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

Posted by: GALLS 521
What about all this boosting and deranking does that actually work? You said its a bell curve so does it


There are a few ways to boost, which I will not discuss. However, there is no proof that any boosting or deranking meaningfully affects the general population, whereas in Halo 2 it did.

  • 06.22.2008 1:17 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I love leveling 2 times in 1 match its class!

  • 06.22.2008 4:55 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Other members of the forum couldn't help me on this subject, a couple of them Heroic, but you've cleared this up nicely.

So your saying the stronger the team you play, the faster you will increase; to put it more simply.

I will also metion that boosting is a way to cheat the system to rank up faster. Normally, most games don't want you to abuse their system, but I was told that for me to rank up faster, I must boost with 40+. I started this tag and its work nicely now but I'm starting to run into the same problem as I did with my other tag, not increasing with my higher sigma as I am still low experience but am winning against 30 and 40+. Hopefully once i play 50+ games it will start working better. Since I've only played 28 and won 27.

Anyways thanks for clearing some things up for me.

[Edited on 06.22.2008 9:03 PM PDT]

  • 06.22.2008 8:57 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

An epic fail on the ranking system bungie make it like halo 2.

  • 06.23.2008 4:43 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

you really helped me. I have been questioning my friends on live why they rank up so fast but its always the same answer "idk". You gave me an amazing in detail tutorial on leveling up. But i do have 1 question for any 1 viewing this topic...Does wearing the katana effect the exp you receive per game?

  • 06.23.2008 7:05 AM PDT

"The national budget must be balanced. The public debt must be reduced. The arrogance of the authorities must be moderated and controlled. Payments to foreign governments must be reduced if the nation doesn't want to go bankrupt. People must again learn to work instead of living on public assistance." -Marcus Tullius Cicero, 55 B.C.

Posted by: XxdeadlockedxX
Does wearing the katana effect the exp you receive per game?


No.

[Edited on 06.23.2008 7:07 AM PDT]

  • 06.23.2008 7:07 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Don't Click Here!!!

  • 06.23.2008 10:23 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Argus eyed
Posted by: XxdeadlockedxX
Does wearing the katana effect the exp you receive per game?


No.


I LOL'd for real...I think he was joking though.

  • 06.23.2008 1:00 PM PDT

great

  • 06.24.2008 12:42 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

thank you for the info its nice to know this type of stuff.

  • 06.24.2008 2:15 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

So, if I'm ranking up for evry win, and ranking down for every loss, what does that mean?

  • 06.24.2008 6:29 PM PDT

Please consider enlisting in the UNSC's Black Water Ops Program. Led by Recon and featured multiple time in Bungie's Community Spotlight. We have over 4000 members in just over 9 months and we are growing everyday. I hope to see at BWO!

~ii

Posted by: Turntable Junky
Cheers for the write up. Tis a shame this thread will probably die as the majority of users on this site won't understand it. But cheers anyway.

lol yeah probably will die it's only got 64 pages of reply's. great post i see why my cousin thinks he knows exactly how the ranking system works now ;)

  • 06.24.2008 7:06 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: ZeeAk
So, if I'm ranking up for evry win, and ranking down for every loss, what does that mean?


Means you still have high sigma and the system is unsure of your rank right now.

  • 06.24.2008 10:49 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

TrueRank or whatever this is called is actually quite a horrible idea the way it is currently set up. Think about this. On your main account you played X amount of games lets say 5000 and you are a level 43. You start a new account now that you have played so many games and your skill has increased so that in 150 games are level 50. Whats my true skill? 43 or 50?

Also TrueRank doesn't take into account the variable of a players changing skill. If I'm playing like a 35 and I've been a 35 forever, then I go play with my friends in tons of customs that are 50's and now I'm playing like a 50... then I go back to my 35 and play on it, I still take hundreds of games to level up even to 40, all while making the game not as fun for the 35's who are getting destroyed. Now we have uneven skill distribution at different ranks.

TrueSkill also seems to ignore individual effort and focus on win/loss ratio only. If I'm playing like a level 30, and I go in with a partner who is the best halo player in the world, I'm still going to be a 50, and it has nothing to do with my 'trueskill'.

I also don't feel there is enough levels (only 50) to create a fair distribution of skill given the variable of luck in matchmaking. Let's say player A gets matched up against two players mentioned earlier that are level 30 but were carried by their partner to a much higher level. They continue to beat these players and level up quickly. Then player B gets constantly matched up against two of the players who skill is much higher and carried their partner to a much higher level. WIth the amount of variable skill crammed into each level and individual effort ignored your level can too easily be inflated or deflated depending on your luck in matchmaking.

