whats the difference between this ranking system and COD? they are bost based on experience... and with the hardcore ranks, you can now show that you play the game more then others which is what COD prestige is all about.
also question to GG: why not just add many more ranks??? since you dont get anything with the additional ranks why not just add more hardcore ranks at like 25k and then at 50k and then at 75k??? what is the problem with that??? just more incentive to those who say the game is getting boring. its also a reward for those who play the game alot. and of course each rank will have its own cool symbol showing that you are that rank.
so basically why just 3?? why not more. i already got the 10k but i kno i wont get the 100k anytime soon, so why not additional ranks in between at like 25k or 50K??
Don't compare games. It's a no no.
Seriously RPFLEE you should know by know you have been on the boards for a year and have over 1000 post. They don't want threads where you compare games especially in a negative fashion. If a thread has a subject matter like that and top of that it's on a game specific board (example COD Series, Killzone 2, or a Socom board) then the chances are the thread will be locked. It's simple fact. You can talk about the Ranks of K2 but I wouldn't suggest comparing them to another game.
What I don't like about this ranking system is there are more Generals than recruits, which in real life is the other way around in rankings, the higher rankings should be more prestigious!
It's not like in there are a lot of Generals Ranked players standing around telling all the classes (soldiers aka players) what to do like in real life.
I call doing the same thing over and over only to see the same results not repetitious but stupid. Only fools repeat an action with out changing their actions with the hopes of seeing different results in the end.