Im not sure how the ranking system works but i see a lot of players who according to halo 5 are high ranks and i check their halo 3 service record and they are at what would be considered a low rank.
What is the difference between halo 5 and halo 3’s ranking system.
They seem to only be tied to win/loss records. I’ve had many games where I go 18-5 and lose because randoms are good for that, and I still lose ranks. I could at least break even.
i think its based of win/loss, how well you did personally, and how the enemy team is ranked. but the system is broken. people arnt getting the rank they deserve
Whether you go up or down is based on win/loss… How much you go up or down is based on individual performance
No need to try to scapegoat the ranking system for your inadequacy. There’s an obvious difference between being able to win games and being able to boost your stats to show off like it’s your -Yoink- length
Ranks are pointless for me cause I play differently each day depending how I feel or depending on whether I have a good team I jell with nicely.
I may go 10kd or 0.1 it just depends
Not just skill but teamwork and objective awareness as well me thinks. New season ranking seem to be better than pre-season so far IMO but not yet perfect.
Yeah for example - today I won 4 straight games of doubles I did great, but after those games I had a few rough ones. It just depends from how focused you are, if the enemy team gains the advantage with power weapons, or the enemy team may just be ultimately better. It’s hard to say, many factors…
Well, for starters, Halo 3 came out 8 years ago. Someone could have gotten better at video games since then. Also, once you place into a rank, it is purely win/loss based. I don’t remember what it was like in H3, but Halo has always been focused on winning, not individual stats. When you go into Onyx, it’s tough. That’s how it should be. That’s kinda why I want to know people’s ranks before the match starts.
The placement system is flawed. The matching system is flawed. Literally the only thing the ranking system does right is take wins/losses into account after (and when) the damage from the other broken aspects is done.
Also, as a side note, most good players I know from Halo 3 and Halo 2 gave up with Halo after the 3 strikes in a row of Reach, Halo 4, and broken MCC.
> 2533274812390628;10:
> The placement system is flawed. The matching system is flawed. Literally the only thing the ranking system does right is take wins/losses into account after (and when) the damage from the other broken aspects is done.
>
> Also, as a side note, most good players I know from Halo 3 and Halo 2 gave up with Halo after the 3 strikes in a row of Reach, Halo 4, and broken MCC.
Actually the ranking system is based on your performance in games… Many times have my buddies and I gotten ranked differently because we aren’t on the same skill level.
From there whether you go up or down is then based of off how many wins/losses you get.
Also I love have you fit in Reach with 4/MCC. When Reach was made by Bungie while this is 343i. Also MCC was literally just a remake, so I don’t understand how it had any more/less flaws then its predecessors. So you obviously know many good players and know a lot.
> 2533274799163887;11:
> > 2533274812390628;10:
> > The placement system is flawed. The matching system is flawed. Literally the only thing the ranking system does right is take wins/losses into account after (and when) the damage from the other broken aspects is done.
> >
> > Also, as a side note, most good players I know from Halo 3 and Halo 2 gave up with Halo after the 3 strikes in a row of Reach, Halo 4, and broken MCC.
>
>
> Actually the ranking system is based on your performance in games… Many times have my buddies and I gotten ranked differently because we aren’t on the same skill level.
>
> From there whether you go up or down is then based of off how many wins/losses you get.
>
> Also I love have you fit in Reach with 4/MCC. When Reach was made by Bungie while this is 343i. Also MCC was literally just a remake, so I don’t understand how it had any more/less flaws then its predecessors. So you obviously know many good players and know a lot.
No, the ranking system, after placement, is entirely based off of wins and losses coupled with the ranks of those you’ve faced. This is confirmed fact.
The placement system - first 10 games - is flawed and takes previous placement, K/D, and other nonsense into account.
The matching system is flawed partly because the population is low - Champions consistently match against Platinums. That’s TRHEE divisions lower.
I don’t care who made what, that wasn’t the point. The point is that we got two bad Halo games in a row, followed by the third strike which was supposed to finally be the Halo game everyone wanted, but was and remains broken beyond belief. Average gamers don’t care about the developer, but rather their experience with the franchise. That goes without mentioning that 343 managed Reach for a good while and failed to fix many things, making some of the worst, unmemorable DLC Halo has ever known. Highlands?
> 2533274812390628;12:
> > 2533274799163887;11:
> > > 2533274812390628;10:
> > > The placement system is flawed. The matching system is flawed. Literally the only thing the ranking system does right is take wins/losses into account after (and when) the damage from the other broken aspects is done.
