Bungie dot net was lit up on topics about the ranking system. 
So much so that Bungie released in depth explanation on how their Trueskill leveling system worked.
For the record, I never had a huge problem with it, other than that it encouraged account selling and smurfing.
I would say much of Infinite’s ranking design was in response to the complaints of previous designs.
But, like I said, we didn’t know what we had, and are now missing the older designs 
That was my recollection as well.
I also find it a little ironic that in his tweets Max admits they penalised high end players (increasing their penalties for losing), and for using the low end of the MMR curve for your rank (instead of the mean).
Yet when 343 do the same thing they get crucified.
Wow. That escalated quickly.
I wouldn’t have thought that this response would be so upsetting;
I’m not sure what part of that was so inflammatory?
Rest assured, I am neither an apologist nor a woodworker.
I would have thought most people can cope with assessing that Diamond is better than Platinum. That Gold 5 is better than Gold 3. And so on. It may be split into Divisions and Tiers… but it is essentially 1 to 36 instead (imagining Onyx 1500-1800) of a simple 1 to 50.
It’s just interesting the way they built the rankings around the normal distribution.
Don’t you think there is an elegance to the following diagram; https://i.redd.it/ql811ro73zxz.png
I was just pointing out that their choice wasn’t random. There is a mathematical reasoning behind their choices. It wasn’t just to annoy people who like numbers (with a passion).
And it’s not wether player’s remember the exact numbers or not… it’s the fact that you can easily look them up / understand them.
Bronze to Onyx and 1 to 6 aren’t exactly hard concepts.
So just out of interest. As an expert in designing UI/UX.
What is your opinion on replacing ranks 44 to 50 with symbols?
Or grouping everyone with an MMR of 1300 or above into a ‘50’ - so that it pretty much lost any relevance?
Yet the art of civil discourse escapes you.
Either, both were better then infinites ranking system.
Well Halo 2’s functions like a traditional ladder and Halo 3’s is similar in function to how Infinite’s works.
Numbers are pretty meaningless on their own.
One of the interesting things from Hoberman’s tweets was that they tried to make TrueSkill in H3 behave more like H2.
I don’t know if he meant that they actually tweaked TS in any way - or just the way they added a requisite for ‘x’ number of wins to add an artificial grind to earn each level of rank.
That was only H2 because of modders/cheaters. I don’t think anybody actually got a 50 in H2. The 30s ranks were where the best players were. H3’s was better. People that supposedly “bought” their rank in H3 didn’t matter because they didn’t want to play ranked to begin with. Another thing nufans like to bring up is boosting, which they seem to forget that that was only an issue in Doubles. And guess what? Derankers, boosters, etc were easily filtered by a feature called “PARTY MATCHING”. Something 343 failed to implement in all of their Halos including the MCC. Lack of party matching=quitters, smurfs, and unbalanced matches.
I appreciate the thought process behind it for sure.
I didn’t play a lot of H2 online. Did it get any better later in the game? Wasn’t there some sort of controversial rank reset.
If you assume a Bell curve of rank distribution a ‘30’ in H2 should be roughly equivalent to ‘42’ in H3 and a ‘P5’ in Infinite.
But as you mentioned… the legitimate players were skewed to the left by the cheaters, so the relationship doesn’t hold.
It’s a long time ago. But if I recall, the problem was that a lot of genuine ‘50’ players were unfairly accused of buying their accounts. The problem was that H3 ‘50’ was such a huge range of skills (1300+) that the really good players (eg. high Onyx) just assumed the lower ones (equivalent to Diamond 3) had bought their accounts.
I hardly played ranked in H2 because I didn’t have an Xbox. I had friends that had it and I would have to go over to play it everyday. If you couldn’t do combos it basically meant you’d get crapped on. I just stuck with btb and stuff. I didn’t even touch it when 3 came out. So I don’t know about a reset. The higher ranks were broken though.
