I like that bronze to champ but the loss of losing 10 csr and you win and only up 1csr is really disgusting
> 2535405556134145;1:
> I like that bronze to champ but the loss of losing 10 csr and you win and only up 1csr is really disgusting
Losing -10 vs winning +1 only happens if you are in a team that is consistently ranked higher than your opponents. Your group is probably over-powered relative to what the matchmaking can put together to play against you.
> You are in a somewhat stacked team, so you tend to play a lot of easy matches, meaning you have a 90%+ chance of beating your opponents. In this case, in order to prove you deserve to go up in rank, you need to win more than 90% of the time.If you are already at the correct rank and playing teams you beat 90% of the time, then, out of 10 matches, you will win 9 gaining a total of +9 points, and lose 1 (-9) ending up back where you started. This is because you are playing as predicted, so your Rank should not go up. To prove the system is wrong, you must win more than it already predicts against a given opponent. If you are playing opponents your CSR predicts you to go 9-1 against, you need to go 10-0 in order to prove you should move up.
I’m not entirely sure but I think the rate of how CSR progresses varies on the CSR of your opponents. I preferred Halo Master Chief Collections and Halo 4’s with the numbering.
Halo 5’s ranking system is more skilled based than grind based. Simply playing more games won’t increase your CSR unless you play better. Unfortunately due to low population this can be annoying. For example, in order to get to champ you need to play well against champs, but if there are no champs searching for matches then ur kinda stuck where you are.
I never played ranked Halo 3 but from what I can tell the 1-50 system worked just fine. This ranking system isn’t accurate at all and the longer I play the higher my rank increases instead of being decided by how well I do in game.
> 2533275001522797;5:
> I never played ranked Halo 3 but from what I can tell the 1-50 system worked just fine. This ranking system isn’t accurate at all and the longer I play the higher my rank increases instead of being decided by how well I do in game.
The H5 ranking system runs off almost identical algorithms as H3’s did, there’s just different names on the ranks instead of numbers >.> This has been well known for years now.
For your specific example, you probably play better as your warm up, so by the end if your sessions you’re matching or beating what the algorithms say you should be doing, giving you the xp increases. As your rack goes up, you also play better opponents.
The only major difference between H5 and H3 ranking, is the update(s) they made to it that gives you less xp for beating worse opponents, and losing more xp for losing against worse opponents.
The xp swings the other way though. If you beat opponents the algorithm doesn’t think you should, you get a bigger XP boost.
halo 5s ranking system sucked lol still not as bad as 4 though but still bad
> 2614366390849210;6:
> > 2533275001522797;5:
> > I never played ranked Halo 3 but from what I can tell the 1-50 system worked just fine. This ranking system isn’t accurate at all and the longer I play the higher my rank increases instead of being decided by how well I do in game.
>
> The H5 ranking system runs off almost identical algorithms as H3’s did, there’s just different names on the ranks instead of numbers >.> This has been well known for years now.
>
> For your specific example, you probably play better as your warm up, so by the end if your sessions you’re matching or beating what the algorithms say you should be doing, giving you the xp increases. As your rack goes up, you also play better opponents.
>
> The only major difference between H5 and H3 ranking, is the update(s) they made to it that gives you less xp for beating worse opponents, and losing more xp for losing against worse opponents.
>
> The xp swings the other way though. If you beat opponents the algorithm doesn’t think you should, you get a bigger XP boost.
if the ranking system is this smart, why do we need ranking resets
> 2533274821339472;8:
> > 2614366390849210;6:
> > > 2533275001522797;5:
> > > I never played ranked Halo 3 but from what I can tell the 1-50 system worked just fine. This ranking system isn’t accurate at all and the longer I play the higher my rank increases instead of being decided by how well I do in game.
> >
> > The H5 ranking system runs off almost identical algorithms as H3’s did, there’s just different names on the ranks instead of numbers >.> This has been well known for years now.
> >
> > For your specific example, you probably play better as your warm up, so by the end if your sessions you’re matching or beating what the algorithms say you should be doing, giving you the xp increases. As your rack goes up, you also play better opponents.
