Forums / Games / Halo: The Master Chief Collection (Xbox)

How a Match Composer can replace Ranked Playlists

OP iiBloxorz

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2
Hi all, I've been doing some thinking about how the Social MC works and how Ranked playlists are becoming less and less populated, as well as Social matchmaking's balancing issues, and I saw some ideas for a Match Composer merging the accessibility and organized nature of it with the more competitive and balanced spirits of Ranked. It's obvious that playlists are more suited for a one game kind of deal, instead of a 5 (soon to be 6) game collection, not counting ODST and CEA. Instead of only including a handful of fan favorite playlists, causing a constant divide of people who get what they want and people who don't, this system can benefit everyone who wants to see a Ranked revitalization. I did some research on former H2, H3, and HR playlists and merged ideas together to come up with a way a Match Composer could function for Ranked play.
  • Players can choose what games, sizes, and modes they wish to play, thereby merging multiple playlists into a single selection combination.
  • Each player will have a universal “game” EXP and rank (i.e. 50 EXP in Halo 2 Classic), and an EXP and rank for each games’ “playlists” (i.e. 25 in Halo 2 Team Slayer, 25 in Halo 2 Team Snipers).
  • Ideally, the ranks will utilize Halo 3’s EXP system (+1 for win, 0 for loss, -1 for quit), with some Halo 2 rank up difficulty spliced in, and players will be skill matched based on their game or playlist rank.
  • Rank matching should operate similar to H3 where no two people outside of a 10 rank limit should match each other (subject to change based on population). Party matching is a no brainer.
  • Ranked matchmaking needs to be PUSHED! Notice how Halo 3's UI had Ranked playlists at the very top of the playlist offerings. If Ranked matchmaking is not as prominent as Social, and remains as a secondary option like it is now, the population simply will not last. I suggest grouping this Ranked MC with the Social one that exists now, under a category titled "Match Composer", and let users select between a Ranked and Social version. Both versions are prioritized, with Ranked being shown first (ideally) so it's existence is acknowledged for people who desire to play it, and Social is one click away for people who want a more laid back experience.
I went through many drafts of how the selections could work out, but this is what I came up with:
  • GAMES: CE, H2, H3, HR, H4, H2A
  • SIZES: 2v2, 4v4, FFA, 8v8 (FFA size should change from 8 to 6 when selecting Halo 3 only, resembling the Lone Wolves playlist)
  • MODES: Slayer, Objective, SWAT, Snipers, Hardcore
EXP offerings would look something like this:
Spoiler:
Show
Team Doubles, Rumble Pit, and Big Team Battle would be a collection of all EXP earned across a game's 2v2, FFA, and 8v8 offerings, and Team Arena would be a collection of all EXP earned across a game's 4v4 Slayer and Objective offerings, meaning a H2 Slayer and CTF game would contribute to the same EXP count. This reduces the amount of EXP counts per game and makes it so people who still want to play strictly Slayer or Objective can do so unhindered. The rest are mostly self explanatory.

An example of how all of this would work is as follows:
  • Player A, Player B, and Player C are all matched into a game of 4v4 Halo 3 SWAT in the Ranked MC. Player A wins the match, Player B loses the match, and Player C quits the match. Player A receives 1 EXP to their overall H3 EXP count as well as their H3 Team SWAT count. Player B receives nothing. Player C loses 1 EXP from both H3 EXP AND H3 Team SWAT EXP.
ALL of a player's current Ranked playlists ranks would be archived in their Career settings as "Legacy Playlist Ranks", and the new playlists would be categorized like above in a similar section.

I understand something like this could take many months, or even longer to code up, even with many of its base features' code already existing as reference, but with the current state of Social matchmaking and the near absence of functional Ranked matchmaking, I think this could be a great investment. TrueSkill's abandonment is one of the biggest flaws to have happened to the Halo matchmaking system, and Ranked play has suffered ever since.
Quote:
Ranked matchmaking needs to be PUSHED!
Given the legacy of Halo 2, it boggles the mind how long it takes to find Halo 2 Ranked matches. Yes, it must be revived.

