New Ranking System!

> 2533274846562867;30:
> > 2533274953123640;29:
> > > 2533274846562867;28:
> > > > 2533274796457055;25:
> > > > > 2533274846562867;23:
> > > > > i think it would be better if the players get placed only with and against players in the same division.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > In an ideal world. that’s how it works. But it’s not that simple to execute.
> > >
> > >
> > > Starcraft 2 did it right.
> >
> >
> > I’m pretty sure they did it the same.
> >
> > Silvers still end up matched with bronze and gold players occasionally.
>
>
> Yeah, but you were matched against a player with the same performance in a hidden rating called MMR, so there was a 50% win ratio when paired against those of similar MMR.

I’m sureHalo 5 also has a hidden MMR that it matches on and pushes for 50/50.

The only thing they need to adjust is what Tier the players get placed in after the qualifying rounds. It’s all over the place it seems. Other then that everything works fine. You can’t go by anything other then wins/losses or the camping and not playing to win as a team would ruin everything. Lets not forget that people have bad games as well.

> 2533274910482609;240:
> > 2533274846562867;2:
> > The whole ranking system is a mess, they should had used the halo reach ranking system
>
>
> what the no-life rank system of reach? play more get more rank, never go down ? pathetic rank system.
>
> it should be more like Halo 2 ranking system, skil based were you can go up and down a rank. none of this happy teletubbie reach, go play COD if you love that so much

You weren’t placed against other players based on your visible “Rank” in Reach. That only showed how many credits you had earned, which isn’t a bad thing. Reach used BPR - Battle Proficiency Rating - to place you against others. It used KDR, Assists, W/L ratio, betrayals, suicides, quits, etc… to rank you and it was out of 100. It was brilliant. It used logical stats to rank you, not just your W/L ratio.

I mean to be honest I enjoy the current ranking system, but they do need to make certain tweaks to it to at least reward a good game for the loser teams carries.

> 2533274874122274;243:
> > 2533274910482609;240:
> > > 2533274846562867;2:
> > > The whole ranking system is a mess, they should had used the halo reach ranking system
> >
> >
> > what the no-life rank system of reach? play more get more rank, never go down ? pathetic rank system.
> >
> > it should be more like Halo 2 ranking system, skil based were you can go up and down a rank. none of this happy teletubbie reach, go play COD if you love that so much
>
>
> You weren’t placed against other players based on your visible “Rank” in Reach. That only showed how many credits you had earned, which isn’t a bad thing. Reach used BPR - Battle Proficiency Rating - to place you against others. It used KDR, Assists, W/L ratio, betrayals, suicides, quits, etc… to rank you and it was out of 100. It was brilliant. It used logical stats to rank you, not just your W/L ratio.

They threw out BPR pretty quickly because it had a lot of problems though, and switched back to using Trueskill.

This was largely because how easy it was to cheese BPR, and also because it encouraged selfish play.

If you use individual performance skills, then you are competing against your own teammates. People complained about this a ton in Reach.

It led to people, e.g., surrendering power weapon map positions to chase kills in order to get that higher K/D than your teammate. It ended with people losing the match all the time because of stuff like that.

So they took it out.

So 343 chose the compromise that, yeah, feels bad when you perform well and lose, but it still super encourages you to learn how to play as a team.

Who cares if you go 20-5 if you aren’t protecting power weapons or doing the objectives?

> 2533274839818445;241:
> > 2533274846562867;30:
> > > 2533274953123640;29:
> > > > 2533274846562867;28:
> > > > > 2533274796457055;25:
> > > > > > 2533274846562867;23:
> > > > > > i think it would be better if the players get placed only with and against players in the same division.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > In an ideal world. that’s how it works. But it’s not that simple to execute.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Starcraft 2 did it right.
> > >
> > >
> > > I’m pretty sure they did it the same.
> > >
> > > Silvers still end up matched with bronze and gold players occasionally.
> >
> >
> > Yeah, but you were matched against a player with the same performance in a hidden rating called MMR, so there was a 50% win ratio when paired against those of similar MMR.
>
>
> I’m sureHalo 5 also has a hidden MMR that it matches on and pushes for 50/50.

I find it hard to believe , since the difference between a guy that got first place(17 kills) and the guy that got last place(1 kill) is really big.

> 2533274796457055;6:
> > 2606994427173321;5:
> > Agreed. If we lose because another player drops out why do I get penalized too??? Of course we lost! It’s impossible to win CTF or strongholds with only two or three players!
>
>
> Because the emphasis is on TEAM play. Ideally you should be playing with a full team. I know that’s not always possible but there’s tons of people that look for teammates on here so that’s an option.