How about this situation: Two players on the same team in doubles continue to get matched up. In each game player A is +12 kills, and player B is -13 kills. In this situation win/loss ratio would be identical, and given the current ranking system, player A skill = player B skill... but does it?

Some of these issues would be resolved if the variable kills/deaths were added to the equation rather than just wins and losses. That way a player being carried and having a negative kill/death could still lose a level even though their team wins (eliminate boosting) and a player that lost but had a positive kill/death skill level could still increase or remain the same and their level wouldn't be reduced by their team mates lower skill level. This would likely only be required for games with teams that the outcome is decided by kill points.

Another issue could be addressed if the factor that determines the rate in which one would level up or down would periodically reset (lets say every 150 games). That way the system could account for the variable of a players changing skill (the level 35 and 43 mentioned earlier now levels up faster if they are playing like a higher skill level, removing them from the uneven skill distribution they would be at if the system ignores change in skill. If skill doesn't change then the reset would not likely do more then a change in a few levels up and down before coming back to rest at origional skill level. (For anyone who is confused, I don't mean reset the ranks, only the factor that determines rate of change.

Just my thoughts
-Physics Major at Private University in Oregon


  • 06.25.2008 12:29 AM PDT

Come Get Destroyed

so basically if u play another playlist for a long time and then go bak to team slayer, u will go up faster in slayer?

  • 06.25.2008 4:19 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

good stuff man, well thought out there but...why?
im sorry. look. in halo 2 it worked some thing like this -
you win, your getting better, you rank up
you loose - not so good, you go down.
theres veriables obviously like if you beat a team of lv 30-35s and your team was lv 30's then yeh, you did good so you can have more...XP ( i mean that bar thing they had for levels ) yeh? thats how it should work. then you get rewarded for being better. not now its not.
in halo 3, you loose games and you level up...not based on MVP, just randomly.
i used to play slayer with 3 of my mates and only us 4 usualy as we play well together right, well now one of us is a 45, one is 32, another 34 and one 35. though we were always a team in that game type. we were all very confuzled. differt thoughts of how it works " it goes off personal performance thats why im a 45 and better than you all n00bz0rz!" but hah, no, it doesnt. whats MVP? eh? most valued player ok. tell me how that works? well i know that, the player with most kills! nothing else taken into account. at all. just if you get more kills than anyone else your the MVP, dispite all your 30 deaths and fluke beat downs etc and while your team mates were taking out warthogs that were heading straight towards you and taking out the other teams rockets or laser etc nope. doesnt count. most kills. is the best.
stupid. thats nonsence. and well, whats the point anyway? if it doesnt count towards your rank why have it? in post game people can clearly see who got the most kills so why do they need to see a picture of you telling them you got the most? they dont...its silly.
i dont know what they thought they were doing with it but its ballsed up royaly now. still really enjoyable and a lurv it but now i really dont pay attention to ranks, they just mean nothing anymore.
J x

  • 06.25.2008 5:20 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: NinjaKiwi621
so basically if u play another playlist for a long time and then go bak to team slayer, u will go up faster in slayer?


No, your sigma and MU are remembered by the system in each playlist, no matter how long you have avoided them

  • 06.25.2008 11:14 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: ProXiMityAl3rt
TrueRank or whatever this is called is actually quite a horrible idea the way it is currently set up. Think about this. On your main account you played X amount of games lets say 5000 and you are a level 43. You start a new account now that you have played so many games and your skill has increased so that in 150 games are level 50. Whats my true skill? 43 or 50?

Also TrueRank doesn't take into account the variable of a players changing skill. If I'm playing like a 35 and I've been a 35 forever, then I go play with my friends in tons of customs that are 50's and now I'm playing like a 50... then I go back to my 35 and play on it, I still take hundreds of games to level up even to 40, all while making the game not as fun for the 35's who are getting destroyed. Now we have uneven skill distribution at different ranks.

TrueSkill also seems to ignore individual effort and focus on win/loss ratio only. If I'm playing like a level 30, and I go in with a partner who is the best halo player in the world, I'm still going to be a 50, and it has nothing to do with my 'trueskill'.

I also don't feel there is enough levels (only 50) to create a fair distribution of skill given the variable of luck in matchmaking. Let's say player A gets matched up against two players mentioned earlier that are level 30 but were carried by their partner to a much higher level. They continue to beat these players and level up quickly. Then player B gets constantly matched up against two of the players who skill is much higher and carried their partner to a much higher level. WIth the amount of variable skill crammed into each level and individual effort ignored your level can too easily be inflated or deflated depending on your luck in matchmaking.

How about this situation: Two players on the same team in doubles continue to get matched up. In each game player A is +12 kills, and player B is -13 kills. In this situation win/loss ratio would be identical, and given the current ranking system, player A skill = player B skill... but does it?

