I haven’t been a big fan of this ranking system in the last few games.
In Halo 3, for those who don’t know/remember, there were ranked and social playlists. In each ranked playlist you could achieve a skill level between 1-50, and this would give you a global rank based on which number range you fell into (Lt, Cpt, Colonel, General etc). A simple explanation was; you beat higher guys and go up, lose to lower guys and go down.
Each playlist had its own rank as well based on the number of wins you got in that playlist; ie if you got 200 wins you were a Social Slayer Cpt (can’t remember the actual # wins required) These ranks showed your experience in each game type.
The new ranks are based on a % of the population that you fall into (I believe) after your 10 games to qualify and then you can grind your way up afterwards. Below is an example of two players after their first 10 games of swat. (Win or loss: kills-deaths)
Player 1: (W:27-11)(W:17-6)(L:17-11)(W:19-8)(W:20-7)(L:8-11)(L:16-11)(W:16-10)(L:18-14)(W:25-7)
Total Kills- 183 Total deaths- 96 Win%- 60
1st on Leader board 8 times
Player 2: (W:22-9)(W:24-14)(W:14-6)(L:6-14)(L:4-15)(L:5-14)(L:5-16)(W:9-9)(L:8-12)(W:1-9)
Total Kills- 108 Total deaths- 118 Win%- 50
1st on Leader board 3 times
If I told you that one of these players was put into the Onyx division and the other got Platinum 1, can you tell me which one?
SPOILER:
Player 1- Platinum 1
Player 2- Onyx 1500
Player 1 played all 10 of his games with player 2(after he had already been placed in Onyx) so I thought the game might be thinking; ‘He is playing with better players on his team’ but I can assure you that one other team member was a below average player. If you take a look at player 2’s first ten games, he actually played with two other Onyx/Diamond players many times.
Nah they just need to fix the ranking system they have now. It’s much better in theory at the moment though it seems a bit broken. I don’t want to have to grind again from 1-50 before I start getting evenly matched games it’s no fun grinding against newbies.
Halo 3’s system was just as controversial at the time as this system is now. Forums on bungie.net were filled with people starting threads exactly like this one, offering excruciating detail on why exactly the ranking system was broken, garbage, unfair, incomprehensible, etc. etc. etc.
There is no good ranking system, there never has been, and there never will be. All you can do is make arbitrary distinctions that may reveal one to be a lesser of evils. Sorry. I know that sounds pessimistic, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t true.
> 2718914239344815;4:
> Everyone brings K/D into the equation. Halo 3 was pure Win/Loss and used microsofts controversial TrueSkill
Halo 3 did just us wins and losses, but does the new one?
That is the reason I felt it important to show how each player performed in each match, especially since it is a slayer playlist. I cannot come up with any good reason that Player 2 got Onyx while Player one didn’t even get Diamond.
LOVED the Halo 3 ranking system. But obviously it’s too late to change Halo 5.
I’m rolling with it. It’s cool, just not as cool. I’m also much less competitive than back in my H3 days.
Halo 2 imho was by far the best ranking. Halo 3 was terrible (I was a 48 in doubles and team). Almost all 50’s were carried and then “locked” into that rank. If ya guys don’t remember H3 would lock you in a rank and you eventually would never be able to get out.l for good or bad.
i do agree though, H5s ranking is garbage. What’s the point if you’re never gonna face similar ranks.
> 2533274873843883;5:
> Halo 3’s system was just as controversial at the time as this system is now. Forums on bungie.net were filled with people starting threads exactly like this one, offering excruciating detail on why exactly the ranking system was broken, garbage, unfair, incomprehensible, etc. etc. etc.
>
> There is no good ranking system, there never has been, and there never will be. All you can do is make arbitrary distinctions that may reveal one to be a lesser of evils. Sorry. I know that sounds pessimistic, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t true.
Not really. Lol. I spent a lot of time reviewing the old forums, and there was barely any negative talk in general. Literally.
The Halo 3 system was awful and broke a number of supporting systems around matchmaking. Keep the visual ranking system and the background matching identifiers totally different.
Anyway, what you’re describing as the H5 system is essentially how the H3 system worked. The 1-50 Trueskill rating was basically a bell curve calculation that moved you up or down the line based on performance. With enough games, it squashed your beta and locked you into a ranking. People didn’t like that and would start new accounts to begin with a fresh rating. That led to constantly changing metrics informing the ranking system and really broke the whole thing down.
