Disclaimer: I am not an expert or an authority on any of what is mentioned below. I am a decent player who is somewhat informed about what is happening behind the great curtain of the matchmaking stage, but also understands that I could be entirely wrong about everything. Also, please keep in mind that I have bad games too and am well aware of it.
Does anyone else feel like the competitive matchmaking experience in Halo 5 can be unfair sometimes (and by sometimes, I mean often)? Anyone else feel like it can be extremely difficult to gain CSR, progress through the ranks, and play higher caliber players? Anyone else feel like there is always that one player on their team that is going -10 (or worse), or not contributing to the objective?
With the advent of Infinite on the horizon, I wanted to toss out a few of my own thoughts about the matchmaking experience that I would like to see moving forward. Now, I know that I am but a simpleton that knows little of the things required to create a fun, balanced, and rewarding matchmaking experience, but I wanted to throw my 2 cents in anyways.
In a nutshell, I think winning or losing is far too narrow of a condition to determine whether a player gets rewarded or punished for a game. I believe that some measure of a player’s individual performance should be taken into consideration.
For a player who is intent on progressing through the ranks, there is nothing more frustrating than having really strong performances nullified and/or penalized by another player’s poor performances. As a simple example, lets use the Team Slayer playlist, as it seems to have the most simple parameters for an objectively “good” or “bad” game. Let’s say I have a “good” game and go 20-8-9 (Kills-assists-deaths), likely leading the team in damage as well. Let’s also say that our team loses the game for any number of reasons, but one of them is obviously the player that went 4-5-16. At the end of this game we all lose CSR as the system tries to find the point where our skill is most accurately represented. Despite the fact that I demonstrated that I was, at least, good enough to perform well against that tier of players, I am forced to fall into a lower bracket due to the lowest performing player’s performance. This is all the more frustrating because I am subsequently more likely to be matched with players below my skill level, thus making me play against lower skill players, and forcing me to “carry” many games in a row to level up.
Now, I know that some of you may argue that: “If you’re really that much better than those n00bs you would carry harder and win.” In some ways there’s some truth to that…but it seems to defeat the objective, the mission, of fair matchmaking. You shouldn’t have to carry your team to victory in balanced and fair matchmaking. If you’re performing significantly better (or worse) than your teammates and your opponents, then you should be bumped (or dropped) to a place where you can play on equal footing. I also know that this is a team game that encourages the synergy of communication and unified strategy, but it seems unfair to expect you to always be able to communicate with other players. I understand that this is the goal of the MMR and the CSR systems, but it doesn’t seem to be working as well as it should.
It’s my hope that future matchmaking, and the competitive ladder, in future releases is somewhat more insightful and savvy. It would seem like it should not be very difficult for the system to identity what are objectively “good,” “bad,” or “fair,” games. And if the system can identify those things, why cant it toss you a little CSR for a carrying performance, or at the very least, not penalize you. Perhaps there is something like this in place already, but if that is the case, I have not noticed it in action.
Feel free to chime in if you have had similar experiences or disagree with my platform.
Thanks!