Some of these issues would be resolved if the variable kills/deaths were added to the equation rather than just wins and losses. That way a player being carried and having a negative kill/death could still lose a level even though their team wins (eliminate boosting) and a player that lost but had a positive kill/death skill level could still increase or remain the same and their level wouldn't be reduced by their team mates lower skill level. This would likely only be required for games with teams that the outcome is decided by kill points.

Another issue could be addressed if the factor that determines the rate in which one would level up or down would periodically reset (lets say every 150 games). That way the system could account for the variable of a players changing skill (the level 35 and 43 mentioned earlier now levels up faster if they are playing like a higher skill level, removing them from the uneven skill distribution they would be at if the system ignores change in skill. If skill doesn't change then the reset would not likely do more then a change in a few levels up and down before coming back to rest at origional skill level. (For anyone who is confused, I don't mean reset the ranks, only the factor that determines rate of change.

Just my thoughts
-Physics Major at Private University in Oregon




You bring up the known flaw of True Skill (or at least perceived)...that being recognition of a skill change for players that have played a lot. I became interested in the system for the same reasons as you...I was a 30-40 guy, but then started playing boatloads of customs with 50's, and I got a hell of a lot better. My ranks were pretty stagnant though, and I proved that through starting some alternative accounts.

No real solution at the moment. Microsoft is looking into a more variable sigma, and Jay and others are having some heavy discussions in other sections of the forums to address the perceived problem.

  • 06.25.2008 11:20 AM PDT

sHoW mE Mii OpOnnEnNT

I think this is going to help me very much because I've been having a hard time ranking up, but now that i have a scientific angle of how I need to play I think I should do well.
Also, is this saying that if you do good, then bad, then good, then bad etc. that you will be able to get your rank (not EXP) up faster? but I may be wrong

  • 06.25.2008 1:49 PM PDT
  • gamertag: Oml3t
  • user homepage:

What I am, is trapped. And I've been trapped for so long that I don't know what it feels like...to be free.

Posted by: Baaaaaaaaaaaaah
Microsoft is looking into a more variable sigma.


They are?

  • 06.25.2008 2:42 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Posted by: Domino Theory 2
Posted by: Baaaaaaaaaaaaah
Microsoft is looking into a more variable sigma.


They are?


My understanding from a few discussions Jay has had with people that they are looking into weighing streaks into the calculation. The only thing streaks could affect would be sigma.

  • 06.25.2008 3:46 PM PDT
  • gamertag: Oml3t
  • user homepage:

What I am, is trapped. And I've been trapped for so long that I don't know what it feels like...to be free.

Posted by: Baaaaaaaaaaaaah
Posted by: Domino Theory 2
Posted by: Baaaaaaaaaaaaah
Microsoft is looking into a more variable sigma.


They are?


My understanding from a few discussions Jay has had with people that they are looking into weighing streaks into the calculation. The only thing streaks could affect would be sigma.


Wouldn't giving a heavier weighting on streaks make it worse? You can't expect everyone to get 50+ wins in a row once they hit a certain rank. TrueSkill simply needs to recognize a change in player skill within a handful of games, not 150+ games.

  • 06.26.2008 1:55 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Heres a ONE word sum up on the ranking system, random.

  • 06.26.2008 1:58 AM PDT

Posted by: Domino Theory 2
Wouldn't giving a heavier weighting on streaks make it worse? You can't expect everyone to get 50+ wins in a row once they hit a certain rank. TrueSkill simply needs to recognize a change in player skill within a handful of games, not 150+ games.
Currently it takes about 10 wins to go up one level on average for a player who has matured his account (low sigma). The only way for the system to currently detect a skill change is by the players sigma going up (after a large amount of unpredictable outcomes coupled with the small amount of sigma the system already adds back in prior to each of your games). I believe, because of info posted on the MS website and viewing players stats, it takes between 50-100 games for the system to detect a significant skill change.

It is my theory that having the system use another variable to adjust sigma up at a quicker rate then it currently happens would allow it to detect skill changes quicker and give it more resolution (not take as many games) than it currently has. What that variable should be is THE point of contention. I believe streaks could be used but others have pointed out that streaks can have no significant relevance in statistics. I still believe they can be relevant given the fact the skill system is "trying" to prevent you from winning by matching you up against players of increasing skill as you win.

  • 06.26.2008 7:10 AM PDT

Posted by: SeriousMouse
Heres a ONE word sum up on the ranking system, random.
It can seem to be but in reality it is not when you know everything that is happening to give you a little number next to your name. Although, I don't agree or like all aspects of the skill system it is anything but random.

I think a better word to describe it would be complicated.

  • 06.26.2008 7:12 AM PDT