> >
> > The only major difference between H5 and H3 ranking, is the update(s) they made to it that gives you less xp for beating worse opponents, and losing more xp for losing against worse opponents.
> >
> > The xp swings the other way though. If you beat opponents the algorithm doesn’t think you should, you get a bigger XP boost.
>
> if the ranking system is this smart, why do we need ranking resets
Ranking resets like between H5 and HI, or ranking resets during H5? Even when you’re not ranked for the current season, the system uses your previous rank in the calculations when determining a new rank after your placement matches.
If I remember correctly the population skill stopped following a normal distribution as the player base shrunk over time, so they reset all ranks to re-normalize it.
I think they also reset all ranks when they pushed the big change I mentioned above, where your xp you gain/ lose depended on how you performed vs your predicted performance.
That should be available in community update archives if you want to go find the finer details though
> 2614366390849210;9:
> > 2533274821339472;8:
> > > 2614366390849210;6:
> > > > 2533275001522797;5:
> > > > I never played ranked Halo 3 but from what I can tell the 1-50 system worked just fine. This ranking system isn’t accurate at all and the longer I play the higher my rank increases instead of being decided by how well I do in game.
> > >
> > > The H5 ranking system runs off almost identical algorithms as H3’s did, there’s just different names on the ranks instead of numbers >.> This has been well known for years now.
> > >
> > > For your specific example, you probably play better as your warm up, so by the end if your sessions you’re matching or beating what the algorithms say you should be doing, giving you the xp increases. As your rack goes up, you also play better opponents.
> > >
> > > The only major difference between H5 and H3 ranking, is the update(s) they made to it that gives you less xp for beating worse opponents, and losing more xp for losing against worse opponents.
> > >
> > > The xp swings the other way though. If you beat opponents the algorithm doesn’t think you should, you get a bigger XP boost.
> >
> > if the ranking system is this smart, why do we need ranking resets
>
> Ranking resets like between H5 and HI, or ranking resets during H5? Even when you’re not ranked for the current season, the system uses your previous rank in the calculations when determining a new rank after your placement matches.
>
> If I remember correctly the population skill stopped following a normal distribution as the player base shrunk over time, so they reset all ranks to re-normalize it.
>
> I think they also reset all ranks when they pushed the big change I mentioned above, where your xp you gain/ lose depended on how you performed vs your predicted performance.
>
> That should be available in community update archives if you want to go find the finer details though
when halo 5 launched they gave you a new rank every month. the issue i have with the 10 placement matches is a player could be rusty during those matches, get his low rank but because he’s finally warmed up he then starts beating team after team. the resets hurt more than they help imo
> 2533274821339472;10:
> > 2614366390849210;9:
> > > 2533274821339472;8:
> > > > 2614366390849210;6:
> > > > > 2533275001522797;5:
> > > > > I never played ranked Halo 3 but from what I can tell the 1-50 system worked just fine. This ranking system isn’t accurate at all and the longer I play the higher my rank increases instead of being decided by how well I do in game.
> > > >
> > > > The H5 ranking system runs off almost identical algorithms as H3’s did, there’s just different names on the ranks instead of numbers >.> This has been well known for years now.
> > > >
> > > > For your specific example, you probably play better as your warm up, so by the end if your sessions you’re matching or beating what the algorithms say you should be doing, giving you the xp increases. As your rack goes up, you also play better opponents.
> > > >
> > > > The only major difference between H5 and H3 ranking, is the update(s) they made to it that gives you less xp for beating worse opponents, and losing more xp for losing against worse opponents.
> > > >
> > > > The xp swings the other way though. If you beat opponents the algorithm doesn’t think you should, you get a bigger XP boost.
> > >
> > > if the ranking system is this smart, why do we need ranking resets
> >
> > Ranking resets like between H5 and HI, or ranking resets during H5? Even when you’re not ranked for the current season, the system uses your previous rank in the calculations when determining a new rank after your placement matches.
> >
> > If I remember correctly the population skill stopped following a normal distribution as the player base shrunk over time, so they reset all ranks to re-normalize it.
