Xp ranking no good

Battlefield 2 modern combat please bring  back that ranking system 

@730zLBGORILA By only requiring XP, it also rewards people for actually playing the objective instead of those camping on the edges.

As soon as you get kill requirements (like the assignments in BFV) you get people concentrating on getting kills and ignoring what they need to do to win the game. Would be much better to say X amount of experience and X number of objectives.

Even with your proposal, eventually everyone will get X amount of kills, just like with experience, so apart from the very start, that sort of ranking system just means they play a lot. A little bit like the old COD camo for headshots on weapons. Everyone will get lucky and get the amount eventually, it doesn't mean they are a good shot.

I can see the appeal of such a system but Battlefield has so many types of different players I think it would be a disservice forcing them to do things they might not want to do (I know people who try to play passively for example)

---

@TTZ_Dipsy wrote:

I can see the appeal of such a system but Battlefield has so many types of different players I think it would be a disservice forcing them to do things they might not want to do (I know people who try to play passively for example)

---

It's funny to see how it upsets some players in the game if you get MVP despite you have zero kills in the game round.  They appear to forget that their own amazing k/d ratio was actually happening due to all those never ending defibs they got from you during the game round in the first place.  And still going for the flags, dropping medics and defibbing your mates nonstop does also make the XP counter go crazy for good reasons.  Some enemies can also be zapped a bit if they get too close, despite they destroy the perfect score then of MVP with zero kills.  (and no, I am no peacenik, so no worries.  I typically play this game in more classic fashion.  But its fun to try and exercise certain goals/restrictions on yourself, to learn the boundaries of the game and all the nice toys/gadgets in it.  :o)

Apart from that, I agree with OP that it would be helpful with some kind of rating system to be able to recognize who your buddies are and what their strengths might be. (if they even have any yet?  But having it all in just one single measure as XP is probably not sufficient.  We need more 'medals on our chest' to make such distinctions I think, if that is really high on our list of priorities. 

Honestly, I have a few other subjects I think are more important we get for the BF2042 than any elaborate XP system.  :o)

AC, weapon mechanics, infantry vs vehicle balance, maps, custom servers and settings....  etc etc...

How about something like Average Positioning on Leaderboard (APL).

Ranked from 1-64?

So if you regularly finish in top 10, you may have a APL of 7.3.

If you finish alot of the time mid-table, you could have APL of 33.5.

If you dont finish round, you score 64 for the round.

Just a thought that popped in my head, with a morning coffee lol 

---

@Goinggrey123 wrote:

How about something like Average Positioning on Leaderboard (APL).

Ranked from 1-64?

So if you regularly finish in top 10, you may have a APL of 7.3.

If you finish alot of the time mid-table, you could have APL of 33.5.

If you dont finish round, you score 64 for the round.

Just a thought that popped in my head, with a morning coffee lol 

---

Certainly one fine way of doing it @Goinggrey123  !

But then to illustrate how complex such scoring/ranking system really is, in our very diverse and non-stop variating gameplay environment, how do you then score one player who is always on classic BF2042 maps with 128 players, versus another player who enjoy to stay on the portal 24/7, in the intense Squad Death Match games, where they only max have like 8-10 players in total?  So yes, could be an idea if all were the exact same, but it wont work in real practice in the diverse BF world.

I still think that some kind of composite algorithm is the only way to make something that takes the majority of BF game aspects into account.  Where also the vast majority of players can support the model and say 'yes, that makes sense, also for me'.

In previous BF4 game, it was calculated as a composite of the following:

Skill ranking for individual game=60% SPM, 30% KPM, and 10% KDR.

Skill ranking soldier= 0.9*old ranking+0.1*new game ranking.

I actually think something along those lines could work for most.  Though personally I would take out the KPM metric, as that is already accounted for by a lot in the SPM metric already.  So instead of the KPM in this model, I would replace it with something linked to going for the objectives in the game.  So like an OPM metric (Objectives Per Minute) that works well in like conquest, rush and obliteration, etc...

@730zLBGORILAI don't want achievements gating ranks. Killzone Shadow Fall had a rank system entirely based on achievements. It was the worst. It was confusing and worse I'd have to play in ways I didn't want to in order to get achievements.  Imagine you are fine tuning your specialist, then for the next rank you get an achievement that requires totally different gear or weapons...maybe even a different specialist. lol!!!

I would like to see the XP required drastically increased between ranks.
Achievements could then hook in by maybe offering XP rewards to boost rank.

I am rank 167 and I can tell a lot others with lower levels are just better than me, at least when it comes to gunfights.

The rank means nothing if it is not someones first FPS game/ first BF game.

Save that stuff for camo and outfit unlocks--and maybe even vanity title unlocks that you can place over your name, as have been included in other games over the years. But like one previous poster said, I hate it when a game forces me to change the way I want to play it.

With all of its flaws, I think CoD has the best system for all of that. If you want to master a certain rifle, for example, you can do that--and get player cards, camos and badges for ranking it up. If you want to master a certain class, you can do that too, with number of kills, headshots, ADS kills, melee kills, etc., and they have the unlocks for those, too.

Making challenge completion a requirement for ranking is going to cause a ton of frustration for the non-try hard, casual players who just want to play for fun. Not everyone wants to take the game that seriously. At the end of the day, if it isn't fun, you don't play it--and the suggested ranking system mentioned in the OP would make it a lot less fun for a huge chunk of players.

@ChugKendallI think that BFV showed us that assignments are affecting the game in bad ways.

In BFV, a lot of people wasted a lot of time doing assignments (for gold skins), instead of helping the team.

BF4 had the same system, but all assignments tracked all the time, and most of them just "happened" by playing the game.

Ranking up should not involve any assignments other than XP and unlocking weapons should happen just by playing the game (getting kills).

Any assignment for skins should be "easily" obtained, "doing things in a round", is the worst offender. People waste hours trying to complete these things.