Quote:
  • SIZES: 2v2, 4v4, FFA, 8v8 (FFA size should change from 8 to 6 when selecting Halo 3 only, resembling the Lone Wolves playlist)
Agreed on FFA size! There was a reason Bungie allocated 6 in the first place on the original H3 Lone Wolves...the maps were simply not designed for 8 individuals (only 4v4 Teams); this breaks spawn points. Woe is to the lone sniper who has a player spawn 5 feet away mid-spree.

Aside from the fact the there isn't a Ranked FFA playlist on the MCC anymore, this is one of the many reasons why I still play ranked Lone Wolves on the original Xbox360 Halo 3 server. (check out my profile for LW videos).
I'm glad that finally someone brought up again this topic that has weakened Ranked population to unbelievable amounts. I'll copy the information I gathered in an old post with a similar purpose, see if it can help somehow or offers some ideas.

Quote:
Currently, the new feature (Match Composer) provides a way to get the games you enjoy, however you don't get any kind of reward for spending time on it, such as an individual/global rank indicator or experience. But the issue is worse: when there is no ranking system, players are matched randomly, so they end up in completely unbalanced games.

This leads a common player to leave the Composer section and to search matches in one of the ranked playlists, because he's not rewarded by any means and can't even play fair matches. Then, he has lost the ability to choose his favourite gamemodes and needs to spent a lot of time searching there due to the low population that uses the ranked playlists.

Although the situation is even harder: he won't be able to get a balanced match because the matching rules had to be changed to adjust the population between the Composer and Ranked. So he might end up in two different ways: he leaves games until he gets banned or he gets tired of Halo MCC. Both cases leads to leaving the game. Then the process is repeated until casual players forget about Halo, and suddenly the competitive ones will experience a similar situation: the population in ranked dissapears and they get unbalanced and long matches too, so they will end up playing Social without filling the competitive purpouse.

So, in my opinion, there are 4 possible ways to keep the game alive for casual and professional/competitive players:
  1. - Make a rank based in combinations: if you usually success in Halo 2 Classic Flag matches, you get a better rank in that choice, and your highest combination rank could be seen in your profile (player 1: very good at Halo 3 King of the Hill). This applies to the Composer and doesn't affect the ranked playlists.
  2. - Make a ranking system like Halo Reach where you get a social rank based in all gamemodes. This option may even be mixed with the other ones as many people have asked for it before.
  3. - Make a rank based in size and/or Halo game chosen. Maybe hide it, as many users proposed. This includes BTB (8v8) and 1v1, but not Infection (12v12), unless they add FFA (Rumble Pit) to it. If more than one Halo is selected, then it will search within the best one. This system wouldn't keep the ranked section, but they're alike. It would also focus the population just in the Composer, so it'd make it easier to find games.
  4. - Divide the Match Composer searching into 3 groups: "Winners" > 70 % win-rate, "commons" 70 - 30 % win-rate and "starters" <30 % win-rate. In case of not finding any game, there could be added a maximal time to wide the parameters to all three groups. This system would keep the ranked section, which I don't recomment because search times will be even longer (doesn't fix the Ranked issues), and is only useful to get balance in the Composer matches.
I think the best option is the 3rd one, mixed with 2. By that way, you'll get balanced, enjoyable (you get the games you like), and varied matches. Not only that, population is no longer an issue, as it mixed the two sides of the community in a consistent way.
I like your ideas, the problem is that it's based in my 1st option if I didn't misread it; while good, leads to lots of ranks and as you said, that's hard to code and requires large amounts of time. Hopefully in the future they'll implement something similar. But everything is not as bad as it seems; Reach overall EXP system is already coming soon (the 2nd option).
I think ranked will just always be dead in MCC. The thing you need for a good rank structure to work is a healthy population and MCC just doesn't and more likely won't ever have it. H5 even struggles to keep ranked playlist going really especially for higher ranked players who have to resort to making "Smurf" accounts so they can find games. I honestly don't feel there is a need to push ranked. What would really help MCC out the most is more options in the match composer. What players truly want in gaming is to get the games they want. That is what is making the match composer so awesome. A ranked match composer in MCC could maybe work... I would make it simple like this... Players would select the titles they want, slayer or objective, and either FFA(max 6 player games), 2v2, and 4v4. Then maybe even an option of AR or BR starts.
LethalQ wrote:
Then maybe even an option of AR or BR starts.
This. There's no one that wouldn't benefit from having an option between AR/SMG starts and BR/DMR when Reach is launched on MCC. Both sides of the coin get whatever they want whenever they want, as you can enjoy your preferences.

