This ranked system just does not encourage you to play. What’s the point of searching for a few hours if 2-3 losses is enough for the game to wipe all your progress…The whole MMR vs CSR thing is another issue in itself but how do you expect people to keep grinding if there’s literally no upside to searching. You’ve had so many chances at this, just go back to the 1-50 system and add champ ranks after 50. Simple solution to his stupid system.
6 Likes
Had 3 losses, drop 36 points. Win 5, go up 10 points. I feel ya on this one mate.
8 Likes
CSR tanked by -6 after clocking 2.20 ball time and 31 kills 26 deaths. Tanked way more than all of my teammates who had 20 seconds ball time with similar kill stats. Joke.
Next match of CTF went 17-8, 1 cap assist, 3 returns and 3 carrier kills. Average team MMR 1269 vs their team 1339. Barely any CSR gained at +3. It is just a joke frankly. I don’t understand the people who defend this ranking system
1 Like
My buddies and I earlier beat Druk & some people. We all stayed the same except my one friend. Then loss the next game, dropped 5 points lol. Won the next 4 in a row and went up 1-2 points per game. It varies so much. My one buddies tag has over the weekend has had multiple times where we’ve lost going negative and stayed the same onyx points while everyone else dropped 10-15 points.
1 Like
It’s frustrating when that happens. But basically you beat some equal or lower ranked teams and the game awarded you CSR but not MMR. When you went on to lose a game they CSR moved back to match your MMR.
Personally I would just award 0 points for such wins - but 343 have decided that overall it is better to give everyone a little “token” reward for the W.
The problem is the expectation. You don’t grind skill rank. You have to earn it by beating better teams. It’s something that moves organically. If you do something to improve your skill you will win those key games and rank up.
If you haven’t actually improved in skill you will lose one of those aforementioned 50:50 games and your CSR will return to the MMR baseline (ie. your skill rank).
This is actually a good idea. Not 1-50 per se. Or going back to the older, less accurate, ranking systems. But they need to change the CSR scale to be smaller than the MMR one. Even moving 1-100 would be great. Or Bronze 1 to Onyx 10 (making it 1-60).
But by having 1-1800+ people are getting hung up on the small oscillations.
It’s not the system at fault. Just the way 343 are presenting it.
And again it’s the “value” we are projecting onto these points.
Overall you’ve moved about 1% of the MMR scale. You rank hasn’t changed. Which is fine (assuming you haven’t beat anyone worthy of justifying a rank up). But you (and everyone else) are getting frustrated with the CSR going up and down. But if the scale was 1-50 your rank wouldn’t have changed and you would be (happily) none the wiser to the minor fluctuations in the background.
CSR doesn’t look at your personal performance at all. It moves purely on the basis of W/L, the rank of your opponents, and how far your CSR is from your MMR.
All your team-mates are on different parts of their MMR journey - so you can’t compare gains and losses.
Your MMR does have a weighting for personal performance. But it’s kpm and dpm. Ball time isn’t relevant (except for it’s contribution to the all-important win).
The flag stats are awesome. Well done. But they, and your 17-8, don’t mean squat for the CSR.
You went +3 on a game vs higher opponent so that suggests that your CSR is pretty close to your MMR. So it doesn’t move much.
BUT…
You won vs a higher ranked opponent. And potentially with a good kpm (you’ll need to look at in context to the game time and what everyone else did).
So at the end of the game your MMR would have moved up.
You are then “rewarded” in the next game. If you win your CSR will be pulled up by your MMR. If you lose your MMR will anchor your CSR and minimise it’s fall.
Your MMR and CSR and in this kind of push-pull dance.
And your team-mates will rush to Waypoint and comment how unfair it was that you got more CSR than they did for the same win!
CSR changes on the W/L, the relative rank of your opponent, and the pull of your MMR.
This will be different for each person.
You can’t compare each other’s changes without the context of where they are in their CSR journey.
That’s not the point. I know how the system works. My point is no one is going to keep playing if you invest time and get nothing out of it. I just lost 14 CSR after winning 2 games in a row getting nothing. The CSR of the people I beat was higher and went positive yet I just wasted a few hours of my time for nothing.
The system doesn’t work. This game was dead within 6 months and even the ranked players can’t be bothered sticking around as the ranking system is broken. It doesn’t matter if you beat people lower than you, you should at least get something as getting nothing will just result in people not wanting to play.
