Social needs to remove hidden MMR - especially for ranked

I don’t want to play low skilled players constantly. It’s really boring.

Opposite could be said too. I have a really high MMR and I am nearly 1600 onyx. SO I am constantly fighting an uphill battle in ranked. Highest rank I have been against was 2100. If I win I barely go up, if I lose… I go down a LOT… it’s because of my social MMR and how ranked works.

As for social, It’s literally me vs another good player on who can kill the lesser skilled players more. That’s not fun at all. Why I try and stay in BTB for variety when it comes to social.

I am happy they are resetting ranks and fixing it. It’s atrociousssssss.


I’m 1,600 too except my MMR must be higher as I consistently gain more MMR for wins than I do for losses. The uphill battle only starts when your MMR and CSR are very close together.

I mentioned to someone here the other day that at one point around Onyx 1530ish I played 20 games, lost 12 and ended up 48 CSR higher than when I started.

I’d rather have a bunch of tough social games most the time than just stomping everyone. Sometimes the weird balancing happens now, can’t say I’m a fan. Had a game of Fiesta the other day 4v4 and I got almost 40 kills and we still lost. Obviously I don’t want social to feel as intense as ranked but a fair amount of sbmm is still required to stop it being utterly joyless for everyone involved. If there was no sbmm then players in the top 1% would never have a fulfilling game and stomp in almost every game they play. It’s not fun for me at least. Might as well be playing against bots. I want to beat players who are as good as me.

Hopefully when they fix it with the update, it will be more streamlined and rank will be ranked, with no outside factors.

Also seeing Halo tracker’s ranked page, is just a gaggle, what is that… lol…

I just want social to be balanced if anything if they keep SBMM. It happens to you too. No reason it should be me and you dropping kills like that, or the opposite. it’s legit a 1v1 game with people tossed in currently.

1 Like

My b, what do you mean?

The graphs should never look like this.

1 Like

I agree with you completely, it’s an odd distribution of visible ranks across the player base. I imagine it isn’t much fun to start in Diamond as well, as I’ve always found it satisfying to climb in a competitive playlist moving from a very low rank to a much higher one. It’s like being helicoptered 20 feet from the summit of Everest as opposed to the satisfaction one would get having started at Basecamp. Makes me wish there were more ranks than those six (Bronze, Silver, Gold, Platinum, Diamond and Onyx) and that we all started at Bronze.


I agree, it does say it doesn’t track 100% of players but based on what we know players are running far too high, it should be a wider spread, more traditional bell curve with the highest % of players in Gold. I’m not sure in a higher tier of Onyx if we will see much difference though.

Splitgate had the same issue.


Plus, starting from the bottom the game will have a better time to recognize your skill. 10 placements, and then being throw into the fray is horrible for any matchmaking game tbh. Your wins and losses will adjust accordingly, so you can achieve your peak and then break it. That’s why I enjoyed Halo 3.

Only issue I see arising (they need to do it though, is ranked CSR restriction). There shouldn’t be high skewed games because your “mmr” isn’t on par yet. That’s why it should be a significant boost if you end up fighting people higher skilled in a CSR bracket while climbing. while starting from the bottom, you will have more than 10 matches to determine where you are. It’ll be more streamlined.


True, but also realize that lower skilled players are not that likely to play ranked, so that graph is already skewed towards the better players because of that. That said, the onyx and D1 are obviously standing out to much.

1 Like

By your logic though how is it fair that a team of 8-12 players with a high sbmm rank stomping randoms all day every day. I don’t really care that I face more ppl around my rank, the problem is that because my MMR is high I usually face ppl around my rank that are almost always linked up.

Now I normally get the teammates that don’t have thumbs while the enemy team demolishes us with a full team.

If party matching was a thing I would care as much because it would match more fairly a d I wouldn’t have to worry about facing teams in social when im searching solo.

Shoot add solo/duos/squads as a matchmaking preference so I don’t have to worry about it. Makes no sense to add that to ranked when you know you’re facing teams and should form a team to rank up. That’s why they have duos, ffa and playlist so you don’t have to worry about teams in ranked.

I don’t know if remove is the best option, but improve definitely. Most games I play have 1 or 2 good players on them and the other 2 are negative kda and in BTB it’s 3-4 or 5-6 with positive (on both teams) and the rest are 0 or slightly negative. The matchmaking system may be creating an average of all ranks and saying the teams are even, but it’s no fun to be that unbalanced amongst a team.

1 Like

100%. I want to be playing on teams with players right at my skill level, not a wide variety of skill levels. Obviously everyone has bad games, but I agree this has been my experience also when solo queuing – the skill disparities on a single team are often enormous.

1 Like

They have something for that. Basically the teams presumed skill level is higher because they are in a team. So these are made up numbers to explain the concept but the sum of a party of 4 MMR might be 4,000 and the sum of your team might be 4,400 to compensate for the fact you aren’t partied up. This would be considered balanced by the system as the party get an MMR boost because they’re partied.

So they get harder opponents than they would alone.

Doing this in “social” is dumb. It basically makes it miserable for friends of varying skill to be able to play together. This makes more sense in ranked playlists.

In this game there are no unranked playlists.

1 Like

Agreed but that is true when you play any game with friends. I can’t play Halo against my wife and expect both of us to have fun. If we take it online it’s the same. For lesser skilled friends to do well, it would mean the opposing team would have to be significantly worse than myself for example. One of us has to facilitate the other, either my friend has to get bodied, or I have to be on a fresh account and put zero effort in at all. Either way one of us is getting the short straw. Even if it was random and no sbmm, I’d still not have a good time playing people that much worse than myself constantly.

Social is unranked, there’s no consequence to losing. The matchmaking has wider criteria so sometimes you play better people and sometimes you play worse people. My friends and I usually stick to big team, but no doubt we will play some forge/customs when that gets a significant boost.

1 Like

All I’m saying is that in “social” the matchmaking shouldn’t be skewing players playing together as higher then what they are.

1 Like

That’s just the result of all the analysed data showing that partied players have higher win rates than non partied players when matched on equal skill.