A problem I’ve had across multiple games and their ranking systems has always been very prevalent which is the need of wins in order to gain ranking. I do not think a list of wins/losses defines a players skill based on the quality of teammates they have. This is something us players have no power over besides finding a team. If you look through my game history you’ll notice even my losses I attain a high amount of kills/scores etc, but a loss and de-rank after having such scores literally makes no sense to me. This issue is somewhat caused by the games ability to match with like skilled players which very rarely happens (yes I search focused). I have a couple DNF’s because I simply cannot handle the frustrations and waste of time due to players that lack skill (which I shouldn’t have been matched with in the first place).
I don’t have that much of a problem with arena but once again, my rank is measured upon my peers which I can’t control their skills or level of communication. What I would like to see in H5 or H6 is an individual rank each player has regarding their skill in particular. Basically, like our Spartan rank but it takes a heavy emphasis on kills, deaths, assists, and scores. This should be what is applied to finding like skilled players, not wins or losses. This would help filter out those teammates who you may end up carrying through the match or players who lack skill in general. I would also love for Xbox to bring back the Lacking Skill report on their gamercard from the 360 days.
Let me know your thoughts and opinions on this.
The good thing is that not only you’ll be able to enjoy this flawed ranking system in 4k (now that H5 is getting a 4k version for Xbox one X) but also the trash servers, terrible shot registration and vanilla settings will also be there 
BTW, I think the ranking system works great, but the problem is that they implemented changes so late in the life of the game that a huge part of the population is gone, making it really hard to find ‘fair’ competitive matches.
I’m from the EU and I must play Expanded…
I’m not sure there’s anything I can say about win/loss ranking that hasn’t already been said. The defenders have math on their side, the detractors have psychology on their side, and never shall the two meet in the middle. Personally I agree with you 100% that win/loss is inaccurate, but what it also is, something which is far more important in my opinion, is psychologically unsatisfying. Win/loss skill ranking may (a mighty big ‘may’ if you ask me) eventually get me to a reasonably accurate rank, but I won’t feel like I got their by anything that I did on my own. I’ll feel like (I do feel like) I got there by luck, by chance, by random fluctuations of the matchmaking algorithm. Straight win/loss disconnects effort from outcome, or seems to. That is exactly the opposite of what a ranking system should do. It’s no wonder so many people use their extra smurf accounts, courtesy of Microsoft, to play the system since they obviously have a) no faith in the integrity of the results or b) any actual use for those results or c) both.
> 2533274873843883;3:
> I’m not sure there’s anything I can say about win/loss ranking that hasn’t already been said. The defenders have math on their side, the detractors have psychology on their side, and never shall the two meet in the middle. Personally I agree with you 100% that win/loss is inaccurate, but what it also is, something which is far more important in my opinion, is psychologically unsatisfying. Win/loss skill ranking may (a mighty big ‘may’ if you ask me) eventually get me to a reasonably accurate rank, but I won’t feel like I got their by anything that I did on my own. I’ll feel like (I do feel like) I got there by luck, by chance, by random fluctuations of the matchmaking algorithm. Straight win/loss disconnects effort from outcome, or seems to. That is exactly the opposite of what a ranking system should do. It’s no wonder so many people use their extra smurf accounts, courtesy of Microsoft, to play the system since they obviously have a) no faith in the integrity of the results or b) any actual use for those results or c) both.
I totally get what you’re saying and the math side should only be applied to tournament/arena style match ranks. But using this rank to determine a players overall skill doesn’t work.
I don’t think anything should change about the current system they are using but just to add a player rank that can be seen as an overall skill level would better determine players skill on a singular level. This would undoubtedly help with matchmaking pairing instead of it being based on your win/loss ratio. To pair with a player that has the same or relatively close gameplay traits as yours would be perfect!! To have not have seen this idea implemented in any other game I’ve seen is completely beyond me but it’s just something us competitive players have to deal with.
Have you posted any of these concerns in the weekly Matchmaking Feedback Update threads by Dr Menke (ZaedynFel). He created H5s ranking and is also one if the most transparent and responsive members of 343. I’ve personally had quite a few conversations with Him. Definitely the man to talk to. There’s also detailed examples/explanations of the inner workings of the ranking system in the Update archive.
I agree with your stand point on the ranking. It’s definitely frustrating, even for FFA players. If you want your voice to be heard check out those threads!