The MMR matching system is broken. It should be matched by rank.
13 Likes
You are tallking about ranked i guess?
I agree that ranked should be matched based on rank. MMR should be for social (but it doesnât seem to do anything there either, i am tired of these one-sided matches almost all the time)
For ranked I completely agree. If you are better than similar ranks you move up, if you are worse you move down. If you are doing alright you stay where you are.
I view MMR as anti competitive
5 Likes
Iâm a bit lost on what we are arguing here?
MMR is your rank. At least as represented by TrueSkill2.
Match-making is a different beast. Itâs the system that allocates available players on the server into matches.
Which bit are you unhappy about?
And if itâs match-making per se, are we talking Social, Ranked, or both?
1 Like
Iâm not sure this is quite the word you are looking for.
MMR is a quick and accurate description of your skill. In that regards it is very competitive.
You want a progression journey for your rank.
So from your perspective itâs anti-grind.
No, respectfully it is the exact word Iâm looking for. MMR is fixing your gains and losses based on a skill curve, not purely the results of your ranked matches. One person goes 15-14 in a slayer and their team wins they could jump 15 CSR, while another plays gets 1 CSR.
You go in to a match knowing you wonât be equally rewarded. I understand the whole point about it finding your skill long term, but to me a competitive ranking system is one where the only thing that matters is the result, and your performance in that match.
You start at bronze and you keep performing well and winning or losing until you canât climb higher. But it rewards you purely based on results. That to me is a competitive ranking system
1 Like
But also yeah a progression journey would be nice too 
2 Likes
Sounds like your problem is with the CSR.
The MMR is in the background. As accurate a reflection of skill as you are going to get. And doing itâs best to allow match making to keep things as âcompetitiveâ as it can.
The difference in the CSR gains and losses is pretty much down to two things. The difference between your CSR and MMR (early, when the curve is wide - and your CSR is on the left hand side of the curve) and the relative skill difference between you and your opponents.
The K/D appears to be largely irrelevant.
But the core premise of any efficient ranking system is to take into account the quality of your opponents. Beating someone ranked below shouldnât be used to increase your skill rank. You havenât demonstrated any increase in skill.
That old fashioned type of ranking system is very slow. It will sort out the ranks eventually. But would take 100âs, if not 1000âs of games. And a lot of the games, especially early, would be horribly mismatched.
And it would be very impractical for Seasons. I doubt you would even have come close to ranking the population before the next Season reset was due. And that includes the current 6 month extended ones.
I mostly understand how it works, thanks to the folks on this forum! I just fundamentally think it negatively affects the game and the competitive integrity of the ranking system. I will never support a visible ranking system that forces you up or down artificially, which in my view is exactly what MMR is doing. Each player should get equal reward for their performance, if they each perform as well as each other.
And I guess my point on ensuring the ranking system doesnât reward you for beating worse players is that a good player would very swiftly move away from bronze and be matching against people in gold and so on until they hit their ceiling. And very soon they would be exactly where they should be, playing against people of a similar skill, without the need for the ranking system to âfixâ your CSR gains and losses for particular wins artificially.
In infinite your CSR is utterly meaningless because the game is forcing it towards your MMR. I guess I just fundamentally disagree with it as a system for gaming.
To me Trueskill is a classic example of overthinking. Throwing money at mathematicians and them going completely overboard. In my view the game is worse for it. I am still playing infinite despite the ranking system and MMR in social, not because it is there.
Your point around seasons is fair, I dislike seasons and donât think rank should be reset anyway.
1 Like
I think more people would be happy if you played people within your visible division rank. Then once you move up to the next division ie plat, diamond, onyx ect, you then play the next one you went into. Instead of matching multiple visible ranks due to a close mmr/csr whatever the game matches on. I know the people I game with would find that more enjoyable, Iâm sure a few others might. Though Iâve just learn to accept the system they have if I plan on playing some halo, itâs just the way it is.
1 Like
Itâs always a bit over the place early in the season.
A lot of people have wide MMR curves and the CSR can be a fair bit lower (itâs based around the left hand edge of the curve). I was P2 post placement but with a mean MMR closer to D1 (from the opponents I was playing).
After a week or two (somewhere between 20 and 50 games) everyoneâs curves are narrow enough that the MMR and CSR are pretty much synonymous. Iâm now D1 and my CSR gains for a win are tailing off.
But you can keep always keep an eye on the average MMR of both teams to see that the matchmaking is above board.
When you are coming up against players well above or below your weight division - itâs usually because those players are squadding up and forcing the match making service to do itâs best to create a match. Not because of any hidden MMR shenanigans.
I disagree, and Iâm saying this from sharing that position at one point a long time ago.