And you’re right about different players in 50. Some players were way better than others and there wasn’t a way of knowing… But it wasn’t a big deal until it started dying. The only gamemode I got a 50 in was lone wolves. I think I was 46 or 47 in team Slayer.
No no no - if it’s not broke then overhaul it so it is broken and call it innovation. ~Sarcasm~
Halo MCC uses it and it has been dead for the longest time.
It sucks.
The best thing about H3’s CSR was that it made relevance to what the game was; Halo is a military shooter so it made sense that you had to move through the ranks;
Halo 3
Recruit
Apprentice
Private
Corporal
Sargent
Gunnery Sargent
Lieutenant
Captain
Major
Commander
Colonel
Brigadier
General
That’s 13 different levels -
Halo infinite
Bronze
Silver
Gold
Platinum
Diamond
Onyx
6 levels
Which one do you think is more relevant to the game?
Some further real worldly experiences bouncing around in my head?
In infinite I find Progression is boring and slow. Let’s say you jump in at platinum 5. You might play 20 games and still be only Diamond 2. I’m already at my highest rank - why should I carry on?
Where with Halo 3 you started at the bottom and you worked through the ranks accordingly. You felt like you were actually progressing so the learning curve became more apparent. I played the game a lot longer.
Sitting in diamond 1-3 / or Onyx for a month becomes tedious for a lot of people.
Also I have friends that went straight in at Diamond 5 progressed to Onyx and now have quit. Why bother carry on when you have reached the top rank?
Whether it’s invisible beyond 50 or Onyx - a lot - not all - people will stop playing at that top rank regardless.
Here you have to question the mentality of people compared with how long people stay active on a game.
(Finding your point naturally I find far more stimulating than just being put at my biting point from the get go.)
Like I’ve said before just because it’s quick doesn’t mean to say it’s the best.
I understand some may not enjoy the progression side and would rather be put straight into super hard games at Onyx or what ever level they are at.
But you have to cater for everybody. Maybe Trueskill2 might be good for the hardcore fans but what about the casual that likes to have more candy floss than hard boiled sweets!
You could say Halo Infinites CSR favours the die hard purist, which is also evident in its only ranked playlist. The CE extremists… I don’t need a rank to have fun… type who will play with a pistol/BR until the servers go down!
I don’t have the answers, but it’s evident Infinite’s CSR doesn’t cater for the majority!
But my main take - CSR isn’t just a number… it’s a game breaker and more attention is needed.
Military ranks are definitely cool. I never really got my head around their exact order though. And it always worried me that at a certain rank you should be retired to a desk job. Nobody is going to be a 5 star general and on the front line.
But I think their best role is with an XP rank. Make it skill based (weighted to wins and medals).
You could even tie a Military rank into each Division. So that if you are good enough to be Onyx you earn Onxy XP and an Onyx Military Rank.
Exactly my point why would I be on the front line when I’ve reached the top rank?
I would retire to my quarters and mess about getting achievement in campaign etc…
However with Infinite I did this 20 - 40 games into the multiplayer.
This would work on a casual level but it wouldn’t on a competitive level. So it would have to run along side a skill based ranking system.
I have no issues with trueskill, I’m just against how quick it takes you to your desired rank relative to your CSR. It shortens the length and of the progression when reaching your desired pinch point.
For a lot this will coincide to how long people will play the game. Which I’m turn has a detrimental impact on player population.
That’s where we are now!
How many people stopped playing when they reached the end of the battle pass?
It’s the same when they reach their highest level, whether that’s bronze - Onyx.
If the content stops people stop. If I’m not moving up I’m not going to play. It’s all relative.
Trueskill2 and seasons is a major cause of this decrease in population.
The difficult part is your rank isn’t some unknown. People pretty much know where they are going to end up. And if you just spent the afternoon matched against Diamond 3’s - then it’s not hard to guess where the system is pegging you.
So I don’t think that’s going to work.
