Sorry for the click bait title, but remember when 343 told us this? Its a good idea in principle, but it is still very flawed.
The only legitimate ranking system we have had was in h2,h3,and h5. All the other ranking systems were based off of grinding.
In Reach if you wanted to hit inheritor all you had to do was play 15 minute grifball games and unplug your router as soon as you finished a weekly challenge until you hit the weekly cap.
In H4 you just had to take a picture of all the dorritto codes at cvs, wallgreens, and 7/11 and idle in btb. They did add a ranking system eventually but you could only see it online lol. Plus h4 wasnt really a halo game at all.
Now we have halo 2’s ranking system which I believe took into account win/loss, in game stats, and the other players rank. I dont ever remember this system being that flawed. The only flaws seemed to come from game exploits like bridging,modding,modded controllers, and super jumps etc.
Halo 3’s system seemed to work as well. Once again the flaw here seemed to be caused by exploits. Derankers were not penalized, people who quit were not penalized, and people were also hitting people offline. Boosting was also a problem, but in this game 50 was the ceiling and everyone wanted to get there or have it in all playlists so people would buy and sell 50’s which ultimately led to tons of derankers and people boosting. If there was a higher rank to get too I dont think the problem would be as bad as it actually was.
Now we have h5’s ranking system which is a good idea in practice, but also terribly flawed. The 10 placement matches is a good idea because you dont have to grind from 1-50 but its also a double edged sword. All 10 placement matches have to go perfect for a good placement. This means no loss of connection, game crashes, quitters, team killers or bad teammates if you are searching alone. If you are placed into a lower tier you still have to grind up, and from what I have observed you dont rank faster if you play higher ranked players. So if you are plat 1 and beating onyx you wont rank any faster than you would playing platinums. On top of this you can run a few champions in your team and a few alt accout platinums or golds. This would match you in games against usually diamonds and onyx players with an occasional champion or team of onyx, just depends on what time of day it is. It has been very easy to get people into champion tiers and even top 100 and 50 due to this exploit.
The biggest problem with the h5 ranking system is the placement and matching. I think there should be more placement matches, and I think during placements rank should be prioritized over finding the quickest game. I much rather wait 8 minutes to find a competitive match during placements than be matched up against gold and plat players due to match speed priority and then get placed low because of the matches it put me in. The game should also focus on finding matching teams. A team of 4 should not match a bunch of randoms. Also if you have 3 champions on your team and you have one gold or plat they should be prioritized as an onyx or champion rather than a gold or plat.
tldr
-More placement matches with emphasis on higher and higher skilled matches. If you beat a team of onyx the next game you play should not be against platinums. Sacrifice speed for a good match.
-Even teams, so a team of 3 should play a team of 2,3,4 instead of 4 solo players
-Join back into games if you disconnect.
Does anyone else have an opinion on this?