Frequently Asked Forum Questions
Search the HBO News Archives Any All Exact		Search the Halo Updates DBs Halo Halo2		Bungie Webcam HBO XBL Gamertags *Ar's Simple HTML Guide Shishka's Guide for Newcomers The Lowdown on Download Accelerators Red Loser's Anti-Spamming Guide Egg FAQ | More Egg Stuff c0ld's Movie Starter Guide Shishka's HaloPC Pre-Release FAQ 3.1 AutoMagic 117 StripzMaker
Search Older Posts on This Forum: Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts

Re: Some notes....
Posted By: FyreWulff <mkidder@gmail.com>	Date: 2/27/11 11:47 a.m.
In Response To: Some notes.... (RC Master) : I would LOVE a source for this. Source on Halo 3, via Shishka post Just search Jeremiah or Shishka's posts on Optimatch, they have repeated it many times. Or heck, just ask them now. In both Halo 2 and 3, the ranking system was used in social playlists but simply hidden. Not only that, but a social playlist was converted to a ranked playlist once - Team Snipers in Halo 2 - which resulted in me going from having no visible rank in it to having a 29 overnight. Of course, Jeremiah's old posts are going to be hard to find since most of the Halo 2 era optimatch posts are now ANONYMOUS USER (DELETED), but just PM him and ask him. He'll confirm it for Halo 2. : Are you sure? It never seemed like it. Since it was cross-platform, and the : match times were always lighting quick, often horridly unbalanced, and : works on a drop-in-drop out model, I was under the impression that it : distinctly did not use any skill ranking what-so-over. It doesn't matter if a game is cross platform. It has to use Trueskill on the 360 version. The PS3 and/or Wii versions are using completely different ranking systems. Rock Band 1 and 2 have Trueskill ranks on Xbox 360 and a completely different ranking system for PS3 for example. Much like how Microsoft runs the backend matchmaking service on 360 but Activision has to pay a company to run their own matchmaking servers for PC and PS3. : The main advantage is that there are probably libraries of implementations : readily available for 360 developers. They mostly get to adjust the parameters, but Trueskill is run by Microsoft and not any of the developers. : If you look at the distribution of player's High Skills in Chris Butcher's : talk , there is clear evidence of population bleedout from ranked MM : across the baord . HS 10? Bleedout. HS 20? Bleedout. HS 30? Bleedout. HS : 35? Bleedout. Etc. There was, but that was more people reaching a milestone in skill. I'm talking about people outright stopping play, leaving less people for other 50s to get games with and affecting search times. Shishka has even noted repeatedly that the population at 40-50 under visible Trueskill wasn't all roses, either. : HS 50 might have been most talked about (it was the only way to become the : Highest rank (general), but the fact that military ranks were tied to your : HS skewed the entire scale. Yep, and this was a mistake. A mistake they tried to correct with playlist ranks and unhooked from each other for Reach. : No. Its not actually. Its use to FFA sort players is GONE for season 7. It : attempted, admirably, to gather more information from each game to speed : up the skill rating process. But this turned the goal from beating the : other team, into getting a better rating than everyone else in the game. : Queue the rise in underhanded tactics to ensure your own high rating at : the expense of even those palyers on your team. I was talking about the actual rating system itself. I did not see nor have seen anyone that has been successfully boosted to top 5% Onyx. Or Onyx at all. And people will be greedy and attempt to get the highest K/D/A even in Halo 3.. that's just human nature. They'll still be able to 'be greedy' in the new season if they so choose, but all that happens is that the Trueskill submission is done by team instead of ratings standing. Either way, being greedy leads to wins, which helps your division rating and standing in either context. : The estimated number of games per gamer in 8 man FFA is 3-9. Bungie ensured : you played a good deal more than that in the first 6 seasons of Arena : (what was it? 40?) This is to prevent people from playing 4 games on the first day of the season, getting an Onyx, and then never playing again for the rest of the month. That'd be even worse boosting than displayed Pure Trueskill. a : Thats a rather stupid thing to say: since theres no such thing. : Aforementioned weirdness of trying to maximise your rating rather than : playing to win. Plus, personally, I think the assist system (which the : Arena rating is very dependant upon) is broken. Maximizing your rating in the old system was playing to win. You just wanted to get more credit for the win. In the new season, assists will have even lower weight than they did before. The assist system seems to function pretty much like the previous Halo games. The difference is that people now have instant visual feedback if the game awarded them for an assist now.. versus 2 and 3 which just awards them in the post game, so if you got 15 kills and 4 assists it was like "okay, neat". In Reach you know right then if you got one or not, hence the "BULLSHIT THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN AN ASSIST" while you play now, where before you didn't care because the game didn't tell you anyway :P

