Why do some people on this forum think that a ranking system that can reward players for individual performance is a viable option? I understand that if you do well and your team loses you don’t like it, well tough luck. No one is giving LeBron a ring for posting MVP like numbers every night, Malone never got a ring, Ewing never got a ring, 80’s Bills, Cubs for 100 years now. You don’t get a bonus for getting fired. If you lose that’s it, try better next time. Halo is a team game and if you lose the match you’ve lost it as a team. There is no reason at the age of 17+ you should still want a consolation prize, we’re done with pee-wee baseball, let’s grow up. Win/Loss makes sense, 1-50 is a proven working ranking system 95% of the time, which only fails when someone illegally kicks you offline. Let’s stop this silly debate and just agree that there should be no consolation prizes, that winning is winning.
Just thinking if people really want an individual performance “prize” let’s have a MVP counter on your service record. (I’m thinking I just came up with a really good idea.)
In case people want to bring it up, I was a 44 in H2, multiple 50’s in H3, gold division in reach season 1 & current. (Only played arena recently because of TU implementation)
I think rank should be win/loss. But reducing or negating the impact of a loss with a substantially positive k/d, say +4, would fix a lot of problems, allow people to go in by themselves more, and make the ranking more accurate. I say this as someone who has no problem finding teammates.
People have overconfidence in themselves, and usually have selective memory with their matchmaking experience.
Nobody remembers the times they got carried, or the times derankers where on the other team, only when they carried or had derankers on their team. This is the basis for the hate of a pure W/L system.
Here is a little test for anyone who is against W/L. Go look at your last 25-whatever ranked matches in a given playlist and tally up all the times you won but went negative, and lost but went positive.
> I think rank should be win/loss. But reducing or negating the impact of a loss with a substantially positive k/d, say +4, would fix a lot of problems, allow people to go in by themselves more, and make the ranking more accurate.
Then the players on the losing team will start to worry about their K/D, instead of trying hard for the win.
I have gone in by myself for the majority of my ranks in Halo 3 and Reach. W/L works fine.
> Why do some people on this forum think that a ranking system that can reward players for individual performance is a viable option? I understand that if you do well and your team loses you don’t like it, well tough luck. No one is giving LeBron a ring for posting MVP like numbers every night, Malone never got a ring, Ewing never got a ring, 80’s Bills, Cubs for 100 years now. You don’t get a bonus for getting fired. If you lose that’s it, try better next time. Halo is a team game and if you lose the match you’ve lost it as a team. There is no reason at the age of 17+ you should still want a consolation prize, we’re done with pee-wee baseball, let’s grow up. Win/Loss makes sense, 1-50 is a proven working ranking system 95% of the time, which only fails when someone illegally kicks you offline. Let’s stop this silly debate and just agree that there should be no consolation prizes, that winning is winning.
>
> Just thinking if people really want an individual performance “prize” let’s have a MVP counter on your service record. (I’m thinking I just came up with a really good idea.)
>
> In case people want to bring it up, I was a 44 in H2, multiple 50’s in H3, gold division in reach season 1 & current. (Only played arena recently because of TU implementation)
If its 1-50 TrueSkill, then how does W/L make up your INDIVIDUAL SKILL?
How does giving players an INDIVIDUALLY NUMBERED (1-50) rank work if its based on TEAM PERFORMANCE? So if I am on the winning team in all of my matches but have a -20 k/d, I deserve to be a rank 50?
<mark>If I have 0 kills and 20 deaths every match but my team wins every match, that means I should be a rank 50?</mark>
> If its 1-50 TrueSkill, then how does W/L make up your INDIVIDUAL SKILL?
>
>
>
> How does giving players an INDIVIDUALLY NUMBERED (1-50) rank work if its based on TEAM PERFORMANCE? So if I am on the winning team in all of my matches but have a -20 k/d, I deserve to be a rank 50?
>
> It makes no sense
It makes sense because first, THAT NEVER HAPPENS.
Second, yes, if you can WIN while going negative every game, you are doing other things besides killing that are helping your team win.
That is the thing, there is so much more to winning in Halo, than any set of stats can show.
> If its 1-50 TrueSkill, then how does W/L make up your INDIVIDUAL SKILL?
>
>
>
> How does giving players an INDIVIDUALLY NUMBERED (1-50) rank work if its based on TEAM PERFORMANCE? So if I am on the winning team in all of my matches but have a -20 k/d, I deserve to be a rank 50?
>
> If I have 0 kills and 20 deaths every match but my team wins every match, that means I should be a rank 50?
>
>
> It makes no sense
The chance that you go -20 (40% of your teams maximum total death count)and still win the game is below 1%.
> > If its 1-50 TrueSkill, then how does W/L make up your INDIVIDUAL SKILL?
> >
> >
> >
> > How does giving players an INDIVIDUALLY NUMBERED (1-50) rank work if its based on TEAM PERFORMANCE? So if I am on the winning team in all of my matches but have a -20 k/d, I deserve to be a rank 50?
> >
> > It makes no sense
>
> It makes sense because first, THAT NEVER HAPPENS.
>
> Second, yes, if you can WIN while going negative every game, you are doing other things besides killing that are helping your team win.
>
> That is the thing, there is so much more to winning in Halo, than any set of stats can show.