2 Likes
I feel ya mate. Was on an alt, won and didn’t go up, other team had higher mmr by 100. Lose a game go down 9, other team higher mmr (went positive). Win the next go up 2 points, then win another 2 in a row going up 1csr & 2csr. Then lose and drop 9. Doesn’t make it enjoyable.
The key is define what you want out of it.
I think a skill weighted XP system would be fantastic.
But you can’t start to over-rank peoples skills. It would cheapen the ranks for those who have actually earnt it. And not to mention how it would disrupt the match making system.
CSR can be deceptive (it’s often lower than their actual MMR).
Going positive won’t help you in this game. It may in the next (if your MMR went up).
As for “wasted”. Hopefully you had some fun. But in that 2 hours did you actually improve as a player?
The ranking system (TrueSkill2) works very well.
The CSR system, not so much. Needs a bit of work.
And as for the stinking pile of XP progression, the less said the better. And therein lies your problem.
There are plenty of other factors putting their hand up to take the blame.
I agree. You need something. And as we’ve discussed, XP weighted to performance would be awesome.
But you won’t, and shouldn’t, get an increased skill rating.
From what I gather it’s a tdm based ranking system implemented over a mostly objective based gametype where you have to be hyper aggressive.
Obviously the objective side of things throws up some issues and causes you to change your play style to win the match (seen teams all go negative k/d but still win a match). I think a good quick fix would be to either make ranked solo queue or not allow plats to join diamond matches. I know the population is pretty low but it would stop you entering those high risk/no reward matches so often. I also think they need to implement some way of rewarding people who win consecutive matches into their formula. The philosophy of oscillating around a rank due to a formula just isn’t satisfying
To be fair to Microsoft they’ve taken objective games into account. The discussion paper specifically talks about objective games and how they reflect differently. And they even talk about “other” actions in death matches that help to get the win (as opposed to pure kills).
But when they ran the numbers… over millions of H5 games… none of the metrics were statistically significant. Essentially players with high kpm do well when put against higher ranked teams. Players who get good objective scores (but poor kpm) don’t.
You may have just carried that flag to victory. But the stats suggest you are unlikely to win vs a tougher team.
And when you think about it - K/min is an entirely different metric to raw kills, K-D, or K/D, etc. Those you can manipulate. If I’m running around against a bunch of similarly skilled players - I can change the way I play to generate a high K/D or K-D. eg. Get 4 kills and 1 death and then go into hiding. Or I can try and extend the game artificially to get more kills.
But k/min is almost impossible to artificially boost. It essentially reflects my 1v1 skill vs my opponents. If I just try to be more aggressive I will probably die a lot. Not only will that drop my kill rate - but it will also increase my d/min (which is a negative weighting).
And it’s just that - a weighting. You only need around 1.5k/min vs the rank you are aspire to. It’s not about smashing players below you. Just holding your own vs the rank you want to be.
Two part problem.
One is having the CSR on the same scale as the MMR. That’s why it “oscillates”. If they reduced the scale (eg. 1 to 100) the oscillations would be smoothed out.
Two. We need a skill based XP to grind. That’s the reward people need for just wins.
Yeah its starting to feel like a waste of time after I grind my rank up with multiple wins, only to lose it all in one loss, even when the other team is higher ranked than me.
Well said OP. I’m a COD player just testing out Halo INfinite and I find the ranked system to be unmotivating. It’s a shame because I’ve had fun so far, but you nailed it.
1 Like
Maybe we should all start tweeting at Greg Hass asking for some real changes to improve the experience.
343 have done such a bad job at communicating this.
Your CSR is going up a little bit. But you haven’t improved in skill so your MMR stays the same.
Any loss is a chance for the system to bring your CSR back to be with your MMR.
It’s 343’s fault for using the same scale for the CSR as the MMR.
You are only oscillating 10-15 points (or less). Around 0.5% of the scale. As far as the system is concerned nothing has really changed - but human nature is such that every point is a dagger through the heart.
If they changed it to a different scale, 1-100 for example, then the oscillations just disappear.
Treating a video game like a maths exercise is a stupid idea, and it is proving that way considering how much the community hates this matchmaking.
