Is there any possible way implement a 1-50 ranking system on a per playlist basis?
If not, is there anyway to use the current Rating System as a sustained ranking system? Similar to The Arena, but that number slowly changes (and never goes away) based on losing and winning matches(beating opponents that TrueSkill suspects will beat you ranks you up), the usual characteristics of the old ranking systems in past Halos.
Playing with and against people that are not quite as skilled as you isn’t very fun, in my opinion. I understand that if I want to play something ranked, I should play The Arena. Problem is, there are multiple playlists I like playing and that I think would benefit for some sort of ranking system.
If anyone from 343 can answer any of these questions, I’d be greatly appreciative.
The 1-50 sucked and should be left out. The game uses Trueskill to match you, and that wouldn’t change, regardless of what ranking/rating system they use.
> The 1-50 sucked and should be left out. The game uses Trueskill to match you, and that wouldn’t change, regardless of what ranking/rating system they use.
Halo 3 had TrueSkill and I had a 50 in MLG, I always played 40s or better. Soooo I don’t understand your reasoning, here.
> > The 1-50 sucked and should be left out. The game uses Trueskill to match you, and that wouldn’t change, regardless of what ranking/rating system they use.
>
> Halo 3 had TrueSkill and I had a 50 in MLG, I always played 40s or better. Soooo I don’t understand your reasoning, here.
And Reach still uses Trueskill. That hasn’t changed. In other words, it’s still matching you like it did in Halo 3.
> > > The 1-50 sucked and should be left out. The game uses Trueskill to match you, and that wouldn’t change, regardless of what ranking/rating system they use.
> >
> > Halo 3 had TrueSkill and I had a 50 in MLG, I always played 40s or better. Soooo I don’t understand your reasoning, here.
>
> And Reach still uses Trueskill. That hasn’t changed. In other words, it’s still matching you like it did in Halo 3.
No, it’s not. No matter what playlist I play, other than The Arena, I get matched with people that would probably be 25s in H3 EVERY single game. Whether they’re on my team or the other… don’t tell me TrueSkill is matching me just like it did H3.
> And Reach still uses Trueskill. That hasn’t changed. In other words, it’s still matching you like it did in Halo 3.
The matching system is not the same in Reach as it was for Halo 3. I’m willing to say that roughly 80% of my matches are either my team utterly destroying the other team, or vice versa. This rarely happened in Ranked Halo 3.
Even if the trueskill system itself went untouched, I don’t think there is any denying that Bungie did something to horribly screw up the matchmaking process.
It really is frustrating to have to sit through three or four games being bored because the other team can’t seem to coordinate their thumbs, and then go through several matches against teams that really should be playing in the MLG playlist or Arena. That, or I’m forced to carry my team who happen to have the negative of my score.
That all may be true, but my original point is that they’re using the Trueskill system, (whether it’s the same or different from Halo 3 is irrelevant), and regardless of how they change ranking, (putting 1-50 in playlists for example), it’ll still match you based on your Trueskill. Reach is a lost cause in terms of changing the ranking system. It’s catered towards more casual players, most of whom wouldn’t notice the skill gap you’re describing.
As far as I understand it, the biggest difference is that Reach uses and unaltered Trueskill algorithm whereas Halo 3 used a slowed down version. The unaltered one seems to be a lot looser because the player’s Trueskill value moves up and down so much more erratically for each win or loss.
The Arena however seems to either have a very strict filter or also do more to minimise uncertainty (4 games per day for example). If a frozen Divisional system could be implemented in the playlists which aren’t purely just for fun (that is everything except Infection, Grifball & Action Sack) I believe that the quality of matches would increase markedly. So I support this thread and hope that we get an answer as to possibilities of such a system being created.
Arena is also more loose in its requirements for matching players together. As a silver you still get a lot of unrated players. In another game you get golds and very occasionally an onyx.
Ranked in Halo 3 was much tighter than that. The maximum skill difference allowed was 10. In practise it was usually more like 3 or 4.