I agree with you that what makes Match Composer so good is the variety it offers. Now let's make that's true and fill that purpose with more options (like the one I stated before or TU/Non-TU Slayer).

But we need population focused in one place: the Composer, whether it's Social with a hidden rank or Ranked with player skill visible. That's the only way we can add more options to select.
Quote:
What players truly want in gaming is to get the games they want.
LethalQ, But that's the thing - many people want competitive games! For example, Social FFA is a joke and primarily includes 1-3 strong players trying to kill the remaining noobs (including guests...) faster than each other. Ungratifying.
WastedU6 wrote:
Quote:
What players truly want in gaming is to get the games they want.
LethalQ, But that's the thing - many people want competitive games! For example, Social FFA is a joke and primarily includes 1-3 strong players trying to kill the remaining noobs (including guests...) faster than each other. Ungratifying.
That is true but if the population isn't there there isn't much 343 can do about it. Ranked play needs a lot of players to work well or it will be just as unbalanced and even more frustrating. I love FFA but I know the majority don't and it's just not popular enough to support ranked play.
LethalQ wrote:
I think ranked will just always be dead in MCC. The thing you need for a good rank structure to work is a healthy population and MCC just doesn't and more likely won't ever have it. H5 even struggles to keep ranked playlist going really especially for higher ranked players who have to resort to making "Smurf" accounts so they can find games. I honestly don't feel there is a need to push ranked. What would really help MCC out the most is more options in the match composer. What players truly want in gaming is to get the games they want. That is what is making the match composer so awesome. A ranked match composer in MCC could maybe work... I would make it simple like this... Players would select the titles they want, slayer or objective, and either FFA(max 6 player games), 2v2, and 4v4. Then maybe even an option of AR or BR starts.
If Ranked gets overhauled with the systems I talked about, it won't always be dead. If the stuff I talked about gets pushed for some time after Reach drops, the population will definitely be there. There's a ton of people eager to get into MCC for Reach and its arrival on PC. Pushing Ranked would also make it so the more competitive players, like myself, can play there instead of with unbalanced skilled teams in Social. Social is currently a mess with full teams of solos will match teams of 3 and 4, and it's even worse in Big Team. We literally just got party matching for 2v2s last week, which solves >10% of the problem. Games become stat boosting sessions for the better team while the other people get stomped. It's not fun for either end unless you're just someone who likes mindless grinding at other's expense, which is toxic. Adding more options to the Social match composer simply won't do anything, especially since all of the stuff I mentioned in the Ranked MC is already in it, save Hardcore, which absolutely doesn't belong in an unranked environment. Games will still be unbalanced and it'll make it harder to find games because you're ultimately still dividing the population between hoppers, instead of playlists. Getting the games you want is awesome, but it's no fun when the game simply isn't interesting. On the off chance you do get a decent game against similarly skilled opponents, the next 5 in a row will be filled with overpowered teams and quitters/afkers. It's a cycle that won't be broken until the competitive players are given other options that perform just as well as Social.

