Halo 3 Forum
This topic has moved here: Subject: In depth explanation of the Halo 3 skill ranking system.
  • Subject: In depth explanation of the Halo 3 skill ranking system.
Subject: In depth explanation of the Halo 3 skill ranking system.
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Im still kinda confused on the whole deal.
Last night me and 3 buddies started playing Team Slayer, my one friend was ranked 23 another was 27 another was 35 and i was 33. We won 21 games in a row without loosing a single game and my buddy who was level 23 is now a 37, the guy who was a 27 is now a 37 and my friend who was a 35 is now a 37 and im only a 35. it might make sense if the 2 lower level guys leveled up to where i was but they went pass my level which really bothered me.
make this easy and please explain to me exactly why this is? By reading what youve said on page 1 i believe its because they havent played as many team-slayer games as i have so their rank levels up quicker?

  • 11.15.2007 7:09 AM PDT

Posted by: ST3W13G
That's a great explanation of the system, but the system is clearly not working. The fact that player after player after player is complaining about levels being way off is proof enough it's not working. After all, the system is suppose to match similarly skilled players but that's not happening. We're all running into 30-40's who play like 10-20's, & 10-20's who're playing like 30's. In Halo 2, you knew (far more often than not) that a 30 was a 30. Completely untrue in Halo 3.

If you're saying the system will only average out & accurately predict skill over time, then what, we're suppose to play a thousand unbalanced games before things balance out?!? No way.

Look, for most players, Trueskill worked well enough. What we still desperately need is better net code!!! (Want me to send you a clip of 3 successive sniper headshots that doesn't kill the opponent. Jeez. If it wasn't for the Halo nicotine I'd have stopped playing a long time ago. ;) )

I see far more posts about "how does the system work" or "I've won 10 games and my level hasn't gone.up". There are always going to be players who seem to play above or below their skill level. It could be anything from someone getting a new GT and starting over to letting someone play on their account. I mean if I played 500 social matches and just started slayer I would have a low level just like someone who has played no social matches and starts in slayer.

I have played just over 1000 matches and everything seems balanced to me. The strength of the system is it's ability to quickly gauge a persons skill. This is why we had so many posts about the leveling system being too easy because people where leveling up fast. Now we are getting in to a trend where people are expecting to go up a level after ever 1 or 2 wins. It's just not how it works anymore so "it must be broken" is what we hear.

No system is going to be perfect and you can debate 100 years about this system being better than H2's system. This thread simply states how it works and what you should expect when playing as far as levels are concerned.

  • 11.15.2007 7:14 AM PDT

Posted by: ATXSUBY
Im still kinda confused on the whole deal.
Last night me and 3 buddies started playing Team Slayer, my one friend was ranked 23 another was 27 another was 35 and i was 33. We won 21 games in a row without loosing a single game and my buddy who was level 23 is now a 37, the guy who was a 27 is now a 37 and my friend who was a 35 is now a 37 and im only a 35. it might make sense if the 2 lower level guys leveled up to where i was but they went pass my level which really bothered me.
make this easy and please explain to me exactly why this is? By reading what youve said on page 1 i believe its because they havent played as many team-slayer games as i have so their rank levels up quicker?


I highlighted the point of interest. yes, it is because they have not played as much Team Slayer as you have. Also, them being such lower levels compared to the other team would have helped aswell.

  • 11.15.2007 7:31 AM PDT

Posted by: ST3W13G
That's a great explanation of the system, but the system is clearly not working. The fact that player after player after player is complaining about levels being way off is proof enough it's not working. After all, the system is suppose to match similarly skilled players but that's not happening. We're all running into 30-40's who play like 10-20's, & 10-20's who're playing like 30's. In Halo 2, you knew (far more often than not) that a 30 was a 30. Completely untrue in Halo 3.

If you're saying the system will only average out & accurately predict skill over time, then what, we're suppose to play a thousand unbalanced games before things balance out?!? No way.