And you can only delay the inevitable for so long. If I’m a Platinum 5 I am a Platinum 5. Jumping through hoops for a couple of months to “earn my rank” isn’t going to change that.
And when the game finally lets me know my true rank, then what? We’re back to treading water. If I haven’t made Diamond by now chances are I’m not going to. So that’s it? Forever?
People seem to like be rewarded for wins.
So keep count of their wins at any particular rank. Give points for winning at different rank.
Eg. A win at Bronze 1 = 1 pt. Bronze 2 = 2 points, Gold 6 = 18 pts. etc.
Accumulate points for your Military Ranks - with a somewhat exponential scale.
This is a major issue for a game. If the player feels like progression has become stale/locked/limited to progress.
The player will look else where. Very few of the total population will carry on grinding. Especially if they favour competitiveness.
Trueskill2 will get you to that point quickly. In some sense which you could say the ten games to get you ranked is the honeymoon period (in the first season - casual players will likely drop off after season 2)
You could add on a xp progression so players can keep playing at there desired level…
But I bet you there were more Generals than ones with stars attached to it.
Or
Brigadiers than brigadier generals.
People ultimately will stop playing when max skill level is evidently reached.
Ranked play lists decline when people reach their desired skill. They often move over to more social playlists or fun modes. Which leaves a niche player base grinding…. Mainly in hardcore settings.
(No fun modes in Infinite 
)
On s side note…
(Not everybody will follow a Reach style xp progression system when the top rank will take forever to reach. But then a battle pass or H4 progression system was too short so population will drop when completed.)
Take us back to the ranked playlists honey moon period… where the majority will play until they reach their point of frustration. The place where you lose more than you win. It certainly deters the population… which is the main aim of a game.
To retain and keep as many players playing as you can.
Being generous
Trueskill got you to that point in 100 - 150 games. Drop off of player.
Trueskill2 gets you to that point in 20 - 40 games.
Drop off of players.
You also need to add… the more time somebody has worked at to reach a rank - say 100 games they are more likely to play more games at that skill level due to time invested.
If A player has only played 20 games and now stuck in Platinum or diamond they are less likely to carry on playing with only 20 games
Of time spent. - compared to 100 games spent.
Which one would a developer prefer ah?
I agree Trueskill2 is better at its job. It’s very successful. But I have to say if doesn’t help retain players In a ranked playlist. - population - which is inevitably death!
After the first two seasons in H5 - I think I only ever played the first ten games per season until I stopped completely. Most my friends play none. I played for the badge…. Fool on me!
Edit: In regards to a XP progression - wins and medals is quintessential. Plus I like your idea - more points the higher your rank 
I think the problem is we are quibbling over a handful of games to reveal your rank (TrueSkill2) vs a few hundred (Halo 3).
What Infinite ultimately needs is a way to engage players for 1000’s of games.
I’ve been grinding (sic) my brain for months in various discussions about this… and I haven’t really seen or come up with anything.
The basic problem is people just hit their skill ceiling… and it’s very hard to actually keep improving. And they hit it quickly. It probably took longer in the H2/3 days - everything was new and people were starting from scratch - but nowadays everyone has grown up on FPS and the ilk. They have the core skills on tap.
Except a buddy of mine we got playing Halo 5 last year. He had never played an FPS. And he was bad. Really, really bad. The worst I have ever seen.
Overall I think it’s not good to grind your skill rank.
The biggest danger I think is that players fall into the trap that they can keep going to the top. If I’m a Platinum 6 and start at Gold 1… all is good as I work my way through Bronze to Silver to Gold… and towards my final destination.
But then I suddenly stop? Platinum 6. But why? - I am playing just as well as I was when I was rising through the ranks. But now I just hit a invisible brick wall?
It’s tricky. I really do agree that we need to incentivise people to keep playing ranked. I really don’t think the current CSR system works. But I’m not sure what worked in H2/3 is going to be all that helpful going forward.