Halo 3 ranking system? No.
Halo 2 ranking system? Yes.
True Skill is flawed and bases skill off of team skill, not individual skill whereas a modified version of Halo 2's ranking system, which, to my knowledge, worked off of a hidden exp system that allowed for increases and decreases of exp is more based on individual skill and has influence from team skill. Simple explanation is as such:
Player 1 is on the losing team but carries his team to the end. He loses a match of 4v4 Slayer, but has a great k/d and has more than half of his team's kills. Now, is it fair that he should be put at less of a chance of ranking up and that it should be made harder for him to rank up because of bad teammates (Trueskill)? Or should he still gain a large sum of exp (Not exp like in Reach.) for his work, but gain less than what he should have if he had won?
Along with this, Player 2 played terribly, but was lucky to be on the team with three of his friends who are all pretty decent. He has a negative k/d, barely any kills and brought the team down. Is it fair that he gets exp over Player just because his team won (Trueskill)? Or should he lose a sum of exp but less than what he would've lost than if he had been on the losing team?
Trueskill is flawed. It is terrible.
Note: My understanding of Halo 2's ranking system may not be what it actually operates as. Regardless, my point still stands. Trueskill is grossly flawed and I would greatly prefer it does not return.