Look, for most players, Trueskill worked well enough. What we still desperately need is better net code!!! (Want me to send you a clip of 3 successive sniper headshots that doesn't kill the opponent. Jeez. If it wasn't for the Halo nicotine I'd have stopped playing a long time ago. ;) )
People complainig about levels being way of is FAR from proof. First of all this forum doesn't really give you any idea what percentage of people are complaining. Secondly those complaining often do it because they don't understand the system and thus either complain for that reason alone or simply ask a question to better understand it. I've seen a number of people complain they didn't move up and you look at there stats and it's OBVIOUS they shouldn't be moving up. I've also seen people complain about not moving up and then you look at there games and I realize the moved 3 ranks...The respons: "oh, I thought I started as a 41 not a 38". So you see just because people complain doesn't mean the system isn't working.

"W'ere all running into 30-40's who play like 10-20's"

I'm not. I wonder why it works for me. What does a 10-20 play like anyway? And what should a 30-40 play like? There is a big difference in my experience between even as few as 6 ranks. You are going to have people working there way up the ranks so that easily explains why some people play "beyond" there level. The people playing below there level don't really exist at least you can't blame the system for it if they do. Some people may have played with friends (either just to have fun or to boost) that got them to a higher rank then they deserve. Not much you can do about that. But in general I would say players who you think aren't any good aren't as bad as you think. As I said just a few ranks can make a big difference so don't think everyone in the 30's is the same. Also everyone has there bad games.

"a thousand unbalanced games"

Again not sure why it's working for me but I play fun competative games most of the time which is all I can ask. Some games are easier some are harder and a few are down right ugly but in general it's a good mixture and often very competative. I'd say it's working just fine and I haven't had to play a thousand unbalanced games to get there.

  • 11.15.2007 10:58 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

wort wort wort!!!

  • 11.15.2007 12:26 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

no skill needed for rank....boosters proved that

  • 11.15.2007 1:53 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

If %5 of the population is at 50 - 40 skill level, 30-40 = %20, 20-30 = %30, and the rest %45, approx.
If the population has stopped growing as fast as when halo3 first arrived, which i believe it has, then for some to rise in skill level means that someone else will have to drop in skill level.
Not everyone can be 40-50, just like not everyone can be millionaires, other wise the economy will stop, inflation would go through the roof, no one would have to work.
It seem everyone is fighting to get into that %5 elite, but do not realise that its %5 for a reason, all the %5 `s are fighting among each other to stay , and the rest are fighting to reach that %5,
Back to my original arguement, it would be alot easier to reach the high skill levels at the first release date than it is now.
And the reason the system does not work is because the skill level stops at 50, if everyone was only allowed to make £50,000 then the economy would be more complex also.
Not taking anything away from the 1% percenters.

  • 11.15.2007 2:55 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT



The fact in reality, is that H3 ranking is not 'linear'.. its not predictable.. and its not consistent...

If it works the way it explains.. it actually has no idea how good YOU really are in TS.. just how good the team you selected was, and their connections..

Its just silly...

And if the system 'thinks' I'm an 11.. it was wrong... I'm not the only one who is seeing inconsistencies.. TS, is hard to rank up with when you are playing with higher ranks.. period.. wins.. losses.. doesnt' matter.. Team doubles, or lonewolves.. is much much easier.

  • 11.15.2007 3:12 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

"People complainig about levels being way of is FAR from proof."
Um, what more do you want? What other info can an individual gather other than the fact this subject is very frequently complained about in game & in forums. Ironically, one of my clan members just posted about this problem less than an hour ago in our clan forum. So I don't know what proof you need or can expect. But direct observation by those for whom Trueskill is designed to serve is a pretty good start.

"a thousand unbalanced games"
Sorry, I should have added a ;) to denote my sarcasm. My point is that there's only so many unbalanced games someone will play before getting sick of playing. I don't know where that point is but Trueskill needs to be accurate well before that point.

"We're all running into 30-40's who play like 10-20's" "I'm not. I wonder why it works for me. What does a 10-20 play like anyway? And what should a 30-40 play like? There is a big difference in my experience between even as few as 6 ranks."
Seriously?!? You have yet to have the pleasure of playing a 30 who sucks? I get it most everyday. And it's not host advantage either--you can tell by their tactics they're not a 30. I'm not saying it's always the case (there are definitely players who accurately match their level & it may be getting better), but I & my clan mates see & discuss it frequently.

Maybe this offers some quantifiable proof. Among our clan of 50 or so players & my full friends list, I have a significant number of players who are listed at 10 levels above or below their Halo2 levels, yet their game play is unchanged. (I'll try to tally their past & present levels when I get more time.) From this historic data, I can tell you Trueskill is not accurate...yet. I'm not saying Trueskill is broken or sucks, only pointing out that it's causing much confusion & frustration among those I game with. We may not be representative of the population, but it's been an issue to us.

