Matchmaking/Ranking Broken. Proposing a New Method

I have been focusing my playtime onto the Slayer gametime to see if I can get good at Halo 5 and improve my skills. Well , I have improved tremendously from my starting days but my rank doesn’t reflect that as it’s based on the result of the match which is team based. I haven’t gone up very far as it’s pot luck that the teams are well matched or that my teammates don’t throw a fit and disconnect which has happened for over half of my matches leaving me often in a 1v4 situation.

When it comes to matchmaking, I mostly find that I never game where everyone is off the same main rank (Bronze, Silver, etc) and when there are people in that match of lower or higher rank, the teams are not balanced. As a Platinum rank, I shouldn’t be seeing a Diamond unless there is a Gold in the same team but I consistently see a Diamond with a group of Platinums and there is a Gold on my team which is hardly fair.

With my other point, regardless of team skill on either side, I don’t know how severe the ban is for disconnecting from matches repeatly or the number of matches required to get hit by a ban but it must not be severe enough when the odds of having a full room of 4v4 at the end of a match is close to 0. It is not fun for either side when people leave on a consistent basis. For the winning team, the game is boring as you wander a nearly empty map and for the losing team, they face being killed over and over again as the winning team have dominance over the map. Both of these factors makes every team based mode outside of Warzone, a game of luck on if you have a balanced game of players and no one quits over losing their perfect k/d which then results in a unfair loss most of the time and you’re swiftly ranked down. I feel this wouldn’t be a big problem if the e-sports competitive nature was not in every facet of the game and didn’t rule over the progression in nearly every mode. This could be alleviated with social playlists to have fun, but everything has to be war for glory where loss is looked down upon severly.

My main point is that the ranking system does not represent your skill at all. It just shows that you happen to won a bunch of games. This system only works for Free For All. For team games, which is most of Halo, the ranking system just portrays the amount you have won without losing which is mostly luck. It does not take into account personal contribution so it doesn’t matter if I get 20-4 if team have died enough to lose the match (and yes this sort of thing has happened more than once). How am I supposed to be motivated to get better, to get to the illustrious Onyx and Champion ranks where I’m constantly punished for trying to win a game and get the rank get shoved down.

To propose a better system would be measure how much a teammate is contirbuting to the mode objective and have that affect CSR. For the winning team, the CSR will increase by your contribution amount (maybe make it a percentage based on how much the player affects the objective). For Slayer and Breakout, this would be the number of kills and assists scored (and flag captures for Breakout). For the Capture the Flag, this would be flag captures, flag assists, escorting/protecting the flag carrier and kills. For Strongholds, it would be bases captured, base defense and kills. For the losing team, the CSR would decrease based on how much that player contributes to the loss. For Slayer and Breakout, this will be based on number of deaths. For Capture the Flag and Strongholds, as there is not much of a way of measuring how an individual would contribute to a loss with the current systems, the lost CSR would be the same for all members of that team.

However, for all team based modes, if a player on the losing team made a huge contribution to the objective and but the game was still lost, they wouldn’t lose CSR, they gain a small amount as recognition for their skill. Additionally, if members of a team leave a match, the CSR would adjust for the remaining players of that team. For a winning team, the CSR that would have been originally split between the 4 players, would be split between the remaining players based on their contribution as a reward for winning with less members. For the losing team, the remaining members would lose less CSR than they have lost based on their contribution for being placed in an unfair situation. For those who leave, they should lose a larger CSR amount that a player would lose for losing a match under normal circumstances. This would happen whether a player deserts a winning team or a losing team.

I know the system I have proposed is not perfect and I know that 343 Industries had the best of intentions when making the CSR system for Halo 5 to make it a contender in the E-Sports scene and let players rank themselves competitively. I actually love the way ranks are split into sub ranks with Onyx and Champion at the top for those that rise to the top. However, with the lack of individual skill shown for team based CSR, I feel that the system falls a bit. I believe my system is the best of both worlds with both match results and individual contribution being factors.

