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

Ranked, a failed atempt ?

32 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[TRV]
Beta Tester
137 posts
12,658 battles

Howdy, before i begin, every player have hes or hers bad ship, ships the player just struggle to handle, there are 2 solutions for this 1) dont use em, 2) try improve by changing your gameplay with them, i belong to the seckond, I wont think of using ships i struggle in during ranked battles under "normal" circumstances. Not every player can be unicums, thats a fact., but for the love of eny god there is a middle way.

 

So to the issue at hand: RANKED battles.

The idea is great, the possibilities are great it could be THE highlight of world of warships for players who cant play clan or team battles on a regular basis.(like myself)

However, the options for that are tossed out the window by total lack of insight by developers, there are a big discussion about that new idea about how to give experienced players a new goal (that naval training thingy) when the fix is easy, quick to implement and will give experienced players a incentive to keep on playing. Now i dont really see why a player should play on after some thousand battles, my only reason is the hope of improvement and that there isnt a similar game out there (ooh WT is stone age gfx and crap gui, also from a developer with the same hmmm mentality as WG).

 

RANKED the word imply much more then it is, now however it is like you invite man. u, to a football show telling them its a glorious competition with great prizes and fun, they show up and gets put up agains a hobbie team of senior players who really havent played football since the 80s, and the prizes are free waffels and a can of piss warm soda with 40 uninterested people as audience. Next time they gets told its improved, they show up and gets divided 1 or 2 players from man. u. gets put in the senior teams... it will never be glorious, fun or eny challenge for eny of the players.

 

This is the way it is for ranked atm. 1-2 players carrys the games, its not fun, its far from rewarding and it isnt motivating experienced players to play the game. Yes the best players will always carry, but by god the battles would have been so much more giving if the players at least did know a bit about "how to", now its about getting as quickly to rank 1 as possible, and if you dont have time to play first 1-3 days of the ranked season you will get a very very hard carrying job to get past the worst players. (experiensing a "crap stop" at sprint rank 3 now for that reason), it should be like that, the battles should be fun, challenging and a substitute for missing team or clan battles.

 

How to improve ranked ? lots of ways.

some ideas wich can be implemented full or partly.

1)Set a higher minimum battles for joining.

2)Require minimum XP and/or average damage in randoms for the ship used(wanted to use)in ranked

3)split ranked to apply for only 1 ship, so that a player can have rank 3 in hes atlanta and rank 1 in hes nelson at the same time.

4)Give XP for spotting (will make the BB campers never get their star  in a lost battle)

5)Adjust so the few bad ships for ranked cant join, this will however be fixed by 2), to many bad players in say mahan.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[COMFY]
Players
1,385 posts
8,221 battles
1 hour ago, Joergensen said:

1)Set a higher minimum battles for joining.

This maybe should be combined with point 2 because on its own it is a partial to no solution.

I've seen many players with 10k or more battles that are absolute trash.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MORIA]
Players
7,346 posts
36,635 battles
1 hour ago, ImperialAdmiral said:

This maybe should be combined with point 2 because on its own it is a partial to no solution.

I've seen many players with 10k or more battles that are absolute trash.

Agree. Those are a "hopeless case" players. Zero kind of thinking. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
628 posts
2,129 battles
2 hours ago, Joergensen said:

 

 

How to improve ranked ? lots of ways.

some ideas wich can be implemented full or partly.

1)Set a higher minimum battles for joining.

2)Require minimum XP and/or average damage in randoms for the ship used(wanted to use)in ranked

3)split ranked to apply for only 1 ship, so that a player can have rank 3 in hes atlanta and rank 1 in hes nelson at the same time.

4)Give XP for spotting (will make the BB campers never get their star  in a lost battle)

5)Adjust so the few bad ships for ranked cant join, this will however be fixed by 2), to many bad players in say mahan.

It's a recipe for disaster and long, long waits for battle. WG (for the sake of argument) announce that the next Ranked season is for tier IX ships two months in advance. That leaves little time for players to grind the useful ships, become proficient and achieve all the goals you set. Unless of course you mean Ranked should in future be an elitist game mode where players already have all the necessary ships, experience, etc. and they are automatically invited into the club? Well you get the same result, long waits because you've decimated the number of players who would normally be available, and as a side note those you've excluded you've also alienated. 

