You seem hearty, what's your theoretical solution?
As a player, not a designer:
The solution is clear(not to be confused with easy), develop a way to determine a player's skill as a constant, not a fixed point. People bought 50s for the 'highest skill' factor. People joined games and immediately viewed everyone's highest skill to perform a quick analysis of both teammates and opponents. This mentality needs to be reversed, without nuking a visual skill based ranking system altogether. If there wasn't a straight up 'highest skill' tag, there wouldn't be half the account boosting and buying, in my opinion, as the overall 'gain' is vastly diminished.
The system needs to be much more fluid in how it detects and reacts to a drop off in skill, too. It needs to understand the differences between a top player, and a good player, and react accordingly. The numbered systems had a tendency to lock and fix themselves too soon, mostly because they weren't really designed as ranks to be attained and lost, but because they were visual signifiers of the true skill system. This too needs to be altered, in my opinion.
Well we still don't know everything, and they may have a fix.
I've already acknowledged this, and said there's nothing we can do. They may have resolved it, they may have an amazing system that answers everyones wishes, and resolves everyone's issues. Unfortunately until 343 begin to talk about this system we can only speculate based on the various crumbs we have available to us.
It seems though unless they out direct 1-50 back in its not a fix in your mind. The thing they have that we don't is loads and loads of data, so for you to think they just aren't do anything and scrambling to react for release is laughable yes.
This is a load of nonsense.
I've not once, at all, in every post I've made over what's been a year since Halo 4 was announced demanded that the 1-50 ranks be brought back. All I've ever done, and I've been vigorous in my discussions on this subject, is say that the game needs a
visual based ranking system.
I never once said they were 'scrambling to react' in regards to the ranking system either, I've said they haven't prioritised the system as heavily as I personally would've liked, and given the fact that after four years they still haven't properly concluded on their system, to the point where they can't divulge details, is poor form.
I get why people want ranks, but it always boils down to either bragging rights or self evaluations stuff, both of which aren't dependent on numbered ranks.
I agree, and I've not once insisted that the numbered system needs to return, all I've ever said is there needs to be a visual skill based ranking system.
I'm pretty sure that no one outside of 343 knows how H4's ranking/placement system is going to work, especially in relation to the older games. All I want is to be placed in a match with people that are actually in my skill range (ESPECIALLY WHEN GOING IN SOLO) and can have a good competitive game. If I can get that in 90% of the multiplayer games, then I'll keep coming back. If not, hopefully campaign and SpOps have some longevity to them.
We're three months out from the game, so I expect the infolanche to start rumbling very soon.
Whilst I do too, I also think a visual system is important to assuage the frustrations of defeat and deflect the blame for said loss away from the matchmaking system itself and more onto your own personal and team failings. There's a tendency to just blame the system in Reach when you lose a match, under the older systems, at least the matchmaking selection criteria was overt, rather than concealed.