fyrewulff dot com

Message Index

Why We Should Never Go Back to 1-50.. or	FyreWulff	2/26/11 3:25 p.m.
Re: Why We Should Never Go Back to 1-50.. or	Pkmnrulz240	2/26/11 3:42 p.m.
Excellent, excellent post *NM*	mr_mcmurder	2/26/11 4:00 p.m.
I agree with your opinion, good sir.	snakegriffin	2/26/11 4:10 p.m.
Re: Why We Should Never Go Back to 1-50.. or	Hyokin	2/26/11 4:14 p.m.
Re: Why We Should Never Go Back to 1-50.. or	ZackDark	2/26/11 4:15 p.m.
Re: Why We Should Never Go Back to 1-50.. or	KalamariKidd	2/26/11 4:46 p.m.
I don't play Arena...	munky-058	2/26/11 4:54 p.m.
Re: Why We Should Never Go Back to 1-50.. or	DEEP NNN	2/26/11 5:00 p.m.
Re: Why We Should Never Go Back to 1-50.. or	GrimBrother One	2/26/11 5:05 p.m.
Re: Why We Should Never Go Back to 1-50.. or	Louis Wu	2/26/11 5:07 p.m.
Re: Why We Should Never Go Back to 1-50.. or	DEEP NNN	2/26/11 5:13 p.m.
Re: Why We Should Never Go Back to 1-50.. or	Dani	2/26/11 6:34 p.m.
Re: Why We Should Never Go Back to 1-50.. or	FyreWulff	2/26/11 6:53 p.m.
Re: Why We Should Never Go Back to 1-50.. or	DEEP NNN	2/26/11 7:02 p.m.
Re: Why We Should Never Go Back to 1-50.. or	Dani	2/26/11 9:05 p.m.
Re: Why We Should Never Go Back to 1-50.. or	bluerunner	2/26/11 7:36 p.m.
Ranks	dogcom	2/26/11 7:53 p.m.
Re: Ranks	DEEP NNN	2/26/11 8:05 p.m.
Re: Ranks	FyreWulff	2/26/11 8:08 p.m.
Re: Why We Should Never Go Back to 1-50.. or	DEEP NNN	2/26/11 5:09 p.m.
Re: Why We Should Never Go Back to 1-50.. or	vlad3163	2/26/11 10:10 p.m.
But CR = Idlers Paradise	sharpsniper99	2/26/11 6:41 p.m.
Re: But CR = Idlers Paradise	FyreWulff	2/26/11 7:05 p.m.
Re: But CR = Idlers Paradise	FyreWulff	2/26/11 7:15 p.m.
Re: But CR = Idlers Paradise	sharpsniper99	2/27/11 4:34 a.m.
Re: But CR = Idlers Paradise	sharpsniper99	2/27/11 5:04 a.m.
PS. Fyrefulff, Gr1m?	munky-058	2/26/11 6:46 p.m.
Re: PS. Fyrefulff, Gr1m?	FyreWulff	2/26/11 7:45 p.m.
Fyrefluff? That's OUSTANDING!	munky-058	2/26/11 8:02 p.m.
Nice	dogcom	2/26/11 7:57 p.m.
I actually read the whole thing. *NM*	SonGoharotto	2/26/11 8:11 p.m.
Bleep Bloop *NM*	FyreWulff	2/26/11 8:12 p.m.
Sup Devin Olsen	FyreWulff	2/26/11 8:12 p.m.
Re: Sup Devin Olsen	Devin Olsen	2/26/11 8:37 p.m.
Re: Sup Devin Olsen	FyreWulff	2/26/11 8:47 p.m.
Re: Sup Devin Olsen	SonGoharotto	2/26/11 9:04 p.m.
Re: Sup Devin Olsen	ArteenEsben	2/26/11 9:33 p.m.
Re: Sup Devin Olsen	Devin Olsen	2/26/11 9:52 p.m.
Re: Sup Devin Olsen	munky-058	2/26/11 10:09 p.m.
Re: Sup Devin Olsen	SonGoharotto	2/27/11 8:31 a.m.
Re: Sup Devin Olsen	General Vagueness	2/26/11 10:52 p.m.
Re: Sup Devin Olsen	Hawaiian Pig	2/27/11 4:33 p.m.
Re: Sup Devin Olsen	Hawaiian Pig	2/27/11 4:37 p.m.
Re: Sup Devin Olsen	General Vagueness	2/27/11 5:52 p.m.
Re: Sup Devin Olsen	BlueNinja	2/27/11 5:56 a.m.
Nice post.	Gravemind	2/27/11 2:44 a.m.
Re: Nice post.	DEEP NNN	2/27/11 8:20 a.m.
Re: Nice post.	BlueNinja	2/27/11 9:49 a.m.
Re: Nice post.	FyreWulff	2/27/11 10:07 a.m.
Re: Nice post.	BlueNinja	2/27/11 12:00 p.m.
Re: Nice post.	Gravemind	2/27/11 12:32 p.m.
Re: Nice post.	FyreWulff	2/27/11 9:38 a.m.
if you flag hold on my team	kidtsunami	2/27/11 3:37 p.m.
Re: if you flag hold on my team	FyreWulff	2/27/11 4:15 p.m.
^ I have the same mindset as you two.	NsU Soldier	2/27/11 7:33 p.m.
Re: Why We Should Never Go Back to 1-50.. or	Zogen	2/27/11 4:29 a.m.
Re: Why We Should Never Go Back to 1-50.. or	zonemanwilf	2/27/11 4:42 a.m.
Re: Why We Should Never Go Back to 1-50.. or	DEEP NNN	2/27/11 9:07 a.m.
Re: Why We Should Never Go Back to 1-50.. or	FyreWulff	2/27/11 10:05 a.m.
Re: Why We Should Never Go Back to 1-50.. or	KalamariKidd	2/27/11 10:17 a.m.
Some notes....	RC Master	2/27/11 11:09 a.m.
Re: Some notes....	FyreWulff	2/27/11 11:47 a.m.
Re: Some notes....	RC Master	2/28/11 9:28 a.m.
Re: Some notes....	FyreWulff	2/28/11 10:01 a.m.
Wholeheartedly agree *NM*	kidtsunami	2/28/11 12:05 a.m.