 

Change a word or punctuation here or there and you've written a formula for a skill and experience based game mode. And we should all know what 'skill based' MM would lead to, and it can be summed up in one word, 'average'. You play against equal skilled and experienced players and ironically those equally skilled players on the enemy teams cause you to lose more battles. 

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
3,376 posts
14,102 battles
2 hours ago, Joergensen said:

How to improve ranked ? lots of ways.

some ideas wich can be implemented full or partly.

1)Set a higher minimum battles for joining.

2)Require minimum XP and/or average damage in randoms for the ship used(wanted to use)in ranked

3)split ranked to apply for only 1 ship, so that a player can have rank 3 in hes atlanta and rank 1 in hes nelson at the same time.

4)Give XP for spotting (will make the BB campers never get their star  in a lost battle)

5)Adjust so the few bad ships for ranked cant join, this will however be fixed by 2), to many bad players in say mahan.

 

1) There are many many many players with over 10,000 game who are still awful and some with only 1000 and yet have learned how to play, so that's a no from me.

2) No, everyone has a different play style, a player of say Belfast could meet the damage requirement you ask and yet be nothing but an awful selfish damage farmer who stays at the back and never supports the team. The one you exclude could have lower than needed damage per your restriction as they support caps with radar and get most of their initial game damage on say DD's and be inherently more useful and better for any team. And you've just manage to get the bad player in your ranked Utopia, not the good one......

3) Takes away the whole point of a short ranked sprint. Plus it's offers variety on what ships to play. Which is one of the fun bits of all ranked.

4) There's whole threads about exp for spotting and support play etc, WG don't care and will focus on rewarding damage most times. 

5) You can't just go excluding players on a F2P game. That's bad business management. 

 

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PORT]
[PORT]
Beta Tester, Players
290 posts
37,416 battles
8 minutes ago, 250swb said:

That leaves little time for players to grind the useful ships, become proficient and achieve all the goals you set.

Or more likely, open their wallets and buy a ship the day before the season starts!

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
628 posts
2,129 battles
9 minutes ago, VonBroich said:

Or more likely, open their wallets and buy a ship the day before the season starts!

Points 1) and 2) in the OP's plan would render this impossible.

 

I tend to agree with players who say Rental ships (or 'pay' ships) generally spoiled some of the battles in the recent Ranked games, and WG are promoting tier VII ships in the Premium Shop for the current Sprint season. But experienced players need inexperienced players to sink, without food they will starve, so rental ships and Shop bought ships are a part of the sandwich filling. That is the brutal fact, that is how somebody gets a 60%+ WR, that is how somebody gets a 43% WR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[B0TS]
Beta Tester
1,798 posts
6,659 battles

I'd just like a cap placed on the number of battles that you can play in the mode - say 50 for Sprints and 200 for full ranked. Maybe it might flag a need to improve synapse in those who spend a huge quantity of time/effort.

 

 

  • Cool 3
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-TPF-]
Players
3,920 posts
16,156 battles
36 minutes ago, philjd said:

I'd just like a cap placed on the number of battles that you can play in the mode - say 50 for Sprints and 200 for full ranked. Maybe it might flag a need to improve synapse in those who spend a huge quantity of time/effort.

That would prevent people learning and experimenting with different ship classes, and would increase game throwing and general saltiness. You don't want people getting angry because they've been prevented from ranking out due to some random game limit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,385 posts
15,531 battles

Judging by the number of players taking part in Rank Battles, WG has reached perfect ballance between effort put into getting to R1 and rewards. All working as intended. No change is required. :Smile_trollface:

 

And seriously. If anything was wrong in the eyes of WG with the current system, they'd have applied changes looooong time ago...

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,261 posts
20,659 battles

I fear WG doesn't have the clearest of visions for Ranked. They basically said it in as many words at the Developer Q&A in St Petersburg.

 

 

Let's try to help them clear up their vision. Let's make it simple, clear and easy, based on what they said there, and just think it through to its logical conclusion.

 

Ranked should be a preliminary stage that

leads up to fully competitive play,

which starts at Clan Battles.

 

 

What follows from that?

There should be a strong focus on team play.

What, in turn, follows from that?

Most people need to be taught how to do that. Spoon-fed what it entails. Baby steps.

