Jump to content
CyReN

Halo Infinite Discussion

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, andregr said:

I think what Boyo said was fine, Id be ok with that. Also, why can't we just show your pure mmr and attach a rank onto certain levels

For some odd reason Menke likes to separate your CSR from your MMR. But yeah ideally they should be the same.

Quote

Im not saying they have to exclusively play ranked, but more people coming to try ranked for the rewards or for a more competitive aspect is always a good thing even if its not their main playlist. I still play lots of action sack even though I mostly play ranked. I think being accessible is important

I'm all for this. I wish we only had Arena, Dubs and FFA as ranked playlists, but thanks to good skill matching and gameplay that is fun even when played competitively everyone would flock to ranked. But still, the average casual gamer is not looking for competition and stays away from ranked, at least from what I've heard. Having better ranked playlists could def. help bridge the gap between casual and competitive tho that's for sure.

Quote

These restrictions sound fine, but what happens if the game isnt popular enough to support constantly matching teams with teams, and queue times are way too high? I think restricting queue sizes might be beneficial for high ranked players and very low ranked players.

That's actually a fantastic solution for low-pop regions like AUS/NZ (and EU as of lately). Restricting the queues should be a last resort though if MM has trouble any match at all for to4, it shouldn't be like that from launch.

 

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I hate how as soon as I get ranked in Arena I can never find games anymore, then am forced to play 3 TS maps on rotation as Social Quick Play is the only playlist I can get games in. Hopefully Infinite addresses this (at the very least have a good selection in their social playlist cos wtf, why was it decided that having 3 total map/gametype combinations in a playlist was a good idea!?)

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

1: I fail to see how one system is considered more telling than the other when behind the scenes 1-50 use the same MMR as the Divisions, it's just presented in a more clear, and unique fashion.

1b: Pretty much every game that uses division ranks after Platinum have different words for the final tier or two.  That's a little confusing. Some Champion, some Challenger, whatever. 

1c: Halo could easily just add a Champion system to the rank 50's.

2: I don't know if I've ever actually met someone who enjoyed re-grinding for their ranks on resets.  Placement matches are stressful, it just makes you never want to step foot in MM if you don't have a full team. I'm willing to bet it hurts pop numbers more than it helps.

3:  Placement matches take away the actual reward of seeing your rank go up.  This might not matter to everyone but I know it does to me, so I doubt i'm alone on this.

4:  Placement matches run the risk of putting you too low (not the biggest deal, you'll just win until your reach your correct skill cap), AND too high  (see, everyone who played Halo 5 FFA in the first 6 months who got an instant 1800 Onyx for losing 10 placement matches).  Now you've awarded bad players ranks that they would've never received otherwise.  The whole purpose of a ranking system is to tell me how good someone is, so why is that Onyx means literally nothing to me in Halo 5? Because everyone has gotten in thanks to the initially borked and overly generous placement system. 

5: Placement matches inherently will place you in a variety of skill ranges during every reset to try and judge you again since the MMR resets (or should reset, I know Halo 5 is weird about this).  That is basically guaranteeing that every X amount of months ranked is going to turn into a shit show for several weeks while everyone gets settled in. 1-50 doesn't have this problem after the first 2-3 months of the game because there's one mad shuffle and then everyone floats to where they should be.  Rank resets are like constantly throwing a rock into a pond that just settled.

 

I actually think 1-50 is too many numbers.  The biggest purpose of a rank is so that I can see it next to your tag and instantly know how good you are.  Is there anyone out there who as a 36, would see a 38 and become scared of losing? Highly unlikely, because it doesn't mean anything.  That could be the difference between them having a good day or a bad day, or playing a few matches after you got off. It's pretty meaningless. I would probably dilute the numbers even further to 1-20 or 1-10 if it were up to me. Very obvious at that point who is better and who is worse.  If you want subdivisions for personal satisfaction of ranking up more quickly you could probably have private divisions within that which are only visible to said player.