I think the system I described would be nearly perfect, as long as it's prioritized as much as Social, but having AR/SMG starts would do nothing but negatively impact the game. An AR/SMG starts hopper would be practically empty because the only reason people like them is for nostalgia. It's been sung countless times how AR/SMG starts make games incredibly one sided. Even Bungie admitted it was an error. In H2 especially, there is simply no way an SMG can defeat the truly jack of all trades BR. The SMG is a low damage, low range bullet hose that only ever has a chance at defeating a BR wielder if the BR user is less than half decent or dying, or if you're dual wielding. BR primary SMG secondary starts are perfectly fine as is, and the same goes for BR with AR starts. People who wish to dual wield with the SMG or use the AR can do so if they please, but the BR is in everyone's pockets for situations the AR/SMG simply can't overcome. That's why all of the H2 games in the MC use BR with SMG starts, to keep the variety of dual wielding while making it so teams can't get shredded for not having a BR. I've seen countless plays by people who favor the SMG or dual wield combinations, but will switch to the BR in sticky situations and still make it out alive. The same goes for the AR, which is pretty much a reskinned SMG with slightly buffed damage output.
LethalQ wrote:
I think ranked will just always be dead in MCC.
I think it just depends on the playlist. People can get games in H3 and Doubles is likely populated as well. The H2 playlists are probably the least populated ones.
iiBloxorz wrote:
LethalQ wrote:
I think the system I described would be nearly perfect, as long as it's prioritized as much as Social, but having AR/SMG starts would do nothing but negatively impact the game. An AR/SMG starts hopper would be practically empty because the only reason people like them is for nostalgia. It's been sung countless times how AR/SMG starts make games incredibly one sided. Even Bungie admitted it was an error. In H2 especially, there is simply no way an SMG can defeat the truly jack of all trades BR. The SMG is a low damage, low range bullet hose that only ever has a chance at defeating a BR wielder if the BR user is less than half decent or dying, or if you're dual wielding. BR primary SMG secondary starts are perfectly fine as is, and the same goes for BR with AR starts. People who wish to dual wield with the SMG or use the AR can do so if they please, but the BR is in everyone's pockets for situations the AR/SMG simply can't overcome. That's why all of the H2 games in the MC use BR with SMG starts, to keep the variety of dual wielding while making it so teams can't get shredded for not having a BR. I've seen countless plays by people who favor the SMG or dual wield combinations, but will switch to the BR in sticky situations and still make it out alive. The same goes for the AR, which is pretty much a reskinned SMG with slightly buffed damage output.
It's a largely known fact that they would be practically empty at launch; nowadays, very few people who likes AR/SMG starts is still in the game nowadays, however if they saw the chance to play that again they would come back eventually. My point is that while at first it would be almost dead, after a certain time the lowest skilled players, newcomers and those who wanna try something difference once in a while can do so (let's try firstly with Silenced SMG + Pistol in H2A only and see if it works). Even if the population isn't enough for matches to be got consistently, at least you offer the chance so that you can enjoy the gametype in a similar percentage as the old MCC vote system, where AR/SMG won 10-25% of the time. You will never see more whining from any side, whoever wants and whenever can try to get only BR and skip AR/SMG or the opposite. Otherwise, at least AR starts are gonna be stuck in Halo 3 forever and you won't be able to dodge them; no matter what, it always survives. No one likes to be forced to play anything, let people choose.