 

1) Communication. Admission requirement should then be the use of voice com. One way to at least try and enforce this would be to turn the in-game voice com on by default and exclude players after they haven't said a word in three games in a row. Or at least bench them for a few rounds. I mean, I get it, people are shy. those geeky nerds and shut-ins that play MMOs doubly so. They need a little "tough love." There is the added language problem, which you can actually avoid in real Clan battles, there are monolingual clans from many if not most countries of Europe. But nobody can deny that at least a rudimentary command of English as the lingua franca would be a good thing for any competitive, more serious player, and something that this preliminary learning stage should also aim to foster.

 

2) Balance re: ship types. At present, cruisers are arguably at a disadvantage. The population is gravitating towards a state of many BBs and some DDs with hardly any cruisers. On the other hand, cruisers are the main ship type in Clan Battles, which have a one-BB cap for good reason, and which have lots of radars etc which tend to punish set-ups with too many DDs. Maybe there should be something like this in Ranked as well. Or some other way to foster a synergetic team composition. Here's a radical idea: Let's have only a limited number of fixed team compositions, and have the game assign players to spots on the team in some way. By lottery, say, or some algorithm that tries to define aptitude based on stats from their Randoms record.

 

I realize that much of this might not be conducive to short wait times. But having to wait for your turn instead of having a right on instant gratification is also a part of competitve play. It is something of a sport, after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[COMFY]
Players
1,385 posts
8,221 battles
45 minutes ago, FixCVs_Nautical_Metaphor said:

1) Communication. Admission requirement should then be the use of voice com.

From personal experience. In regular ranked I win games when I do completely opposite thing to which the "ranked tacticians" say. I really lost hope that anything I say matters even if I trully want to help my team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,261 posts
20,659 battles
Vor 13 Stunden, ImperialAdmiral sagte:

From personal experience. In regular ranked I win games when I do completely opposite thing to which the "ranked tacticians" say.

True, but for one, there is a very big difference difference between text chat and voice. And for another, negotiating a winning tactic as a group, and the whole leadership and productivity thing, is an invaluable skill set. Clan Battles without voice chat are fairly pointless, and some form of leadership and negotiation always emerges.

 

There would be friction for sure, with (mostly) complete foreigners. Loooots of emotion. But these are core challenges of competitive play. I maintain they need to be introduced if Ranked is truly supposed to lead up to that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[COMFY]
Players
1,385 posts
8,221 battles
2 minutes ago, FixCVs_Nautical_Metaphor said:

True, but for one, there is a very big difference difference between text chat and voice. And for another, negotiating a winning tactic as a group, and the whole leadership and productivity thing is an invaluable skill set. Clan Battles without voice chat are fairly pointless, and some form of leadership and negotiation always emerges.

 

There would be friction for sure, with (mostly) complete foreigners. Loooots of emotion. But these are core challenges of competitive play. I maintain they need to be introduced if Ranked is truly supposed to lead up to that.

I would not mind vc in ranked as madatory but then IMO that would be a dead mode. Or even less used than CB. Since not many want to talk with randoms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,261 posts
20,659 battles
Vor 13 Stunden, ImperialAdmiral sagte:

Since not many want to talk with randoms.

OK, so make the rewards sufficiently enticing for all these wallflowers to overcome their shyness.

@MrConway said in above video he didn't believe people would be willing to "suffer enormous pain" just for in-game rewards but we all know that's not true. The rewards just have to be good enough. Couple hundred steel would do the trick.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,261 posts
20,659 battles
Vor 13 Stunden, DanSilverwing sagte:

No discrimination against the physically disabled, thanks.

Dude, lamest excuse ever.


Don't talk to me about disabled people. A mate of mine plays with only one hand. Leading CB teams no less. You don't need to be Stephen Hawking to use a speech synthesizer any more these days. If there's a will, there is a way.

 

And the same, incidentally, goes for Ranked, or any other mode: All that is needed is WG's will to make it into something other than what it is now.

 

And what it is now, as the OP set out, is almost indistinguishable from Randoms. Maybe a bit more stressful and challenging in some respects but there are no CVs which makes Ranked more relaxing again. Less anger-inducing. But regarding the intent to lead up to competitive play, they are at best a half measure.

 

(And as we have seen with the NTC, concerted/organized  player action goes a long way toward shaping WG's will. <Starts singing The Internationale>)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ALYEN]
Players
1,619 posts
3,585 battles

Elitist much ?

