Halo Infinite Ranked.... I'm done with this game

Games Halo Infinite
,
41

Took a peek… and I can’t work out how to see how much rank your lost or gained for a specific match.

But if you lost a single MMR point… I’m wondering if it was a rounding error?

So, so true. Especially round these parts. :smiley:

It is. And the problem is putting the MMR front and centre. It should never have been the focus of the rank.

People are losing their -yoink- over a handful of points… when the system is nowhere that accurate anyway.

Up to a point. At some stage people also need to be reminded that they have hit their ceiling. And they are probably not getting any better. At least not without a significant increase in effort.

Whereas an XP based system is something they can grind for points (weighted for wins and medals). Forever. And sounds perfect to fill this emotional niche.

Again, the ranking system is great. The way it is presented (as a CSR number) just doesn’t work.

2 Likes
42

Normally it would.

I had to quit a game a couple of days ago (wife rang and said I had 12 minutes to get to the pharmacy to pick up my daughter’s scripts).

I dropped over half of a tier.

43

I’ll have to agree with pretty much everything you said. It seems like you get what I’m trying to communicate.

The problem is placing a number on a player. Then have the whole game so centrally focused around those numbers. It’s something to work towards and I understand that completely, although to some it’s a constant reminder of what they haven’t achieved. -add server problems and some BS player accounts and it makes the whole system a joke.

I also like your idea of having more ways than one to determine rank/skill by using XP or multiple means. It’s the way the game should be setup.

I also think it would be a healthy practice to not provide such preferential treatment to the BR. All weapons should kill efficiently and equally. Halo has power weapons, the BR shouldn’t be considered a power weapon -yet it is treated as such….Most other FPS titles do a better job of balancing their sandbox. HI needs to really change it mentality about weapons because its costing them players. -343 going as far as nerfing other weapons to make the BR stand out MORE, even power weapons were nerfed.

There needs to be more than one way to play the game successfully.

44

Yo true, the bullet magnetism on the sniper in Halo Infinite is like non-existent compared to previous Halo titles. Theres even a video on youtube PROVING that on mouse, the game pushes your cursor away from the player outlines. Im not even joking look this up. It made so much sense to me when I was missing like %80 of my sniper shots. On Halo Reach MCC I hit every sniper shot with ease. Why pick it up if I can just use the BR?

2 Likes
45

It can’t really predict Team skill at all….

The difference between somebody going negative and not calling out to somebody going negative at the same value but calling out is huge.

Communication could also supply somebody with a 20-30 score game and winning the match.

Even if true skill is weighting more to do with winning it’s still measuring individual skill as it stands.

Being in a team you are responsible for each of your team mates and equal points should be shared. Whether you go 50-0 or 0-50. If somebody goes into a team game without three players they must take responsibility for this. This should be signposted. Like leaving your belongings in place at your own risk.

But overall I agree with your opinions.

1 Like
46

I agree they are connected but bear with me.
Is it possible to win any%, let’s say 90%, of the time against other equally skilled players? Yes, it is.
Why wouldn’t it be possible? What I mean is that one does not automatically imply the other. There are plenty of factors that could lead up to this “unbalanced” result. Like luck, better communication, a cup of coffee, map and mode choice, whatever. Things that statistically don’t matter.
That’s why people feel unaccomplished when they get punished after a sick play that the system is blind to.
Over LONG periods of time we should see roughly a 50-50 distribution but my point is: The system FORCES you into that. And does it in an unrewarding way by throwing on you all of a sudden a player that does not belong to your skill level at all. Win streaks happen all the time in sports. Here any win streak is guaranteed to be broken after a few games.
It’s like the NBA forcing Michael Jordan to play with my cousin because he’s winning too much according to what should be the correct win percentage.

2 Likes
47

And just the mix of playstyles… throw four specialist snipers together on a close quarters map and you probably won’t do as well as you’d think.

But over time… and a large number of games… everything will wash out.

Agreed. I’ve played with plenty of high ranked players who go out of their way to nurture the lesser lights on the team. They provide a structure for you to play off. They wait for you to catch up. Protect you. Share weapons.

Obviously they steal a lot of your kills too (just leaving the assists)… but they are a different beast to the “lone wolves” who disappear for the whole game to get their K:D up and then abuse you for not “pulling your weight”.

And the basic principle of TrueSkill2 is the win. If you think about kill rate - it really just identifies the big fish (Onyx) in the small pond (Gold) and can be used as a weighting to rank you up faster. As you hit opponents of your level the win becomes far more influential than kill rates (which simply can’t be maintained).

48

I wouldn’t think so.

If you were winning 90% of the games it would clearly indicate you are of higher skill. Matchmaking should seek out better opponents for you and bring your W/L back to 50%.

