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

WG, please don't award ranked star to last in the winning team.

72 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[IDDQD]
Players
224 posts
7,801 battles

..or even better, shift the star from last of wining team to 2nd of loosing team - this will fix so many problems with ranked.

All the trolls, AFKs and YOLOs, why are the allowed to spam 1000 games and still get R1 doing NOTHING.

Trolls in stock ships, ppl who just park near closest island and afk, ppl who sail to ridiculous positions on maps and rushing yolos spamming battles....

 

On the other hand, BBs sniping from 20km, just farming dmg (hello Musashi in next T9 season), getting HiCal and saving the star, while others helped contesting the cap and died...i understand we wont fix BB gameplay, but allow at least 2nd from loosing team to save star, and take that star from last of wining team.

 

Just think about it how much this super simple change would make ranked better place.

 

PS: I understand that every 1000 battles there will be win where whole team did well and may be unfair to not give star to last guy...but how rare is that compared to other 99.99% games with trolls.

 

edit: Seems the topic is touching the nerve of some ppl (one could wonder why). Excuses like "but what if i do good, but still be last, how is that fair to not get star"

So, what about a threshold of lets say 500 EXP? If ppl really feel like that teams are balanced that often that all contributed fair share to the win, getting 500 EXP in a win should not be a problem and you get the star even if last.

It will still eliminate the yolos and AFKs.

 

edit2: Focus of the topic is on RANKED SEASONS, the 25 tier long ranked that takes hundreds of games to complete - NOT Sprints.

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 3
  • Bad 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
16,376 posts
11,328 battles

Yepp, and nobody risks anything anymore to not sink first. Great idea. :fish_palm:

Instead reward players for losing.

 

Maybe reevaluate your experience. The 99.99% seem "a bit" off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[IDDQD]
Players
224 posts
7,801 battles
1 hour ago, ColonelPete said:

Yepp, and nobody risks anything anymore to not sink first. Great idea. :fish_palm:

Instead reward players for losing.

 

Maybe reevaluate your experience. The 99.99% seem "a bit" off.

not risking to die should be the point of any competitive game mode? Especially those where u got just one "life", you should ONLY risk when the gain can decide the match or at least turn it into your favor.

 

i see you greatly evaluated also the benefits explained in the topic. Giving out stars to AFK and total trolls is so great idea, right?

If you sink first, DOING TOTALLY NOTHING, why it should be a problem to not be rewarded for it?

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
16,376 posts
11,328 battles
51 minutes ago, RAYvenMP said:

not risking to die should be the point of any competitive game mode?

That means staying in spawn or going for the border.

 

ANY player trying to accomplish something, risks getting sunk.

 

Trolls and AFK are much rarer than you say and cannot be controlled by your measures.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[IDDQD]
Players
224 posts
7,801 battles
49 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

That means staying in spawn or going for the border.

 

ANY player trying to accomplish something, risks getting sunk.

 

Trolls and AFK are much rarer than you say and cannot be controlled by your measures.

are you even playing ranked dude? for me guy bringing stock ship into Ranked is troll, guy going EXACTLY opposite way team agreed to go is troll. I have specifically mentioned also "special" dudes who go 25km to snipe.

Its not just pure AFK and yolos, its all the "i dont give a [edited]" players, and they are even rewarded for it. How it would be even possible that players with 45% WR and 3k average dmg reached R1 in some 600-700 games? 

 

and YES, playing safe, exploiting mistakes of enemy team rather than making yours is exactly what competitive should be about. They want all camp on spawn, easy win for us - we just made good use of enemy team passivity when we controlled all caps.

just check how ppl play CWs, its the same principle - exception is that they will simply kick that mental that does stupid crap, but in ranked we are even forced to carry them.

 

edit: checked, you got like 50 games played total across all ranked seasons and another 50 in sprints, and all you came to tell in this topic is that mine 99.9% is not accurate - and you know that how?

so you are just that, guy with 15k forum posts who jumps every random topic to spread his wisdom even tho he has zero clue about the situation, thank you.

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
16,376 posts
11,328 battles

With a 99.99% claim I do not even need to play this game to know that you are wrong.

Just tone down the hyperbole and people have a harder time to argue against you.

 

And yes, I played enough Ranked to know you would punish mostly the wrong players.

And the stats of the Ranked seasons are public. The players you complain about are rare, unless you include everyone that not agrees with you.

  • Cool 5
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[IDDQD]
Players
224 posts
7,801 battles
11 hours ago, ColonelPete said:

With a 99.99% claim I do not even need to play this game to know that you are wrong.

Just tone down the hyperbole and people have a harder time to argue against you.

 

And yes, I played enough Ranked to know you would punish mostly the wrong players.

And the stats of the Ranked seasons are public. The players you complain about are rare, unless you include everyone that not agrees with you.

once again and last time. Your whole discussion and contribution to this topic is that i estimated amount of "players who don't care" at 99.99% wrong? Alright, so its 50%, better?

How does it change the fact that players who wants to contribute, wants to take it seriously *Edited* ? Do you understand that if these ppl who literally end up with 50EXP on the scoreboard WONT get a star in the end they either try harder or wont bother - and this is exactly what ranked needs - good and average players to compete and troll and super potatoes to move to coop/randoms.

 

i know that it will affect ppl who actually try but are just really bad, but why play ranked when you don't have a clue about the basics of the game? I don't have problems with bad players, i am often explaining newbies some hard-to-discover mechanics like radar/sonar ranges, CV strafes and DoTs stacking etc, but that does not mean they should be learning the game in ranked.

