Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
chorltonandthewheelies

T10 battles minimum 53% winrate

59 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
4 posts
25,197 battles

Ever since the last ranked season, the standard of play in t10 matches has gone through the floor.

 

You would think that by the time you've got a T10 ship, you'd have a rough idea how to play, but the evidence is increasingly to the contrary. There will always be bad players, there will always be bad teams, but recently, the only place you can get a good game is clan battles. the number of matches in randoms at T10 where your entire team camps, or where you completely annihilate the opposition in less than 10 mins is increasing. Neither is enjoyable.

 

I would suggest that if you want to play T10, you should have at least a 53% winrate, or not be allowed to play T10, because the incompetence of so many players in T10 matches is spoiling it for the rest of us.

 

We expect bad play at t1-5, but not so much at this level. Now, it is ubiquitous throughout the levels. This is not fun anymore and the matches where you have a good fight and a close game are becoming rarer and rarer.

 

Am I alone in thinking this?

  • Cool 4
  • Funny 5
  • Boring 9
  • Bad 14
  • Angry 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DC_DK]
Players
3,168 posts
36,894 battles

WG will never do that.... As long you can free XP your way through the lines... When you have your ship there is no restrictions on usage.... Some people used real money to get to T-X..

So in short WG won't slaughter a cash cow

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
12,666 posts
9,841 battles

Even if (agreeing with @hgbn_dk anyway) they would introduce something like that, what WR would count towards that? Ive seen players that have 40% WR on T10 and can manage still like 50%+ on lower tiers. So they just play enough T2 to get to 53% WR and then go back to T10? If you drop below, play more T2.

What do those ppl do that have several thousand battles with like 50% WR? They arent allowed to play T10 for like ever again untill they manage to get 53% WR in total? Which would take again like thousand battles or so.

Or if you only consider T10 WR: Since everytime 12 ppl WILL lose, more and more ppl would drop below 53%. With more ppl dropping below that number, fewer players would be around to play, which means, those that have like 55% WR will start to lose more, at some point dropping below that aswell. You catch my drift i believe.

 

Apart from that: Yes hightier battles become more unfun to play with every passing week. I dont play t8+ anymore right now, because its supposed to be fun, thats why we play right? and for me, its not fun to play that right now.

  • Cool 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
Players
4,795 posts
12,260 battles
16 minutes ago, chorltonandthewheelies said:

Am I alone in thinking this?

No, you're not alone, other people have similar poorly thought-out ideas too. It's not even the first time someone brings something like this up on the Forum.

 

The first argument off the top of my head: people do heavy statpadding and sometimes go as far as to create re-rolls even without in-game incentives to stat-pad.

Second: there's enough elitism, toxicity and anger at allies that you perceive as the reason for your defeat, we don't need to encourage more by making winrate MATTER in-game beyond giving people bragging rights.

Third: finding yourself as bottom tier in t10 match is painful enough even without t10s being played exclusively by above-average (stat-wise at least) players.

Fourth: queues for t10 can be painful enough at worse hours even without excluding most of the players (and possibly scaring away some of the rest because playing t10 where enemies are filtered as you suggest would inevitably lead to most t10 players losing at t10 much more than at lower tiers)

Fifth: it's not very healthy for the game to tell a significant portion of the playerbase (those with many battles and sub-50% stats) that, realistically, they'll NEVER be allowed to play their t10 ships.

  • Cool 14

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NED]
Players
2,211 posts
8,536 battles

Quick question what does OP think will happen with his precious winrate if he only gets to fight against those with 53%+ ?

  • Cool 8
  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NIKE]
Beta Tester
3,409 posts
7,445 battles

I would prefer WG to stop handing out XP like candy, so you don't get people getting to tier X with only 500 games played, and at the same time introduce some criteria for unlocking the next ship beyond just get enough XP.

Armoured warfare for example, you couldn't unlock the tier IV light vehicle until you had done XX amount of spotting in the previous. With the heavy tank line it was XX damage under a certain distance.

 

Putting a limit on people based on their WR is pointless anyway - if someone with 49% goes and plays a bunch of matches in the tier 2 umikaze to pad his WR over 53% how is that going to make him any better in his Yamato?

 

Even if you only had good players it wouldn't necessarily change anything. What if they are great in one class, and useless in another?

What about different ships? You probably wouldnt mind me in the zao (54%). I doubt you would eant me in the DM (46%)

Also people don't always play consistently the same. I have 57% overall, so I would make your cut. Problem is, sometimes I play great, carry the game etc etc. Other times I play like hot garbage and I'm the first to sink. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
Players
4,795 posts
12,260 battles
2 minutes ago, chorltonandthewheelies said:

I don't think your fifth point is a bad thing

Gaming industry has some funny preconceptions. Changing the rules halfway through in a way that insultingly f*cks over half of your playerbase is generally not considered a very good move, you see.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DC_DK]
Players
3,168 posts
36,894 battles

It would end in a shitstorm of unseen magnitude.... Besides that you can play clan battles if you seek good players... Random is not the place you'll find it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
290 posts
3,522 battles
23 minutes ago, piet11111 said:

Quick question what does OP think will happen with his precious winrate if he only gets to fight against those with 53%+ ?

Considering his solo stats, it’d probably plummet...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
Players
4,795 posts
12,260 battles
14 minutes ago, piet11111 said:

Quick question what does OP think will happen with his precious winrate if he only gets to fight against those with 53%+ ?

Well, he's in a decent CB-participating clan, I think he could maintain 53%+ for some time with their help. Just as he does now, btw, since solo his t10 winrate is at 52,76% :Smile_teethhappy:

And if that was a problem, well, there's also the option to statpad a bit in lower tiers. No need to even venture into some unknown waters either: Belfast, Clemson and Kamikaze R - his three most played ships should easily be enough to keep him afloat if he just keeps playing them, he's both extremely experienced and very good in them :Smile_medal:

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,800 posts
6,951 battles

A skill based MM has been discussed many times, the main rejoinder, IIRC, is that the player base is not large enough to sustain a league type structure across the tiers.

