Forums / Games / Halo Infinite

Implement a real ranking system

OP I Steal Toilets

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2
Trueskill like H2/3 1-50 that actually have to win games and takes some skill to level up. No halo 4 xp rank or Halo 5 ranking we need a real ranking system
Trueskill like H2/3 that actually have to win games and takes some skill to level up. No halo 4 xp rank or Halo 5 ranking we need a real ranking system
Halo 5 uses Halo 3's same backend system.
Trueskill like H2/3 that actually have to win games and takes some skill to level up. No halo 4 xp rank or Halo 5 ranking we need a real ranking system
Halo 5 uses Halo 3's same backend system.
Unfortunately, the presentation and use of that system to the player doesn't really foster longevity in Halo 5.

1-50 presents a very easy way to read and interpret what skill someone is, and gives people an incentive to attain a "highest skill" with a straight forward number that once earned is there forever.
I would love to see 1-50 ranking system similar to H3 but extended to rank 100 along with exp and xp per playlist.
I've never really understood the obsession with the particular numbers from 1 to 50, nor the notion that a skill based ranking system should somehow be about leveling up. As far as I'm concerned, a skill ranking system has one, and only one job: to give me an accurate representation of my skill relative to other players. Giving me a sense of progression should be relegated to a progression system. Now, whether that progression is skill based or not, it should not be advertised as a ranking system if its goal is not to rank me as efficiently as possible.

To that end, there is no point arbitrarily limiting a skill ranking system to an interval like 1 to 50, because that's not how skill works. The most sensible choice of representation is to have everyone start at 0, and then their rating can go as far negative, or as far positive, as necessary, limited in reality of course by the fact that gaining or losing rating becomes the more difficult the further you deviate from the rest of the playerbase.

baaask wrote:
1-50 presents a very easy way to read and interpret what skill someone is
Not really. Since the skill range is arbitrarily capped off at both ends, you end up with a situation where there are players of vastly different skill levels with the same rating. In Halo 3, due to how Bungie set it up as a pseudo-progression system, I don't think there was much of an issue at the low-end. However, there were pretty major skill differences at the high end between the "50s", which made comparing high-skill players based on ranks alone essentially useless.

Furthermore, it was never clear at least to me personally where the actual "average" player stood. It would be natural to assume that it's 25, but if you actually looked at how the skills were distributed in playlists, it was clear that this was not the case. Again, this was because Bungie sought to make a pseudo-progression system rather than a straightforward skill rating system.

baaask wrote:
and gives people an incentive to attain a "highest skill" with a straight forward number that once earned is there forever.
As I said above, you're describing a progression system. If that's what people want, that's fine, but such a system should not be advertised as a "ranking" system if it prioritizes incetivizing and giving players a definite goal over honest, clear presentation of their skill.
tsassi wrote:
I've never really understood the obsession with the particular numbers from 1 to 50, nor the notion that a skill based ranking system should somehow be about leveling up. As far as I'm concerned, a skill ranking system has one, and only one job: to give me an accurate representation of my skill relative to other players. Giving me a sense of progression should be relegated to a progression system. Now, whether that progression is skill based or not, it should not be advertised as a ranking system if its goal is not to rank me as efficiently as possible.

To that end, there is no point arbitrarily limiting a skill ranking system to an interval like 1 to 50, because that's not how skill works. The most sensible choice of representation is to have everyone start at 0, and then their rating can go as far negative, or as far positive, as necessary, limited in reality of course by the fact that gaining or losing rating becomes the more difficult the further you deviate from the rest of the playerbase.

baaask wrote:
1-50 presents a very easy way to read and interpret what skill someone is
Not really. Since the skill range is arbitrarily capped off at both ends, you end up with a situation where there are players of vastly different skill levels with the same rating. In Halo 3, due to how Bungie set it up as a pseudo-progression system, I don't think there was much of an issue at the low-end. However, there were pretty major skill differences at the high end between the "50s", which made comparing high-skill players based on ranks alone essentially useless.

