Modern vs. classic ranking system?

What are some thoughts on the modern vs. classic ranking system? Which would you like to see in Infinite?

I think the new ranking system used in Halo 5 is mathematically sound and better than a system such as Halo 3’s. It rewards players for playing consistently rather than always winning, but winning is still a factor. However, I think it should be a bit more upfront about the hidden bets the system makes on players. It’s a good system that rewards and punishes properly, but no one can tell in-game how it rewards and punishes post-game. That lack of clarity can leave players confused after a match they believe should have rewarded them more than it did. I should mention I don’t play ranked a whole lot and this is all based on my understanding from some of the posts I’ve read on Waypoint, so this view might not carry as much weight as someone who has lots of experience with the system.

EDIT: To clarify, I’m referring to Champion-Onyx-etc. vs. 1-50.

Are you referring to how CSR is calculated, or a 1-50 system compared to the Bronze-Onyx/Champion system?

> 2533274815711361;2:
> Are you referring to how CSR is calculated, or a 1-50 system compared to the Bronze-Onyx/Champion system?

Good question! I’m referring to the latter. Edited into the first post.

The new system is terrible. its almost as bad as MCCs “lets have a 50 match a 2”

Any placement match ive played since the first season is against players between onyx and champion so its like “okay, lets let champions play people who arent even ranked”

The old ranking system is the one that actually worked and did its job. You knew that a first lieutenant was going to get their -Yoink- kicked by just about anyone. Now we play and its like the lottery where we ask "Is this person a real silver player or did he get unfair placement matches that

> 2533274824050480;3:
> > 2533274815711361;2:
> > Are you referring to how CSR is calculated, or a 1-50 system compared to the Bronze-Onyx/Champion system?
>
> Good question! I’m referring to the latter. Edited into the first post.

In that case I lean towards the newer system. I don’t 100% know how it works, but if it’s true that it works by consistency, I’m more inclined to like it. As someone who took a break from the game and had to relearn a few things when coming back I think that is a more accurate ranking system.

But at the same time, I do appreciate the nature of a simple “You win you go up.” Perhaps the two could be combined into something new? I do think the coveted level 50 has more prestige than being an Onyx in Halo 5.

I really think infinite needs the 1-50 or maybe up to 100 or something. Regardless of how accurate this system is in matching, it creates a great incentive to keep playing and leveling up over time, as well as going through the ranks again on new accounts. The current ranking system with resets fail to do this and I feel hurts the longevity of its mp.

One issue I have is how I am mot always able to play, but when I can I average in the onyx-champ tier. When thw ranks get reset, I lose my progress. I know thos system has pros, though I find it disheartening to lose my progress.

I believe the new system would be far superior, as long as they fix it up. I know it ranks you by rank and skill, but I feel it leans to much towards the rank side. I’m a 149 in Halo 5 with a 3.4 KDA in Arena, but if I don’t play for 2+ days, I get really rusty. Having this happens sucks, because then I always lose my first match because, as you know, 140’s and up are sweats. If it relied more on skill, maybe this would happen less. Thoughts?

For ranking systems, ranks with names (ex. Private, Corporal, General, Inheritor) are better than SR imo.

I’m going to start by saying that I’m no competitive player. Modesty aside, I think I’m reasonably good at Halo, but ranked modes aren’t my first choice when I log in.

With that said, the whole point of a ranking system is to match players of similar skill, isn’t it? And if the system is pairing Onyx players against Silvers, or players who are 40+ against players who are in the single digits, then there’s no point to it. Of course, this may also happen due to low population and not be the fault of the ranking system itself. In any case, I think that the modern ranking system makes more sense. If a player demonstrates that they have diamond tier skills within the first 10 matches they play, why make them grind to the 1-50 system’s equivalent of diamond? I think that would just lead to a lot of lopsided matches, and those are no fun.

But again, I don’t know the ranking systems as well as other people who play competitive regularly. If there’s something about the old system that I’m missing, I’m open to learn about it.

i like the bronze-champ but the old one, not the one where you rank D3 as the highest

I just don’t want seasons.