Please 343! Don't let Halo 5 die! Fix Halo 5!!

Something that I am noticing is players talking how they are starting to have issues with finding matches, people are talking about the skill gap, Warzone farming, Companies and Pro players taking control of modes, leaving the casuals with nothing but death. Players are leaving Halo 5 because of choices made on how to approach matchmaking.

Before I continue, I love Halo 5, I played the Beta and loved it, I love it now, Its my most played game, But even I cannot ignore the glaring issues that have not been acknowledged. Please 343! Don’t let Halo 5 die out…

I will break this down into sections so that it will be more organized on what I think are issues and what can be done.

RANKING (A):
This is something that many people seem to be PO’ed about, ranking is broken, its as simple as that. Not just how is given to players, but the pairing of players as well. Before I continue, I will give a little info on how the system works as of now.

The first 10 matches you play are what give you your rank, these 10 matches are based on the players personal skill, but once the rank is rewarded, it becomes based on winning and losing. This is where the issues begin.

Why? Why is the system based on winning and losing? I understand that it is supposed to give the incentive of team work, but that is just not the case, By basing it on winning and losing you are hurting the player, just because this system encourages teamwork does not mean it will happen. People who already have a rank may lose just to affect un-ranked players, players who do well or poorly will be affected by teammates, poor players will get ranks better then their true skill while better players will be affected by the poor players performance. Instead of basing it on Win to Lose ratio, the system should be based on your Kill to Death ratio similar to Free for All. Along with that, Do not put un-ranked players with ranked players, this causes hiccups as people with ranks may to to take advantage of un-ranked and it destroys the purpose of the system as those with no rank may be placed in a game of lower skill or higher skill. Put un-ranked with un-ranked and ranked with ranked.

The second large issue with the system is the matchmaking itself, it does not work, getting put against a Diamond 4 and only being a Gold 2 means, it does not work. Having a team of bronze and silvers against a team of platinum and Golds means, it does not work. The matchmaking should only take from your ranking pool and the players just outside of it. for example, I am about Gold 5 in Breakout I believe, If that is so, then I should only be paired up with other Golds, platinum 1’s or Silver 6’s. This brings the gap out of gold so that you have a better chance of games, But keeps the gap close together at the same time. This is how the system should matchmake, not what ever way its working right now, cause its not working.

Also, to do with matchmaking is dropping and increasing in rank, I am fine with not getting dropped from Gold to Silver, that is fine, but as for the rest, it should be even, it should not take 5 wins to gain a rank, then only 1 lose to drop down, the weighing on that is ridiculous. If the system changed to take a Kill to Death ranking system, this system could be based on hwo you did KD wise, for example, again, I am Gold 5 in Breakout, it could take 20 KD points to get to Gold 6, I am at dead 0 for that progression, I win a game and get 10 kills and 2 deaths, I get 8 points that game for my rank, I win another game and magically, for the sake of time, get 24 kills and 12 deaths, I get 12 KD points and have increased to Gold 6. But, then I do a game and get 5 kills and 10 deaths, I just lost 5 points and went to 15, I am now back at Gold 5. That is how the system could work.

RANKING (W):
Now before I begin, No, I am not saying that a ranking system should be added to Warzone, not like Arena at least. Let me explain.

As said to the WAY top, Halo is having a bit a casual player problem, many are leave because the main social mode, Warzone, Is not really social, it is in fact very competitive, and because no system is in place, people get unfairly killed by pro players, players with better REQS, and companies, farming or not. This has caused many to stop playing Warzone or leave Halo 5 altogether. Now 343 says that a hidden system is in place, but, if so, it broken just like arena. Warzone needs a different system, here is what it needs to do.

The system needs to track the players(s) skill and give them a hidden rank, it needs to work similar to arena and pull from a similar skill pool. But, it also needs to compare REQ collections, for example, lets say I have 4 Legendary tanks, the other guy has 0 Legendary tanks, instead of pairing us, it will look for someone who has a similar size, like 2 or 3 tanks. But think of this happening for the whole collection, its like a collection average, then that average is compared to others and BOOM!, the match is made.
The system would take both your hidden skill rank and collection average to find other players, this not only makes the teams more evenly matched, but also the REQs.

