Should they bring back the Halo 3 ranking system?

#1Wii0playerPosted 11/23/2012 6:25:29 AM
Imo, they should. I'm not really a fan of grinding to get commendations and challenges so I can level up. I just want to play the game the way I want to play it. Also when you saw a 45-50 in matchmaking you knew they were pretty freaking good, but now it just seems like people with high levels just play the game alot.
---
"In Mass Effect 3, the path to victory is less clear at the outset. You wont just find some long-lost Reaper off button."-Casey ******* Hudson.
#2Orange_ApplePosted 11/23/2012 6:26:55 AM
Bring back the halo 2 system instead.
---
TWSSted since 2010
http://bearsareeverywhere.com/homepage.jpg
#3cobaltlotusPosted 11/23/2012 6:28:03 AM
Wii0player posted...
Imo, they should. I'm not really a fan of grinding to get commendations and challenges so I can level up. I just want to play the game the way I want to play it. Also when you saw a 45-50 in matchmaking you knew they were pretty freaking good, but now it just seems like people with high levels just play the game alot.


Played with plenty of 50s in Halo 3 that were absolutely, positively AWFUL and got stomped by guests.

Trueskill isn't a perfect system, and any system is exploitable.
---
Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine is god tier. There, I said it.
http://goo.gl/6MEyA ~ Please click!
#4WebstedgePosted 11/23/2012 6:34:27 AM
Leveling up has no bearing on your actual skill ranking, which is done behind the scenes and is invisible.
---
https://p.twimg.com/AirgRzVCEAAPBp6.jpg
#5The_MadnessPosted 11/23/2012 6:59:03 AM
It may not be perfect, but a ranked playlist system based around skill is much better than one based around time played.

Believe me, even though it was slightly easy to get around the system and get level 50 in team doubles or something, it was actually difficult to get a 50 in lone wolves or team slayer.

I'd say a team of level 50 generals in Halo 3 would stomp any Nova, Eclipse, Forerunner, Reclaimer, even Inheritor in Halo:Reach which is based around time spent/farming credits.

I remember winning 6 matches before I went up to level 47 in team slayer, only to lose once and get knocked down a level.

They should refine the system. Take into account accuracy, kills, assists, deaths, average life etc. not just win/loss.

Make quitting ranked games an instant 1 rank loss and people would try and play the game as much as possible and not ditch.

I hated going like 21-4 only to lose the match because my team sucked and go down a rank.
#6yomamma297Posted 11/23/2012 7:03:42 AM
The_Madness posted...
It may not be perfect, but a ranked playlist system based around skill is much better than one based around time played.

Believe me, even though it was slightly easy to get around the system and get level 50 in team doubles or something, it was actually difficult to get a 50 in lone wolves or team slayer.

I'd say a team of level 50 generals in Halo 3 would stomp any Nova, Eclipse, Forerunner, Reclaimer, even Inheritor in Halo:Reach which is based around time spent/farming credits.

I remember winning 6 matches before I went up to level 47 in team slayer, only to lose once and get knocked down a level.

They should refine the system. Take into account accuracy, kills, assists, deaths, average life etc. not just win/loss.

Make quitting ranked games an instant 1 rank loss and people would try and play the game as much as possible and not ditch.

I hated going like 21-4 only to lose the match because my team sucked and go down a rank.


I don't think we'll see a ranking system like that for awhile but it would be ideal.
---
Go Dolphins, Heat and Marlins!
GT: shock297
#7cobaltlotusPosted 11/23/2012 7:08:16 AM
The_Madness posted...
It may not be perfect, but a ranked playlist system based around skill is much better than one based around time played.

Believe me, even though it was slightly easy to get around the system and get level 50 in team doubles or something, it was actually difficult to get a 50 in lone wolves or team slayer.

I'd say a team of level 50 generals in Halo 3 would stomp any Nova, Eclipse, Forerunner, Reclaimer, even Inheritor in Halo:Reach which is based around time spent/farming credits.

I remember winning 6 matches before I went up to level 47 in team slayer, only to lose once and get knocked down a level.

They should refine the system. Take into account accuracy, kills, assists, deaths, average life etc. not just win/loss.

Make quitting ranked games an instant 1 rank loss and people would try and play the game as much as possible and not ditch.

I hated going like 21-4 only to lose the match because my team sucked and go down a rank.


It's still a flawed system, and I don't remember playing against a single 50 in H3 that didn't abuse some sort of glitch or silly camping tactic to win.
---
Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine is god tier. There, I said it.
http://goo.gl/6MEyA ~ Please click!
#8superhPosted 11/23/2012 8:09:17 AM
They are in early 2013.
---
"Magic doesn't exist? Oh really, then explain magic tricks you nimwit."
-Dax Flame
#9CorndogburglarPosted 11/23/2012 8:22:44 AM
superh posted...
They are in early 2013.


I keep hearing that. Is it true, and where did you see it?

As for the topic, yes, I would love for it to go back to the Halo 3 skill ranking system.

There already is one in place for Halo 4, but its invisible. You can, however, tell a huge change in difficulty and skill of enemies once you reach a certain point of playing Multiplayer.

I used to feel unbeatable when I started playing Halo 4 MP, but now it feels like every match is a struggle.
---
Everyone said it a was a miracle when Jesus hit that grand slam in the bottom of the 9th. I just thought it was a lucky shot.
#10superhPosted 11/23/2012 10:35:01 AM
343 said it themselves. google it.

right now it's invisible and they are just testing it and ironing it out. They are debating whether to start fresh when they release it or use existing data.
---
"Magic doesn't exist? Oh really, then explain magic tricks you nimwit."
-Dax Flame