  • Like (+1) 7

Share this post


Link to post
1 hour ago, MultiLockOn said:

1: I fail to see how one system is considered more telling than the other when behind the scenes 1-50 use the same MMR as the Divisions, it's just presented in a more clear, and unique fashion.

1b: Pretty much every game that uses division ranks after Platinum have different words for the final tier or two.  That's a little confusing. Some Champion, some Challenger, whatever. 

1c: Halo could easily just add a Champion system to the rank 50's.

2: I don't know if I've ever actually met someone who enjoyed re-grinding for their ranks on resets.  Placement matches are stressful, it just makes you never want to step foot in MM if you don't have a full team. I'm willing to bet it hurts pop numbers more than it helps.

3:  Placement matches take away the actual reward of seeing your rank go up.  This might not matter to everyone but I know it does to me, so I doubt i'm alone on this.

4:  Placement matches run the risk of putting you too low (not the biggest deal, you'll just win until your reach your correct skill cap), AND too high  (see, everyone who played Halo 5 FFA in the first 6 months who got an instant 1800 Onyx for losing 10 placement matches).  Now you've awarded bad players ranks that they would've never received otherwise.  The whole purpose of a ranking system is to tell me how good someone is, so why is that Onyx means literally nothing to me in Halo 5? Because everyone has gotten in thanks to the initially borked and overly generous placement system. 

5: Placement matches inherently will place you in a variety of skill ranges during every reset to try and judge you again since the MMR resets (or should reset, I know Halo 5 is weird about this).  That is basically guaranteeing that every X amount of months ranked is going to turn into a shit show for several weeks while everyone gets settled in. 1-50 doesn't have this problem after the first 2-3 months of the game because there's one mad shuffle and then everyone floats to where they should be.  Rank resets are like constantly throwing a rock into a pond that just settled.

 

I actually think 1-50 is too many numbers.  The biggest purpose of a rank is so that I can see it next to your tag and instantly know how good you are.  Is there anyone out there who as a 36, would see a 38 and become scared of losing? Highly unlikely, because it doesn't mean anything.  That could be the difference between them having a good day or a bad day, or playing a few matches after you got off. It's pretty meaningless. I would probably dilute the numbers even further to 1-20 or 1-10 if it were up to me. Very obvious at that point who is better and who is worse.  If you want subdivisions for personal satisfaction of ranking up more quickly you could probably have private divisions within that which are only visible to said player.

I’m actually glad you pointed out the fear of losing. This is what I meant about the 33 level player and the 27. There’s nothing to fear. This isn’t a level 27 who’s up against a level 40 who now knows/feels they’re screwed, they’re not winning this.

Share this post


Link to post
10 hours ago, Boyo said:

Rank and exp both convey information about the player.  Another piece of information that could be conveyed somehow is how active that rank is.  Was he playing on his 50 yesterday or has he not played on it in months?

I think this is a great idea and should be reflected in the service record.

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, Botheredhat360 said:

Just make it like halo 2 where 50s were basically pros or modders. 

IIRC, Bungie talked about how the number 1 Rumble Pit player was a 37.

In my experience, just about everyone 40 and up was some kind of modder or stand byer.

I kind of liked how no one could legit achieve max rank because it made it more about the game than grinding for a 50.

Share this post


Link to post
16 minutes ago, Boyo said:

IIRC, Bungie talked about how the number 1 Rumble Pit player was a 37.

In my experience, just about everyone 40 and up was some kind of modder or stand byer.

I kind of liked how no one could legit achieve max rank because it made it more about the game than grinding for a 50.

Yeah I want my ranking system to convey my skill, and I don’t want to grind through pointless ranks just to reach what i actually am. This is why I don’t want to start at 1. If I climb in a rank I want it to be because I’m actually getting better as a player.

  • Like (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post
5 minutes ago, andregr said:

Yeah I want my ranking system to convey my skill, and I don’t want to grind through pointless ranks just to reach what i actually am. This is why I don’t want to start at 1. If I climb in a rank I want it to be because I’m actually getting better as a player.

