Maybe they could do something like:
Bronze 1-9
Silver 10-19
Gold 20-29
Platinum 30-39
Diamond 40-49
Onyx 50
I think that would be a bit better than just a number.
The problem with infinite is I’ve heard that once you get to a tier you don’t rank down easily, whereas the 1-50 system in Halo felt a bit more fluid.
Highest I ever got there was a 45 in Lone Wolves.
I’m currently Platinum I in Infinite I think.
You can easily work out your Halo 3 rank.
We know that 50 = Diamond 3 = CSR of 1300.
Which means each rank is 1300/50 = 26 points.
So just divide your CSR by 26 to get your Halo 3 ranking!
It’s a little harder to work out a Halo 2 / Infinite equivalent.
Using the current format of divisions and tiers then Onyx 6 would be 1750 to 1800.
So if we use 1800 as an effective ceiling (yes, I know there are some outliers) then you could divide your CSR by 1800/50 = 36 points to get your Halo 2 (or Infinite) 1 to 50.
But the important point is that it doesn’t matter what CSR system you use… the underlying MMR (TrueSkill2) is the same.
CSR of 1300 = 36 (Halo 2) = 50 (Halo 3) = Diamond 3 (Infinite).
What we don’t want are the hidden levels or rank blocking of Halo 3. Never again.
I would prefer a Halo 3/Reach progression system personally… feels more rewarding than number for a rank
Once you get Onyx you do get a number system. It’s not 1-50 it’s more like 1500-??? But it is still a number system.
I was thinking about this on the way home. The ??? that is.
Ideally the ranking system would constrain the players into a normal distribution with the six divisions (bronze to onyx) roughly a standard deviation each.
If we take our anchor of Diamond 3 = 1300… then Onyx 6 would be 1750 to 1800.
So theoretically 1800 should be the MMR ceiling. Very few players should drift past this.
But we are seeing (or at least hearing) of players 1800-2200+. I think this shows how redundant the system gets when the top players / squads in a region can’t be placed against equal or better teams on a regular basis. You get an artificial MMR drift to the right.
The only thing they can do is limit the amount of CSR gained per win and then put a weighting on any losses. The result of this is the treading water pattern that people are getting frustrated with (run of slow CSR gains followed by a chunky loss).
How do we know 50 is diamond 3?
Why would we ever want to go back to that?
If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.
1-50 system: Rank up for wins, rank down for losses. Game uses this to match players by skill, keeping the good with the good and the bad with the bad. Pros get their challenge while the average player can have fun. Everyone is happy.
The 1-50 thing existed in a time when no real rank systems existed outside of the occasional 3rd party system systems. Halo was pretty innovative in this regard, but it’s clear from other titles after innovating their own visual rank representations it wasn’t going to be the winner.
A 1-50 rank system can coexist with a more modern interpretation as the numbers should be fairly translatable with some basic division. I don’t see why there couldn’t be a toggle for a classic visual over a modern visual.
what the hell are you talking about???
Halo 3 was absolutely balanced.
When you had Skill of 35 the game searched for players between 30 and 40.
When you had Skill of 35, one teammate 28, another one 38 and the last one 1 the game will search for players between 38 and 29.
It was totally balanced.
Don’t want to know how often I’m matched against diamond and onyx players - cause I’m platin.
Also I got matched against players without any rank and bronze and silver ranks like why???
If I remember correctly there was a Halo 5 q&a with someone involved in the ranking system and that’s what they said. Although my memory is hazy of the origin I know I’ve seen that little line stated many times over the years.
Once you got to 50, you could still play players below 50 even if you were technically much higher in theory. There was a period where my team of 3 won 150+ games in a row on our 50s. I don’t see how that could ever be considered balanced.
Also if a new playlist came out it was filled with high skilled players, but it was balanced on visible rank for the playlist so I could be a 10 despite being a 50 in four other playlists and play against a legitimate 7 who is their highest skill. Head to head playlist was like that. Some games it would be an easy 15-0 and others it would be the sweatiest 7-6 you’ve ever seen. Terribly balanced.
Then the ranked matches were also plagued with deranking accounts. Which was just awful for everyone involved. Then there were also loads of smurfs, which would typically playing solo take a minimum of 40ish games to get from 1-40ish high skill, sometimes more. This means that they could typically decimate a full team by themselves for 40ish games. Again, not fun for the gamers who want balanced games.
I loved Halo 3 but it was a deeply flawed ranking system and ultimately only 6 playlists could survive using it.
I’ve never quite understood the fascination with 1-50 ranks. To me, it is boring. I much prefer the current tiered system that has been in place since Halo Reach.
In terms of the actual system and how it functions, I think the best ranking system Halo has ever had existed in H5.
H3’s ranking system was horrible. I much prefer having seasons to having a single career rank for each playlist. Also, achieving a high rank shouldn’t be a grind. The whole point of a ranking system is to pit similarly skilled players against eachother, and to show the player how good they are vs the rest of the population.
Also, if numbered ranks are so interesting, why did everyone complain when H4 applied numbers to progression ranks instead of the militarized version that Reach used (which imo was the best progression system we’ve had)?
Odd that, In my reality I found it a lot easier to get to Onyx let alone Diamond 3 than it was to 50. But I suppose that was the difference between TrueSkill and TrueSkill2.
I don’t think it quite works like that.
I recall reading somewhere that there were actually 75 ranks in Halo 3, with the last 25 ranks being hidden.
Lucid, the highest ranked player in Infinite has a CSR of 2500. If you apply your formula, he would have a H3 rank of 96.
I think the experiences of players with a rank 30 - 45ish had much more fun and encountered less annoyances than players with a 50 in matchmaking. It wasn’t perfect but it was fun to live in that hope! Although, wait times wasn’t always great but you waited to get the good games.
There were probably 75 ranks in the hidden rank but the has to be… The good 50s couldn’t always play 49s it wouldn’t be fair. It would make sense.