[quote]I know, I've been making several posts regarding how to "fix" comp or to illustrate problems with comp, especially the 5-10-15 minutes load time, laggy games and networking errors. But as I struggle with heartbreaking matchmaking (why are you on the other side of a map hardscoping with a bow when no one is even close), I've come to realize that maybe matchmaking is just not possible to get right, maybe it's always going to be what it is now (a kick in the groin for anyone that cares about PvP), but the real kicker is the point system. Playing game after game, some extremely close and just won by luck/extreme gameplay (sniping a silk strike hunter in the head as they pop 20m away from me) and having wins be 40-50 points, whilst a loss is 140-210 points. I'm simply just fed up. There is absolutely no point to play comp. It used to be amazing and now it's pointless. The game has decided a score for me, and no amount of effort can change that. In the old system losing due to bad team mates (inspecting the map geometry) was painful, but at least you know what you lost. And should you get an easy game, well that's just dandy... I've previously written regarding the 2 principles for a good comp experience, but I would like to add 1 more principle and outline a new point system. 1) Skill should matter 2) Skill should be rewarded 3) Skill should not be punished What I mean by 1 is that skill should be reflected in KD, win rates and most importantly in weapon balancing. The ability to aim for the head, or to use movement and/or cover should impact how to win games. Look at old 1v3 games with youtubers like Benny. Things like that should be possible if skill gap is large enough. Having spray and pray weapons be as fast ttk as today basically negates the reason to invest in aiming skill. 2) better skill in PvE means easier games, but in PvP it means less skilled team mates... there is nothing that gets better, easier with skill. You get kicked in the groin instead... When you have the most kills of the game, highest KD of both teams, but you have 2 team mates with 0.25 on your team it really, really sucks to lose 150 points 3) when a game starts and a high skill group faces a lower skill group, the high skill group has done nothing wrong. Yet winning the game,. spending the time, will only give mediocre result. It's a waste of time even when winning. Punished a good skill player for something out of their control, it feels stupid, especially when if the opposite was true (like when a team mate disconnects) the loss is.140-200 points. Suggestion for a point system. It should never feel arbitrary, it must never punish skill, but be forgiving for unfair games. A) wins are 140 points, always B) loss is 145 points, always C) highest amount of kills 5 points (no matter win or loss) D) highest KD 5 points (no matter win or loss) E) a win streak system, similar to previously Then a loss protection 1) if a team member disconnects, then no loss in points (limited to 1 time per fireteam in 1 hour) 2) if the game is very unbalanced matchmaking or similar, then just half the loss. But never punish the skilled players for winning. Anyhow. That's my suggestions, please feel free to comment and fix anything that I missed or got wrong. 😉[/quote] I think everything is fine, no one complained about it when Luna’s Howl, and the Not Forgotten, was obtainable; now they’ve increased xp rewards and losses have become more forgiving.

[quote]There is absolutely no point to play comp. It used to be amazing and now it's pointless. The game has decided a score for me, and no amount of effort can change that.[/quote] Bungie had a working Comp system. All they had to do was improve it slightly by reducing the points deduction for a match loss. Instead, they copied the Halo system that locks a player into a rank that can be very difficult, if not impossible, to escape. 343 made this mistake with Halo Infinite. Much of their population left the game. The old Halo rank system worked well enough years ago, but it is outdated. Players want to see progression for their time spent in an activity.

Blame bad players who want a forced 50% win ratio

Like you say, the matchmaking and team balancing is always going to be hit and miss (more miss lately it seems). Individual performance needs to have more influence over points won and lost.

I made a post the other day on Reddit about getting hard rank balanced (70 per win, -140 per loss), that this didn’t make much sense when I was only 2 ranks above my placement, I think this type of thing might be necessary but it also sucks. The overarching question for me about the whole system is, since this is a system with fixed differences between each rank, exactly how much should be rewarded for a win and docked for a loss. Should there be a maximum and minimum, like a minimum for if you win? I think that’s probably fair, but it’s downstream of “what fraction of a rank up should you get for winning and lose for losing”. I think probably the best system would have a min and max, and fixed modifiers based on team ELO differences. I just don’t know how many wins people think is fair before you should go from say, Gold II to Gold I.

Those are really good and interesting suggestions. The point system in comp does need to be changed to be more straightforward. It's something that will help lower skilled players as well. A lot of people seem to have trouble linking their score to what they've been doing during matches.