Think about a game where you played with and against a bunch of clones of yourself. Your K:D would be 50% and your K:D 1.0.

But your overall “skill” is the sum of all those things.

The system tries it’s best to find you opponents of equal skill.

Maybe they even drink the same brand of coffee.

I’m not sure what else it should be FORCING?

No system is perfect. But over time it will be a mixture of team-mates and opponents that balance out.

And sporting organisations go out of their way to stop it from happening. Overall it’s not very good for tv ratings, sponsorships, or fan growth. We are increasingly seeing the influence of salary caps, drafts, and concession.

I’m sure the Frosty’s of the world are running around on huge winning streaks. The rest of us are in the minor leagues… well and truly playing in our pay grades.

And overall… if the system is somehow allowing players to go on 90% winning streaks. How does it decide who gets this dream run? If you fall below 90% should you get softer opponents to bring your W/L back up? And what about those poor suckers who are consigned to the 10% bracket.

49

I completely agree. Can’t play Ranked right now. Also, the single playlist and lack of game types is annoying.

I’d like them to include a playlist with new game types so we can try, strategize, and provide feedback.

Or better yet, change ranked from br starts to fiesta starts. :slight_smile:

51

First: Winning most of the time against people of the same rank doesn’t mean I’m actually more skilled. It could mean I have better synergy with my teammate for instance. There’s nothing wrong with the fact that matches over very long periods of time should give you a 50-50 W/L. The problem arises when the system purposefully puts you against people you have no chance to win against BECAUSE you steer from that number.

I think your assumption is wrong: If I play with clones of myself I would not have a 50-50 W/L. It would be 100% of the time a TIE.

My skill can’t be a combination of things the system cannot see.

Balancing out can be done in different ways and the way it works now is not optimal.
taking the average of closer values has a different impact on the game than taking the average of vastly different values

That’s my point it shouldn’t be forcing anything.

Winning is not an indication of higher skill when considering a very narrow range of skill. Which is what the system should be doing and then ramping up the difficulty very slowly, so that you don’t have a sudden stop to your wins due to something out of your control. If I win it should be because of me. If I lose itr should be because of me. Not the will of the system.

if winning is an accurate representation of true skill than the highest onyx would win 100% of the time which is obviously impossible due to the same unpredictable reasons I mentioned before.

saying the system allows for 90% W/L ratio is not the same as saying it should allow winning streaks no matter how long. The system should let YOU be in control of the results you get. Which is not the case. Nobody should decide anything. It should be up to the player to be able to do it. But you simply can’t. You are going to be stopped by artificial means.

PS: It’s like trying to climb a ladder where at some point you need a helicopter to get to next step.

52

Yes it does. By definition. If you are winning most of the time you are not the same skill.

Which means you are running around with the better skilled team.

Time to take on better teams.

Why wait though. If you are clearly ranking up you need to face harder opponents.

No system can afford to wait. How can it? If the system is deliberately letting you win more than 50% it goes without saying that somebody else has to be forced to win less than 50%.

:smiley:

Your skill is represented by your W/L.

In the end the system sees everything!

Have a read of the discussion paper on TrueSkill2. They looked at lots of different ways to optimise the system - and backing it up with hard data.

But it also works the other way. If you drop below 50% you will rank down and start to play lower ranked opponents.

In the end you will win or lose based around you.

What you are literally describing is an anti-ranking system.

It’s more like climbing a ladder where the steps are slowly getting further apart. You climb very quickly at first… but it will get harder and harder. At some stage you will find a spot where you get stuck. With a lot of effort you may be able to jump an extra few rungs… but eventually you will get as far as you can go.

2 Likes
53

Why should the ladder be that way in the first place?
Can’t it be with same size steps, preferably small ones?
Why wait? You say
Because it feels cheap, artificial and out of player’s control not to do so.
I may be able to make the big jump but I will never actually do it because it’s as if there’s a guy shooting down anyone who’s trying to climb this already badly designed ladder.

As I see it the system should evaluate your skill and put you against other people with the same skill level, then it’s up to the players if their W/L rate is 10/90, 40/60, 90/10 or whatever. I repeat this is not the case. Here ALL players in the long run will have a 50/50W/L regardless.

54

I think you said it best yourself, 1 in 20 players will become onyx.

Why are we subjecting the other 95% of the population to something only 5% enjoy?

The system was well thought out and probably as some great mathematical theory behind it -but- halo is losing players.

Some of the PRO’s disagree strongly with the current ranking system format. -not that anyone really cares.

It makes the MOST sense logically to MAXIMIZE the experience of the MOST AMOUNT of players as possible, not just slim margin of the population. -this is also why halo is losing players and weapons have become dull.

The entitled mentality that players deserve fair matches is an illusion that I’m not buying -in fact, I think this thesis damages the longevity of the game for a few reasons.

