Skip to main content

Forums / Games / Halo 5: Guardians

BTB refresh could be ranked!?!?!?!?!

OP ExO BIGG

  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2
qlimm wrote:
Bad players can hop in vehicles and go positive.
I think individual performance can come into play with points and ranking up in relation to kills per minute and what they game expects them to get (although that could've changed recently), but vehicle kills could be adjusted to have less weighting on that. They also still have to win which is the most important factor.
BTB Bill wrote:
If a team is controlling vehicles and the counters (laser, hydra, Plasma Pistols, ect), aren't they just the better team at that point and deserve to win?

I don't see how playing BTB is somehow less skillful than something ranked like swat or breakout....
The rankings would be fine if the fireteam minimum was 8. In SWAT there is nothing you can grab to give yourself a massive advantage. Breakout is round based, so if the enemy team gets a hydra or camo in one round then the enemy team can adapt in the next. Breakout using BTB's model would be respawn based and the hydra gets infinite ammo with a shield, so if you lose the initial "breakout" you are going to get farmed.
LUKEPOWA wrote:
qlimm wrote:
Bad players can hop in vehicles and go positive.
I think individual performance can come into play with points and ranking up in relation to kills per minute and what they game expects them to get (although that could've changed recently), but vehicle kills could be adjusted to have less weighting on that. They also still have to win which is the most important factor.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the current CSR system only use winning or losing as the deciding factor? If BTB used MMR as the ranking system I think it could work, but currently I'd be like a gold 4 if it used wins and losses.
qlimm wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the current CSR system only use winning or losing as the deciding factor? If BTB used MMR as the ranking system I think it could work, but currently I'd be like a gold 4 if it used wins and losses.
W/L is the main factor, but kills/deaths per minute also come into play to a lesser degree in certain situations as well as their opponents' skill levels. eLantern made a post which explains a lot of it.

eLantern wrote:
Based on everything I've gathered from Josh by way of Twitter, Discord, Waypoint, and Video Interview this is my understanding of TS2.0/MMR:
  • [PRIMARY] A match outcome (W/L) along with the disparity between average team MMRs will establish a net adjustment.

    If you win a game that you weren't expected to win there's a much greater chance your MMR will improve. But it's not guaranteed to occur at the individual level. The only assurance provided by the match outcome (W/L) on MMR is towards the team's net adjustment. A win will guarantee a positive net change just as a loss will guarantee a negative net change (For The Team). The amount (of the net change) seems to be a combination of factors that relate to match expectations. This directly corresponds to the disparity between the average MMR of the two teams, but it also may include the length-of-time that the match took to complete. I'm not 100% certain about the match time factor, but I think it's safe to assume a time period range plays some type of role on the net adjustment.

    Anyways, a match outcome that defies expectation results in the system self-correcting its understanding of the teams. These particular re-adjustments will result in larger net MMR gains or losses for the teams. The individual team member adjustments are a zero sum byproduct (adjustment) of the team's net adjustment. Thus, the larger the net adjustment the greater the odds are for an individual to receive a portion of it.
  • [SECONDARY] Kills per Minute (KPM) and, to a much lesser degree, Deaths per Minute (DPM) are the individual performance-based metrics.

    If you slay faster than the range your MMR predicted for the particular mode you were playing (and against the opposing skill level) then your MMR will likely increase. However, this is also not guaranteed as it's relative to the performances of your teammates too. This is because, as mentioned previously, it's a zero sum byproduct adjustment of the team's net adjustment. In other words, if you only slightly outperform your expected range, but your teammates greatly outperform theirs you may not see an increase in your MMR.

    KPM & DPM expectations possess various weighted ranges based on the mode and difference in perceived skill. They self-adjust based on global plus personal trends. Now, I'm not sure if this self-adjustment is actively accomplished moment-to-moment or match-to-match or if it only occurs after a new batch run is preformed or some combination. Nevertheless, these metrics simply serve as a method to identify individual influences on match outcomes in order to appropriately scale skill-based adjustments at an individual level instead of awarding team members equally from the net adjustment.

    As mentioned previously it’s possible for an individual’s MMR to independently increase or decrease in opposition to the team’s net adjustment, but the zero sum aspect means that their teammates (per their particular individual adjustments) are required to offset that individual’s MMR adjustment such that the team’s net adjustment is realized. This is all because a team's performance is still ultimately a sum of its individual parts. And due to the fact that matchmaking is a system designed to constantly create new teams from independent individuals and/or variable groups of individuals who elect to search for a potential match. In other words, it's not like a tournament that features, or establishes, pre-registered teams. Teams that essentially lock-in members as one cohesive unit throughout the tournament period.
  • [NOTEWORTHY] Severe outlier performances may get flagged by the system and potentially ignored by TS2 if it seems to clash dramatically with historic expectations. This is done out of concern for manipulation that's deemed unacceptable.
In the end, match outcome (W/L) is still the most important component. Pace and individual performance certainly play roles with regards to skill recognition and progression, but the moment selfish play rears its ugly head in hopes of improving one's personal performance (which is often detrimental to match outcome) it actually is restricting a player's potential skill assertation and progression. Playing as an efficient team and for one-another will always be the most successful way to improve. The system acknowledges this fact while also appropriately recognizing the individual contributions in order to provide improved predictive accuracy.
qlimm wrote:
BTB Bill wrote:
If a team is controlling vehicles and the counters (laser, hydra, Plasma Pistols, ect), aren't they just the better team at that point and deserve to win?