Furthermore, it was never clear at least to me personally where the actual "average" player stood. It would be natural to assume that it's 25, but if you actually looked at how the skills were distributed in playlists, it was clear that this was not the case. Again, this was because Bungie sought to make a pseudo-progression system rather than a straightforward skill rating system.

baaask wrote:
and gives people an incentive to attain a "highest skill" with a straight forward number that once earned is there forever.
As I said above, you're describing a progression system. If that's what people want, that's fine, but such a system should not be advertised as a "ranking" system if it prioritizes incetivizing and giving players a definite goal over honest, clear presentation of their skill.
You must be the angel of logic that flies through the window in my dreams! 100% agree with you even as a Halo 3 fanboy.

Halo 5 is close to other AAA games' setup including Overwatch, League of Legends, CS Go, etc...

Since seasons are essential to bring players back, I wonder if transparency of MMR, or permanent display of previous seasons rating, or highest seasons rating when viewing player details would be a nice bit of data to display.

Should be possible since waypoint shows this data.
There is a win/lose based ranking system, unfortunately it has seasons though. There's just also a leveling system.
tsassi wrote:
I've never really understood the obsession with the particular numbers from 1 to 50, nor the notion that a skill based ranking system should somehow be about leveling up. As far as I'm concerned, a skill ranking system has one, and only one job: to give me an accurate representation of my skill relative to other players. Giving me a sense of progression should be relegated to a progression system. Now, whether that progression is skill based or not, it should not be advertised as a ranking system if its goal is not to rank me as efficiently as possible.

To that end, there is no point arbitrarily limiting a skill ranking system to an interval like 1 to 50, because that's not how skill works. The most sensible choice of representation is to have everyone start at 0, and then their rating can go as far negative, or as far positive, as necessary, limited in reality of course by the fact that gaining or losing rating becomes the more difficult the further you deviate from the rest of the playerbase.

baaask wrote:
1-50 presents a very easy way to read and interpret what skill someone is
Not really. Since the skill range is arbitrarily capped off at both ends, you end up with a situation where there are players of vastly different skill levels with the same rating. In Halo 3, due to how Bungie set it up as a pseudo-progression system, I don't think there was much of an issue at the low-end. However, there were pretty major skill differences at the high end between the "50s", which made comparing high-skill players based on ranks alone essentially useless.

Furthermore, it was never clear at least to me personally where the actual "average" player stood. It would be natural to assume that it's 25, but if you actually looked at how the skills were distributed in playlists, it was clear that this was not the case. Again, this was because Bungie sought to make a pseudo-progression system rather than a straightforward skill rating system.

baaask wrote:
and gives people an incentive to attain a "highest skill" with a straight forward number that once earned is there forever.
As I said above, you're describing a progression system. If that's what people want, that's fine, but such a system should not be advertised as a "ranking" system if it prioritizes incetivizing and giving players a definite goal over honest, clear presentation of their skill.
You must be the angel of logic that flies through the window in my dreams! 100% agree with you even as a Halo 3 fanboy.

Halo 5 is close to other AAA games' setup including Overwatch, League of Legends, CS Go, etc...

Since seasons are essential to bring players back, I wonder if transparency of MMR, or permanent display of previous seasons rating, or highest seasons rating when viewing player details would be a nice bit of data to display.

Should be possible since waypoint shows this data.
Seasons are certainly not essential to keep players playing. Halo 2 and 3 were clear proof of this.

Also, whatever your personal opinion is the fact is that people like a clear number (not some arbitrary title like Onyx) that they can work towards that gives them some satisfaction and bragging rights. The fun of the ranking system is why it shined, not necessarily how perfectly accurate it was at representing said skill. That fostered an interest in improving in a lot of players and kept the popularity high.