1- players rarely (if ever) get to experience the fruits of their labor by never playing players below their skill bc the game constantly pushes you to play at your highest possible skill. -this is why warming up in customs/academy is so critical in halo.

2- because of the above, the mental part of playing becomes very tasking and frustrating for players that eventually plateau for extended periods of time.

3- nothing is fair in life and we shouldn’t pretend like it is, no matter how good you are there is always someone better -catch me on a good day and you’ll likely lose biggly, catch me on a bad one and I’ll probably lose biggly… that’s life…50:50…

This is why alternate accounts exist, ping is very high in matches the higher up you go. The game literally forces you away from everyone else. -in essence the system forces the most experienced players away from the title. (Also bad)

Being realistic, if players want 50/50 matches the simple answer is play more, at least that’s the way things use to be or how things should be. 5% of players smacking around the population is not enough of a sizable concern as to cause anymore player loss than halo has currently sustained.

The developer WANTS the highest tier players to like the ranking system to keep those players off on a corner somewhere isolated from the rest of the population. -then the developer has the audacity to call those players cheaters for using geofiltering to have some element of control over the quality of their matches. SBMM tosses them into excessively high ping matches because geographically nobody in your area the system will allow a match to be created. -I’d say In this situation the highest tier of players are being cheated/punished for their skill by placing them in less desirable servers.

Ill never be able to prove it but I’m not even certain that this is where the MM stops, this is just discussing the creation of a match itself. I believe the game also balances IN-GAME during a match.
This can be done in various ways. Spawns, rendering, nade tosses, shots…

1 Like
55

The thing is both of these scenarios you mentioned are okay… sometimes you need a lone wolf to go behind enemy lines to cause havoc and other times you need the valuable team structure.

However which ever style is played during the game… individual KD should not be taken into account, but instead Team KD when adding the extra points to either the losing team to deduct or the winning team to increase.

To put it mildly it isn’t a fair or reasonable system.

1 Like
56

I guess that’s the way any life skill works; playing Halo, learning the piano, taking up crochet. The learning curve is fast at the start… then you plateau and any level of mastery takes time and effort.

If you are being shot down by someone on the other team… I dare say you aren’t ready to take that “leap”.

If, and when, you are the one doing the shooting down… the system will rank you up.

Which has to be the goal of any ranking system.

I mean, that’s their job. It’s what they do.

57

Yep.

But it’s a team game. And Halo, with it’s shield and health system, is suited to a team-shooting style of play.

The better “lone wolfs” actually use their pack.

Again I wouldn’t get hung up on K:D.

The metric is kill rates… and it only a weighting. It’s to help the system rank up players faster who are in a lower pool. You need kill rates of above 2-3 kills per minute for it to make a difference… so won’t really have an influence on a well balanced game.

58

I just made Diamond last week. After weeks, if not months, of self improvement. I was stoked. Literally jumped up and danced around the room.

You don’t have to be Onyx to get something out of the system.

Lots of reason. TrueSkill’s ranking isn’t one of them.

But I agree that the way 343 sell the CSR journey really isn’t helping.

Again… it’s probably the CSR… which becomes less accurate the further out you get. Which is just promoting insane grinding.

343 have some work to do.

We need an XP rank yesterday. Weighted to wins and medals.

If you are talking about taking out SBMM. Yuck.

It’s not 50:50 good and bad games for anyone except an average player. For good players it’s a kill streak fest.

And it has been shown that SBMM improves player retention.

We desperately need the respite of Forge and customs.

Again if you are talking about abandoning SBMM - it’s not life… and it’s definitely not 50:50.

For a good player, say MMR 1500. It’s at least 9/10 opponents worse than them. It’s an average opponent team ranked around Gold 6. It’s a lot of streamable content.

Not 50:50.

I agree that work can be done on improving access to servers and the netcode.

But I don’t want to become a plaything for those players.

Personally I would favour a social set up that has a handicapping system for players (based around the game type and the player’s abilities). That way you could genuinely concentrate on connection speeds and throw all sorts of players into the mix - and still have a fun / fair game.

1 Like
59

This is why battle royale is popular because some reason people like unfair things. I don’t. I come to Halo for Halo equal starts and only 3 halos got that right. Halo CE. Halo 2. And halo 5. The rest are a unbalanced mess

However I think HCS should be a separate thing all together

1 Like
60

This is the way! I think this is a good middle of the road compromise

I’m going to keep grinding rank to hit diamond, but I just have a huge issue with how the CSR is handed out and taken away. I have a hard time enjoying losing nearly all of a nights worth of progress just because one loss.

61

It’s your problem the system is perfect and if you don’t show MASSIVE improvement you don’t deserve 5 points.

1 Like