate the bad kids and pair them up with each other. If there was a way to do that without a stigma of having a low rank it would be better for everyone.

 

The reason people push so hard for the rank being tied to skill is the same reason I'm arguing against it - fragile egos.

Where in my post did I say bad kids should be playing social only? No need to get so hostile over nothing. 

 

I clearly said that players who get discouraged easily by a rank based on skill should not be playing Ranked. Why you ask? BECAUSE THEY GET DISCOURAGED EASILY and they have an option to be secure in social playlists, that's one of their main purposes.

 

 

here's a question for everyone.

 

If a skill ranking system works properly, shouldn't you only be paired against people of your exact skill rating? Thus eliminating the need to check your opponent's skill rank every game?

 

 

 

The desire to check your pairings would go away shortly with a system that actually worked - once you realized you are a 41 and only ever play other 41s it would seem dumb to check it over and over. This is the same flaw with the ELO system, it has calculations to change points awarded based on the skill of your opponent. But that is because it's inherently flawed (at least as far as Halo, works great for Chess - far different play environment) because it allows pairings outside of your skill.

 

It depends on the population of the game/playlist, in H3 you could be searching MLG with 700 people in and you're a 42, you might get a bunch of mid-high 30's and a few low 41's. That game, and your mindset, will play out completely different than if you get matched up against/with mid/high 40's and a few 50's.

 

I don't think Halo will ever have a large enough population so that you would only get matched up against your skill level every game.

 

Furthermore, what about if you're with a friend/s and they have different ranks to you?

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Players who are easily discouraged by having a low rank due to their low skill should be playing social.

 

How is this any different than "Bad kids should stick to social" It's not.

 

The reason MLG had a population of only 700 is 1.)the name scares peope off and 2.)the ranking system didn't work well so less skilled players got stomped, instead of being matched fairly. It's the same problem with throwdown today. Read the waypoint forums.

 

I'm sorry but a skill/ranking system has to also be designed to accomodate casuals or it will never be put into any Halo game. There are ways to do that that also get the competitive community everything it wants. The only trade off is that some bad kids will have the same named military rank as you.

Share this post


Link to post

How is this any different than "Bad kids should stick to social" It's not.

 

The reason MLG had a population of only 700 is 1.)the name scares peope off and 2.)the ranking system didn't work well so less skilled players got stomped, instead of being matched fairly. It's the same problem with throwdown today. Read the waypoint forums.

 

I'm sorry but a skill/ranking system has to also be designed to accomodate casuals or it will never be put into any Halo game. There are ways to do that that also get the competitive community everything it wants. The only trade off is that some bad kids will have the same named military rank as you.

Because it's fair to say someone has a low skill in comparison to the population of an entire game but it's not fair to say they are "bad kids", that's just insulting and demeaning. 

 

The reason the competitive playlist has a low population is because it's a niche playlist that only a small group of the population enjoy. Casuals make up the vast majority of the population with the "casual competitives" making up a chunk, too. 

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Because it's fair to say someone has a low skill in comparison to the population of an entire game but it's not fair to say they are "bad kids", that's just insulting and demeaning. 

 

The reason the competitive playlist has a low population is because it's a niche playlist that only a small group of the population enjoy. Casuals make up the vast majority of the population with the "casual competitives" making up a chunk, too. 

 

 

How is this any different than "Bad kids should stick to social" It's not.

 

The reason MLG had a population of only 700 is 1.)the name scares peope off and 2.)the ranking system didn't work well so less skilled players got stomped, instead of being matched fairly. It's the same problem with throwdown today. Read the waypoint forums.

 

I'm sorry but a skill/ranking system has to also be designed to accomodate casuals or it will never be put into any Halo game. There are ways to do that that also get the competitive community everything it wants. The only trade off is that some bad kids will have the same named military rank as you.

In the spanish community, MLG means Mejores Jugadores en Linea (Bets players online) in, in other words 80% of the casual players know that MLG Playlist is for people with above average skill in the game and its for a more serious approach to a competitive setting. Casual neither hate it or are scared of it. It's just not attractive to some people, thats all.

 

I'm not sure if Halo 2 did... but in Halo 3 the ranking system (or skill system whatever you guys call it) worked a lot. Specially in MLG, I couldn't be a 50 before Reach but most of the time I got matches with the same skill I had. And Halo 3's ranking system wasn't really that complex in my opinion.

 

If you're good and won a lot of games, you rank up.

If not, you either go DOWN DOWN DOWN... or get stuck in a low-mid rank.

 

And I guess is fine, I mean for example... Sam can be a Pistola while I'm a Drug dealer from Mexico in MLG

But in the other hand he sucks 3/4 of a taco and I start being Machoman when we play Rumble Pit.

 

That's the advantage of a ranking system/skill system in every playlist it shows how good/bad you're in each playlist or in overall of the game. And believe me, 99% of the Spanish community wants that... my amigo.

 

(At least that's how I see it)  :) If I'm wrong... oh well.