I don’t believe changing the CSR system for Halo 5 is feasible as it would anger players who have worked their way up with the current system but it would be nice to see this sort of system in Halo 6.

For those that have read this far, thank you, I know this post is long and ranty but I feel I needed to place my feedback on how the flaws in the CSR system is making the game not fun for me with constant punishment for things that are outside my control. I didn’t want to come off as some angry gamer that spouts problems without a solution to make the game better. I love the gameplay of Halo 5 and 343 Industries have done an amazing job with the game. This is just a major sour point for me that has led to me to walk away from the game for a long while. I’ll be following updates on the game, but won’t come back until I think the game is better to online.

> 2793974233131001;1:
> I don’t believe changing the CSR system for Halo 5 is feasible as it would anger players who have worked their way up with the current system but it would be nice to see this sort of system in Halo 6.

Actually it is because ranks reset every month anyways.
As for me, I couldn’t care less about my rank since most of my friends are not into halo so I play it alone most of the time and I don’t worry about something which I have almost zero control over. If you don’t have a team, I wouldn’t recommend playing arena anyways. I might as well roll the dice when I start an arena match alone. I can’t remember team stomping ever being so prominent in halo, it’s killing the population.

Your proposal would only create selfish play. Why work as a team if I can just sit back and pick off kills from my teammates and go super positive. If I win great, if i lose, so what, I won’t lose rank because I did so well. I don’t care if you go 20-4, that does not explain how you helped your teammates. If you join solo and you see your team dying, follow a teammate and help them out.

Invite people that did decent in your game and party up. I get it that people play at different times, but I send invites to people after games all the time and make new friends. If you are trying to get to high CSR Onyx and Champions, you need to have a team hands down. Team play will always win a match. I fully back the W/L ranking system, because this promotes teamwork,

> 2533274800383882;3:
> Your proposal would only create selfish play. Why work as a team if I can just sit back and pick off kills from my teammates and go super positive. If I win great, if i lose, so what, I won’t lose rank because I did so well. I don’t care if you go 20-4, that does not explain how you helped your teammates. If you join solo and you see your team dying, follow a teammate and help them out.
>
> Invite people that did decent in your game and party up. I get it that people play at different times, but I send invites to people after games all the time and make new friends. If you trying to get to high CSR Onyx and Champions, you need to have a team hands down. Team play will always win a match. I fully back the W/L ranking system, because this promotes teamwork,

You’re right with the selfish play with the system I talked about, especially for games like CTF or Strongholds, so maybe the solution for that would be to have kills to minimally affect your contribution and have objective take precedence. For Slayer and Breakout, have KDA take precedence as getting kills and assisting teammates in kills are the focus of those game types

I’ve notice this as well but I think it depends on how well you’re doing in your classification + available players. I believe that is how they determine matches. As you get closer to the next tier you start to see more and more players in that tier. It’s probably a test to see if you’re ready to move up.

My only real issue with the ranking system is the same issue I’ve had with every Halo ranking system. It punishes solo players. I play with friends when I can but don’t always have people available so I play solo pretty often and if I get paired with bad randoms and we loose I drop in rank regardless of my individual performance. Also if a player gets disconnected or quits, the system doesn’t factor in that you are now 3 on 4. Not impossible to overcome but very difficult if you are playing quality opponents. I’d just like to see factors other than win or lose determine a rank.

Here is my proposal -
The whole ranking system based on the team winning is total BS. I got carried into gold in all of my qualifying games. In each gametype i played i lost every match except maybe two and still managed gold.MY K/D was .3 .3!!! I should have been at the bottom of the barrel in terms of ranks. I have friends that are platinum or higher and I play BTB with them and they always carry me. But If I continue to play with them I will get bumped up to diamond or better even though I in no way should be there. I understand they are trying to promote team play and their ranking system looks good on paper. But terrible in practice. The rank should be based on XP level + K/D + Accuracy + W/L. the higher level players most often have higher accuracy than mediocre players.

KD or KDA would be good.