> > >
> > > Also, as a side note, most good players I know from Halo 3 and Halo 2 gave up with Halo after the 3 strikes in a row of Reach, Halo 4, and broken MCC.
> >
> >
> > Actually the ranking system is based on your performance in games… Many times have my buddies and I gotten ranked differently because we aren’t on the same skill level.
> >
> > From there whether you go up or down is then based of off how many wins/losses you get.
> >
> > Also I love have you fit in Reach with 4/MCC. When Reach was made by Bungie while this is 343i. Also MCC was literally just a remake, so I don’t understand how it had any more/less flaws then its predecessors. So you obviously know many good players and know a lot.
>
>
> No, the ranking system, after placement, is entirely based off of wins and losses coupled with the ranks of those you’ve faced. This is confirmed fact.
>
> The placement system - first 10 games - is flawed and takes previous placement, K/D, and other nonsense into account.
>
> The matching system is flawed partly because the population is low - Champions consistently match against Platinums. That’s TRHEE divisions lower.
>
> I don’t care who made what, that wasn’t the point. The point is that we got two bad Halo games in a row, followed by the third strike which was supposed to finally be the Halo game everyone wanted, but was and remains broken beyond belief. Average gamers don’t care about the developer, but rather their experience with the franchise. That goes without mentioning that 343 managed Reach for a good while and failed to fix many things, making some of the worst, unmemorable DLC Halo has ever known. Highlands?
So first paragraph, literally what I said. After placement “From there whether you go up or down is then based of off how many wins/losses you get.” Learn to read.
Next in their explanation before H5 release, they even stated previous seasons will NOT determine placement. And off course the placement would take in to account K/D and other performance in the game, why shouldn’t it?
And so far, there has been very little broken about this game. I’ve ran into very little issues. So what’s broken?
> 2533274812390628;12:
> > 2533274799163887;11:
> > > 2533274812390628;10:
> > > The placement system is flawed. The matching system is flawed. Literally the only thing the ranking system does right is take wins/losses into account after (and when) the damage from the other broken aspects is done.
> > >
> > > Also, as a side note, most good players I know from Halo 3 and Halo 2 gave up with Halo after the 3 strikes in a row of Reach, Halo 4, and broken MCC.
> >
> >
> > Actually the ranking system is based on your performance in games… Many times have my buddies and I gotten ranked differently because we aren’t on the same skill level.
> >
> > From there whether you go up or down is then based of off how many wins/losses you get.
> >
> > Also I love have you fit in Reach with 4/MCC. When Reach was made by Bungie while this is 343i. Also MCC was literally just a remake, so I don’t understand how it had any more/less flaws then its predecessors. So you obviously know many good players and know a lot.
>
>
> No, the ranking system, after placement, is entirely based off of wins and losses coupled with the ranks of those you’ve faced. This is confirmed fact.
>
> The placement system - first 10 games - is flawed and takes previous placement, K/D, and other nonsense into account.
>
> The matching system is flawed partly because the population is low - Champions consistently match against Platinums. That’s TRHEE divisions lower.
>
> I don’t care who made what, that wasn’t the point. The point is that we got two bad Halo games in a row, followed by the third strike which was supposed to finally be the Halo game everyone wanted, but was and remains broken beyond belief. Average gamers don’t care about the developer, but rather their experience with the franchise. That goes without mentioning that 343 managed Reach for a good while and failed to fix many things, making some of the worst, unmemorable DLC Halo has ever known. Highlands?
I agree with you completely. Thanks for a sensible and informative post.
> 2533274805919869;1:
> Im not sure how the ranking system works but i see a lot of players who according to halo 5 are high ranks and i check their halo 3 service record and they are at what would be considered a low rank.
> What is the difference between halo 5 and halo 3’s ranking system.
What is your point? Some people have gone from scrubs to top tier in 6months and halo 3 was a decade ago. I’m playing with my old friends who in H2 used to be too bad to even consider adding into my friendlist but now I get murdered like I’m nothing.
As for the ranking system, it’s only fair that the people that dedicate their time to play enough wins in first place get recognition just like it is in, let’s say, hearthstone. Your qualification for hall of fame isn’t based on matchmaking performance but eSports performance. As long as you have a win% higher than 50% you will eventually get rank 1 if you play 24/7 it’s basic math and it has nothing to do with your real skill, only your dedication.
If you belong to Onyx, you will get to onyx. If you qualify to onyx/diamond but belong to platinum then yeah, let’s not discuss that any further… That’s why you don’t qualify into diamond/onyx so easy, this is not rocket science srsly…