> >
> > I think they also reset all ranks when they pushed the big change I mentioned above, where your xp you gain/ lose depended on how you performed vs your predicted performance.
> >
> > That should be available in community update archives if you want to go find the finer details though
>
> when halo 5 launched they gave you a new rank every month. the issue i have with the 10 placement matches is a player could be rusty during those matches, get his low rank but because he’s finally warmed up he then starts beating team after team. the resets hurt more than they help imo
Your previous season rank effects your rank your placing for. Even though the display resets, your previous rank is still used to MM.
I think the monthly resets at launch was more to drive content unlocks, as there were different profile banners unlocked for ranking each season for the first year (2 years?)
> 2614366390849210;11:
> > 2533274821339472;10:
> > > 2614366390849210;9:
> > > > 2533274821339472;8:
> > > > > 2614366390849210;6:
> > > > > > 2533275001522797;5:
> > > > > > I never played ranked Halo 3 but from what I can tell the 1-50 system worked just fine. This ranking system isn’t accurate at all and the longer I play the higher my rank increases instead of being decided by how well I do in game.
> > > > >
> > > > > The H5 ranking system runs off almost identical algorithms as H3’s did, there’s just different names on the ranks instead of numbers >.> This has been well known for years now.
> > > > >
> > > > > For your specific example, you probably play better as your warm up, so by the end if your sessions you’re matching or beating what the algorithms say you should be doing, giving you the xp increases. As your rack goes up, you also play better opponents.
> > > > >
> > > > > The only major difference between H5 and H3 ranking, is the update(s) they made to it that gives you less xp for beating worse opponents, and losing more xp for losing against worse opponents.
> > > > >
> > > > > The xp swings the other way though. If you beat opponents the algorithm doesn’t think you should, you get a bigger XP boost.
> > > >
> > > > if the ranking system is this smart, why do we need ranking resets
> > >
> > > Ranking resets like between H5 and HI, or ranking resets during H5? Even when you’re not ranked for the current season, the system uses your previous rank in the calculations when determining a new rank after your placement matches.
> > >
> > > If I remember correctly the population skill stopped following a normal distribution as the player base shrunk over time, so they reset all ranks to re-normalize it.
> > >
> > > I think they also reset all ranks when they pushed the big change I mentioned above, where your xp you gain/ lose depended on how you performed vs your predicted performance.
> > >
> > > That should be available in community update archives if you want to go find the finer details though
> >
> > when halo 5 launched they gave you a new rank every month. the issue i have with the 10 placement matches is a player could be rusty during those matches, get his low rank but because he’s finally warmed up he then starts beating team after team. the resets hurt more than they help imo
>
> Your previous season rank effects your rank your placing for. I think the monthly resets at launch was more to drive content unlocks, as there were different profile banners unlocked for ranking each season for thr first year (2 years?)
not in my experiance as my rank has significantly changed before when halo 5 was popular. obviously the first placement match will keep your past rank but the whole point of the 10 placement matches is to have the potential to significantly rank you higher or lower in a short space of time. games like rocket league have it too. my rank in rocket league goes up and down like a yoyo in placement matches
> 2614366390849210;6:
> > 2533275001522797;5:
> > I never played ranked Halo 3 but from what I can tell the 1-50 system worked just fine. This ranking system isn’t accurate at all and the longer I play the higher my rank increases instead of being decided by how well I do in game.
>
> The H5 ranking system runs off almost identical algorithms as H3’s did, there’s just different names on the ranks instead of numbers >.> This has been well known for years now.
>
> For your specific example, you probably play better as your warm up, so by the end if your sessions you’re matching or beating what the algorithms say you should be doing, giving you the xp increases. As your rack goes up, you also play better opponents.
>
> The only major difference between H5 and H3 ranking, is the update(s) they made to it that gives you less xp for beating worse opponents, and losing more xp for losing against worse opponents.
>
> The xp swings the other way though. If you beat opponents the algorithm doesn’t think you should, you get a bigger XP boost.