Each part could be weighted like XP-10%, KDA 20%, W/L 40%, Accuracy 30%. Just one example. Or they could all be weighted equally as another example.

well sayig that the ranking is only working in ffa is quite wrong as most of the ffa players are in the same rank , so something is not working as intended ther either .

the initial rank placment seems quite random as well .

So far I’ve jumped up in rank by myself in breakout, slayer, and swat. If you deserve the promotion you’ll eventually get it unless you have the worst RNG in the world.

Take every game that has a ranked system and ask yourself how it is based. It’s W/L, right? This is pretty much the only pheasable scenario that works. Yes, it sucks when you’re paired with awful children who go 1-17 but you’re pretty much just as likely to play these kids as you are to get them on your team. Once the ranks reset again I believe it will be more balanced. I’m almost positive your initial ranking is based off your KDA so everyone with low KDA’s will probably be demoted upon ranking again.

Win loss is the only reliable way to rank play skill.

Trying to find the correct metric for individual play in an team game is overly complicated at best, and most likely not possible.

If a player is being “carried” by playing in a team, then their rank is a reflection of performance in that team. Outside of that then rank means nothing… but rank doesn’t really mean anything as it is. Rank should only be used to create the best possible matches. It isn’t badge of honor.

If someone is offended at an “unearned” rank, I suspect that person is viewing the ranking system wrong.

> 2533274794829884;8:
> So far I’ve jumped up in rank by myself in breakout, slayer, and swat. If you deserve the promotion you’ll eventually get it unless you have the worst RNG in the world.
>
> Take every game that has a ranked system and ask yourself how it is based. It’s W/L, right? This is pretty much the only pheasable scenario that works. Yes, it sucks when you’re paired with awful children who go 1-17 but you’re pretty much just as likely to play these kids as you are to get them on your team. Once the ranks reset again I believe it will be more balanced. I’m almost positive your initial ranking is based off your KDA so everyone with low KDA’s will probably be demoted upon ranking again.

I was demoted. The funny part is, I just got this game like 2 weeks ago. Haven’t played Halo in forever so I naturally was doing awful. I’m talking like 0.2 KD bad. I ranked platinum(pretty much only arena game I play). So while trying to get my Halo skills back and playing very badly I somehow still managed to be put into platinum. Fast forward to now. I’ve gotten a good bit of my Halo skills back and now have a 1.6 and had the most kills in mostof my qualifying matches if I’m not mistaken. Yet somehow I was put into the Gold Tier. Yup! Thats right! I went down in rank even though I’m doing a thousand times better!

> 2533274812526953;10:
> > 2533274794829884;8:
> > So far I’ve jumped up in rank by myself in breakout, slayer, and swat. If you deserve the promotion you’ll eventually get it unless you have the worst RNG in the world.
> >
> > Take every game that has a ranked system and ask yourself how it is based. It’s W/L, right? This is pretty much the only pheasable scenario that works. Yes, it sucks when you’re paired with awful children who go 1-17 but you’re pretty much just as likely to play these kids as you are to get them on your team. Once the ranks reset again I believe it will be more balanced. I’m almost positive your initial ranking is based off your KDA so everyone with low KDA’s will probably be demoted upon ranking again.
>
>
> I was demoted. The funny part is, I just got this game like 2 weeks ago. Haven’t played Halo in forever so I naturally was doing awful. I’m talking like 0.2 KD bad. I ranked platinum(pretty much only arena game I play). So while trying to get my Halo skills back and playing very badly I somehow still managed to be put into platinum. Fast forward to now. I’ve gotten a good bit of my Halo skills back and now have a 1.6 and had the most kills in mostof my qualifying matches if I’m not mistaken. Yet somehow I was put into the Gold Tier. Yup! Thats right! I went down in rank even though I’m doing a thousand times better!

That is because they did not reset your CSR, they just hid the ranks again until you requalified. I was Diamond 4 at the end of the Preseason, and my placement matches were almost all against people that were Diamond or better in Preseason. That can’t be coincidental.