Myself and many others have got used to the BR + Auto starting pack, and while it's really good and as you described you are still able to dual-wield or to use that AR when given the chance and the right situation, you can overcome a BR or even have an easier kill than the enemy user, since the last MCC update, lots of us would also like to play the original settings again just like we did in the past. There are lots of reasons for that and one of them can be nostalgy (which is applied for everything, even to deny necessary nerfs or buffs or certain changes to the old game), paired with harder matches, risky situations, plenty of teamwork, cover strategies, guns diversity (mainly because of the upgrade mechanic) and constant turns of power that creates an enjoyable and balanced game in the correct maps (close) and size (4v4/2v2 if they're like SSMG + Pistol in H2A). It's true that the enemies have the same possibilites than you to perform clever tactics, but as soon as some of them makes a mistake and you take advantage of that, or surprise them, they no longer have that good weapon and the situation completely changes. Not to mention that people with more power often tend to forget about being smart and think it will be so easy to win every fight, a fact that benefit your weak team. Map control becomes really important and that includes but is not limited to power weapons; BRs, Carbines, duals and such get the same treatment. Your win is never ensured (for instance, once my team was in a bad situation in Ivory Tower where the enemies got 2 Snipers somehow, and we managed to steal them and reversed balance, ending up in our victory), and skill, map and sandbox knowledge get rewarded (a feature that offers BR + Auto starts too, that's why I like it too, that's why both of them have a purpose and should be represented). The Match Composer is our first and last chance to give both sides of the coin exclusively what they want; please don't refuse to do so as everyone gets a benefit and there won't be more complaints. It's the main objective of it: variety and freedom. Throw there skill, ranks (hidden or not) and party matching and it's a perfect system.
iiBloxorz wrote:
LethalQ wrote:
I think the system I described would be nearly perfect, as long as it's prioritized as much as Social, but having AR/SMG starts would do nothing but negatively impact the game. An AR/SMG starts hopper would be practically empty because the only reason people like them is for nostalgia. It's been sung countless times how AR/SMG starts make games incredibly one sided. Even Bungie admitted it was an error. In H2 especially, there is simply no way an SMG can defeat the truly jack of all trades BR. The SMG is a low damage, low range bullet hose that only ever has a chance at defeating a BR wielder if the BR user is less than half decent or dying, or if you're dual wielding. BR primary SMG secondary starts are perfectly fine as is, and the same goes for BR with AR starts. People who wish to dual wield with the SMG or use the AR can do so if they please, but the BR is in everyone's pockets for situations the AR/SMG simply can't overcome. That's why all of the H2 games in the MC use BR with SMG starts, to keep the variety of dual wielding while making it so teams can't get shredded for not having a BR. I've seen countless plays by people who favor the SMG or dual wield combinations, but will switch to the BR in sticky situations and still make it out alive. The same goes for the AR, which is pretty much a reskinned SMG with slightly buffed damage output.
It's a largely known fact that they would be practically empty at launch; nowadays, very few people who likes AR/SMG starts is still in the game nowadays, however if they saw the chance to play that again they would come back eventually. My point is that while at first it would be almost dead, after a certain time the lowest skilled players, newcomers and those who wanna try something difference once in a while can do so (let's try firstly with Silenced SMG + Pistol in H2A only and see if it works). Even if the population isn't enough for matches to be got consistently, at least you offer the chance so that you can enjoy the gametype in a similar percentage as the old MCC vote system, where AR/SMG won 10-25% of the time. You will never see more whining from any side, whoever wants and whenever can try to get only BR and skip AR/SMG or the opposite. Otherwise, at least AR starts are gonna be stuck in Halo 3 forever and you won't be able to dodge them; no matter what, it always survive. No one likes to be forced to play anything, let people choose.