  • 11.15.2007 3:36 PM PDT

Posted by: ten1zer7
If %5 of the population is at 50 - 40 skill level, 30-40 = %20, 20-30 = %30, and the rest %45, approx.
If the population has stopped growing as fast as when halo3 first arrived, which i believe it has, then for some to rise in skill level means that someone else will have to drop in skill level.
Not everyone can be 40-50, just like not everyone can be millionaires, other wise the economy will stop, inflation would go through the roof, no one would have to work.
It seem everyone is fighting to get into that %5 elite, but do not realise that its %5 for a reason, all the %5 `s are fighting among each other to stay , and the rest are fighting to reach that %5,
Back to my original arguement, it would be alot easier to reach the high skill levels at the first release date than it is now.
And the reason the system does not work is because the skill level stops at 50, if everyone was only allowed to make £50,000 then the economy would be more complex also.
Not taking anything away from the 1% percenters.
Honestly I'm a little confused what your saying. The last sentence you say the system doesn't work because it caps at 50. Skill levels aren't meant to serve as a leader board. It's meant to group players. Spreading people out to thin doesn't serve any addititional purpose. I'm not sure why 50 skill levels was selected but I'm assuming there is some math behind it that shows 50 ranks distributes the group pretty well. Or in the very least it's based on actual testing.

  • 11.15.2007 3:59 PM PDT

Posted by: ST3W13G
"People complainig about levels being way of is FAR from proof."
Um, what more do you want? What other info can an individual gather other than the fact this subject is very frequently complained about in game & in forums. Ironically, one of my clan members just posted about this problem less than an hour ago in our clan forum. So I don't know what proof you need or can expect. But direct observation by those for whom Trueskill is designed to serve is a pretty good start.

"a thousand unbalanced games"
Sorry, I should have added a ;) to denote my sarcasm. My point is that there's only so many unbalanced games someone will play before getting sick of playing. I don't know where that point is but Trueskill needs to be accurate well before that point.

"We're all running into 30-40's who play like 10-20's" "I'm not. I wonder why it works for me. What does a 10-20 play like anyway? And what should a 30-40 play like? There is a big difference in my experience between even as few as 6 ranks."
Seriously?!? You have yet to have the pleasure of playing a 30 who sucks? I get it most everyday. And it's not host advantage either--you can tell by their tactics they're not a 30. I'm not saying it's always the case (there are definitely players who accurately match their level & it may be getting better), but I & my clan mates see & discuss it frequently.

Maybe this offers some quantifiable proof. Among our clan of 50 or so players & my full friends list, I have a significant number of players who are listed at 10 levels above or below their Halo2 levels, yet their game play is unchanged. (I'll try to tally their past & present levels when I get more time.) From this historic data, I can tell you Trueskill is not accurate...yet. I'm not saying Trueskill is broken or sucks, only pointing out that it's causing much confusion & frustration among those I game with. We may not be representative of the population, but it's been an issue to us.


As I stated in my post many complaints aren't really about the system because it doesn't work. They are made because they don't understand the system or the people have some inflated idea about there performance. Considering the system isn't nice and linear you are bound to have confusion. That however absolutly does not serve as proof the system isn't working. There are lot's of things I don't understand, that doesn't mean they don't work. If I question something because I don't understand it that's normal, but to conclude it doesn't work because I have a question is silly. If you want to supply proof your going to have to do it mathmatically. Your going to have to have data. A few observations that people don't understand the system is not proof it doesn't work.

From my experience I play fairly balanced games. If you aren't having that experience then I can understand your frustration. You will never get perfectly balanced teams every time. Halo 2 couldn't do it and Halo 3 system can't do it either. When you are aproximating people's skill levels there are going to be mis matches. Also you get paired with people not just at your level but above you and below you. I also tend to believe people exagerate. Like I said there can be a BIG difference in skills between just a few skill levels. You again state the 30's don't play like 30's. That's a ridiculouse comment in my opinion. I asked you what does a 30 play like? I guarantee you can't answer that so how do you know they aren't playing like 30's. What makes a person a 30? It could be good tactics but maybe they aren't a great shot. Or maybe they overcome poor tactics by being a better shot. There isn't some book that defines exactly what tactics a 30 should know to be a 30.

