- fifthderelicte
- |
- Exalted Mythic Member
- gamertag: BJRSCJ
- user homepage:
As I was PMing someone, a few ideas came to me about the ranking system we should see in Reach. Yes, we all have ideas about how we should go up in rank, and we all have our own feelings towards true skill. That being said, these are not specific ideas for that part of the system, but rather an over all ideal I think the developers should shoot for in their ranking system.
The following examples were created by myself as I responded to Spearmint on his idea of a ranking system. As I realize the faults of H2's ranking system (deranking, boosting, etc), I also realize the flaws of H3's (multi-accounting resetting mu/sigma, too easy to obtain a high highest skill, etc). But I also realize that both had good things. H2 was very consistent and quick in its determining of rank, and it also prevented too much of the "BKs" getting to higher levels. H3's system was also good in that you were rewarded for how high you got, plus it promoted movement through the ranks via consistency, not partnering up with the right people to boost.
So as you read below, envision a H2 + H3 ranking system merger. Also, try to find Spearmint's thread about ELO type ranking for Halo. As soon as I find the link I'll post it here. The following is a response written to him.
[EDIT] LINK HERE
Preventing Multi-accounters
The following is assuming that Bungie actually desires to protect the interest of the lesser skilled players.
As far as deranking, I'd really like to deter them from having fun at the expense of the lower ranks. So here's an idea that could possibly deter deranking, I would suggest having a component of the system that tracks your highest skill. So let's say your high skill is 40, but you keep going down. Once you get 5 levels (or however you decide to make it so it's fair, considering that people can get worse - it could be 10 or whatever) below your highest skill in each playlist, this component kicks in.
So you drop from a 40-35 and the system kicks in because something looks fishy. Now, every matchmaking game in that playlist matches you up with others whose high skill is the same, or close to yours. So now you're a 34, and while you get matched up against other 34s in that playlist, their high skill in that playlist may be 35-40. This way you are playing people comparable to you. So if these people were just as good as you and have lost it about as much as you have, it's a good match. But it is also preventative for deranking, as if you go down too much, you'll only end up playing other derankers both on your way down, and back up.
-Finally, to deter second accounters, here's what I suggest. Your system is great, but people can rise in it very quickly. I think you should have some type of predictive incorporation like true skill does. If someone blasts through their first five games, your system should predict where they go. Bump them up 2 levels at a time, 5, or even 10. I know that sounds absurd, but hear me out. This system would get second accounters out of the low levels where they do so much damage FAST. BUT, unlike the current system, your high skill is not determined by just reaching that skill level. Here's where my ideas branch into two lines of thought:
1. Have a minimum amount of games in a playlist before your high skill solidifies. Let's say you have to play 50 matches in a playlist until your high skill is calculated. Any time after those 50 games, the highest you get to will be your high skill level.
OR
2. Have a minimum amount of games you must win at at a particular level until it's considered your high skill. So let's say I get to a 50, I have to win X amount of games as a 50. These games don't have to be won in a row, but over the lifetime of your account. This would deter people from making second accounts for the purpose of manipulating the ranking system, plus it would get seconds out of the bottom fast.
[Edited on 10.14.2009 5:05 PM PDT]