Seems odd to make the ranking system team-based, and then remove split screen

> 2533274839818445;245:
> > 2533274874122274;243:
> > > 2533274910482609;240:
> > > > 2533274846562867;2:
> > > > The whole ranking system is a mess, they should had used the halo reach ranking system
> > >
> > >
> > > what the no-life rank system of reach? play more get more rank, never go down ? pathetic rank system.
> > >
> > > it should be more like Halo 2 ranking system, skil based were you can go up and down a rank. none of this happy teletubbie reach, go play COD if you love that so much
> >
> >
> > You weren’t placed against other players based on your visible “Rank” in Reach. That only showed how many credits you had earned, which isn’t a bad thing. Reach used BPR - Battle Proficiency Rating - to place you against others. It used KDR, Assists, W/L ratio, betrayals, suicides, quits, etc… to rank you and it was out of 100. It was brilliant. It used logical stats to rank you, not just your W/L ratio.
>
>
> They threw out BPR pretty quickly because it had a lot of problems though, and switched back to using Trueskill.
>
> This was largely because how easy it was to cheese BPR, and also because it encouraged selfish play.
>
> If you use individual performance skills, then you are competing against your own teammates. People complained about this a ton in Reach.
>
> It led to people, e.g., surrendering power weapon map positions to chase kills in order to get that higher K/D than your teammate. It ended with people losing the match all the time because of stuff like that.
>
> So they took it out.
>
> So 343 chose the compromise that, yeah, feels bad when you perform well and lose, but it still super encourages you to learn how to play as a team.
>
> Who cares if you go 20-5 if you aren’t protecting power weapons or doing the objectives?

As far as I know the BPR system is still in use, can you provide a link showing me otherwise? The reason I say so is because mine still fluctuates after games.

But I don’t find it to be a problem - nor did I see TOO much complaining about it (maybe I was in the wrong group, Idk) - because it took wins into account, and needing wins to increase your rating promoted team play, guarding power weapons, and achieving the actual objectives. Maybe I’m overly bias towards it but I thought it worked well. It was Bungie’s last ranking system after all, and I feel like Bungie’s systems only improved from the last one. But I could be wrong and my opinion obviously isn’t for everyone and I understand that…

I think if the halo 5 system was right, there wouldn’t be players with k/d +15 and -15 in the same match

> 2533274874122274;248:
> > 2533274839818445;245:
> > > 2533274874122274;243:
> > > > 2533274910482609;240:
> > > > > 2533274846562867;2:
> > > > > The whole ranking system is a mess, they should had used the halo reach ranking system
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > what the no-life rank system of reach? play more get more rank, never go down ? pathetic rank system.
> > > >
> > > > it should be more like Halo 2 ranking system, skil based were you can go up and down a rank. none of this happy teletubbie reach, go play COD if you love that so much
> > >
> > >
> > > You weren’t placed against other players based on your visible “Rank” in Reach. That only showed how many credits you had earned, which isn’t a bad thing. Reach used BPR - Battle Proficiency Rating - to place you against others. It used KDR, Assists, W/L ratio, betrayals, suicides, quits, etc… to rank you and it was out of 100. It was brilliant. It used logical stats to rank you, not just your W/L ratio.
> >
> >
> > They threw out BPR pretty quickly because it had a lot of problems though, and switched back to using Trueskill.
> >
> > This was largely because how easy it was to cheese BPR, and also because it encouraged selfish play.
> >
> > If you use individual performance skills, then you are competing against your own teammates. People complained about this a ton in Reach.
> >
> > It led to people, e.g., surrendering power weapon map positions to chase kills in order to get that higher K/D than your teammate. It ended with people losing the match all the time because of stuff like that.
> >
> > So they took it out.
> >
> > So 343 chose the compromise that, yeah, feels bad when you perform well and lose, but it still super encourages you to learn how to play as a team.
> >
> > Who cares if you go 20-5 if you aren’t protecting power weapons or doing the objectives?
>
>
> As far as I know the BPR system is still in use, can you provide a link showing me otherwise? The reason I say so is because mine still fluctuates after games.
>
> But I don’t find it to be a problem - nor did I see TOO much complaining about it (maybe I was in the wrong group, Idk) - because it took wins into account, and needing wins to increase your rating promoted team play, guarding power weapons, and achieving the actual objectives. Maybe I’m overly bias towards it but I thought it worked well. It was Bungie’s last ranking system after all, and I feel like Bungie’s systems only improved from the last one. But I could be wrong and my opinion obviously isn’t for everyone and I understand that…

I think BPR is still being calculated, but not used for matchmaking. It’s a fun number for individuals to look at, but not used for any major ranking or matchmaking purposes.

I’d be OK with a fun number like that, as long as the main number was still CSR. So you have one number that is pure, and deals with your ability to help your team win, and another “fun” one on the side to measure your individual performance.

I thought you were referring to the way that skill was calculated for Reach’s Arena Ranking area. That started with something like BPR, but was dumped because people would try and min-max it by playing selfishly, and the core complained.

> 2533274817492720;3:
> they should have the halo 3 ranking system, actually made me feel like i was good. i have always thought the “getting points and ranking up” system was crap. just cause you play a lot doesn’t mean you should be the top rank, only way to get the top rank is to do good and earn it.

H3 ranking was great

I mean, who would you rather have on your team?

The guy who goes 12-10 with 15 assists, and makes sure someone on your team always has the power weapons, and you usually win?

Or the guy who goes lone wolf and is always 20-5, but doesn’t really influence the win more than that?