The BIG differences between the two were in 3 if you won everyone goes up the same amount. In Halo 5 that isn’t the case at all. Halo 3 was based purely on wins and losses. Not to mention in 3 it doesn’t care what your kills or deaths are whereas in 5 those two things are SUPER important And can greatly affect how much you go up. Assists, damage dealt and every other stat means absolutely nothing in 5 when it comes to rank.
I think Halo 5 system is very average and I can give you a lot of examples and a lot of games cuz I play a lot of ranked of where it fails pretty hard. I’ve also shared a lot of these with ZaedynFel as well. Halo 3 system definitely was not perfect either but overall more people enjoyed it.
As I’ve said to ZaedynFel many times, the best system would be a combination of the two. You have a playlist rank and a personal rank. The playlist rank is purely just based on wins and losses. You win you go up you lose you go down. No other stat matters at all aka like Halo 3. Then You have a personal stat that ranks you on just your performance, which would be more like along the lines of Halo 5.
So for example, using Halo 5’s system, I could be a Diamond 2 in team Slayer but my personal rank is a diamond 6. So pretty much meaning when I play on a team I’m generally playing with people that aren’t as good as me or I might not work very well with others… Or maybe both lol this way even if you lost in a team Slayer match but you did really well your playlist ranking would go down but perhaps your personal ranking would go up.
I can’t tell you the amount of times over the years heard people say “Halo 5 system is a joke you only go up one CSR and I won 10 matches in a row I lose one I dropped 15…” Or "We just beat champs back-to-back games and barely go up and yet we just played a team that was ranked worse than us and then we went up a lot…huh? And then people just proceed to laugh. Things like this. Most people regard the system as a joke or frustrating or very not rewarding.
Would I propose fixes all of this as people when they win you know you go up no matter how good you do that match but if you do well your personal rank will also go up so it also pleases the people that always say the rank should be based on how well you do (which I’ve always thought was ridiculous in a TEAM playlist…) So even if your team loses and you do well people will say well at least my own personal rank went up.
It literally is the best of both worlds. Not to mention if someone is bragging about how they’re a champ and team Slayer but their personal rank is only a mid diamond well then you know they play with people who are really good and they get carried.
I was quite happy when ZaedynFel saw the merit in my proposals. I’m really hoping that Halo Infinite has something like this. Also you could have a personal rank just playlist wide so to speak, or you could have a personal rank and a playlist rank for each playlist if you wanted but I thought that might be a bit much.
All I know is if someone has played Halo 5 as much as I have ranked wise, they would know most people regard it as a joke when it comes to the ranking system and very non-rewarding. That definitely needs to be changed in Infinite.
> 2614366390849210;6:
> > 2533275001522797;5:
> > I never played ranked Halo 3 but from what I can tell the 1-50 system worked just fine. This ranking system isn’t accurate at all and the longer I play the higher my rank increases instead of being decided by how well I do in game.
>
> The H5 ranking system runs off almost identical algorithms as H3’s did, there’s just different names on the ranks instead of numbers >.> This has been well known for years now.
>
> For your specific example, you probably play better as your warm up, so by the end if your sessions you’re matching or beating what the algorithms say you should be doing, giving you the xp increases. As your rack goes up, you also play better opponents.
>
> The only major difference between H5 and H3 ranking, is the update(s) they made to it that gives you less xp for beating worse opponents, and losing more xp for losing against worse opponents.
>
> The xp swings the other way though. If you beat opponents the algorithm doesn’t think you should, you get a bigger XP boost.
I know Halo 5’s ranking system works similar to Halo 3’s. The problem is that I don’t have to try in Halo 5 to get high onyx but you never hear people saying that was the case in Halo 3. Most of the players who are champ in Halo 5 are not much better than I am and there are some I have never lost against but they are top 100. Also, one of my friends is a platinum 3 and he is better than my other friend who is diamond 5. All I’m saying is that this system isn’t accurate, I don’t even think I should be in onyx.
> 2535405556134145;1:
> I like that bronze to champ but the loss of losing 10 csr and you win and only up 1csr is really disgusting
1-50 skill based like Halo 2. Lose to many games and lose your rank.
