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

Why are rank games such a waste of time.

104 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[EIS-]
Players
88 posts
8,637 battles

First I'd like to start by stating I don't give a toss about those that are going to come back to me with my stupid stats.

 

for four rank seasons now I get to rank 10 and then get stuck there.  I even get quite a few games where I keep my star, but I always seem to get stuck at rank 10 after reaching rank 9.

 

I'd also like to know why it is that when I play rank I somehow manage to get a lot of citetels when I shoot at a kurfurst, when in random battle it's rare.  Why do you also need to be unemployed in order to have the time to even have a chance of getting to rank 1? You certainly can't do it playing on a weekend.  So it's totally unfair right from the off.

 

I'm at the point now where I wish I had never started playing rank because I'm now stuck with these meaningless numbers next to my name.

 

Please don't get back here with how bad my stats are and what a bad player I am.  I heard enough of that crap by now.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
1,818 posts
4,938 battles

The goal of ranked is to win more than you lose (unless you aim to save a star every match), so what is the purpose of this thread again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[EIS-]
Players
88 posts
8,637 battles

I never said or suggested I play badly.  You don't get to keep a star when the team loses when you play badly.  And there is more to my post than just losing.

 

17 hours ago, Kartoffelmos said:

The goal of ranked is to win more than you lose

 

but that really isn't possible when the team loses because of their stupid game play.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Modder
3,876 posts
6,947 battles
2 minutes ago, TurtleSpot said:

I never said or suggested I play badly.

 

When I read such stuff, I assume you are aware that you are a bad player:

15 minutes ago, TurtleSpot said:

I don't give a toss about those that are going to come back to me with my stupid stats

 

with how bad my stats are and what a bad player I am.  I heard enough of that crap by now.

 

And again: Why do you expect to win more and rise in ranks, if you are a not a good player?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BONUS]
[BONUS]
Beta Tester
2,683 posts
7,236 battles
20 minutes ago, TurtleSpot said:

 

but that really isn't possible when the team loses because of their stupid game play.

 

So what you are saying is that you can't progress because you can't carry yourself and you can't find teams to carry you.  Sounds about right at rank 10.

 

Many people don't progress far because thre are better players than them that do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CU]
Players
296 posts
3,439 battles

First you said this:

 

43 minutes ago, TurtleSpot said:

Please don't get back here with how bad my stats are and what a bad player I am.

which implies you have crap stats (I haven't looked so wouldn't know)

 

Then you said this:

 

31 minutes ago, TurtleSpot said:

You don't get to keep a star when the team loses when you play badly.

Which in fact suggests you do play badly. In combination, this is probably why you are not doing well in ranked. It doesn't matter how your team plays, if you play badly, you don't keep the star.

 

EDITED to say: Of course you could have tried to play for the team and lost out on the saved star because you weren't damage farming. I use ranked for a quick boost of signals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
2,882 posts
12,099 battles
43 minutes ago, TurtleSpot said:

I'd also like to know why it is that when I play rank I somehow manage to get a lot of citetels when I shoot at a kurfurst, when in random battle it's rare.  Why do you also need to be unemployed in order to have the time to even have a chance of getting to rank 1? You certainly can't do it playing on a weekend.  So it's totally unfair right from the off.

I'd keep my daytime job if I were you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DAVY]
Players
1,538 posts
9,015 battles

well if you only win 4.3 games out of 10 how do you expect to progress through ranked battles, where a loss looses you a star, you can't blame the team for not carrying you, you are part of that team...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[EIS-]
Players
88 posts
8,637 battles
2 minutes ago, Hedgehog1963 said:

 

Many people don't progress far because thre are better players than them that do

 

no they progress because the other team is better.  The losing team will have good players, but not enough.  Rank games are not one man shows, which is why the arguments people like you make are so stupid.

 

But like I have stated before, my post has more to it.  It would be nice if you wrote something about that too and not just get the old red herring out which is so common on this forum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
[TOXIC]
Players
3,770 posts
10,668 battles
24 minutes ago, TurtleSpot said:

You don't get to keep a star when the team loses when you play badly.

Oh yes, yes you do. Playing passively and farming damage can give you decent XP - especially when (due to passive play) you're left as the last or one of the last people on your team when the enemy knows they've won and just try to farm some more damage - making them play recklessly. The remaining player(s) of the losing team can then just enjoy all the benefits of kiting/defensive play and also get damage and sometimes kills that are both useless (the game is already decided) and much easier to score than when it matters.

 

As a result - it's FAR from uncommon for people playing like crap to top the chart for the losing team. It's much harder (borderline impossible) to get the top spot on the winning team through bad play - but to be the first of the losers? Happens depressingly often.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[EIS-]
Players
88 posts
8,637 battles
1 minute ago, Salentine said:

well if you only win 4.3 games out of 10 how do you expect to progress through ranked battles

 

I did progress to rank 9.  How the hell did I manage that by winning only 4.3 out of 10.  And if I stay at rank 10 then clearly I am winning at 50%.  This is the usual moronic replies I get from people that can't even do simple arithmatic.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
2,882 posts
12,099 battles
2 minutes ago, TurtleSpot said:

I did progress to rank 9.  How the hell did I manage that by winning only 4.3 out of 10.  And if I stay at rank 10 then clearly I am winning at 50%.  This is the usual moronic replies I get from people that can't even do simple arithmatic.

