Win/losses are an artificial unlocking event. That's it. Any win rate beyond an absurd outlier is going to converge.eLantern wrote:That's not true.One Sig Fig wrote:And that's fine. No system is going to be perfect. I just very much prefer the system where I don't have a voice in my head to fast play every engagement vs. playing each situation for the win, even if it's slow. I have played games in every Halo where I know the players on the other team, I know he has a better shot than me and I can't just fly into an encounter- but I know I can bait them, out-think them and sometimes steal a win. That's not rewarded much now. From a game quality perspective, I think it's a negative.
- The CSR system still only rewards based on wins. It will self-correct to adjust to one's assessed skill, but match outcomes (W/L) are still the only manner in which you can increase or decrease your rank.
- The TS2/MMR system is still primarily based on match outcomes despite the inclusion of individual KPM (and to a lesser degree DPM) influences that can sway some adjustments in opposition of the team adjustment. Their purpose is to further identify personal skill which directly leads to increased predictive accuracy.
- From a game quality perspective, more accurate skill-based matchmaking (SBMM) is the most critical component. And from an individual rank perspective, rank integrity is the most critical component. These two things are, more or less, being achieved now.
Re: game quality- I mean that, is a big ranked win/play enjoyable? If I get feedback that is inverse to the outcome of that game, it's less likely. So that's one of the reasons why I have repeatedly said I would trade a small amount of global accuracy, while maintaining a high accuracy and rank integrity.