Your point about clan members being above/below there old Halo 2 ranks isn't proof of anything. I've discussed this a bit (I believe in this thread but I can't remember). The systems are DIFFERENT. The distrabution is NOT the same. The ranks WILL NOT translate exactly. I'm willing to bet based on the distrabution that most people from Halo 2 are higher then they were. The basic reason is because the top ranks weren't used in Halo 2 so there is more room for everyone to push up. Not because it doesn't work. I also believe more of the bottom ranks are probably in use as well thus why people might also be lower. ALL the skill levels are now used. Halo 2 didn't really make great use of them.

If you are frustrated because you don't understand the system that's fine. I get that. That's exactly what this thread is for. It's to help clear some things up. But your original post said the "system is clearly not working". You believed that a short while ago. Now you say it's just confusion and frustration. Now I'm confused :)

[Edited on 11.15.2007 4:33 PM PST]

  • 11.15.2007 4:23 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

You mention the word "pushing up" thats what im trying to say, if the cap was not 50 then we all would get a chance to move up.
At this present time we are being pushed down by the growing weight above us, these top guys have no were to go to leave room for lower league players.
Name another points system that caps at a score ? ICE SKATING.. We are not being judged.
It should be more like the chess federation system, there is no limit on that, if you beat someone with higher points you move up a % of the difference between you and them, and vice versa.
This is a simple fix,, Do not cap the skill at 50, let it run naturally.,in the process will give others room to move up or down.
If the chess table was fixed at 2500 it would take 40 years to reach grand master stage if indeed you had the talent to do so.
Back to my first point, in the beginning everyone was moving freely up the skill ranking, untill people started to hit 50, then more and more, untill the weight is just getting to much, meaning that its going to take 10 times as long to reach 40-50 than it did at the start.
In the proccess giving false skill ratings for everyone.

  • 11.15.2007 6:42 PM PDT

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I can't say that I've stopped being disappointed by Bungie, but I can say that I've stopped being surprised by the disappointments.

Posted by: El KafungusIf you're worried that you're not getting your fair shake in the ranking system, look at the last 50 games that you've played in that hopper. (If you haven't played 50 games, play more. The system needs more data.)

Take your win/loss average. If it's 65% or above, and you've been in that playlist for a while, you've probably increased in level 2 or more times over the last 50 games (or you will in the next 20 or so). Otherwise you are going to be hovering around the same level or dropping in rank.





http://www.bungie.net/stats/PlayerStatsHalo3.aspx?player=vDo% 20Matt&ctl00_mainContent_bnetpgl_recentgamesChangePage=6
This team only plays together. They are something like 137-0. They hit level 14 towards the top of page 6. Please, explain why they have been stuck at level 14, for quite some time.

  • 11.15.2007 6:47 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Definately one of the best posts I've seen made on this forum in a very long time.

ALTHOUGH...I disagree with how the system actually works, it SHOULD take into account your in match statistics.

  • 11.15.2007 7:21 PM PDT

Posted by: squomp
Posted by: El KafungusIf you're worried that you're not getting your fair shake in the ranking system, look at the last 50 games that you've played in that hopper. (If you haven't played 50 games, play more. The system needs more data.)

Take your win/loss average. If it's 65% or above, and you've been in that playlist for a while, you've probably increased in level 2 or more times over the last 50 games (or you will in the next 20 or so). Otherwise you are going to be hovering around the same level or dropping in rank.





http://www.bungie.net/stats/PlayerStatsHalo3.aspx?player=vDo% 20Matt&ctl00_mainContent_bnetpgl_recentgamesChangePage=6
This team only plays together. They are something like 137-0. They hit level 14 towards the top of page 6. Please, explain why they have been stuck at level 14, for quite some time.
I think I counted 66 straight wins at level 14 with no prior losses...Well that's just messed up :) Someone mentioned something a while back about the TrueSkill system having some difficulty with people who only play together. Not sure if that's true. Perhaps the OP can help explain that one. I'd send the OP a message just in case this gets lost in the shuffle. I'm curiose about the answer.