What's your explanation for not progressing past rank 10 then?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
726 posts
8,152 battles

The only constant factor in ALL your ranked games is YOU.

So if you get to rank 10 every season and get stuck there than that means its your skillceiling.

To rise above that rank you'll need to bring more to the table than you're currently doing.

It is actually very simple and fair: Git gud.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Modder
3,876 posts
6,947 battles

Asking for replies - insults all who answer. Obviously a good strategy to get ignored...

 

I am quite a bit surprised not the read the following in the opening post: "winrate is luck".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[EIS-]
Players
88 posts
8,637 battles
13 minutes ago, Malfuss said:

Which in fact suggests you do play badly. In combination, this is probably why you are not doing well in ranked

 

Well I've seen pleople like Flamu struggle with bad teams.  I also don't have 5 or 6 hours to play 7 days a week, which is also one of the points I have made in my post which of course no one is bothering with because they have their ego's to deal with that makes them have to tell me I'm a bad player.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Modder
3,876 posts
6,947 battles
1 minute ago, TurtleSpot said:

which of course no one is bothering

of course...

 

Just because it is playin stupid what you wrote.

1 hour ago, TurtleSpot said:

you also need to be unemployed in order to have the time to even have a chance of getting to rank 1

 

That are statements not worth any answer at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
[TOXIC]
Players
3,770 posts
10,668 battles
2 minutes ago, TurtleSpot said:

no they progress because the other team is better.  The losing team will have good players, but not enough.  Rank games are not one man shows, which is why the arguments people like you make are so stupid.

 

But like I have stated before, my post has more to it.  It would be nice if you wrote something about that too and not just get the old red herring out which is so common on this forum.

No. Your post really doesn't have anything more to it. You whine that you can't progress and you look for reasons everywhere but at your own play. I'll tell you a secret: even if you WERE unemployed and spent whole days playing Ranked, you're extremely unlikely to reach R1. Because you just don't play well enough and, what's worse, you refuse to acknowledge that this might be the main reason for your lack of success.

 

As for people progressing because they're better. Yes, in a single player even the best player can get a team so bad that the match is a guaranteed defeat. But every match is:

green team:

 - you

 - 6 random dudes

red team:

 - 7 random dudes

 

If you're better than the average random dude within your MM bracket, you'll slowly progress. If your progression grinds to a halt - this strongly suggests that you're just not good enough, you've caught up to people at and above your skill level. Sure, it can be bad luck - but you yourself say that this happens to you consistently at around the same Rank. That strongly suggests that it's NOT a coincidence after all.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CU]
Players
296 posts
3,439 battles

No-one mentioned your other points because they are just your imagination.

 

Flamu also has a 66% WR which means he can easily help influence the game, but sometimes it doesn't matter what you do your team will throw it away.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BONUS]
[BONUS]
Beta Tester
2,683 posts
7,236 battles
18 minutes ago, TurtleSpot said:

 

no they progress because the other team is better.  The losing team will have good players, but not enough.  Rank games are not one man shows, which is why the arguments people like you make are so stupid.

 

But like I have stated before, my post has more to it.  It would be nice if you wrote something about that too and not just get the old red herring out which is so common on this forum.

 

If the team is carrying you it isn't a one man show.  And you call me an idiot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DAVY]
Players
1,538 posts
9,015 battles
15 minutes ago, TurtleSpot said:

 

And if I stay at rank 10 then clearly I am winning at 50%

strange, you seem to be rank 11...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CU]
Players
296 posts
3,439 battles
12 minutes ago, principat121 said:

But his best rank is 9.

He fall back to 11.

But he's saying he's winning 50% of games and thats why he's staying at rank 10, when in actual fact he's only winning 48/49% of games and has fallen back to rank 11 which explains why he's not progressing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Modder
3,876 posts
6,947 battles

@TurtleSpot

 

Wanna know something funny?!

 

I sucked hard this Ranked season. I really sucked at ranked this time. No one to blame here, but me. But the funny part is: I played 52 games with a abysmal winrate of 42%. But I reached rank 10 with that. You on the other hand played 129 battles with 49% winrate only to reach rank 9.

 

Can you explain this huge discrepancy? I played a lot less and even win less than you, but I reached quite the same rank?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,338 posts
5,806 battles
3 minutes ago, principat121 said:

Can you explain this huge discrepancy? I played a lot less and even win less than you, but I reached quite the same rank?!

 

Only two explanations for that: He started at a lower rank then you OR he lost more stars on the way, which means, even when having bad teams, he couldnt score decent.

 

@TurtleSpot just post some replays of your ranked. Then you´ll get some feedback and we can see, if its you or yout team. After all, since you are so convinced, it isnt you, we should see decent gameplay, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×