So, in halo 5, I think that diamond players and above are good or at least decent. At this level, players start to know the maps very well, have a good aim and fluid movements. Platinum players are closer in skill to gold players rather than diamond players, Imo. I would like to hear your opinions. Thx
> 2535424277783655;1:
> So, in halo 5, I think that diamond players and above are good or at least decent. At this level, players start to know the maps very well, have a good aim and fluid movements. Platinum players are closer in skill to gold players rather than diamond players, Imo. I would like to hear your opinions. Thx
It’s entirely subjective and ranking is entirely defined by your team if you have a regular group. I know Platinum and Gold players who I’d far rather have as teammates than some Diamond or Onyx players. I’ve some Diamond and Onyx friends who’ll regularly invite me despite my rank to join them (sometimes over their own company-mates of their own rank).If they have a spot because they know I’ll be happy to play objectives and support.
I’m a Plat on a good day and I hold my own. Now, sure I’m not going to beat many Diamond players 1v1 on a regular basis, but I know my maps, can hit my shots, and can communicate.
I don’t think you can judge how good someone is based on their rank until you get into the high Onyx/Champs .
The skill gap between Gold to Diamond can vary wildly between players and even for the same player from match to match. I have been ranked from a Gold to an Onyx and depending on the day and who I am playing with, those can both be accurate.
that depends on the game mode, i think arenaQ onyx i consider good more than slayer’s 1600 onyx
I have found there are a number of ways to see if a player is good. For instance, a high KD is usually indicative of someone who knows the game well. Also, someone who gets a ton of Wheelman medals per match shows they know how to drive well. Obviously, higher skill ranks are also a good metric. There’s no catch-all stat, but there are a few useful ones that show how good someone is.
Hey if you’re having fun playing a game you love then you’re a good player no matter what anybody else thinks.
I think personal stats in the service record are a much better metric to base a judgment off of. Rank in arena are temporary to a season and are extremely dependent on your team 90% of the time.
> 2533274841519598;7:
> I think personal stats in the service record are a much better metric to base a judgment off of. Rank in arena are temporary to a season and are extremely dependent on your team 90% of the time.
Even then you need to drill down in the data a bit - I know plenty of people whose KD is 1.5 overall, but take grifball out and it’s suddenly below 1.
> 2533274874872263;8:
> > 2533274841519598;7:
> > I think personal stats in the service record are a much better metric to base a judgment off of. Rank in arena are temporary to a season and are extremely dependent on your team 90% of the time.
>
> Even then you need to drill down in the data a bit - I know plenty of people whose KD is 1.5 overall, but take grifball out and it’s suddenly below 1.
Now that you mention it I guess that is the strength of the ranked playlist ranks that are specifically tailored to game type. I know I am trash at swat but fairly decent at eliminations and much better at objectives.
Still I consistently compete against too many champions who obviously had a free ride for the season or lucked out with teams and perform in last place on the team vs low ranked golds who absolutely wipe the match away by themselves for me to trust the ranking metric that much. Usually upon greater inspection of the service record the number usually make more sense, at least in my experience which is probably where my assumption comes from.
> 2533274841519598;9:
> > 2533274874872263;8:
> > > 2533274841519598;7:
> > > I think personal stats in the service record are a much better metric to base a judgment off of. Rank in arena are temporary to a season and are extremely dependent on your team 90% of the time.
> >
> > Even then you need to drill down in the data a bit - I know plenty of people whose KD is 1.5 overall, but take grifball out and it’s suddenly below 1.
>
> Now that you mention it I guess that is the strength of the ranked playlist ranks that are specifically tailored to game type. I know I am trash at swat but fairly decent at eliminations and much better at objectives.
>
> Still I consistently compete against too many champions who obviously had a free ride for the season or lucked out with teams and perform in last place on the team vs low ranked golds who absolutely wipe the match away by themselves for me to trust the ranking metric that much. Usually upon greater inspection of the service record the number usually make more sense, at least in my experience which is probably where my assumption comes from.
Entirely agree. The system is good enough that it usually fixes someone’s rank if it gets the chance. I don’t understand the ‘badge of honour’ thing so much - if you’ve been carried to a high rank people can easily tell. I’ll respect someone as a teammate based on how they are as a teammate, nothing else.
With how low Halo’s population is I honestly can’t put a skill to a rank anymore. I find Champs 200 who back in the day wouldn’t have been more than 1600 Onyx at most and possibly lower.
When Halo 5 first came out I would agree with your statement that Diamond was above average-good players. Onyx was an accomplishment and champion was the bees knees.
I would view the competitive ranks Onyx and Champion as good. This is mainly due to being restrictive with the definition of good as I don’t really want to see a too large proportion of the playerbase being in this category.
I don’t even generally consider rank in judging how good a player is, but I would say at least rank 120.
Using Rank 120 isn’t a great marker, because that just tells you ‘how much’ you’ve played, not ‘how well’.
343 released info that showed diamond and above was roughly top 30% in terms of player distribution across the ranks for slayer in Halo 5. I would say that being top 30% is ‘good’, since diamond or higher literally means you are ‘above average’. Platinum includes roughly 45% of the player base and is clustered around the average.
I think in terms of ability there is not much difference from the platinum rank, however, at the higher ranks teamwork is demonstrated.
I agree that when you drill down into the K/D of competitive play lists like slayer or arena it gives you a pretty good idea of how good someone is. Greater than 1.5 KD in those playlists is usually a pretty good player
I was talking about this with a friend yesterday. I guess it depends on what you call ‘good’, but I actually would agree that certainly at mid-Diamond you start to see more skill jumps, more advanced movement techniques etc. At mid-Platinum people are timing overshield and camo, and its Gold and below that you don’t generally see any game management like that - in my experience only of course.
I"m an incredibly average player, Platinum 4 currently, Magnum accuracy between 48%-55% most games I would say. It’s very noticeable to me how much harder the game is tactically when I play Diamonds and up, even though my technical skill / accuracy isn’t that far behind the stats of those I play at that rank.
I am also a stickler with things like Spartan Charge, which I think just gives people an excuse to go round corners unprepared, and can be a ridiculous leveller. But that’s probably my position because I never use it.
I’ve beat champions that had no clue which way is up and I’ve been wrecked by platinums. If someone has a csr of 1900 or up, they probably know what they are doing, but that’s not always the case
Edit: my point is rank may indicate a players skill, but it’s definitely not the entire picture
> 2535426763288543;16:
> I agree that when you drill down into the K/D of competitive play lists like slayer or arena it gives you a pretty good idea of how good someone is. Greater than 1.5 KD in those playlists is usually a pretty good player
K/D is dependent on who you play. The rank is the best indicator overall, even though that’s not perfect either.
> 2533274794684102;18:
> I’ve beat champions that had no clue which way is up and I’ve been wrecked by platinums. If someone has a csr of 1900 or up, they probably know what they are doing, but that’s not always the case
>
> Edit: my point is rank may indicate a players skill, but it’s definitely not the entire picture
People have good games and bad ones, and other issues like connection related. Someone that high ranked may not have the best strategy, but they’re definitely good at the game (killing) — that requires performing well and winning over a decent chunk of games to get that high.
Any player that is one CSR point higher then me?