[Edited on 11.15.2007 8:04 PM PST]

  • 11.15.2007 8:03 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Your thoery did not make sense in my case

Myself and 3 other friends decided to start a team slayer team, WE WERE ALL SKILL 1 and had NEVER played team slayer before. We played strictly just the same 4 of us EVERYDAY and nobody did any team slayer games by themselves and yet im a 32 team slayer skill and they are all 15? The theory that you suggest of the trueskill system MAKES NO SENSE IN MY CASE. All of us have the EXACT same win/loss ratio in team slayer.

  • 11.16.2007 1:21 AM PDT

7r1p1um

So basically your saying that Your "trueskill" really means crap and that you may win alot and have a consistant playing level but ultimatly means crap if you preform well in the game. I mean your k/d spread speaks louder than anything in slayer. your team preformance means everything in a team game, and your medals displays how you rate with each ability handed to your and NONE of these are concidered in the way your rank and rating ends up.

  • 11.16.2007 1:52 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: TwoFaced1680
Posted by: squomp
Posted by: El KafungusIf you're worried that you're not getting your fair shake in the ranking system, look at the last 50 games that you've played in that hopper. (If you haven't played 50 games, play more. The system needs more data.)

Take your win/loss average. If it's 65% or above, and you've been in that playlist for a while, you've probably increased in level 2 or more times over the last 50 games (or you will in the next 20 or so). Otherwise you are going to be hovering around the same level or dropping in rank.




http://www.bungie.net/stats/PlayerStatsHalo3.aspx?player=vDo% 20Matt&ctl00_mainContent_bnetpgl_recentgamesChangePage=6
This team only plays together. They are something like 137-0. They hit level 14 towards the top of page 6. Please, explain why they have been stuck at level 14, for quite some time.
I think I counted 66 straight wins at level 14 with no prior losses...Well that's just messed up :) Someone mentioned something a while back about the TrueSkill system having some difficulty with people who only play together. Not sure if that's true. Perhaps the OP can help explain that one. I'd send the OP a message just in case this gets lost in the shuffle. I'm curiose about the answer.


Sure, I can explain.

Here's the problem with these guys. They don't lose. In fact, as far back as I can see, they NEVER have lost a game in team slayer. Nor in a matchmaking hopper.

Without a loss, the system doesn't have anything to gauge your performance against. Therefore, the Sigma value in that hopper stays REALLY high. Now the problem with that is, that the game might think these guys are level 30-40. However, there's where the conservative ranking system kicks in.

See, the game is unsure of their rank, and therefore ranks them lower. It is SO unsure, that their rank is underrepresented to the tune of 20 levels.

Mathematically, I've seen hypothetical Sigma values in excess of 7 from Microsoft. So when fit in to the Rank = Mu - (K * Sigma) equation, where K is assumed to be three (again, information from microsoft), that means that, say, 14 = 38 - (3 * 8). See how their Mu is actually 38? If their Sigma was smaller, they'd be ranked in the high 30's using those numbers. But they haven't lost. So, their Sigma might actually be HIGHER than 8. Which leads us to another problem. That Mu value is still being put into the experience calculations. So is the Sigma. And you get less "experience" from winning against a team with a lower Mu rating, and still less when one or both of the teams involved have a high Sigma value. And they're going to lose a HELL of a lot of experience when they finally DO lose.

This is why these unbroken teams have trouble ranking up. I would say that winning 80% of the time will actually make you rank up FASTER than winning 100% of the time. And winning 100% of the time is usually why a team stays unbroken. Yes, it's a flaw in the system, but designing whole systems around unbeaten teams makes NO SENSE. MOST extremely talented players are going to have a ratio of around .75-.9 wins per games played. You CANNOT design a meaningful and efficient system that makes room for people who NEVER lose. Because sooner or later, they will lose. Yes, the system punishes people who don't ever lose, but everyone loses eventually. At least once.

However, this is a perfect example of what I wanted to do myself, research wise. This is a team with no outside variables. They have all played in the same team from the start, with NO other ranked games than what they have played together. And if K/D ratio really DID matter inside matches, this guy (3.35 K/D) would be ranked lower and this guy (3.91 K/D) would be ranked higher. So we finally have experimental data to show that in-game performance truly doesn't count in the Trueskill system. Just whether or not your team wins.