Myself and many others have got used to the BR + Auto starting pack, and while it's really good and as you described you are still able to dual-wield or to use that AR when given the chance and the right situation, you can overcome a BR or even have an easier kill than the enemy user, since the last MCC update, lots of us would also like to play the original settings again just like we did in the past. There are lots of reasons for that and one of them can be nostalgy (which is applied for everything, even to deny necessary nerfs or buffs or certain changes to the old game), paired with harder matches, risky situations, plenty of teamwork, guns diversity (mainly because of the upgrade mechanic) and constant turns of power that creates an enjoyable and balanced game in the correct maps (close) and size (4v4/2v2 if they're like SSMG + Pistol in H2A). Map control becomes really important and that includes but is not limited to power weapons; BRs, Carbines, duals and such get the same treatment. Your win is never ensured (for instance, once my team was in a bad situation in Ivory Tower where the enemies got 2 Snipers somehow, and we managed to steal them and reversed balance, ending up in our victory), and skill, map and sandbox knowledge get rewarded (a feature that offers BR + Auto starts too, that's why I like it too, that's why both of them have a purpose and should be represented). The Match Composer is our first and last chance to give both sides of the coin exclusively what they want; please don't refuse to do so as everyone gets a benefit and there won't be more complaints. It's the main objective of it: variety and freedom.
Well then I would say add them back to Social. I really don't understand, people complained about auto starts until 343 removed them almost entirely, and now everyone wants them back? And about map control, it's almost impossible to control a map with an auto start if you're getting gunned down by a BR. Take Lockout for example. If people control the BRs on BR3 and Top Blue, auto starts will leave opponents endlessly vulnerable if they spawn library or S1. They're outranged anywhere they go unless they manage to sneak up and somehow outgun someone. It's pretty much an objective science that auto starts are far inferior. It's like if you played CE and started with just an AR and had to find magnums around the map. BRs are essentially power weapons when compared to autos. The only game I could even mildly support having auto starts in is H3, because at least the BR got a huge nerf and is only slightly more reliable than the AR because of poor hit detection. If the desire is there however, keep them in Social. Ranked should be about skill in the actual game, not skill of overcoming a slaughter session because someone picked up a BR before you.
iiBloxorz wrote:
Well then I would say add them back to Social. I really don't understand, people complained about auto starts until 343 removed them almost entirely, and now everyone wants them back? And about map control, it's almost impossible to control a map with an auto start if you're getting gunned down by a BR. Take Lockout for example. If people control the BRs on BR3 and Top Blue, auto starts will leave opponents endlessly vulnerable if they spawn library or S1. They're outranged anywhere they go unless they manage to sneak up and somehow outgun someone. It's pretty much an objective science that auto starts are far inferior. It's like if you played CE and started with just an AR and had to find magnums around the map. BRs are essentially power weapons when compared to autos. The only game I could even mildly support having auto starts in is H3, because at least the BR got a huge nerf and is only slightly more reliable than the AR because of poor hit detection. If the desire is there however, keep them in Social. Ranked should be about skill in the actual game, not skill of overcoming a slaughter session because someone picked up a BR before you.
Of course, Social only. Competitive is already in a good state with BR + Auto starts that offer versatility since spawn and balance. AR/SMG starts just offer another concept that's usually misunderstood or difficult to happen correctly in a match, that's why it should be kept in 4v4, close maps and optional for fun or nostalgy purposes.
MCC would suffer from having two near identical Match Composers. I don't think it's worth the time and resources to be completely honest.
omarlotrc wrote:
MCC would suffer from having two near identical Match Composers. I don't think it's worth the time and resources to be completely honest.
Ranked playlists are never going to satisfy everyone because of how much content there is, and this MC isn't really identical to the Social one per say. Besides, there were times where Ranked playlists in legacy Halo were also offered as Social counterparts as well.
iiBloxorz wrote:
omarlotrc wrote:
MCC would suffer from having two near identical Match Composers. I don't think it's worth the time and resources to be completely honest.
Ranked playlists are never going to satisfy everyone because of how much content there is, and this MC isn't really identical to the Social one per say. Besides, there were times where Ranked playlists in legacy Halo were also offered as Social counterparts as well.
I believe the best option would be to combine Ranked with Social; by that way, you get a rank attached to your nameplate and it can be used to create fair matches, and population is focused in one place: the current Match Composer.

I mean, why would anyone dislike having a rank to work towards it? It can still work like you said (H3 System), and paired with the Reach EXP Credits system it would be fine.
iiBloxorz wrote:
omarlotrc wrote:
MCC would suffer from having two near identical Match Composers. I don't think it's worth the time and resources to be completely honest.
Ranked playlists are never going to satisfy everyone because of how much content there is, and this MC isn't really identical to the Social one per say. Besides, there were times where Ranked playlists in legacy Halo were also offered as Social counterparts as well.
The old titles did not include six multiplayers, though.
omarlotrc wrote:
The old titles did not include six multiplayers, though.
That's why an MC would be more beneficial than playlists. If every game had all of the community's preferred playlists, they'd all be empty (save a select few) because of how many there would be. That's essentially what the MC does, combines a bunch of playlists into one selection that lets you play a variety of playlists at one time, on a match by match basis. There's always going to be a limited number of playlists that can be in circulation at one time, as well as a demand for different playlists to be implemented. That's part of the reason the Social MC was established in the first place.
I believe the best option would be to combine Ranked with Social; by that way, you get a rank attached to your nameplate and it can be used to create fair matches, and population is focused in one place: the current Match Composer.