Ok, well if they make the ranking system based on wins, then they shouldnt give players an INDIVIDUAL rank (ONLY IN FREE FOR ALL SHOULD AN INDIVIDUAL RANK BE GIVEN)
> > > If its 1-50 TrueSkill, then how does W/L make up your INDIVIDUAL SKILL?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > How does giving players an INDIVIDUALLY NUMBERED (1-50) rank work if its based on TEAM PERFORMANCE? So if I am on the winning team in all of my matches but have a -20 k/d, I deserve to be a rank 50?
> > >
> > > It makes no sense
> >
> > It makes sense because first, THAT NEVER HAPPENS.
> >
> > Second, yes, if you can WIN while going negative every game, you are doing other things besides killing that are helping your team win.
> >
> > That is the thing, there is so much more to winning in Halo, than any set of stats can show.
>
> Ok, well if they make the ranking system based on wins, then they shouldnt give players an INDIVIDUAL rank (ONLY IN FREE FOR ALL SHOULD AN INDIVIDUAL RANK BE GIVEN)
If I go (on average) 20 kills for 5 deaths, lose the majority of those games because of how the rest of the team (on average) performs, that means I should be labeled as a low ranking player?
> If its 1-50 TrueSkill, then how does W/L make up your INDIVIDUAL SKILL?
This is a fair point. Individual ranks in team playlists are based on ephemeral teams. It is a bit misleading to compare them to divisions in team sports because those teams are long-lasting. Because 1-50 ranks are supposed to be indicative of and are usually perceived as individual skill, but are actually based on consistent performance of changing groups of players one happens to get matched with, it makes sense that there be a system to give credit to individual skill. That’s why I am in favor at the very least at reducing the impact of losses for proficient players. It is the main and most bitter and understandable complaint and easily fixed.
> > Dbeykiller was my H2 tag. forgot to quote.
>
> Lol, well all I saw was circle boosting, stopped going back at 36.
>
> So, what was your legitimate level in Halo 2.
I always hit that wall of modders and could never get into the higher 30’s although I ripped in custom FFA’s with parties full of symbols. Circle boosting wasn’t me btw, my cousin decided it was something to do when he came over my house one weekend. I was hooked on ruby/sapphire/emerald like an addict and payed no mind to what he was doing on my xbox.
> If its 1-50 TrueSkill, then how does W/L make up your INDIVIDUAL SKILL?
>
>
>
> How does giving players an INDIVIDUALLY NUMBERED (1-50) rank work if its based on TEAM PERFORMANCE? So if I am on the winning team in all of my matches but have a -20 k/d, I deserve to be a rank 50?
>
> <mark>If I have 0 kills and 20 deaths every match but my team wins every match, that means I should be a rank 50?</mark>
>
>
> It makes no sense
Chances are that if you went negative 20 every game you would be lucky to win 1 out of 10 games. Point being if you consistantly go negative your win loss ratio will show it. It all pans out in the end.
Also some players are just better support players so why should they have a bad rank when they are the ones driving the hogg for the guy who goes +20
> > If its 1-50 TrueSkill, then how does W/L make up your INDIVIDUAL SKILL?
>
> This is a fair point. Individual ranks in team playlists are based on ephemeral teams. It is a bit misleading to compare them to divisions in team sports because those teams are long-lasting. Because 1-50 ranks are supposed to be indicative of and are usually perceived as individual skill, but are actually based on consistent performance of changing groups of players one happens to get matched with, it makes sense that there be a system to give credit to individual skill. That’s why I am in favor at the very least at reducing the impact of losses for proficient players. It is the main and most bitter and understandable complaint and easily fixed.
When all that matters is a W or L and your down by 10 kills, you and your current teammates rally together to try to make a comeback.
When you can reduce the impact of a loss by going positive, you don’t gave a -Yoink- about your team.
> > If its 1-50 TrueSkill, then how does W/L make up your INDIVIDUAL SKILL?
> >
> >
> >
> > How does giving players an INDIVIDUALLY NUMBERED (1-50) rank work if its based on TEAM PERFORMANCE? So if I am on the winning team in all of my matches but have a -20 k/d, I deserve to be a rank 50?
> >
> > <mark>If I have 0 kills and 20 deaths every match but my team wins every match, that means I should be a rank 50?</mark>
> >
> >
> > It makes no sense
>
> Chances are that if you went negative 20 every game you would be lucky to win 1 out of 10 games. Point being if you consistantly go negative your win loss ratio will show it. It all pans out in the end.
>
> Also some players are just better support players so why should they have a bad rank when they are the ones driving the hogg for the guy who goes +20
> > > Dbeykiller was my H2 tag. forgot to quote.
> >
> > Lol, well all I saw was circle boosting, stopped going back at 36.
> >
> > So, what was your legitimate level in Halo 2.
>
> 34. I always hit that wall of modders and could never get into the higher 30’s although I ripped in custom FFA’s with parties full of symbols. Circle boosting wasn’t me btw, my cousin decided it was something to do when he came over my house one weekend. I was hooked on ruby/sapphire/emerald like an addict and payed no mind to what he was doing on my xbox.
Actually, 26 was your legitimate rank, and I don’t believe you om the rest.
Modders is no excuse. My 40 is 100% legit, no bridging.