I'll have to do some research into what actual mechanism there is, if any, to "punish" a group that plays only in one unbroken team. I doubt it, but it should be tested one way or another. Things are busy right now, and my birthday is Sunday (Finally a Weekend Birthday!) it might take me a while. But the model that I researched covers 98% of all outcomes so far. And if anyone wants to help with the research, PM me on the forums. But I need GOOD players (preferably even better than I, so we can test the whole lossless thing) with a matchmaking playlist that they've NEVER played in before on that gamertag, and their hours of availability either have to match mine (generally 3-7 central on weekdays, weekends by appointment), and/or they need to be dedicated to a scientifically rigorous style of play. Which means logging outcomes, and other unfun stuff. And they have to realize that we'll have to play something like 100 or more games in each hopper we test before I'm satisfied with the data set.

Oh, if you have a set of data you'd like to have analyzed, and that you think I'd like to analyze, please PM me on the forums with a set of links to the information.

Oh, and please don't message me in-game, just do it on the forums. I might be receiving a lot of PMs, and the forums are faster.

  • 11.16.2007 2:55 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Of course, before making such a bold statement about my theory's inapplicability, you'd do a little bit of research to make sure you had things right, right? I mean, it's so easy to go into your past games list on your Service Record that you'd have to be a fool not to. Or I'd have to be a fool not to check into your games list to see how I can modify my theory if it DID turn out to be incorrect, right?

I don't call this, this, and this playing "strictly just the same 4 of us EVERYDAY" and "nobody doing any team slayer games by themselves." If these are the friends you're talking about, then YOU went "off the reservation" plenty of times. In fact, your FIRST GAME of team slayer was the first game I linked to from YOUR game history. You played that game with NONE of the people that you reached level 32 with.

So I can say this with complete certainty: you lie, sir. You lie with such an extraordinary boldness that I'm not sure whether it should engender admiration or contempt. Next time someone spends 5 hours on a thread developing and supporting a theory, and more adding to it and addressing questions, do yourself a favor and avoid the shaming you'll inevitably receive; make sure you have your facts straight before you tell the OP his careful and painstaking research makes no sense. It took me less time to discover your inaccuracy than it did to type this post.


Posted by: SuddnDeath
Your thoery did not make sense in my case

Myself and 3 other friends decided to start a team slayer team, WE WERE ALL SKILL 1 and had NEVER played team slayer before. We played strictly just the same 4 of us EVERYDAY and nobody did any team slayer games by themselves and yet im a 32 team slayer skill and they are all 15? The theory that you suggest of the trueskill system MAKES NO SENSE IN MY CASE. All of us have the EXACT same win/loss ratio in team slayer.


[Edited on 11.16.2007 4:31 AM PST]

  • 11.16.2007 3:44 AM PDT

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I can't say that I've stopped being disappointed by Bungie, but I can say that I've stopped being surprised by the disappointments.

Thank you for the explanation. It made sense to me. I find that this supports the beliefs that many people share here. Many have "observed" what you have explained. I find this to be a "flaw" within this system. Common sense tells us that if we defeat all of our opponents we should at least be ranked higher than they are. There are many more examples of this system not making sense.

  • 11.16.2007 3:45 AM PDT

Posted by: squomp
Thank you for the explanation. It made sense to me. I find that this supports the beliefs that many people share here. Many have "observed" what you have explained. I find this to be a "flaw" within this system. Common sense tells us that if we defeat all of our opponents we should at least be ranked higher than they are. There are many more examples of this system not making sense.


Actually, all ranking problems I have seen are all explained in this thread.

  • 11.16.2007 5:20 AM PDT

I saw this in another thread and thought it should be included here.

Microsoft FAQ's about TrueSkill

  • 11.16.2007 6:36 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

if you dont workfor microsoft, then im not WASTING my time reading your bull poo

  • 11.16.2007 7:04 AM PDT

Posted by: N8 D 88 420
if you dont workfor microsoft, then im not WASTING my time reading your bull poo

If you would have took the time to read the OP you would have seen the link to the detailed and technical information from Microsoft. He basically took the time to break it down for folks and make it easier to understand. Obviously no matter how simple you make some things, some people will still be too dumb to understand it.

  • 11.16.2007 7:50 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

The process of me leveling up makes your post seem bunk and I'm not kidding.

I win 12+ Games in a Row going positive against higher levels then me and I don't budge a level.
I always carry my team in Team Slayer going +6 or better each game, they level up but I don't.

  • 11.16.2007 8:25 AM PDT