Halo 5’s is a good balance of providing player’s a chance to change their rating and a fairly accurate picture of what their ability is.
> 2533274793616507;12:
> > 2533274873843883;5:
> > Halo 3’s system was just as controversial at the time as this system is now. Forums on bungie.net were filled with people starting threads exactly like this one, offering excruciating detail on why exactly the ranking system was broken, garbage, unfair, incomprehensible, etc. etc. etc.
> >
> > There is no good ranking system, there never has been, and there never will be. All you can do is make arbitrary distinctions that may reveal one to be a lesser of evils. Sorry. I know that sounds pessimistic, but that doesn’t mean it isn’t true.
>
>
> Not really. Lol. I spent a lot of time reviewing the old forums, and there was barely any negative talk in general. Literally.
Were you actually there at the time? Because the entirety of Bungie.net’s Halo 3 activity was talking about BR spread and how busted the TrueSkill rating was (new accounts, rank locked, etc).
> 2533274852942669;15:
> God, no. Halo 3 had a terrible ranking system. You could win games with a good k/d and derank. Even Bungie admitted it was horrible.
Seemed to work for me a lot better than the example above.
I just wish they would at least bring back the playlist ranks. I really liked them.
> 2533274807425261;1:
> I haven’t been a big fan of this ranking system in the last few games.
>
> In Halo 3, for those who don’t know/remember, there were ranked and social playlists. In each ranked playlist you could achieve a skill level between 1-50, and this would give you a global rank based on which number range you fell into (Lt, Cpt, Colonel, General etc). A simple explanation was; you beat higher guys and go up, lose to lower guys and go down.
>
> Each playlist had its own rank as well based on the number of wins you got in that playlist; ie if you got 200 wins you were a Social Slayer Cpt (can’t remember the actual # wins required) These ranks showed your experience in each game type.
>
> The new ranks are based on a % of the population that you fall into (I believe) after your 10 games to qualify and then you can grind your way up afterwards. Below is an example of two players after their first 10 games of swat. (Win or loss: kills-deaths)
>
> Player 1: (W:27-11)(W:17-6)(L:17-11)(W:19-8)(W:20-7)(L:8-11)(L:16-11)(W:16-10)(L:18-14)(W:25-7)
> Total Kills- 183 Total deaths- 96 Win%- 60
> 1st on Leader board 8 times
>
> Player 2: (W:22-9)(W:24-14)(W:14-6)(L:6-14)(L:4-15)(L:5-14)(L:5-16)(W:9-9)(L:8-12)(W:1-9)
> Total Kills- 108 Total deaths- 118 Win%- 50
> 1st on Leader board 3 times
>
> If I told you that one of these players was put into the Onyx division and the other got Platinum 1, can you tell me which one?
>
> SPOILER:
> Player 1- Platinum 1
> Player 2- Onyx 1500
>
> Player 1 played all 10 of his games with player 2(after he had already been placed in Onyx) so I thought the game might be thinking; ‘He is playing with better players on his team’ but I can assure you that one other team member was a below average player. If you take a look at player 2’s first ten games, he actually played with two other Onyx/Diamond players many times.
>
> Can anyone explain this ranking system to me?
Tiers will always hold far more longevity than a numbered ranking system. There’s no reason to go back when everybody else wants to progress forward.
Halo 3 was the last true ‘MLG’ Halo. Ever since then, MLG has widely regarded Halo as the mentally deficient runner up with Halo 4 being the last title played back in 2012<-----(meaning Halo has been knocked out of the National Tournament for the past 3-4 years). In addition to this 343 has completely ignored the negative feedback on this “competitive win rank” system. Individual skill is null in Halo 5 and the game is so unbalanced that once the 1st season is over I can see a majority of players leaving the game to go prestige in Black Ops 3. Yes Prestige…the ranking system that has been around since Modern Warfare 1…the one that players think is fair and balanced…the one that the developers kept in for each game after because of player feedback…sound familiar 343? No? Thats because you are changing the CORE functions of what made Halo a great game to begin with, in favor of “participation trophys”. PATHETIC