Bungie talked about this too IIRC, might have been about H3 though, can’t remember.  Basically, they said that even if you should have jumped up a bunch of visible ranks, slowing your visible rank gain gave players a better sense of progression.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post
Just now, Boyo said:

Bungie talked about this too IIRC, might have been about H3 though, can’t remember.  Basically, they said that even if you should have jumped up a bunch of visible ranks, slowing your visible rank gain gave players a better sense of progression.

Yeah I understand it, and I’m not against it entirely, I would personally rather have it another way.

Share this post


Link to post
13 minutes ago, andregr said:

Yeah I want my ranking system to convey my skill, and I don’t want to grind through pointless ranks just to reach what i actually am. This is why I don’t want to start at 1. If I climb in a rank I want it to be because I’m actually getting better as a player.

I'd wager you've actually spent more games grinding by replaying 10 placement matches every season than by simply starting at 1 and reaching your skill cap. I don't have access to the hard numbers obviously but I'm willing to get we could crunch some numbers and get a ballpark answer. 

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post
9 minutes ago, MultiLockOn said:

I'd wager you've actually spent more games grinding by replaying 10 placement matches every season than by simply starting at 1 and reaching your skill cap. I don't have access to the hard numbers obviously but I'm willing to get we could crunch some numbers and get a ballpark answer. 

This is especially true the longer you play the game. Eventually it’s inevitable you’d grind out more games doing placement matches. Like wouldn’t it be cool if every couple months we forced pro fighters to mingle with the amateurs and beat the living shit out of them to return to their pro status? No, because that would be dumb as hell.

Share this post


Link to post
8 hours ago, LI Mr X IL said:

This is especially true the longer you play the game. Eventually it’s inevitable you’d grind out more games doing placement matches. Like wouldn’t it be cool if every couple months we forced pro fighters to mingle with the amateurs and beat the living shit out of them to return to their pro status? No, because that would be dumb as hell.

It depends how placement matches are done. If it's just a soft reset, then your placement matches in season 2 are going to be no different then they were before the reset. The placement matches, IMO, are only there to really show that it is a new season and it gives the feel of it. But you aren't actually being reset to rank 0

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

Very interesting watch, found this while digging for information about ranking systems. Menke is clearly a smart guy although he is clearly biased towards his own division systems (as would anyone that is proud of their work). It's interesting that he calls systems like H2/3 "hybrid systems" because technically they are a cross between skill and progression systems. What I would like to see is a system that combines the best of both worlds:

  • What I like about the 1-50 is that feeling of actually earning your rank and how they tied it in with the military rank in H3 was nothing but genious. It provides a long-term goal and that challenge of "how far can I go before I hit a wall start losing more than winning?" makes for a very engaging experience. The bottom 50% of the ranks are mostly meaningless though at least in my experience.
  • CSR on the other hand gives fairer matches quickly and the lower levels aren't such a mess of bad players/good players with few games played/smurfs etc. but I get the feeling that after the placements there isn't a whole lot to play for and progress slows to a snail's pace. The system spits out a rank after 10 games that often doesn't feel justified nor is the system transparent in any way shape or form. The constant resets are also stupid and it should require no more than three, maybe five games to get your rank back IMO.

 

  • Like (+1) 2
  • Upvote (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

A reduction in placement matches after your initial season should be something we can all agree on, at least.

  • Like (+1) 4

Share this post


Link to post
2 hours ago, Hard Way said:

A reduction in placement matches after your initial season should be something we can all agree on, at least.

Definitely. Overall I'm fine with CSR staying as long as there are 1) hard party restrictions in ranked and 2) either less frequent season resets or reduce the amount of placement matches required. If it's generic Bronze, Silver icons or 1-50 I don't really care about but it would be a nice nod towards the OG fans.