I’d rather have the first guy on my team, and I’d rather be matchmade according to that.

Especially when it’s not Slayer, but even if it is, being a team player when it comes to map control is pretty important in H5.

It’s how the Pros play as well. If you were to matchmake and judge skill based on individual performance, it would penalize Pro players in a support role — which is common.

> 2533274834104412;1:
> I have had so many games where I go 20 and 10, or something along those lines and still lose skill! This is due to all of my other team members going horribly negative. They need to revamp the system fast because so many players are in the wrong tier. If somone goes 2 and 17 they are not Diamond, and I shouldn’t suffer for their poor play!

well it doesn’t get more relatable than this

> 2533274839818445;250:
> > 2533274874122274;248:
> > > 2533274839818445;245:
> > > > 2533274874122274;243:
> > > > > 2533274910482609;240:
> > > > > > 2533274846562867;2:
> > > > > > The whole ranking system is a mess, they should had used the halo reach ranking system
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > what the no-life rank system of reach? play more get more rank, never go down ? pathetic rank system.
> > > > >
> > > > > it should be more like Halo 2 ranking system, skil based were you can go up and down a rank. none of this happy teletubbie reach, go play COD if you love that so much
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > You weren’t placed against other players based on your visible “Rank” in Reach. That only showed how many credits you had earned, which isn’t a bad thing. Reach used BPR - Battle Proficiency Rating - to place you against others. It used KDR, Assists, W/L ratio, betrayals, suicides, quits, etc… to rank you and it was out of 100. It was brilliant. It used logical stats to rank you, not just your W/L ratio.
> > >
> > >
> > > They threw out BPR pretty quickly because it had a lot of problems though, and switched back to using Trueskill.
> > >
> > > This was largely because how easy it was to cheese BPR, and also because it encouraged selfish play.
> > >
> > > If you use individual performance skills, then you are competing against your own teammates. People complained about this a ton in Reach.
> > >
> > > It led to people, e.g., surrendering power weapon map positions to chase kills in order to get that higher K/D than your teammate. It ended with people losing the match all the time because of stuff like that.
> > >
> > > So they took it out.
> > >
> > > So 343 chose the compromise that, yeah, feels bad when you perform well and lose, but it still super encourages you to learn how to play as a team.
> > >
> > > Who cares if you go 20-5 if you aren’t protecting power weapons or doing the objectives?
> >
> >
> > As far as I know the BPR system is still in use, can you provide a link showing me otherwise? The reason I say so is because mine still fluctuates after games.
> >
> > But I don’t find it to be a problem - nor did I see TOO much complaining about it (maybe I was in the wrong group, Idk) - because it took wins into account, and needing wins to increase your rating promoted team play, guarding power weapons, and achieving the actual objectives. Maybe I’m overly bias towards it but I thought it worked well. It was Bungie’s last ranking system after all, and I feel like Bungie’s systems only improved from the last one. But I could be wrong and my opinion obviously isn’t for everyone and I understand that…
>
>
> I think BPR is still being calculated, but not used for matchmaking. It’s a fun number for individuals to look at, but not used for any major ranking or matchmaking purposes.
>
> I’d be OK with a fun number like that, as long as the main number was still CSR. So you have one number that is pure, and deals with your ability to help your team win, and another “fun” one on the side to measure your individual performance.
>
> I thought you were referring to the way that skill was calculated for Reach’s Arena Ranking area. That started with something like BPR, but was dumped because people would try and min-max it by playing selfishly, and the core complained.

Right, I guess that makes sense since the population in Halo Reach is down so much. I’m guessing there is no active system used to separate players because there wouldn’t be enough to do it accurately so it’s probably all random (which I don’t think is a bad thing either, I like random matches - like Warzone).

But now you’re talking about two different ranking systems and that would cause a dilemma about which should be used. One system you mentioned would put you into games based on how well you can help out teammates, and another with how good of a player you are by yourself (in a way). I’d honestly rather be ranked and sorted based on how well I do as an individual, which shows my own personal skill. I realize that’s not for everyone. I personally don’t like my rank being affected by others performance because I don’t believe that’s a true representative of my own PERSONAL skill…again, that’s just me. Sure, I do think your W/L ratio should affect your ranking, I don’t think it should be the biggest factor, but a factor nonetheless.

Looking back at my most recent comment…I guess I’d be OK with a ranking system that used team performance so long as there was also a system that showed how good of a player you were individually…

Hoestly the 3v4 gamess hould give less penalty 4 loss and more ftw

Right, the system is pretty good, but needs work. I like the idea of team work but the people who do good should atleast get a bit of exp.

> 2533274834104412;1:
> I have had so many games where I go 20 and 10, or something along those lines and still lose skill! This is due to all of my other team members going horribly negative. They need to revamp the system fast because so many players are in the wrong tier. If somone goes 2 and 17 they are not Diamond, and I shouldn’t suffer for their poor play!

Hasn’t it always been like that? In Halo 3 you rank up because of wins, not points…

I like the ranking system tbh. If you don’t like
your teammates, invite some ppl that are good to your fireteam

All ranking should be a personal performance measurement with bonus for winning games