The problem I believe you have run into is that you should have been much lower than Platinum anyway, so when you were on your poor KD streak early on, your CSR dropped down into the Silver tier. Since they don’t demote mid-season, you get placed lower the following season. This is a pretty common occurrence for games that don’t feature demotions during seasons.

Welcome to the future of gaming, where personal skill doesn’t matter and having a stacked team does. Ive said this about countless games, developers don’t listen. Its easier to make it based on win/loss and not like halo 3 which wasn’t just about winning the game but how well you personally did. Titanfalls ranking system is gorgeous. best ive seen in years.

If you watch pro teams play, you very rarely hear them talk about KD or KDA. Why is this? Because in the end, the only thing that matters is W/L, and the matchmaking system in H5 is a microcosm of that.

Win more than you lose? You’ll move up.
Win a lot more than you lose? You’ll move up quickly.

As someone earlier pointed out, you are just as likely to play against the kids that go 4-20 as you are to play with them.

My advice to you is to use the forums here, halolfg.com, and any other website you come across to find more people to play with. If people near the top of the bell curve of players (i.e. Diamond+++) can find anything from Spartan companies of similar skilled players, to random people just looking to make a party for a few games, then there are definitely plenty of people in the Plat range to pull from.

Lastly, and perhaps this will come across as somewhat douchey, but playing less than 200 games all time does not make it seem like you are truly “putting in the effort to improve”. I don’t mean this as a slight to you, it’s just shear numbers. The people that are in the High CSR Onyx/Champion range play that many games in a weekend. I encourage you to put more time into the matchmaking before you make a determination on whether the ranking system is a good representation of skill, because I believe it is fairly accurate after you have played several hundreds of games.

> 2533274820722681;12:
> Welcome to the future of gaming, where personal skill doesn’t matter and having a stacked team does. Ive said this about countless games, developers don’t listen. Its easier to make it based on win/loss and not like halo 3 which wasn’t just about winning the game but how well you personally did. Titanfalls ranking system is gorgeous. best ive seen in years.

There will always be difficulty in truly measuring individual skill from team performance without looking at each case subjectively. We’re asking 343i the equivalent of tracking the migratory patterns of birds using mathematical algorithms, and getting pissed when they predict the wrong county.

Also, I guarantee you that “stacked” team probably has tons of individual skill on it as well. Why should they be looked at in any sort of negative light because they had the bright idea of working together?

You should be ranked on your own skill not others. I was on a team slayer match, one guy got 2 kills, 1 assist and 21 deaths. I find it stupid that I’m ranked based on his performance. If ranks don’t matter then why bother having them.

I would like to point out that the CSR system is too broken to actually portray skill in this. When I got ranked in Slayer, I was immediately ranked into Diamond 3. Want to know something crazy about my stats for those 10 games? They were quite honestly some of the worst games I’ve ever had in Halo as I had no played Slayer in a long time (mostly a SWAT guy myself), and was merely sorted higher because the teams I was with carried me.

And I’ve seen plenty of people in the lower ranks just -Yoink- on Diamond and Onyx players. Despite being a more dynamic ranking system compared to past games which were cumulative, this one still fails to show any hint of the players actual skill, because most people vary from match to match, and whatever they got sorted into after those first ten matches, they can’t go down, no matter how poorly they do. They can only go up, but there’s no way to know if they were carried through wins, or if they actually achieved that. So saying a Diamond player shouldn’t see Onyx or Platinum is a null point.

It seems SO random, like Diamond players should usually place higher than gold in game stats but more often than not it is helter skelter. I would love games that are all players of the same rank, like 8 bronze arena players, and promote/demote based on the outcomes. The rating system is pretty useless to players right now, but if they fix it, I’d like to see player ranks at the start of the games.

> 2793974233131001;1:
> My main point is that the ranking system does not represent your skill at all. It just shows that you happen to won a bunch of games. This system only works for Free For All. For team games, which is most of Halo, the ranking system just portrays the amount you have won without losing which is mostly luck. It does not take into account personal contribution so it doesn’t matter if I get 20-4 if team have died enough to lose the match (and yes this sort of thing has happened more than once). How am I supposed to be motivated to get better, to get to the illustrious Onyx and Champion ranks where I’m constantly punished for trying to win a game and get the rank get shoved down.