1-50 > Seasons if we're talking about fun factor and keeping longevity/popularity in Halo's MP.
baaask wrote:
tsassi wrote:
I've never really understood the obsession with the particular numbers from 1 to 50, nor the notion that a skill based ranking system should somehow be about leveling up. As far as I'm concerned, a skill ranking system has one, and only one job: to give me an accurate representation of my skill relative to other players. Giving me a sense of progression should be relegated to a progression system. Now, whether that progression is skill based or not, it should not be advertised as a ranking system if its goal is not to rank me as efficiently as possible.

To that end, there is no point arbitrarily limiting a skill ranking system to an interval like 1 to 50, because that's not how skill works. The most sensible choice of representation is to have everyone start at 0, and then their rating can go as far negative, or as far positive, as necessary, limited in reality of course by the fact that gaining or losing rating becomes the more difficult the further you deviate from the rest of the playerbase.

baaask wrote:
1-50 presents a very easy way to read and interpret what skill someone is
Not really. Since the skill range is arbitrarily capped off at both ends, you end up with a situation where there are players of vastly different skill levels with the same rating. In Halo 3, due to how Bungie set it up as a pseudo-progression system, I don't think there was much of an issue at the low-end. However, there were pretty major skill differences at the high end between the "50s", which made comparing high-skill players based on ranks alone essentially useless.

Furthermore, it was never clear at least to me personally where the actual "average" player stood. It would be natural to assume that it's 25, but if you actually looked at how the skills were distributed in playlists, it was clear that this was not the case. Again, this was because Bungie sought to make a pseudo-progression system rather than a straightforward skill rating system.

baaask wrote:
and gives people an incentive to attain a "highest skill" with a straight forward number that once earned is there forever.
As I said above, you're describing a progression system. If that's what people want, that's fine, but such a system should not be advertised as a "ranking" system if it prioritizes incetivizing and giving players a definite goal over honest, clear presentation of their skill.
You must be the angel of logic that flies through the window in my dreams! 100% agree with you even as a Halo 3 fanboy.

Halo 5 is close to other AAA games' setup including Overwatch, League of Legends, CS Go, etc...

Since seasons are essential to bring players back, I wonder if transparency of MMR, or permanent display of previous seasons rating, or highest seasons rating when viewing player details would be a nice bit of data to display.

Should be possible since waypoint shows this data.
Seasons are certainly not essential to keep players playing. Halo 2 and 3 were clear proof of this.

Also, whatever your personal opinion is the fact is that people like a clear number (not some arbitrary title like Onyx) that they can work towards that gives them some satisfaction and bragging rights. The fun of the ranking system is why it shined, not necessarily how perfectly accurate it was at representing said skill. That fostered an interest in improving in a lot of players and kept the popularity high.

1-50 > Seasons if we're talking about fun factor and keeping longevity/popularity in Halo's MP.
I'm fine with seasons but, they need to last 3 months long I just hate logging on to see I have to grind back to the rank it took me all season to achieve.
baaask wrote:
tsassi wrote:
I've never really understood the obsession with the particular numbers from 1 to 50, nor the notion that a skill based ranking system should somehow be about leveling up. As far as I'm concerned, a skill ranking system has one, and only one job: to give me an accurate representation of my skill relative to other players. Giving me a sense of progression should be relegated to a progression system. Now, whether that progression is skill based or not, it should not be advertised as a ranking system if its goal is not to rank me as efficiently as possible.

To that end, there is no point arbitrarily limiting a skill ranking system to an interval like 1 to 50, because that's not how skill works. The most sensible choice of representation is to have everyone start at 0, and then their rating can go as far negative, or as far positive, as necessary, limited in reality of course by the fact that gaining or losing rating becomes the more difficult the further you deviate from the rest of the playerbase.

baaask wrote:
1-50 presents a very easy way to read and interpret what skill someone is
Not really. Since the skill range is arbitrarily capped off at both ends, you end up with a situation where there are players of vastly different skill levels with the same rating. In Halo 3, due to how Bungie set it up as a pseudo-progression system, I don't think there was much of an issue at the low-end. However, there were pretty major skill differences at the high end between the "50s", which made comparing high-skill players based on ranks alone essentially useless.