I mean, why would anyone dislike having a rank to work towards it? It can still work like you said (H3 System), and paired with the Reach EXP Credits system it would be fine.
Honestly I mildly disagree with MCC implementing a Reach-esque progression system at all. There was a strong vocal request for a H3-esque system to be implemented but 343 chose a Reach "everything counts" system for whatever reason. But that's besides the point, if a H3 EXP system is implemented, there should be no problem. It just wouldn't be Social anymore, the entire experience would be Ranked, which may drive some casuals away. I believe that if the population gets high enough (around the time Reach drops, or when the entire collection is finished for PC), two MCs can coexist and offer two different experiences, one more laid back "play for the fun of it", one more competitive and balanced. Who's to say a Ranked MC wouldn't give a bit of a boost in population anyway? There's a ton of people who think Ranked needs revitalization.
iiBloxorz wrote:
omarlotrc wrote:
I believe the best option would be to combine Ranked with Social; by that way, you get a rank attached to your nameplate and it can be used to create fair matches, and population is focused in one place: the current Match Composer.

I mean, why would anyone dislike having a rank to work towards it? It can still work like you said (H3 System), and paired with the Reach EXP Credits system it would be fine.
Honestly I mildly disagree with MCC implementing a Reach-esque progression system at all. There was a strong vocal request for a H3-esque system to be implemented but 343 chose a Reach "everything counts" system for whatever reason. But that's besides the point, if a H3 EXP system is implemented, there should be no problem. It just wouldn't be Social anymore, the entire experience would be Ranked, which may drive some casuals away. I believe that if the population gets high enough (around the time Reach drops, or when the entire collection is finished for PC), two MCs can coexist and offer two different experiences, one more laid back "play for the fun of it", one more competitive and balanced. Who's to say a Ranked MC wouldn't give a bit of a boost in population anyway? There's a ton of people who think Ranked needs revitalization.
I imagine that maybe the major population boost that is going to happen with the addition of Reach will be enough to support two different Match Composers (given that they will enable crossplay between Xbox and PC), but at the moment I suppose it's better to combine them until there's proof of that (might aswell need to wait for the whole game to be released on PC to get a substancial population increase, so then we can try that experience) or after we can ensure itself will boost Ranked community (which can be checked simply by changing certain and concrete social playlists to be ranked and seeing how they work).

On the other hand, I understand the love for the Halo 3 system, although I'd like the progression not to be based exclusively in wins/losses rate, but to include also medals, kills (with extra things like headshots), assists and Objective performance (like capturing the flag) points. That said, despite the fact that Reach had a similar feature, it wasn't the right approach, as a player standing still in the field or without doing anything reliable could still earn some score. A mix between them rewarding some competitive (both Slayer and Objective based purposes) gameplay elements and teamwork, in addition to wins/losses like in Halo 3, would be in my opinion the best for both worlds, as that rate is strictly based on team performance and party matching. By that way, you can even get some points if you don't win at all but played correctly.
iiBloxorz wrote:
omarlotrc wrote:
-Snip-
Couldn't have said it better myself. A combination of the two without the afker benefits would work great imo, and the population would definitely be supportive of it post Reach launch.
Agreed. Speaking from my own perspective, I’m not the 18 year old I was when H2 was out and don’t have as much time, I want to play ranked but waiting so long to match up instantly turns me off. I’ll hop on social get a few in and get off, even for longer sessions with a party we rather rank but end up mixing in 2v2 custos and social 4v4 because we get so much more playtime in. Definitely not the traditional Halo way that we used to do.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2