 

Yes you could group the tiers into brackets and then restrict access to those into how well you performed in the previous bracket. If your performance dropped below a certain level, over X amount of games, then you could not access the higher bracket. If it dropped below a low point of some form, then access to a bracket  could be removed until you had played a certain number of games in the next lower bracket at a selected performance rate.

 

Sh1tstorms galore though....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[KAKE]
Players
2,801 posts
6,795 battles

Allow me to point out the obvious idiocy of the proposal: there's always going to be only one winning team. Which means that 50% of teams are going to lose. Eventually, more and more people currently playing Tier 10 will be pushed below the 53% threshold because they lose just a little bit more than others. Let it run for long enough, and the total population allowed to play T10 will eventually be practically zero.

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TTTX]
[TTTX]
Players
4,608 posts
8,139 battles
1 hour ago, chorltonandthewheelies said:

Ever since the last ranked season, the standard of play in t10 matches has gone through the floor.

 

You would think that by the time you've got a T10 ship, you'd have a rough idea how to play, but the evidence is increasingly to the contrary. There will always be bad players, there will always be bad teams, but recently, the only place you can get a good game is clan battles. the number of matches in randoms at T10 where your entire team camps, or where you completely annihilate the opposition in less than 10 mins is increasing. Neither is enjoyable.

 

I would suggest that if you want to play T10, you should have at least a 53% winrate, or not be allowed to play T10, because the incompetence of so many players in T10 matches is spoiling it for the rest of us.

 

We expect bad play at t1-5, but not so much at this level. Now, it is ubiquitous throughout the levels. This is not fun anymore and the matches where you have a good fight and a close game are becoming rarer and rarer.

 

Am I alone in thinking this?

plenty of stupid in here that others have already pointed out, let me just add one thing.

How much of the playerbase do you think has 53% winrate and up? Just based on how statistics in general and Wargaming stats in particular work, I'd bet on 30% at most. So you want Wargaming to kick a good two thirds of their playerbase out of the tier where Premium Time and Premium Camo is the most needed, and thus a good chunk of money is spent? How dumb do you think they are?

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
12,666 posts
9,841 battles
15 minutes ago, Tyrendian89 said:

plenty of stupid in here that others have already pointed out, let me just add one thing.

How much of the playerbase do you think has 53% winrate and up? Just based on how statistics in general and Wargaming stats in particular work, I'd bet on 30% at most. So you want Wargaming to kick a good two thirds of their playerbase out of the tier where Premium Time and Premium Camo is the most needed, and thus a good chunk of money is spent? How dumb do you think they are?

 

If we look on the tracker players on wows numbers, we have ~115.000 tracked individual players. (EU)

https://wows-numbers.com/de/ranking/?p=315

31467 got 53% or better WR, which makes it roughly 27%. So your guess was pretty good, even when who knows how many profile this side only tracks. But i doubt it will change that much.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
401 posts
7,897 battles

Just combat the bots and you will reduce those idiots at high tier for large margin. 

 

At the moment WG doesnt take enough action against bots and AFKers. 

 

But you cant use WR as borderline to enter tier, i have seen sub 38% CVs at T10 with hundreds of games that are bots that have no place ingame and should be banned after 2 warnings without chance to reclaim banned account. This sends message to play with the rules or buy your stuff multiple times for sevral accounts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DC_DK]
Players
3,168 posts
36,894 battles

You can't ban people for being bad players..... Then they should ban elitist as well for whining threads about win rate every week

  • Cool 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NED]
Players
2,211 posts
8,536 battles
1 hour ago, Uglesett said:

Allow me to point out the obvious idiocy of the proposal: there's always going to be only one winning team. Which means that 50% of teams are going to lose. Eventually, more and more people currently playing Tier 10 will be pushed below the 53% threshold because they lose just a little bit more than others. Let it run for long enough, and the total population allowed to play T10 will eventually be practically zero.

 

Hey you gave away the answer to my question for the OP :fish_palm:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BONUS]
[BONUS]
Beta Tester
3,126 posts
12,451 battles

Gatekeeping alive and well in WoWS 2018.

 

Why is your gaming experience more important than that of the weaker players?  Do you thing WG think more of you than them?

  • Cool 4
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DC_DK]
Players
3,168 posts
36,894 battles
1 minute ago, Hedgehog1963 said:

Gatekeeping alive and well in WoWS 2018.

 

Why is your gaming experience more important than that of the weaker players?  Do you thing WG think more of you than them?

To be honest I think they care more about the majority of paying customers which do not come to the forum and whine.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
6,440 posts
23,608 battles
2 hours ago, chorltonandthewheelies said:

I would suggest that if you want to play T10, you should have at least a 53% winrate, or not be allowed to play T10, because the incompetence of so many players in T10 matches is spoiling it for the rest of us.

 

Sounds ok to me... so nobody with a winrate below 53% will ever get in a T10 battle, right? :cap_cool:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OGHF]
Players
1,634 posts
27,123 battles

One thing no one has mentioned, WG are pushing you to race to level 8 so you can get 3 free Tx ships to play clan battles in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
3,936 posts
18,027 battles

Ok. So people will just statpad in lowtier OP premiums to get the magical 53%. How on earth did you come up with that number btw?

 

Edit: add division to statpad sentence 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
663 posts
12,465 battles

Ok so they cannot play their T10 ship, they just jump into their T9 ship and ruin your game for you in that. This was obviously a well thought out proposal. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×