I don't see how playing BTB is somehow less skillful than something ranked like swat or breakout....
The rankings would be fine if the fireteam minimum was 8. In SWAT there is nothing you can grab to give yourself a massive advantage. Breakout is round based, so if the enemy team gets a hydra or camo in one round then the enemy team can adapt in the next. Breakout using BTB's model would be respawn based and the hydra gets infinite ammo with a shield, so if you lose the initial "breakout" you are going to get farmed.
If anything, making BTB ranked would solve any farming issue. Right now there is zero incentive for a team to end a BTB game. They are much more likely to farm. When ranked, teams are more likely to get matched up against another skilled team and if not, they are more likely to end the game ASAP to get their rank up as fast as possible when faced with an "easy" game.

I still don't understand why its somehow less skillful because people use vehicles. Honestly, Halo 5's vehicles are pretty balanced and easy to take down. I don't see how they would be too dominant in a ranked BTB.
BTB Bill wrote:
qlimm wrote:
BTB Bill wrote:
If a team is controlling vehicles and the counters (laser, hydra, Plasma Pistols, ect), aren't they just the better team at that point and deserve to win?

I don't see how playing BTB is somehow less skillful than something ranked like swat or breakout....
The rankings would be fine if the fireteam minimum was 8. In SWAT there is nothing you can grab to give yourself a massive advantage. Breakout is round based, so if the enemy team gets a hydra or camo in one round then the enemy team can adapt in the next. Breakout using BTB's model would be respawn based and the hydra gets infinite ammo with a shield, so if you lose the initial "breakout" you are going to get farmed.
If anything, making BTB ranked would solve any farming issue. Right now there is zero incentive for a team to end a BTB game. They are much more likely to farm. When ranked, teams are more likely to get matched up against another skilled team and if not, they are more likely to end the game ASAP to get their rank up as fast as possible when faced with an "easy" game.

I still don't understand why its somehow less skillful because people use vehicles. Honestly, Halo 5's vehicles are pretty balanced and easy to take down. I don't see how they would be too dominant in a ranked BTB.
If you don't see how vehicles in their current state are not suited for competitive play, then I don't think I will be able to change your mind on anything.

In my opinion, vehicles in competitive play should mimic powerups in HCS: equidistant from each team's spawn and 1 or 2 max on the map. Then maybe give Banshees a shield that doesn't recharge (similar to OS) and make ghost drivers able to be headshot when facing an enemy head on.

This would still create an advantage for the team who acquires the vehicle, but allows the players on the enemy team to counter the "powerup" with the weapons they spawn with, similar to arena.

You can reversal perfect a dude with camo in Arena, but in BTB if you run into a ghost with your loadout you will: 1. Die....2. Have to seek out a plasma pistol which may or may not be controlled by the enemy team....3. Use the PP on the ghost and then either board it or have a 1v1 with your BR.

You may say "just team shoot the ghost" which works in your 8-man squad, but for people who solo-queue this isn't a viable option, and now we have reached the reasoning behind limiting a ranked BTB playlist to full squads.
qlimm wrote:
You may say "just team shoot the ghost" which works in your 8-man squad, but for people who solo-queue this isn't a viable option, and now we have reached the reasoning behind limiting a ranked BTB playlist to full squads.
When it was mentioned last, solo teams were beating parties by I think 50% using the newest matching system in social. In a ranked environment, the restrictions will be tighter as long as the population is there so I think the games will be a lot closer. Solo players at a higher skilled level will likely be more inclined to use their mics, but if not, they'll very likely have more map awareness at least to see and help a teammate. It was also suggested by Menke that a ranked version would be 6v6 instead.

My concern is that I don't think the population will be big in the long run and that will cause the issues that you're bringing up because the matchmaker will have to loosen the restrictions so people can find games and that's when the uneven matches will occur.
God I hope it doesn’t become ranked. Regular BTB is the only social playlist I actually enjoy playing. God help us all if they take that away as well
Ranked BTB? Take out H5 BR starts while your at it.
Ranked would be cool.
I'm talking about making it ranked along with the new refresh. The refresh will generate interest and a population spike of old players returning to the game. Keep that spike entertained with competitive play on new maps/gametypes and classic BTB can survive. Otherwise your gonna be stuck with 24/7 Big team super fiesta and just have to wait for BTB to come up as a rotational. That would be such a sad day.
  1. 1
  2. ...
  3. ...
  4. 2