The attitudes seen between Social (casual) and Ranked (competitive) provide a stark contrast between calculated rankings. To suggest that Social MMR and Ranked MMR should be comparable is being ignorant of experience. Not trying to be inflammatory (for once) when I use that term, the difference is actually easily observable when you compare the two modes, âcasualâ and âcompetitiveâ arenât just words used to keep the modes separated.
For example I was high Diamond (3400+) in Overwatchâs Competitive (1-5000) mode and it was a grueling experience trying to climb among players of my own skill rating. Comparatively I was regularly matched against GM and Top 500 players (4500+) in Quickplay, however these players werenât giving the same effort they would have if they were in Ranked so it was relatively casual in the perceived gameplay.
It would be a mistake to square up the ranks evenly between the modes, disproportionately making Casual harder/easier, or Ranked impossible/cakewalk depending on the current differences in MMR.
Youâve hit the nail on the head.
If you go into Social with the same mindset of Ranked then this will reflect back in your opponents.
Go in chill. Come out chill. And most importantly, you need to be able to keep chilling in the face of an impending loss.
Itâs all up to them.
Iâm getting pretty good matches lately.
1 Like
This is part of the flaw imo. Why is it so important we face players at our skill level? Especially if weâre unranked. Isnât the entire purpose of playing ranked to play against players in that rank in an attempt to increase it?
If youâre unranked, you should be facing other unranked players.
Right now, the CSR is just a representation of your performance/wins but mostly performance under the corresponding MMR.
You could win 20 games in a row, but if your MMR doesnât change, your CSR goes up be only a negligible amount because youâre at the max CSR for your current MMR. (this works vise versa with losing)
This is why youâll see people complain they won so many games but lost once and went down a lot.
Your MMR is affected by social games so you can face high ranked players on your first game.
I match against Onyx 1800 as my first game of the reset all the time. So itâs still horribly mismatched.
At least before, when everyone played day 1, yes you could play a hardcore player, but it didnât matter because you were at the bottom. Eventually those players would rank up past you and youâd face the correct players as you went through the rankings. Things ironed out better and it didnât take 1000s of games. You could just wait a week or so and all the hardcore no lifers would be out of the way for your grind.
1 Like
Max Hoberman had a good explanation of why H3 ranking system was designed with a modified SBMM and how he limited TrueSkill in the ranking system
https://twitter.com/MaxHoberman/status/1503498644791701512?s=20&t=SzjbKt8HdboW3jiGI1Qzcg
So that we have close and competitive games.
And in particular, so that nobody is subjected to unnecessary stompings.
Yep. But you can prove to the system that you deserve to rank up by beating those who it thinks are at your rank.
CSR is a representation of your MMR with a little leeway for recent performance.
Kind of true if you are genuinely unranked.
But if you are just going through placement again - itâs not a full reset. The system knows what rank you should be and will give you a chance to prove otherwise.
I guess.
Bottom line is that you need to beat teams above you to rank up⌠and lose to teams below you to rank down.
There is a little bit of luck to what comes to you from the server. If you are the best player / team on a local server you may get more games vs lower ranked teams than ideal.
But 20 in a row should definitely net you a scoring game or two.
Understandable. But the answer is better education of the unwashed masses. Explain to them how and why that result affects their CSR / rank. It wouldnât be hard to have a little icon to click for a detailed breakdown.
No, itâs not. At least not to a degree that really makes much difference.
Your HaloTracker record has you not playing since Apr 28th. Assuming your gamertag is perfectXzerO. So, you have had one reset (the mid-season one). And given that your ranking was solid Diamond - an Onyx player in a placement game is a tad unfair, but not completely unwarranted.
The key is âeventuallyâ. Those kind of rank sorts can take 100âs if not 1000âs of games. And in the meantime they create a lot of unbalanced games that can be very unpleasant. You think you didnât like playing the Onyx 1800 - what about a Bronze or Silver player?
Sounds like Max is killing it at CA. Hope he is working hard on the new Halo gametype.
As for Halo 3? It hasnât aged well. Was Max also responsible for hiding 20 levels and the awful rank locking that literally destroyed accounts (and created a black market for people selling locked â50â accounts).
Weâve moved on in the last decade and a half.
Last solo/duo match.
Other Team: 1558, 1736, d5, d4
My Team: d6, d4, d6, unranked.
Wasnât that much fun 
. But those are the matches you get half the time. Onyx is fine to play against, Iâd just rather wait till Iâm an actual onyx in that playlist before I start matching against them. The grind continues though lol.
Absolutely. RANKED should be doing matchmaking using the RANKS. Donât understand why that would be such a massive problem.
1 Like