WARZONE ISSUES:
This includes things such as farming and uneven teams. The first thing I will point out is farming, this is something that has split the community on whether it is right or wrong, but in truth, does not happen as much as you would think. People may call 343s chart a lie, but in truth, farming is actually rare, but that does jot mean it never happens. now, the ranking system above would filter out most issues as many large companies who are more likely to farm have many higher ranking players, which would mean that they would be put against other higher ranking players, along with their REQs being taken into account, so the system above would actually solve most issues with that. Heck, it would solve the issue of unevenly skilled teams as well. (This system really could fix a lot…)

CONTENT:
I cannot deny it, Halo 5’s launch content was poor, many modes where missing, still missing, a stripped down emblem and customization system, no forge or file browser, small amount of maps, not even social modes

While the emblems have improved, Forge was added, I can understand its delay, 343 was making a new forge, literally, modes like BTB and Grifball, with a social playlist were added and some new maps. But its not enough. 343, listen to me, you have done great with listening to the community, but hold all these things that past Halos had will only hurt the game in the long run, in fact, its already hurting it. Halo 5 needs more maps, modes, a better file browser, it just needs more, REQs are nice and all, they make money when people buy them and go toward HCS, but your hurting your game.

Here is what should be done so that more modes and maps can be delivered, you need to stop making REQs until June, focus fully on non-forged maps and modes, try to get 3 modes and 3 maps out each update along with other additions and changes, like adding a Reach like file browser so that I don’t need to friend every person on Xbox to get a map and mode, more customization, you guys did great with the emblems, even if you could change the arms and legs only, it would not affect the REQ system in any way, it could just all be given together as the body. We cannot have social modes clumped together in one, they need to blossom on their own.

These are just some ideas on what 343 could do to help Halo 5, please 343, if you ever see this.

Well said.

Ranking in Halo should never, ever, be based on K/D. Halo is not about K/D. And on top of that, you want to add hidden ranking to the only playlist in the game with actual social matching, so that decent players can’t solo queue without getting extra sweaty games and the matching times are far longer? Man. You just full of fantastic ideas. /s

You forgot a really important issue Teams.
Your Arene matchmaking should ne based by the skill of the 2 best players and not the average of your team.
The same things goes for the warzone matchmaking. The collection shouldn’t be average, it should only look at the number 1 player.
And last the must ad in group matchmaking.

I’ve often Played with 1 silver player, 2 (including me) Onyx players and 1 diamond player. The 2 onyx people just dominate every round.

Warzone should not have skill based matchmaking it is a very bad idea in social game modes. Bungie and treyarch had sbmm in there games and the back lash was insane - for good reason; it ruins social games. Req card matchmaking I can get behind but definetly not sbmm.

couldn’t have said it any better

> 2533274890584596;3:
> Ranking in Halo should never, ever, be based on K/D. Halo is not about K/D. And on top of that, you want to add hidden ranking to the only playlist in the game with actual social matching, so that decent players can’t solo queue without getting extra sweaty games and the matching times are far longer? Man. You just full of fantastic ideas. /s

I understand that Halo is not about going in Rambo style, but the system in place now is not working.

As for Warzone, look at what many are saying, Warzone is not social anymore, if it was at launch, its not now, This can be blamed for many reasons such as companies going in as large 12 man teams, Achilles, even stat padding if we want to get real deep, I also understand the issue with not finding matches, but in truth, you can never know until its actually tested.

I don’t want to take the social aspect of Warzone away, I am no where near hardcore player, I mainly play Warzone Assault, Fiesta, Grifball and BTB, But this would stop many of the issues people have talked about within warzone as a whole.

> 2535424120266661;5:
> Warzone should not have skill based matchmaking it is a very bad idea in social game modes. Bungie and treyarch had sbmm in there games and the back lash was insane - for good reason; it ruins social games. Req card matchmaking I can get behind but definetly not sbmm.

ok, I can understand this, Believe me, I only added the skill becuase it would back up the REQs, I literally came up with this system last night while typing. It was also the only thing I could think of to help with the uneven matching.

but for the REQ system, if just alone, it would basically average out all your cards into a number, taking quantity and rarity into account and create a collection average number. Then that number would get put against other numbers and those with numbers close to yours would get matched with you.

> 2533274921373075;4:
> You forgot a really important issue Teams.
> Your Arene matchmaking should ne based by the skill of the 2 best players and not the average of your team.
> The same things goes for the warzone matchmaking. The collection shouldn’t be average, it should only look at the number 1 player.
> And last the must ad in group matchmaking.
>
> I’ve often Played with 1 silver player, 2 (including me) Onyx players and 1 diamond player. The 2 onyx people just dominate every round.

