Idk about you, but I like to know where are fall on the bell curve of most things. What’s the point in bragging about your rank unless you know it’s an actual good rank? The 1-50 system sucks because the bell curve will be skewed to the 1-10 placement because of the casuals. If you have to play 10 games to receive your rank (i.e. have “unranked” as a rank), then the bell curve simply doesn’t include casuals and it allows you to better guage how good you are at the game.
e.g. a CoD pro just trying Halo out for 10 games isn’t actually rank 15. They would actually be like rank 40, let’s say. If that CoD pro were to play their 10 games in a H5 system, their data point contributes to the bell curve more accurately. The same can be said for someone at the opposite side of the skill curve.
As someone who lived for Halo 3 as a teenager I became very attached to 1-50, but the reality is that system is not great. Halo 2 was much worse than that too for getting consistent games.
The Halo 5 system in its first iteration also had its own issues, I love where it is now and hope that’s how infinite goes about it. Highest from placements is Diamond 3, you can fall below the rank if you lose at bottom of tier 1. To be a Champion you need minimum 1,600 CSR.
I hope there are good incentives for playing the competitive mode, the more people that play it, the better matches and more accurate the rank will be. I think a lot of people are put off, especially as they see ranked as a way to constantly climb because in 1-50 you would climb all the way until you plateaued at level 35 for example. They felt the progression to this point and could work hard to try to get 36. H5 system you hit that 35 in 10 games and then bounce up and down, which is normal but players don’t feel that same sense of accomplishment. Instead of grinding to 35, they see it as a negative as they are only in Gold 2, they should climb higher but as their rank is already maxed out, they don’t get that satisfaction. Ranked is great if you want loads of games that end 50-49, I love H5 for that so many of the games are really close.
as someone who has hit onyx in H5 during its “prime time” (talking about the few months after launch when it still had alot of people) I still prefer halo 3’s 1-50 system. sure it can be tweaked and updated but man was it great.
> 2533274847845259;4:
> as someone who has hit onyx in H5 during its “prime time” (talking about the few months after launch when it still had alot of people) I still prefer halo 3’s 1-50 system. sure it can be tweaked and updated but man was it great.
The H5 system was tweaked later on (2017 or 2018) and became much better than it was at launch.
I really liked the Halo 5 ranks. It was straight forward and easy to understand. I hope Halo 5’s rank system or similar comes back for Halo Infinites ranking.
But the normal number leveling for the Spartan ranks was boring, I hope they go back to something like Halo Reach’s ranking for that.
> 2535425414012969;1:
> Idk about you, but I like to know where are fall on the bell curve of most things. What’s the point in bragging about your rank unless you know it’s an actual good rank? The 1-50 system sucks because the bell curve will be skewed to the 1-10 placement because of the casuals. If you have to play 10 games to receive your rank (i.e. have “unranked” as a rank), then the bell curve simply doesn’t include casuals and it allows you to better guage how good you are at the game.
>
> e.g. a CoD pro just trying Halo out for 10 games isn’t actually rank 15. They would actually be like rank 40, let’s say. If that CoD pro were to play their 10 games in a H5 system, their data point contributes to the bell curve more accurately. The same can be said for someone at the opposite side of the skill curve.
>
> What are your thoughts?
The Bell curve only holds up if their is a decent population spread across all skill levels. Fingers crossed for Infinite.
But it should settle into a nice normal distribution (as do most stats) and you can then use the 1-50 or Bronze to Onyx (it doesn’t really matter which) to gauge your worth.
But if you had two different playlists… one that was just for noobs and one that was just for pros… they would both settle into their own curves. The difficulty here is you have no way to judge the difference between a ‘14’ on one curve and a ‘14’ on the other.
And yep, for the placement matches, your MMR is your previous MMR, or assumed from your MMR in another (similar) playlist, or if it is genuinely your first up effort - an average starting MMR (in Chess everyone starts at 1000).
But the bottom line is that TrueSkill2 is very quick. It knows your rough skill level (eg. Platinum 3) in a few matches. It may take 40 or so to truly place you in the nitty gritty of the pecking order… but that’s only important for Onyx rankings etc.
Seeing a bell curve on where your rank stands against the entire population of the game would be pretty cool. Regardless ranking systems of any kind get more accurate if players play a lot of games, so if there is a sizable portion of players that only casually play ranked to get placement each season and then go back to social playlists, the curve would be skewed. I always felt like the Halo 5 ranking system was fairly accurate, as I would usually be better than low golds or silvers but would consistently get outplayed by diamonds or high plats. The only problem with a 1-50 ranking like the old days is that since every single player starts out at rank 1, the bell curve will naturally show an inordinately large amount of players in the lower ranks unless every single player plays more than let’s say 20-30 matches a season.
> 2753763522162009;5:
> > 2533274847845259;4:
> > as someone who has hit onyx in H5 during its “prime time” (talking about the few months after launch when it still had alot of people) I still prefer halo 3’s 1-50 system. sure it can be tweaked and updated but man was it great.
>
> The H5 system was tweaked later on (2017 or 2018) and became much better than it was at launch.
yeah but i hate the symbols and what not, I just want the 1-50 number system. I guess it doesnt really matter to me though as i will never touch ranked again. hitting onyx in halo 5 was the last time i have ever touched it.
> 2533274866022405;8:
> Seeing a bell curve on where your rank stands against the entire population of the game would be pretty cool. Regardless ranking systems of any kind get more accurate if players play a lot of games, so if there is a sizable portion of players that only casually play ranked to get placement each season and then go back to social playlists, the curve would be skewed. I always felt like the Halo 5 ranking system was fairly accurate, as I would usually be better than low golds or silvers but would consistently get outplayed by diamonds or high plats. The only problem with a 1-50 ranking like the old days is that since every single player starts out at rank 1, the bell curve will naturally show an inordinately large amount of players in the lower ranks unless every single player plays more than let’s say 20-30 matches a season.
That’s what I’m saying. Most players will only play 5 ranked games. Therefore, with the 1-50 system, those players will skew the bell curve to the lower ranks. H5’s system just clumps those players into “unranked”, which can be removed from the bell curve. 10 games, I think is enough time for the system to guage, roughly, how good a player is and place them correctly on the bell curve. This will make the bell curve more accurate.
> 2533274847845259;9:
> > 2753763522162009;5:
> > > 2533274847845259;4:
> > > as someone who has hit onyx in H5 during its “prime time” (talking about the few months after launch when it still had alot of people) I still prefer halo 3’s 1-50 system. sure it can be tweaked and updated but man was it great.
> >
> > The H5 system was tweaked later on (2017 or 2018) and became much better than it was at launch.
>
> yeah but i hate the symbols and what not, I just want the 1-50 number system. I guess it doesnt really matter to me though as i will never touch ranked again. hitting onyx in halo 5 was the last time i have ever touched it.
The 1-50 system had huge gaps. Not only did higher ranks steamroll players on their way to the correct rank, 50 was the visible cap even though the actual skill rankings went well beyond that (so you could have two players with 50s with wildly different skill)