You have the exact same problem as everyone: you’re biased. You only remember the times you were pulled down by your team, forgetting all the times you were the failure and pulled your team down. There’s no preference for the game to give you a team that is worse than you. Frankly, all the game does is tries to balance the teams in such a way that the difference of the sums of their ratings are as small as possible. In the case that your rating is not accurate and you are better than it indicates, you will more often end up having the better team than the worse team, and therefore win more often than lose. This in turn means that your rating will go up. Similarly, if you’re actually worse than your rating indicates, you will lose more than win, and your rating will go down.

It’s all about the averages. Sure, you may have one game where you are totally carrying your team, but you are equally likely to have a game where you’re the one getting carried. On average, whether your rating goes up or down really only depends on your own performance. Your team’s performance has no preferred direction. It’s just random noice. Your own performance is the only thing that stays constant from game to game, and for that reason, it’s the only thing that actually has any effect on your rating.

So, whether you want it or not, a purely win-based rating system perfectly represents your performance. It may be difficult to understand and accept, but the system is brutally honest about your skill.

> 2793974233131001;1:
> To propose a better system would be measure how much a teammate is contirbuting to the mode objective and have that affect CSR. For the winning team, the CSR will increase by your contribution amount (maybe make it a percentage based on how much the player affects the objective). For Slayer and Breakout, this would be the number of kills and assists scored (and flag captures for Breakout). For the Capture the Flag, this would be flag captures, flag assists, escorting/protecting the flag carrier and kills. For Strongholds, it would be bases captured, base defense and kills. For the losing team, the CSR would decrease based on how much that player contributes to the loss. For Slayer and Breakout, this will be based on number of deaths. For Capture the Flag and Strongholds, as there is not much of a way of measuring how an individual would contribute to a loss with the current systems, the lost CSR would be the same for all members of that team.

And how would you go about doing this? I¨’m going to repeat what I said in another thread. The purpose of a rating system is to be an estimate of the player’s performance. It’s all about making predictions of match outcomes. If you pit two players against each other, how do you derive the win probability estimate? Does your system lead to stable ratings? If so, can you show that these stable ratings correspond to the player’s actual performance? If your system has no predictive power, it’s as good as useless.

You criticize something you don’t really understand, and make suggestions that are only vague ideas with no consideration of how they can actually be implemented, and whether they actually have anything positive to add to the rating process.

Does need some work I think. I got Champion in Slayer with an Average K/D but then play SWAT and win almost all qualifiers and did great in like all but one game and it ranks me Gold 4… I was quite shocked lol. Also winning almost all in FFA and getting ranked Diamond! Last season I was Onyx 1900 and Placed Onyx lol. Definitely need work lol.

The thing everyone seems to keep forgetting is ranking systems need lots of data. They need hundreds of games to really be able to definitively display your rank. You can’t expect the game to rank you properly within 10 matches of play, it’s just statistically impossible.

The other thing is, ranking even within a tier is going to be skewed. If you are a true Platinum 1, you are going to be significantly less skilled than a Platinum 6. But, every time I’ve seen someone finish their placement matches, they were always placed in the bottom end of the tier (i.e. Plat 1). That just seems like more evidence to support the idea that after your placement matches, the game has determined a likely range for your actual CSR, and it places you in the Tier that has the highest probability of being correct. They place you at the bottom of that tier, because it is easier to figure out a range that you are in, than your actual CSR. So they find your range, put you in the bottom of that tier, and then let you determine how your CSR changes based on your decisions (within individual games, but also whether or not you take advantage of the teamwork aspect or try to lone wolf through a team based playlist).

If someone has evidence of being placed into anything other than rank 1 of a tier, I would love to see it. I suspect that doesn’t happen, because when placed into Onyx, you start at 1500 (the minimum) and have to work your way up. I can’t imagine they would have two different systems of analysis for Onyx+ and everything else. I could be wrong, I just haven’t seen it happen yet.