The issue I see with this is what I said above, this causes players with lower skill to get higher ranks and to be placed in higher ranks, or vice versa. But, one way I could see this idea work is that not everyone gets the same amount of “ranking points” the top player would get 5 maybe, second 4, third 3 and forth 2, then if fifth 1?

Warzones system has nothing to do with winning or losing, the average is to compare REQ collections so that matches are more even REQ wise.

Agree 100%. I love halo 5, but I don’t refuse to acknowledge its issues.

> 2535455681930574;10:
> Agree 100%. I love halo 5, but I don’t refuse to acknowledge its issues.

I am starting to worry more and more though, I just saw an article where it said that E-sports was one of the main focuses of Halo 5 and that other games may follow suit. What ever happened to games beginning fun? why do all games need to be sports? I can get having a competitive thing going on the side, but making the game based solely on E-sports then ignoring the rest, that’s just fowl play. We are the ones giving you the most money not the people who play in the competitions, they are taking that money.

> 2535429756019039;11:
> > 2535455681930574;10:
> > Agree 100%. I love halo 5, but I don’t refuse to acknowledge its issues.
>
>
> I am starting to worry more and more though, I just saw an article where it said that E-sports was one of the main focuses of Halo 5 and that other games may follow suit. What ever happened to games beginning fun? why do all games need to be sports? I can get having a competitive thing going on the side, but making the game based solely on E-sports then ignoring the rest, that’s just fowl play. We are the ones giving you the most money not the people who play in the competitions, they are taking that money.

I guess they thought that warzone would be enough for the casual crowd. They. Were. Wrong. I’m glad they noticed and have added more social modes. At launch we had 2 and now we have 5. Hopefully we’ll get infection in April.

You dont seem to fully unterstand the issue of a ranking system that is based on individual skill. See, the problem is that you are not only playing against the enemy team, u r actually playing against your OWN team mates as well. If your team mates are better than you and you are on the bottom of the leader board u RANK down even though you went 4 and 1. So what is going to happen? I will tell you. People are not gonna care about winning.They wont care about losing either but what they care about is that their own team mate has just grabbed the sniper they wanted to get.
You see where I am going with this? An individual ranking system forms the main core of the whole “betraying-for-power-weapons” issue. A problem that could undoubtedly destroy a whole game.

Two more things:
In your post you said that you had to win 5 matches to rank up and only lose one to rank doen. Thats because the system is similar to an XP system: if you win you get, lets say 10xp. If you lose, your xp drops by 10. If you reach 50xp you rank up. What happens if you reach 50xp, rank up and lose the following game? Isnt it only logical that you rank down?

And the last thing:
You said that, as a Gold 5 you should only be matched against other golds, silver6 and plat1. If we convert the tier into csr numbers, which they are, Gold 5 would be like lvl 17 ( bronze tier is lvl 1-6, silver is lvl 7-12 and gold is 13-18, etc…).
Basically you are saying: as a lvl 17 you should only be matched against players from silver6 (which is lvl 12,so players that are 5 ranks below you) to plat1 (which are lvl 19s). Sounds like you want to only play against players worse than you.

I cant really say any thing about the warzone issue other than that I never go into warzone and play competetively. If we lose, we lose I dont really care. I just have fun sniping people or getting overkills with the saw

If they just added a casual matchmaking category for Warzone that didn’t allow parties over 6 that would bring back the casual players.

> 2533274977982443;13:
> You dont seem to fully unterstand the issue of a ranking system that is based on individual skill. See, the problem is that you are not only playing against the enemy team, u r actually playing against your OWN team mates as well. If your team mates are better than you and you are on the bottom of the leader board u RANK down even though you went 4 and 1. So what is going to happen? I will tell you. People are not gonna care about winning.They wont care about losing either but what they care about is that their own team mate has just grabbed the sniper they wanted to get.
> You see where I am going with this? An individual ranking system forms the main core of the whole “betraying-for-power-weapons” issue. A problem that could undoubtedly destroy a whole game.
>
> Two more things:
> In your post you said that you had to win 5 matches to rank up and only lose one to rank doen. Thats because the system is similar to an XP system: if you win you get, lets say 10xp. If you lose, your xp drops by 10. If you reach 50xp you rank up. What happens if you reach 50xp, rank up and lose the following game? Isnt it only logical that you rank down?
>
> And the last thing:
> You said that, as a Gold 5 you should only be matched against other golds, silver6 and plat1. If we convert the tier into csr numbers, which they are, Gold 5 would be like lvl 17 ( bronze tier is lvl 1-6, silver is lvl 7-12 and gold is 13-18, etc…).
> Basically you are saying: as a lvl 17 you should only be matched against players from silver6 (which is lvl 12,so players that are 5 ranks below you) to plat1 (which are lvl 19s). Sounds like you want to only play against players worse than you.
>
> I cant really say any thing about the warzone issue other than that I never go into warzone and play competetively. If we lose, we lose I dont really care. I just have fun sniping people or getting overkills with the saw

Ok, I can understand the issue with the solo play causing people not to win, But I don’t understand the issue with getting paired against other golds and platinum 1’s and silver 6’s.