 

Anyway you are guilty of the same sin as the WG Devs in the NTC discussion ... you are confusing veteran with good/unicum ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,261 posts
20,659 battles
Vor 4 Stunden, Hugh_Ruka sagte:

Elitist much ?

Dude, I'm elitist? When WG is using Ranked for one thing, and one thing only - pushing commercial product?

 

Edit, and another thing, maybe there is a slight misconception here but

 

Zitat

confusing veteran with good/unicum ...

 

At no point did I mention talent or anything.

 

The mentioned skills can be acquired. As can all skills needed for competitive play, by normal people with an average capacity for learning, and possibly even by people who do have some sort of day job. You do not need to be a unicum in Randoms to be an acceptable competitve player and good team mate. You don't need to be a tactical genius either.

 

Talent, and the time to really hone those skills, and all things one might call elitist, come into play when your goals get ambitious. I'd say maybe if you want to regularly compete in the third league and above. The further up you move, the thinner the air gets. But that is the way with every sport. The majority of motorcyclists could learn to do regular lap times on a race track, and a high percentage could get within fifteen, twenty seconds of the pertinent lap record. Only chasing down lose last few elusive seconds - that's the realm of the actual elite.

 

I can only keep saying it: It's all a question of what you want. If you want Ranked to actually lead up to Clan Battles, then the mode needs at least to start introducing people to what is required in CBs, what goes on in them. Trying to set out what that is and how it maybe could be done. Clan players feel free to chime in. I've only known three clans from the inside so far, none of them very high up the ladder.

 

And if you want it to lead up to competitive play, then that of necessity precludes all but the most talented casual players. But that's a problem of their lack of ambition. Not even the worst amateur football club would just let anybody play who walks in from the street. If they don't want to do what it takes, they can always keep playing Randoms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MORIA]
Players
7,346 posts
36,635 battles
5 hours ago, LowSpeedHighDrag said:

bots anyone?

 

I know personally such players. They just don't care. Nothing will change their attitude. 

Ill have you know Spongebob 15072019084324.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[B0TS]
Beta Tester
1,798 posts
6,659 battles
On 7/14/2019 at 10:03 AM, invicta2012 said:

That would prevent people learning and experimenting with different ship classes, and would increase game throwing and general saltiness. You don't want people getting angry because they've been prevented from ranking out due to some random game limit. 

Apologies but you are missing the point - the purpose is to put a cap on the games players can use to achieve ranking out, with a fair amount of leeway for those who wish to experiment. Season 5 of sprint took me 40 games to complete with a 42.5% win rate, which I consider to be appalling. 50 games would be an even lower performance, never mind needing more than that to complete.If you can';t complete a competitive game mode without some form of 'never never land' level of battles, then what purpose does it serve in saying to players, 'you need to consider how you play so that you can get better'? This is purely an attempt to make the overall quality of play better, not to beat poor players over the head with a baseball bat like some would prefer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,261 posts
20,659 battles

I've got another crazy idea along the lines of "baby steps toward actual competitive play".

 

This one's from teacher training, where they force you to present a preliminary lesson plan in some form or other. It usually calls for spelling out the learning goals you aim to achieve, structured into sub-goals that need to be achieved first, in order to enable the students to attain the overall goals. It also calls for naming the methods and means etc you plan to employ in order to achieve the goals. In a word, a bit of planning and goal orientation, whereas your typical WoWs battle involves a group of people doing it all like the President of the USA, i.e. by the seat of their pants, guided by selfish motives and terrible prejudice. But I digress.

In an actual Clan Battle, many players are happy to have someone else assume the leadership responsibility and call the shots. And even if you have many strong players, and strong-willed ones, who may disagree on things, they usually agree fairly quickly on some general course of action because they have learned that any plan is better than no plan, and that there is no time to bicker over minutiae. Also there is of course a degree of trust, which results from knowing each other and knowing what they can expect.

All of this is difficult, and difficult to learn.

To guide people into this, I thought maybe use multiple choice. You would maybe need to adjust map and cap design a little, maybe finally drop epicenter mode. But you could conceivably present the group with a choice of steps, of which they had to select some, and select a sequence. Or even just name the sequence of caps they plan to cap, in advance.

Just to gently force a little bit of planning somehow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×