Whats up guys had a quick thought for ranked settings, that i thought would benefit everyone. Screw that mmr system 343 simplexicons implemented…
For csr i think is should be simplier than complicated and should be as follows.
A win = +1
A win with a good performance= +2
A loss with a good performance= -1
A loss with a bad performance= -2
I also think if the player base is there than we should have onyx as its own division were onyx players only vs onyx players. This would help the lower ranks because they wouldn’t get onyx players decimating them from bronze to diamond, while helping the onyx players because it will minimize the lower iq players from the lower ranks being in their matches.
Anyways this was just a quick thought, let me know what you think and the pros/cons of having the csr like this.
No bro how it works rn is you can have a gold player who is as good as a onyx player because of the hidden mmr but just dosent have the rank to show for it and it makes those decisions based on per player base instead of rank based. With my ranking system if you are a diamond 4 you will vs other diamond 4s for example and gain/lose because thats the rank you are at, and will match you with other diamond 4s even though they are levels above you. I just feel like its best to rank up via your actual rank, over the game telling you if you deserve to rank up or not because of the mmr.
sorry, but ELO-based matchmaking is perfect for me.
Competitive Halo is a team effort. If you aren’t communicating via pings or voice chat, then you better be good enough to carry your team to victory until you reach your appropriate rank.
Also one glaring fault of the system you describe is:
how would you define ‘a win with good performance’
how would you define ‘a loss with a bad performance’
how would you define ‘a loss with a good performance’
Players shouldn’t be punished for losing. An MMR or ELO system prevents this & accurately places you into the category of players with a similar skill level to you.
Lmao players shouldnt be punished for loosing?? Thats absurd thats takes the whole purpose of competitive away. This is coming from a onyx 1650 in infinite , onyx in halo 5, and 50 back in 3. But you did bring some good points on how they will determine a good or bad performance. i think there should be a clear map for example, obj, kills, assists ect matter the most. Mmr is completely stupid way of running a “ranking system” should just be based on pure rank and naturally players will be in the rank they belong unless they improve and move up.
You are contradicting yourself here, because first you say you want the matchmaking based on skill, but directly after that you say you want it based on rank (wich are often not the same, perhaps with the exception of the Onyx rank).
The whole problem with the current ranked matchmaking where you see people from different ranks in one match is because it is based on skill and ignores the rank.
i’m sorry mate, i just don’t think i understand the differences + benefits that your idea has over MMR/ELO-based matchmaking
when i said ‘punished for losing’, what i was trying to illustrate is that a system wherein
‘a win’ increases your rank by 1
a ‘loss with a bad performance’ reduces your rank by 2
sounds extremely frustrating, and i personally don’t agree with those binary values/sentiment being injected into ranked matchmaking.
if i am a player that has a bad game why am i punished for it? it could be as a result of bad luck, or maybe it’s just a day where i suck for some reason. why does my teammate who got more kills not lose as much as i do when we are the losing team
what if i am a player that has a bad game and loses due to no fault of their own? why should they be punished for things out of control? temporary lag, server outages/issues, ISP outages/issues, toxic/abusive teammates etc etc - if my teammates decide to actively grief me, but they finish with more kills, why should i be punished & lose more points than them?
again, im confused because what you’re describing is how it currently works!
yes, I believe that if you perform poorly and lose you should be punished because chances are you could have possibly made the team lose, for example a negative K/D in slayer would be at its simpliest form. However if you perform poorly but team ends up winning there will be no penalty for you playing like -Yoink!-.
I agree smurfing is a big issue and even bigger with the free to play model. My form of the rank system was to change the style 343 had which would be csr given based and judged by performances. However I do think ELO is good but i feel most times wins and losses arent effected as much as they should.
i think people focus far too much on the specifics of the progress made after each match… we get a progress bar showing what we earned/lost from the match, we have a tier system - at a certain point I wonder why people aren’t just playing the game & focusing on improving lol
Why do we have to have a number to grind? Especially one that becomes less accurate or meaningful the higher it gets.
I would keep the six divisions; bronze to onyx (as standard deviations from the mean) and increase the tiers out to 10. That would give 60 levels in total. You can then buffer the CSR so that you don’t immediately drop a rank you have just earnt.
You just need an arrow after each match telling you the direction you are heading.
People can play and have fun. Let the journey take care of the destination.
Your logic is a fallacy. The way the game is meant to be played would put players unrealistically ranked based on what role they are playing in the game. The trueskill2 system is bad, real bad, and you are here supporting the worst system in the history of Ranked Matchmaking.
A division amongst onyx players. Mmmmm. What would that be.
Of that’s right. Champoin ranks. Once you reached champoin in halo 5 you weren’t facing diamonds. Or at least you weren’t suppose to. Champoin ranks should come back.
I also like your rank system. Nice and simple. Like it should me.