 

(The example of Me Versus Sam is just an example and also a bit of a joke... I know, I'm bad joker  :( )

 

Share this post


Link to post

Halo 2's ranking system had it flaws, but was the best in the franchise thus far.

 

Halo 3's ranking system was ********. I never broke 30 in Halo 2, but reached a 46 in Lone Wolves not even a month after launch.

 

A League of Legends ranking system would be ideal for halo.

Share this post


Link to post

1 - In the spanish community, MLG means Mejores Jugadores en Linea (Bets players online) in, in other words 80% of the casual players know that MLG Playlist is for people with above average skill in the game and its for a more serious approach to a competitive setting. Casual neither hate it or are scared of it. It's just not attractive to some people, thats all.

 

2 - That's the advantage of a ranking system/skill system in every playlist it shows how good/bad you're in each playlist or in overall of the game. And believe me, 99% of the Spanish community wants that... my amigo.

 

 

 

1 - I think that MLG or Pro or whatever its called should not be reserved for only the best player. After all it's just a different group of settings. There's nothing inherently more difficult about it if you are paired with similarly skilled players.

 

2 - Agreed, there should be a rank/skill for every playlist except action sack and infection.(and maybe one TS playlist) I don't want a ranked/social split, that hurts proper matchmaking.

 

 

 

side note: A population of 700 should not lead to poorly matched games. Assuming (for the sake of argument) a 1-50 scale and each level has the same number of players, that's 14 players per rank. Provided a player can be matched either 1 rank above or below and that's 42 players, 4 of them are you or your teammates. That leaves 38 players you can match against, for 9.5 games. Factor in different combinations of those players and the flux of players signing off and signing on and you could play for hours and only be matched against similarly skilled players. Low population is not an excuse until it's a lot lower than that.

  • Downvote (-1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

1 - I think that MLG or Pro or whatever its called should not be reserved for only the best player. After all it's just a different group of settings. There's nothing inherently more difficult about it if you are paired with similarly skilled players.

 

2 - Agreed, there should be a rank/skill for every playlist except action sack and infection.(and maybe one TS playlist) I don't want a ranked/social split, that hurts proper matchmaking.

 

 

 

side note: A population of 700 should not lead to poorly matched games. Assuming (for the sake of argument) a 1-50 scale and each level has the same number of players, that's 14 players per rank. Provided a player can be matched either 1 rank above or below and that's 42 players, 4 of them are you or your teammates. That leaves 38 players you can match against, for 9.5 games. Factor in different combinations of those players and the flux of players signing off and signing on and you could play for hours and only be matched against similarly skilled players. Low population is not an excuse until it's a lot lower than that.

You don't get it... MLG has competitive settings. In other words: Anyone who plays in MLG playlist, plays the competitive settings. It's not reserved for Pros.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

You don't get it... MLG has competitive settings. In other words: Anyone who plays in MLG playlist, plays the competitive settings. It's not reserved for Pros.

You said the exact opposite in your previous post. "The MLG playlist is for people with above average skill"

 

Maybe I don't get it because you contradict yourself.

Share this post


Link to post

1 - I think that MLG or Pro or whatever its called should not be reserved for only the best player. After all it's just a different group of settings. There's nothing inherently more difficult about it if you are paired with similarly skilled players.

 

2 - Agreed, there should be a rank/skill for every playlist except action sack and infection.(and maybe one TS playlist) I don't want a ranked/social split, that hurts proper matchmaking.

 

 

 

side note: A population of 700 should not lead to poorly matched games. Assuming (for the sake of argument) a 1-50 scale and each level has the same number of players, that's 14 players per rank. Provided a player can be matched either 1 rank above or below and that's 42 players, 4 of them are you or your teammates. That leaves 38 players you can match against, for 9.5 games. Factor in different combinations of those players and the flux of players signing off and signing on and you could play for hours and only be matched against similarly skilled players. Low population is not an excuse until it's a lot lower than that.

 Theres less 50 then there are any other ranks So If your a 50 there less people you can match because less 50s but if your a 10 theres lots of 10s easy match

Share this post


Link to post

In the spanish community, MLG means Mejores Jugadores en Linea (Bets players online) 

 

 

 

 

Dude, don't be ridiculous. I've been playing since Halo CE and never heard anyone saying or implying MLG means "mejores jugadores en linea".

Share this post


Link to post

Dude, don't be ridiculous. I've been playing since Halo CE and never heard anyone saying or implying MLG means "mejores jugadores en linea".

Of course not, but my bad thats how people relate to it. You seriously think people says Mejores Jugadores En Linea? Everybody knows it means Major League Gaming  :)

Share this post


Link to post

Ummm, what? Not allowed to have an opinion?

 

 

 Theres less 50 then there are any other ranks So If your a 50 there less people you can match because less 50s but if your a 10 theres lots of 10s easy match

Jero, in my opinion you're quite annoying. And most of the time when someone tries to explain something to you... you over-think.

 

When I meant: The MLG playlist is for people with above average skill it means that people with average skill gets destroyed in that playlist. Go ahead, go to MLG against people with 50 and maybe you'll get what I'm saying.

I'm done with you.

  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy.