Hi. I see a lot of pro 1-50 posts. And I’m sure there exists anti 1 50 posts. Well I never like extremes like these. So I’m here to say what needs to be said
1-50 (or 100, or 500) is a good idea. Overall, not counting its flaws and outcomes, its a good addition.
Yet it does have flaws, terrible outcomes, and as with any system creates an entire elitist a hole side hierachy.
See halo 2 had hacks, mods, standby, boosting, glitches and even rerankers. The system was abused, so most high levels were not even legit,
Yet even those who were 35+ and honestly legit were never always better then people 35>. Sadly if that person met a better level 20 they would loose. So ranks can only really warrant a part of respect.
See I never fear a general in Halo3, a level 45 in halo 2, or a noble in Reach or level 2 prestige in COD. High ranks just say “you play a lot, you win sometimes, you do good”. Yet I’ve never seen this mean too much. Its a good thing to be higher, yet it does not mean the system is flawless
There’s no perfect MM system. Other then grading players on more then wins and losses. Wins and loses should count for a part, but include general K/D, flag caps, bomb arms, assists, metals, accuracy and more. Convert it into some rank (1-50) and hope we don’t get cheaters.