- Jay120171
- |
- Exalted Mythic Member
Posted by: TOM T 117
Posted by: Jay120171
Currently players are handicapped for the first 50-100 games. I would like this removed or lessened to try and keep very skilled players from beating up on sub-par opponents for game after game. I don't care if players can get to their highest skill in 10-20 games if it means they don't get to pick on less skilled players for 100's of games.While I agree this ia an issue isn't it one that could be easier solved via the Halo 2 experience system? The True Skill system can be manipulated, users could purposefully lose huge amounts of games to attain a "rank lock" therefore meaning they can constantly beat up the lower skilled. If a points based system was established it would be much easier to push users up the table for the first 20 or so ranks and then increase in difficulty afterwards to establish the good players for those average.Losing hundreds of games in H3 will not "rank lock" your skill, it will make it more volatile. Yes, you will go down but once you start playing legit again, you will go up very fast. This is all by design because when a player suddenly loses a bunch of game, the system becomes "unsure" of the players rank. This "certainty of rank" (sigma) is what controls how fast you go up or down. Now that you have a high sigma, the system raises you up very quickly once you start winning, much like when a player is new to a playlist.
Yes players could 'de-rank' but that is a waste of time and players would eventually grow bored of having to quit 20 games to beat up terrible players for 5 or so games. This could be created if the first few ranks were hard to go down from but easy to reach something the True Skill system couldn't easily create.This is exactly how the current Trueskill system works and why you see very little de-ranking. Most of the quitters do so out of some inaccurate feeling that having a NEG amount of EXP will help them rank friends up. In H2 we saw lots of de-rankers because you needed a certain amount of EXP to get to the next skill level. So, good players who de-ranked got a lot of games against inferior players because it took at least 6-8 games to gain 1 skill level.
I'm personally in favour of a revamped Halo 2 system where it is slightly easier to reach level 30 but from then on becomes increasingly difficult so that only the best of the best can reach the coveted 50. I don't think a system that accelerates the ranking process such as your refined proposal of Halo 3's True Skill is ideal, level 50 needs to be representative of the very best and a small number of games cannot accurately chart skill in my opinion.I will agree that it is too easy to attain the highest skill levels in H3. I also agree that only a select few should be 50's. The problem is the skill of the community kind of dictates how hard or easy it is to get to a skill level. There is not set amount of 'X' needed, you just have to consistently beat players of equal or higher skill to go up. That being said, I think the system can be tuned to make it harder at the top I would like it harder too.
Also remember that match quality (players happiness) is directly related to competitiveness. If a player is facing higher skilled opponents for too long, they will stop playing. If a player is facing lower skilled opponents for too long, they will get bored (unless they are like 13 years old). Idealy you want players to win and lose in equal amounts. In other words, you want to set up matches that have a high chance of being a tie (equal player skill). That is why I think the quicker a person goes up, the better it is for players. It is hard to combine that concept and use a EXP based system.
Edited in:
Posted by: trigga trainzz
I voted other, for one reason. They should use the H3 ranking system, but with something new. The TrueSkill Ranking system has a bunch of information about your rank that Halo 3 does not tell you. It knows how many wins you are away from ranking up, ranking down, what ranks you haveto beat to rank up, how many wins or losses you have on that rank, etc. This info should be shown to the player! In some format at least! It would be a LOT less frustrating to a LOT of people if the system simply tells you all the info, and adapts to your next win or loss. Say the system tells you' 4 wins in a row to level 50", and then you lose and it tells you "6 or 7 wins in a row away from your 50" so that you at least have a general idea of where you stand on your rank. This would help a lot of people calm down who are trying to rank and are getting frustrated with never knowing what is really happening with their rank. i.e. those times when your 'rank locked' and win 14 or 15 in a row and wonder just what the hell is going on? The game should tell you if you need 50 wins in a row to rank up one level, it really should. Even a rough estimate, just something!! I know a lot of you guys will agree with me on this, it just makes sense. More than often ill hear from my friend "Yeah, im 1 win away from my 50 in mlg, i got 5 wins in a row on my 49." Then he rejoins my lobby after the game "FKIN B****-blam!-!!! I lost 1 game on my 49 and now im a 48! F THIS GAME!" If the game told you a little warning or something just so that you knew! "Warning - 1 loss away from de-ranking, 4 wins to rank up." Something like that would make a lotta sense. I have several friends and tons of xbl friends who have dropped this game entirely because of the ranking system, and not ever knowing the information that the ranking system does. This could only help the online ranked experience. You could also have the option to show/hide the indo if you play on your 50s a lot. Thoughts? Someone reply directly to this please. Personally I think it's a good idea, ive talked to a lot of people about it who feel the same way.The Truskill system doesn't track a single one of the things you mentioned. It has no idea how many wins it will take to go up or how many losses you are away from going down. It simply doesn't work that way because how many games depends on the skill level of the people you are playing. The system doesn't know the skill level of the people you are playing until you play them. The system also doesn't know how wins or losses you have in a playlist. The main variables the skill system knows about you is your MU (skill) and your sigma (uncertainty). It uses those 2 variables along with a constant set by Bungie to give you your displayed skill level. It probably also tracks how many games played in a playlist too but it is unclear if it is actual wins and losses or if it is just total games played.
This is why there is no "bar" telling you how close you are to your next skill level on your service record. It could be 10 games or it could be 1. It all depends of the skill levels of your opponents.
[Edited on 06.03.2009 2:03 PM PDT]