Furthermore, it was never clear at least to me personally where the actual "average" player stood. It would be natural to assume that it's 25, but if you actually looked at how the skills were distributed in playlists, it was clear that this was not the case. Again, this was because Bungie sought to make a pseudo-progression system rather than a straightforward skill rating system.

baaask wrote:
and gives people an incentive to attain a "highest skill" with a straight forward number that once earned is there forever.
As I said above, you're describing a progression system. If that's what people want, that's fine, but such a system should not be advertised as a "ranking" system if it prioritizes incetivizing and giving players a definite goal over honest, clear presentation of their skill.
You must be the angel of logic that flies through the window in my dreams! 100% agree with you even as a Halo 3 fanboy.

Halo 5 is close to other AAA games' setup including Overwatch, League of Legends, CS Go, etc...

Since seasons are essential to bring players back, I wonder if transparency of MMR, or permanent display of previous seasons rating, or highest seasons rating when viewing player details would be a nice bit of data to display.

Should be possible since waypoint shows this data.
Seasons are certainly not essential to keep players playing. Halo 2 and 3 were clear proof of this.

Also, whatever your personal opinion is the fact is that people like a clear number (not some arbitrary title like Onyx) that they can work towards that gives them some satisfaction and bragging rights. The fun of the ranking system is why it shined, not necessarily how perfectly accurate it was at representing said skill. That fostered an interest in improving in a lot of players and kept the popularity high.

1-50 > Seasons if we're talking about fun factor and keeping longevity/popularity in Halo's MP.
I'm fine with seasons but, they need to last 3 months long I just hate logging on to see I have to grind back to the rank it took me all season to achieve.
Yeah that's exactly my point. I'm sure there are many many players like you in a similar situation that got their ranks in a previous season and don't care to keep playing in ranked for this reason. It just doesn't promote competitive longevity, however accurate the system may be.
I’m glad to see there’s a lot of people that support the true skill 1-50 ranking system being brought back, halo 5s is seasonal, halo 2/3 ranks were permanent and kept the game alive and competitive forever. True skill 1-50 ranking needs to be brought back, it’s the best ranking system halo has ever had and will have, nothing else compares. Hopefully 343 listens, but with the amount of ever increasing casual players I’m not sure they will, time will tell
I really enjoyed H2 and H3 ranking and dont mind H5 if it wasn't season based I think you can implement a season based ranking for MLG but should also have playlist rankings as well and a social xp rank would be another incentive to keep playing/grinding the game for less skilled players to also feel accomplished
tsassi wrote:
I've never really understood the obsession with the particular numbers from 1 to 50, nor the notion that a skill based ranking system should somehow be about leveling up. As far as I'm concerned, a skill ranking system has one, and only one job: to give me an accurate representation of my skill relative to other players. Giving me a sense of progression should be relegated to a progression system. Now, whether that progression is skill based or not, it should not be advertised as a ranking system if its goal is not to rank me as efficiently as possible.

To that end, there is no point arbitrarily limiting a skill ranking system to an interval like 1 to 50, because that's not how skill works. The most sensible choice of representation is to have everyone start at 0, and then their rating can go as far negative, or as far positive, as necessary, limited in reality of course by the fact that gaining or losing rating becomes the more difficult the further you deviate from the rest of the playerbase.

baaask wrote:
1-50 presents a very easy way to read and interpret what skill someone is
Not really. Since the skill range is arbitrarily capped off at both ends, you end up with a situation where there are players of vastly different skill levels with the same rating. In Halo 3, due to how Bungie set it up as a pseudo-progression system, I don't think there was much of an issue at the low-end. However, there were pretty major skill differences at the high end between the "50s", which made comparing high-skill players based on ranks alone essentially useless.