As a middle of the pack player the attraction of ranked for me is getting a better match-up than in social. Arena hasn’t been as good for that. It’s too random until you get to high silver.
> Arena is based in win/lose not individual skill.
most people say arena is based on rating but I think its more w/l as well…
last season I would get an average of 1467 one day with a 8/9 w/l: I went from 5% gold to 60% onyx
the next day I get a 1605 with a 4/6 w/l: I went from 60% onyx to 40% onyx…
I really dont know.
> > > The 1-50 sucked and should be left out. The game uses Trueskill to match you, and that wouldn’t change, regardless of what ranking/rating system they use.
> >
> > Halo 3 had TrueSkill and I had a 50 in MLG, I always played 40s or better. Soooo I don’t understand your reasoning, here.
>
> And Reach still uses Trueskill. That hasn’t changed. In other words, it’s still matching you like it did in Halo 3.
false. it DOES use trueskill, you are right about that. unfortunately for all of us, bungie stated that the trueskill being used is much less strict.
as a result, someone like me going into 1 of the 2 playlists that i frequent, will run up against people who have absolutely no idea whats going on. like first day players. it happens all the time. you lose against an inheritor and his team of 4, then the next game you play against random first day’ers.
the games matchmaking system is literally so un-strict its basically non existent.
> > > > The 1-50 sucked and should be left out. The game uses Trueskill to match you, and that wouldn’t change, regardless of what ranking/rating system they use.
> > >
> > > Halo 3 had TrueSkill and I had a 50 in MLG, I always played 40s or better. Soooo I don’t understand your reasoning, here.
> >
> > And Reach still uses Trueskill. That hasn’t changed. In other words, it’s still matching you like it did in Halo 3.
>
> No, it’s not. No matter what playlist I play, other than The Arena, I get matched with people that would probably be 25s in H3 EVERY single game. Whether they’re on my team or the other… don’t tell me TrueSkill is matching me just like it did H3.
win get credits
lose get credits
no visible rank
thats why ppl suck so much, its not that they are bad its that they dont care about winning, ther eis no incentive to care. In H3 it was every where, you had ot win for XP you ahd to win to rank up for a rank that would be seen in highest global rank.
the problem with reach is that its liek a cell phone game, you just play it for luls.
I would have no problem with using either Arena Divisions for a ranking system, but it needs to be more strict than the matchmaking system is in Reach at present. Furthermore, TrueSkill needs to be improved in order to be an effective ranking system. In Halo 3, TrueSkill worked, more or less, like an RPG system. You started at level one, slowly going up based on wins, and losing a buttload of progress on a loss. Getting to 50 was more of a grind than a contest of skill, considering most of the experienced players were at level 50 about two months into the game. That is where Arena is special. It matches players more loosly in a sort of “Preliminary Phase”, and judges from about twenty games from that time period how you should be ranked. From there, your rank is still subject to change, even capable of jumping whole divisions. That is how Reach should be, universally. Whether or not numbers or shiny medals are used to show skill is of no matter to me, so long as it emphasises skill and NOT dedication.
> I would have no problem with using either Arena Divisions for a ranking system, but it needs to be more strict than the matchmaking system is in Reach at present. Furthermore, TrueSkill needs to be improved in order to be an effective ranking system. In Halo 3, TrueSkill worked, more or less, like an RPG system. You started at level one, slowly going up based on wins, and losing a buttload of progress on a loss. Getting to 50 was more of a grind than a contest of skill, considering most of the experienced players were at level 50 about two months into the game. That is where Arena is special. It matches players more loosly in a sort of “Preliminary Phase”, and judges from about twenty games from that time period how you should be ranked. From there, your rank is still subject to change, even capable of jumping whole divisions. That is how Reach should be, universally. Whether or not numbers or shiny medals are used to show skill is of no matter to me, so long as it emphasises skill and NOT dedication.
I would be against the H3 rating system to if my highest level achieved was a 32 commander grade 2…I personally loved the H3 system it did make you want to win…I also like how this system resets after 3 months…why cant they just put the two together and save baddies from buying hundreds of one months…