Edited by Nebiros_1
Edited due to Insults
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
16,376 posts
11,328 battles

Bad players are allowed to play Ranked. Deal with it.

 

50% sounds better, but is still too high. And you have to consider that not all "Trolls" end up in last place.

Meaning that you punish more "innconcents" than "guilty" players while not really discouraging players from playing that way.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[IDDQD]
Players
224 posts
7,801 battles
Just now, ColonelPete said:

Bad players are allowed to play Ranked. Deal with it.

 

50% sounds better, but is still too high. And you have to consider that not all "Trolls" end up in last place.

Meaning that you punish more "innconcents" than "guilty" players while not really discouraging players from playing that way.

so, how exactly would not AFK or guy who does nothing just charges into cap in 1st minute of the game not end up in last place?

  • Boring 1
  • Bad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
16,376 posts
11,328 battles

These guys are rare and do not fall under your broad "Troll" definition.

 

Yolo players can easily sink a ship.

AFK guys would be last. AFK players who do this on purpose to get carried, would simply adapt their strategy and show some activity to not get last. They would game your system.

  • Cool 2
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[IDDQD]
Players
224 posts
7,801 battles
59 minutes ago, ColonelPete said:

These guys are rare and do not fall under your broad "Troll" definition.

 

Yolo players can easily sink a ship.

AFK guys would be last. AFK players who do this on purpose to get carried, would simply adapt their strategy and show some activity to not get last. They would game your system.

yea yea, bad players can have good game, trolls can end up second to last, and AFK players will magically not be last ... like you are questioning my estimations, but your scenarios are far less realistic.

i know you dont care about ranked, and most likely discussing this just for the sake of boredom and having some place to argue about whatever comes along.

 

ranked is toxic shithole, full of ppl who should not be there in the first place, definitely not in the R5-R1 brackets with 40%WR and 50EXP average...and if it wasnt BAD, you would have been participating in it, but you arent.

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PMI]
Players
2,564 posts
6,009 battles
11 minutes ago, TheComedian1983 said:

Rare? Oh common!

 

Yeah, and you "feeling" it is no measure.

 

Do you have any metrics to dispute the claim?

  • Boring 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CATS]
Players
16,376 posts
11,328 battles
4 minutes ago, RAYvenMP said:

ranked is toxic shithole, full of ppl who should not be there in the first place, definitely not in the R5-R1 brackets with 40%WR and 50EXP average...and if it wasnt BAD, you would have been participating in it, but you arent.

Yes, it is toxic. People flame each other and blame the other guy. Not a fun enviroment.

The people you complain about are not the source of the toxity.

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THROW]
Players
661 posts
21,439 battles

If you are talking about the current rank sprint, you do know that it's just a bit of fun that no one really cares about right? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[COR3]
Players
425 posts
9,847 battles

i care enough to rank out in Huanhe again! :P

But besides that it is meant to be fun. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[IDDQD]
Players
224 posts
7,801 battles
4 minutes ago, Mr_Snoww said:

If you are talking about the current rank sprint, you do know that it's just a bit of fun that no one really cares about right? 

no, i am talking about Ranked seasons, next one start on ~20th with T9

Sprints can be whatever they are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PMI]
Players
2,564 posts
6,009 battles
13 minutes ago, TheComedian1983 said:

 

You might want to have a point if you discuss someone, just FYI.

 

So, no metrics, only your tears to measure how little you like someting, ok...

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[IDDQD]
Alpha Tester, Players
2,820 posts
17,314 battles
9 hours ago, Mr_Snoww said:

If you are talking about the current rank sprint, you do know that it's just a bit of fun that no one really cares about right? 

And what's the difference between sprint and classic RB?

Rewards? Ok.

Time? Ok.

Players? Oh.

-----------

Spojler

btw Sprint was fun in 5vs5. I can win battles almost alone. 7vs7 with plebs is.. classic ranked

 

 

9 hours ago, Juanx said:

 

You might want to have a point if you discuss someone, just FYI.

 

So, no metrics, only your tears to measure how little you like someting, ok...

Are you serious? :Smile_veryhappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
[NWP]
Players
8,241 posts
11,737 battles

I'm assuming no one who thinks the bottom XP earner shouldn't get a star plays DDs?

 

It's quite easy to finish bottom despite doing a lot of the leg work since WG has decided in their wisdom that spotting damage is essentially worth nothing. A decent flanking DD can get very little XP gains if they're not going out of their way to get spotted to farm damage. 

  • Cool 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[IDDQD]
Players
224 posts
7,801 battles
11 minutes ago, Negativvv said:

I'm assuming no one who thinks the bottom XP earner shouldn't get a star plays DDs?

 

It's quite easy to finish bottom despite doing a lot of the leg work since WG has decided in their wisdom that spotting damage is essentially worth nothing. A decent flanking DD can get very little XP gains if they're not going out of their way to get spotted to farm damage. 

there is some logic in that, but to my experience contesting DDs usually shoot other DDs or get a cap, far enough to not be last.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
[NWP]
Players
8,241 posts
11,737 battles
1 minute ago, RAYvenMP said:

there is some logic in that, but to my experience contesting DDs usually shoot other DDs or get a cap, far enough to not be last.

Most of the time but I've finished bottom of a team on numerous occasions where I've not done a single point of damage or capped but still been instrumental towards wins.

 

Single DD games with lots of radar might mean your role is to flank and area deny with torps. That'll mean no capping and potentially very little damage but anyone would be hard pressed to say they didn't deserve a star.

 

No matter anyway, I've won Ranked enough times to know I never want to play it again. Would rather not play at all than be forced into another season of it :Smile_hiding:

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×