Halo 5’s ranking system makes perfect sense after reading the FAQ (it’s stickied in the matchmaking forum).
Maybe people would be less stressed if there was more info post match… showing how much CSR you moved and why - as opposed to a generic arrow up or down. You would be more accepting of only getting a few points if you could clearly see how much better your team was rated pre-match.
Going back to a simple win - loss really doesn’t make sense… not all wins (or losses) are the same.
I would, however, prefer some sort of re-distribution based on your performance within a team. It’s frustrating when a higher ranked ‘team-mate’ goes -10 and loses you the game. But I understand it’s a team game… so get good or suck it.
> 2535453407941985;4:
> Halo 5’s ranking system is more skilled based than grind based. Simply playing more games won’t increase your CSR unless you play better. Unfortunately due to low population this can be annoying. For example, in order to get to champ you need to play well against champs, but if there are no champs searching for matches then ur kinda stuck where you are.
It’s more grind based than skill based, and the matches are unbalanced more than half of the time. Low population has absolutely nothing to do with it because there’s never been party matching. I should be higher than what I am and so should most people. Platinums shouldn’t rank down for losing to diamonds and Onyxs either.
> 2533274821339472;8:
> > 2614366390849210;6:
> > > 2533275001522797;5:
> > > I never played ranked Halo 3 but from what I can tell the 1-50 system worked just fine. This ranking system isn’t accurate at all and the longer I play the higher my rank increases instead of being decided by how well I do in game.
> >
> > The H5 ranking system runs off almost identical algorithms as H3’s did, there’s just different names on the ranks instead of numbers >.> This has been well known for years now.
> >
> > For your specific example, you probably play better as your warm up, so by the end if your sessions you’re matching or beating what the algorithms say you should be doing, giving you the xp increases. As your rack goes up, you also play better opponents.
> >
> > The only major difference between H5 and H3 ranking, is the update(s) they made to it that gives you less xp for beating worse opponents, and losing more xp for losing against worse opponents.
> >
> > The xp swings the other way though. If you beat opponents the algorithm doesn’t think you should, you get a bigger XP boost.
>
> if the ranking system is this smart, why do we need ranking resets
So bad players have a chance to compete. There’s never been any legitimate arguments against H2 or 3’s ranking system aside from mentioning boosters which was only ever a problem in Doubles in H3. People act like H5 isn’t 70% smurf accounts since day 1.
> 2535407109813100;17:
> > 2535453407941985;4:
> > Halo 5’s ranking system is more skilled based than grind based. Simply playing more games won’t increase your CSR unless you play better. Unfortunately due to low population this can be annoying. For example, in order to get to champ you need to play well against champs, but if there are no champs searching for matches then ur kinda stuck where you are.
>
> It’s more grind based than skill based, and the matches are unbalanced more than half of the time. Low population has absolutely nothing to do with it because there’s never been party matching. I should be higher than what I am and so should most people. Platinums shouldn’t rank down for losing to diamonds and Onyxs either.
The grind based aspect only affects diamond 3 and up, and that was a fairly recent change. It’s sorta annoying but ig it helps freshen things up for the top players.
Population affects the quality of matches, I’ve played games where the opponent has like a 90% chance to win because they would be stuck searching forever otherwise. Yeah it sucks that it wasted time, but no one wants to wait indefinitely. If the population was higher, both teams would’ve been able to find a fair match.
The reason a lot of people think they should be ranked higher is likely due to the Dunning-Kruger effect. There’s also only a limited space in high ranks; everyone can’t be a champ.
I’m pretty sure CSR lags a game behind, if your going down a bunch from losing to a higher ranked team, you either: had good teammates, lost a fair match the game before, or the opponents MMRs are a lot lower than their CSR.
> 2533274870308953;3:
> I’m not entirely sure but I think the rate of how CSR progresses varies on the CSR of your opponents. I preferred Halo Master Chief Collections and Halo 4’s with the numbering.
Halo 3s was the best. Pretty close to what they did in mcc and halo 2