So I wanted to create a thread for everyone to post in about the ranking system currently in the beta. Please be constructive and refrain from yelling, screaming, crying, or just posting that you hate something unless you can post something constructive about how to fix it or how it could be more enjoyable to you.
My thoughts so far:
The ranking system is flawed but it can be fixed/retuned. The first 10 placement matches are unfair to many players and I believe everyone should just start out at Iron-1 and have to work their way up the ladder. This also increases the longevity of the game because many people love to grind out ranks but right now people can be placed over halfway up that ladder after their first 10 matches.
Solo Players are punished under the current system. I play solo a lot because I’m an adult and have real life obligations as well as all my friends so playing with them happens maybe once every couple of weeks. While playing solo I have no control who I get to play with on my team. I have had many games where I am the only person on my team that has a rank while the other team is all silver/gold or higher. I will finish the round with 20+ kills and like maybe 5 deaths but I still get punished because my team who was way under skilled and barely even knew how to reload their weapons. If we had a free for all game type this may not be as big of a problem but right since the entire team is graded as one I get punished for the n00b players lack of skill and knowledge while the other team LOL stomps them into the dust. I think that if a player is going solo then they shouldn’t be punished if they were on the losing and played very well. Now if that solo player was playing badly then sure they should lose some ranking but not if they were doing very good.
So what is everyone else’s thoughts on the ranking system so far?
Any ranking system is a random and arbitrary accounting of what one group of people (multiplayer lead and his/her team) thinks is important (and unimportant) in gameplay. This list of factors is lengthy, and no two people will put the same value on any one individual component therein.
Then you have the problem of INDIVIDUAL vs. TEAM performance. This is as old and unsolvable as time itself.
Then you have the problem of transparency and accountability. Do people understand how they are being ranked? Do they agree with how the system works? The answer to the first question is “almost never.” The system is far too complicated for most people to understand, even if they were willing to take the time to try. And they are not. The answer to the second question is “no.” Witness this thread.
No ranking system can ever “succeed.” Some might manage to fail less than others, but they will all ultimately be failures. The degree of failure can be measured directly by the amount of griping in these forums. The Halo 3 ranking system, with all the many and varied ways in which it could be manipulated and outright cheated, was a constant source of negative feedback for Bungie. They dropped ranking from Reach and people -Yoinked!- even more. 343 chose to leave ranks out of Halo 4 and the -Yoinking!- continued unabated.
Now, with Halo 5 on the horizon, the calls for a return to rank are loud and vociferous, and the masses will get what they’re asking for. And they will HATE it.
A ranking system that takes more than a few months to master is what really keeps the average player tuned in. I have been playing BF4 for nearly a year and there are still cool things to unlock. So whatever ranking system can accommodate that most definitely will succeed.
> 2533274873843883;2:
> Any ranking system is a random and arbitrary accounting of what one group of people (multiplayer lead and his/her team) thinks is important (and unimportant) in gameplay. This list of factors is lengthy, and no two people will put the same value on any one individual component therein.
>
> Then you have the problem of INDIVIDUAL vs. TEAM performance. This is as old and unsolvable as time itself.
>
> Then you have the problem of transparency and accountability. Do people understand how they are being ranked? Do they agree with how the system works? The answer to the first question is “almost never.” The system is far too complicated for most people to understand, even if they were willing to take the time to try. And they are not. The answer to the second question is “no.” Witness this thread.
>
> No ranking system can ever “succeed.” Some might manage to fail less than others, but they will all ultimately be failures. The degree of failure can be measured directly by the amount of griping in these forums. The Halo 3 ranking system, with all the many and varied ways in which it could be manipulated and outright cheated, was a constant source of negative feedback for Bungie. They dropped ranking from Reach and people -Yoinked!- even more. 343 chose to leave ranks out of Halo 4 and the -Yoinking!- continued unabated.
>
> Now, with Halo 5 on the horizon, the calls for a return to rank are loud and vociferous, and the masses will get what they’re asking for. And they will HATE it.
I don’t believe all ranking systems are failures. Some are better than others for sure but the ranking system has to take into account when a solo player enters matchmaking there is massive chance the people they will get matched with people who don’t communicate at all and there is a good chance you could get matched against a premade team of guys who are going to stomp all over everyone that isn’t organized in some way. In my opinion the solo player has to have some sort of compensation for entering into the competition with the odds stacked against them.
> 2533274950604834;4:
> > 2533274873843883;2:
> > Any ranking system is a random and arbitrary accounting of what one group of people (multiplayer lead and his/her team) thinks is important (and unimportant) in gameplay. This list of factors is lengthy, and no two people will put the same value on any one individual component therein.
> >
> > Then you have the problem of INDIVIDUAL vs. TEAM performance. This is as old and unsolvable as time itself.
> >
> > Then you have the problem of transparency and accountability. Do people understand how they are being ranked? Do they agree with how the system works? The answer to the first question is “almost never.” The system is far too complicated for most people to understand, even if they were willing to take the time to try. And they are not. The answer to the second question is “no.” Witness this thread.
> >
> > No ranking system can ever “succeed.” Some might manage to fail less than others, but they will all ultimately be failures. The degree of failure can be measured directly by the amount of griping in these forums. The Halo 3 ranking system, with all the many and varied ways in which it could be manipulated and outright cheated, was a constant source of negative feedback for Bungie. They dropped ranking from Reach and people -Yoinked!- even more. 343 chose to leave ranks out of Halo 4 and the -Yoinking!- continued unabated.
> >
> > Now, with Halo 5 on the horizon, the calls for a return to rank are loud and vociferous, and the masses will get what they’re asking for. And they will HATE it.
>
>
>
>
> I don’t believe all ranking systems are failures. Some are better than others for sure but the ranking system has to take into account when a solo player enters matchmaking there is massive chance the people they will get matched with people who don’t communicate at all and there is a good chance you could get matched against a premade team of guys who are going to stomp all over everyone that isn’t organized in some way. In my opinion the solo player has to have some sort of compensation for entering into the competition with the odds stacked against them.
I agree 100%. I also believe whole-heartedly that as 343 tries to implement provisional methods of ranking based on factors like going solo or in a party that several things will happen. First they will created exploitable “loopholes” in the system that some people will use to their advantage. Second, and far more important, is that they would be opening the door on having to build in about a million “special case” modifiers like “press A if your phone rang during the match and we’ll decrease its weight on your service record.” There is no end to how this could unravel if followed to its logical conclusion.
In the case of solo vs. party, it will always boil down to this: the best player in the world (if he has garbage teammates) is inferior to a TEAM of solid players. The ranking system will always reflect this. They would rather not modify the ranking system to take solo players into account. They would rather that the solo players send out friend requests and build a team.
Don’t get me wrong - I AM you in this case. I almost never go into mm with a party and the system rooks me the same way it does you. I guess the difference is that I despise the ranking system for so many other additional reasons that I just can’t get worked up over the particular way that it screws me on this particular point.