For anyone curious this article describes TruSkill2, the system H5 uses to calculate your MMR (which you CSR is based on). According to Menke they use not only Win/Loss but to a large degree your kills per minute and to a smaller extent deaths per minute stats (compared to your opponents) to calculate your MMR, even in objective gametypes. This is honestly baffling to me but also super interesting because as we all know from H5's fake social and the inability to smurf nowadays this shit works really damn well.

  • Like (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

The tally for progression changes nothing, really. You will always hit a point where you slow down or hit the cap of either the rating system or your own skill level.

However, I do agree that shorter placement duration (fewer matches) and soft resetting would benefit matchmaking the most alongside proper matching of premades. I personally prefer having solo/duo and team queues separate but many issues arise from this including win trading, the existence of 2v2 matching, and locking out 3 man parties.

Share this post


Link to post

How can maps be more interactive?  How about an acid river that moveable objects can be knocked into.  Crates slowly sink as they travel down the deadly river, allowing players to ride on top them for a limited time.  Maybe certain parts of the river can be frozen so players can temporarily traverse it as if it were solid ground.  Maybe throwing a grenade into the river spews acid in a wide radius.

How can we make maps feel alive?

Share this post


Link to post

I don't know what it is but I'll never be able to wrap my head around having a mindset like that regarding Halo gameplay. BTB and shenanigansd is fun sometimes but to me that's not what Halo is and it's just weird to hear people be so vehement about the casual side.

It's probably the exact opposite for casuals though.

  • Like (+1) 2

Share this post


Link to post

The frustrating thing is that if the game works at a high level, it will also work at a low level. The opposite is not true. Use the best of the best players to iron out the fundamentals of the game and make sure it holds up at a high level, and the casual side of the game will fall in line. You can tune things for a casual audience with things like settings and item layouts on maps. It's far easier to do that than it is to gut the game for competitive play, and still have leftover problems baked into the DNA of the game bc the people testing it were total noobs.

Any problem a casual player has can be corrected by good matchmaking and a new goofy playlist every few weeks. Their lack of discerning taste is inherent in the name "casual". They don't care.

Edit: That said, don't use Walshy to playtest Banshee mechanics. Use Gamesager. Get the right guys for the right jobs.

  • Like (+1) 6

Share this post


Link to post
5 hours ago, NeverGoFullCanc said:

4:53 Triggered hard

I honestly don't understand why people are freaking out about a there being a pro team for Infinite just like there was for Guardians. I personally as a player can't enjoy a game if it's not balanced from the top down. If I'm losing to something in an unfair fashion and the reason for me losing has nothing to do with me improving as a player then I lose my patience very quickly.

Share this post


Link to post

There is no difference between competitive and casual. It's just good or bad.

  • Like (+1) 6
  • Simms (+1) 1

Share this post


Link to post

I realized this competitive vs casual crap is totally bullshit when Keemstar said "Halo Reach sucks because it was made for the MLG tryhards and that's why it is no fun". No, Reach was just total ass and had glaring design flaws. 

Saying shit like that just shows a very low level of understanding and worst of all it puts the blame on the wrong people. It's neither the casual nor the competitive crowd's fault when a game has flaws, it's always the developers making mistakes or cutting corners. 

  • Like (+1) 3

Share this post


Link to post

Good halo is good map design and basic traits(no sprint no abilities is obviously preferred but I wouldn’t mind something new like a double jump(like doom). 

No bloom or spread on precision weapons is most preferred, maybe a little bit of recoil(h5 BR as an example it’s only bad because of abilities like thruster but without it, the Br be perfect as it has no spread)  to make it so precision weapons like BR and DMR aren’t super op(but should be very minimal and easy to control as this is halo we’re talking about) , abilities and equipment on map are fine since they’re like weapons one time use pick ups, hardcore would obviously remove them but that’s hardly a big deal. The game just needs to be simple, fast BMS and Strafe accel etc. I’d say 120% speed should be default(this speed is equivalent to the speed of sprint in h5). Aiming needs to be perfect like h2a and h4 regarding feel and inputs. If sprint is in halo 6 then I say(I’ve said it before) sprint in BTB and Warzone, and infection only) . 

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.