In truth you have to be realistic about this, if systems were that precise you would never find a game, there has to be some leeway. I understand why you mean, and no, I don’t want to only verse lower ranked players, but its the best that could be done, get players who are in the same rank group and the players just outside of it.

as for ranking up, base it on a fixed EXP increase/decrese then if you win, you get 10 of example, if you lose you lose 10.

> 2535429756019039;9:
> > 2533274921373075;4:
> > You forgot a really important issue Teams.
> > Your Arene matchmaking should ne based by the skill of the 2 best players and not the average of your team.
> > The same things goes for the warzone matchmaking. The collection shouldn’t be average, it should only look at the number 1 player.
> > And last the must ad in group matchmaking.
> >
> > I’ve often Played with 1 silver player, 2 (including me) Onyx players and 1 diamond player. The 2 onyx people just dominate every round.
>
>
> The issue I see with this is what I said above, this causes players with lower skill to get higher ranks and to be placed in higher ranks, or vice versa. But, one way I could see this idea work is that not everyone gets the same amount of “ranking points” the top player would get 5 maybe, second 4, third 3 and forth 2, then if fifth 1?
>
> Warzones system has nothing to do with winning or losing, the average is to compare REQ collections so that matches are more even REQ wise.

I could see those points working. Winning Team: 1st gets 4, 2nd gets 3, 3rd gets 2, 4th gets 1. Losing Team: 1st gets 1, 2nd gets 0, 3rd gets -1, 4th gets -2. You could have it so you need like 8 points to rank up

> 2533274842997033;16:
> > 2535429756019039;9:
> > > 2533274921373075;4:
> > > You forgot a really important issue Teams.
> > > Your Arene matchmaking should ne based by the skill of the 2 best players and not the average of your team.
> > > The same things goes for the warzone matchmaking. The collection shouldn’t be average, it should only look at the number 1 player.
> > > And last the must ad in group matchmaking.
> > >
> > > I’ve often Played with 1 silver player, 2 (including me) Onyx players and 1 diamond player. The 2 onyx people just dominate every round.
> >
> >
> > The issue I see with this is what I said above, this causes players with lower skill to get higher ranks and to be placed in higher ranks, or vice versa. But, one way I could see this idea work is that not everyone gets the same amount of “ranking points” the top player would get 5 maybe, second 4, third 3 and forth 2, then if fifth 1?
> >
> > Warzones system has nothing to do with winning or losing, the average is to compare REQ collections so that matches are more even REQ wise.
>
>
> I could see those points working. Winning Team: 1st gets 4, 2nd gets 3, 3rd gets 2, 4th gets 1. Losing Team: 1st gets 1, 2nd gets 0, 3rd gets -1, 4th gets -2. You could have it so you need like 8 points to rank up

there we go!!

> 2533274842997033;14:
> If they just added a casual matchmaking category for Warzone that didn’t allow parties over 6 that would bring back the casual players.

I don’t think that would work because then people would get mad that they couldn’t get all their friends in. They just need to match teams with teams.

> 2535455681930574;18:
> > 2533274842997033;14:
> > If they just added a casual matchmaking category for Warzone that didn’t allow parties over 6 that would bring back the casual players.
>
>
> I don’t think that would work because then people would get mad that they couldn’t get all their friends in. They just need to match teams with teams.

Correct, I only play warzone if my group wants to, no one likes to solo that stuff and having a team adds so much more.

> 2533274923562209;19:
> > 2535455681930574;18:
> > > 2533274842997033;14:
> > > If they just added a casual matchmaking category for Warzone that didn’t allow parties over 6 that would bring back the casual players.
> >
> >
> > I don’t think that would work because then people would get mad that they couldn’t get all their friends in. They just need to match teams with teams.
>
>
> Correct, I only play warzone if my group wants to, no one likes to solo that stuff and having a team adds so much more.

not only that, but adding a social version will stop that kind of issue, half a team can still do a lot, it would be pointless. Just compare REQ collections.