Furthermore, it was never clear at least to me personally where the actual "average" player stood. It would be natural to assume that it's 25, but if you actually looked at how the skills were distributed in playlists, it was clear that this was not the case. Again, this was because Bungie sought to make a pseudo-progression system rather than a straightforward skill rating system.

baaask wrote:
and gives people an incentive to attain a "highest skill" with a straight forward number that once earned is there forever.
As I said above, you're describing a progression system. If that's what people want, that's fine, but such a system should not be advertised as a "ranking" system if it prioritizes incetivizing and giving players a definite goal over honest, clear presentation of their skill.
You must be the angel of logic that flies through the window in my dreams! 100% agree with you even as a Halo 3 fanboy.

Halo 5 is close to other AAA games' setup including Overwatch, League of Legends, CS Go, etc...

Since seasons are essential to bring players back, I wonder if transparency of MMR, or permanent display of previous seasons rating, or highest seasons rating when viewing player details would be a nice bit of data to display.

Should be possible since waypoint shows this data.
Yeh they could change it to show previous seasons mmr like say Overwatch does for example.

I loved Halo 3 but I gotta say I like how Halo 5 matchmaking ranking and skill are separate systems for the reasons tsassi wrote.
A true skill 0-50 ranking system for comp modes like breakout, swat, slayer, and arena. While having a halo 4/5 system for social modes (or in general) so there is also a reason to play those modes more. But if the game is just true skill 0-50 then the game will be sweaty for every thing you play
TECH PON3 wrote:
A true skill 0-50 ranking system for comp modes like breakout, swat, slayer, and arena. While having a halo 4/5 system for social modes (or in general) so there is also a reason to play those modes more. But if the game is just true skill 0-50 then the game will be sweaty for every thing you play
I agree but why would there only be ranked playlists? That wouldn't make sense. Ranked and social playlists would coincide.
I’m glad to see there’s a lot of people that support the true skill 1-50 ranking system being brought back, halo 5s is seasonal, halo 2/3 ranks were permanent and kept the game alive and competitive forever. True skill 1-50 ranking needs to be brought back, it’s the best ranking system halo has ever had and will have, nothing else compares. Hopefully 343 listens, but with the amount of ever increasing casual players I’m not sure they will, time will tell
How did a permanent rank keep the game competitive?
Get a rank then quit that playlist.

However, could you describe the differences between what we have now, and what we had? And with the comparison, highlight what's better with the older system?
If Halo 3's 1-50 truly is the best system, what details regarding it was so good?
Naqser wrote:
I’m glad to see there’s a lot of people that support the true skill 1-50 ranking system being brought back, halo 5s is seasonal, halo 2/3 ranks were permanent and kept the game alive and competitive forever. True skill 1-50 ranking needs to be brought back, it’s the best ranking system halo has ever had and will have, nothing else compares. Hopefully 343 listens, but with the amount of ever increasing casual players I’m not sure they will, time will tell
How did a permanent rank keep the game competitive?
Get a rank then quit that playlist.

However, could you describe the differences between what we have now, and what we had? And with the comparison, highlight what's better with the older system?
If Halo 3's 1-50 truly is the best system, what details regarding it was so good?
The posts and replies I made in this thread have answers to your questions. Read the earlier posts.
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not bump.
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show
This post has been edited by a moderator. Please do not bump.
*Original post. Click at your own discretion.
Spoiler:
Show
baaask wrote:
Naqser wrote:
I’m glad to see there’s a lot of people that support the true skill 1-50 ranking system being brought back, halo 5s is seasonal, halo 2/3 ranks were permanent and kept the game alive and competitive forever. True skill 1-50 ranking needs to be brought back, it’s the best ranking system halo has ever had and will have, nothing else compares. Hopefully 343 listens, but with the amount of ever increasing casual players I’m not sure they will, time will tell
How did a permanent rank keep the game competitive?
Get a rank then quit that playlist.

However, could you describe the differences between what we have now, and what we had? And with the comparison, highlight what's better with the older system?
If Halo 3's 1-50 truly is the best system, what details regarding it was so good?
The posts and replies I made in this thread have answers to your questions. Read the earlier posts.
If I didn't want the OP to talk for himself, I wouldn't have asked for his explanations.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2