These sort of ranking systems work for something like chess, where the only factor is somebody’s skill in a one on one scenario. But that simply is not the case here. So much of it is reliant on having competent teammates, and so the best method is to team up. That is not skill.
It wouldn’t be so bad playing this game solo if you were given credit for performing well in a loss. For example, the difference between winning 50-49 and losing 49-50 while getting 20 kills and 10 deaths could be MASSIVE (10 CSR swing +). In that scenario the reason you lost was your teammates but because you lost by one kill your CSR change could be wildly different. That is not a measure of your skill, that is luck.
And you may say, well the MMR does consider all those things. Well where is it? I cant see it, so why would I care? And if the game artificially pulls me towards that MMR that’s all well and good, but that is just fixing the visible result based on a hidden factor so how is the player to feel watching random swings in their CSR that aren’t reflective of their performance in each match. The player is not given any understanding of what is happening. The CSR is a completely nonsense measure and in many cases is just not accurate.
2 Likes
I agree. However ranking and match-making is a math’s exercise.
Come to think about. Pretty much everything about a video games are maths (and yes, I am being cheeky / facetious).
Meh. Community will always find something to hate.
The problem here is that 343 have created an easy target with the CSR system.
But it is a team game.
Your “ranking” reflects your ability to work inside a team.
Finding a team and working to improve your team work is a skill.
And on the flip side you should also be discredited for performing badly in a win. But nobody wants to talk about that.
It’s only “luck” if you isolate out selected game results.
Overall your “skill” comes out in the wash. If you are playing well the wins will come.
Maybe. But even 10 CSR isn’t that much. If we had a 1-50 ranking scale you wouldn’t even know it happened.
Agree whole-heartedly.
343’s is clearly at fault here. The player is left floundering. Wondering what the Hell just happened.
Part of it is the silly decision to have such a large scale on the CSR. They have created a toxic grind over a handful of statistically insignificant points. I really don’t understand why they have done this.
The second is poor communication by 343. Both overall in how the system works, and on a game by game basis of what just happened.
There should be a way to look up our MMR’s. Josh Menke used to be show player’s graphs of their MMRs (global and per playlist) and of their kpm’s vs different skill ranks. I imagine it would be fairly easy to auto generate these for us to look at. It literally should be a function here on Waypoint.
I agree it’s silly / nonsense.
It is accurate. Just not to the level of the number. If it says you are Diamond 3 then you are a Diamond 3. And you can safely assume that a Diamond 2 is worse and a Diamond 4 is better. But there is no accuracy in saying that a 1325 is better than a 1320.
1 Like
And thats a huge problem that causes really frustrating moments.
An example from a ranked stronghold match. We lost, i ihad more capture but less kills as an other player im my team. I lost more csr as the other player.
And thats wrong. The implementation of the csr calculation for a ranked objective mode must weight the objective like “stop the flag carrier”, “bring back the flag”, “capture a stronghold”, “keep oddball in your hand” and so on, much more than a kill.
Its not slayer, sure all k/d metrics should be also weighted in objective modes.
1 Like
I just looked at an “onyx” player who has a win rate of 39.9 percent so the best players can’t even win 2 out of 5 games… laughable how they rank people I played with them today that’s why I looked they grabbed the ball for guess how long? 
Sorry for the run on sentence 
Two things.
-
Your CSR has nothing to do with your personal performance in that match. Not your K/D, not your damage, not your strength in the hold. If you lost more CSR it was because you were higher ranked (more of a personal upset) or because your CSR had drifted above your MMR.
-
The data may be frustrating. But good objective scores doesn’t correlate to an increase in skill.
The way to think about it is - imagine you have two players at the same level, say D3. They are ranked appropriately - with 50:50 win rates vs other D3. One player is very good at playing the objective. The other starts to improve his kpm.
We know, from millions of stats, if you move both these players up to D4 - the “objective” player will struggle, despite their fondness for holding the oddball, but the player with better kpm will hold their own at the higher level.
It’s frustrating. But the objective play is already incorporated into your skill ranking because of the win.
The harsh reality is that you need to improve your ability to win 1v1 (which is honestly, the real skill) if you want to get your chance to carry the flag at a higher level.
And don’t get me wrong. I love playing the objective. I take pride in doing my part. But the reward is the win. The medals. And of course, there should be a XP rank that is weighted to objective scores.