Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Leo_Apollo11

[POLL] How was your "Ranked Sprint 11" experience?

How was your "Ranked Sprint 11" experience?  

216 members have voted

  1. 1. Did you play "Ranked Sprint 11" ?

    • Yes
      185
    • No
      31
  2. 2. If you played "Ranked Sprint 11" did you reach rank #1?

    • Yes
      124
    • No
      62
    • I didn't play "Ranked Sprint 11" at all
      30
  3. 3. If you played "Ranked Sprint 11" did you like the format (i.e. "Arms Race" game mode) ?

    • Yes
      136
    • No
      50
    • I didn't play "Ranked Sprint 11" at all
      30
  4. 4. If you played "Ranked Sprint 11" did you like the number of participants in the game (12 vs. 12) ?

    • Yes
      71
    • No
      115
    • I didn't play "Ranked Sprint 11" at all
      30
  5. 5. If you played "Ranked Sprint 11" do you think that more information / education would be helpful / needed for players that don't undesrtand the rules of the "Arms Race" game mode?

    • Yes
      124
    • No
      62
    • I didn't play "Ranked Sprint 11" at all
      30
  6. 6. If you played "Ranked Sprint 11" how would you grade the whole event (1 = Lowest grade / 10 = Highest grade) ?

    • 10
      7
    • 9
      14
    • 8
      32
    • 7
      30
    • 6
      20
    • 5
      22
    • 4
      13
    • 3
      22
    • 2
      11
    • 1
      45

48 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[SCRUB]
Quality Poster
4,389 posts
15,275 battles

Hi all,

 

[POLL] How was your "Ranked Sprint 11" experience?

 

IMHO this "Ranked Sprint 11" was one of the worst I experienced... :Smile_sad:

  • too many players simply do not understand the rules for the "Arms Race" game mode - they simply have no grasp of collecting Buffs and the inevitability of central CAP later in the game :Smile_facepalm:
  • camping and overall border flanking was present in almost every game - too many players simply don't understand that CAP that creates in the center later in the game should at least be contested if not seized (when you are 25 km from CAP on the border camping this is moot point BTW) :Smile_izmena:
  • 12 vs. 12 is simply too much for the ranked IMHO - the individual performance is much less pronounced and the games are much much longer lasting than ever before in Ranked :Smile-angry:
  • I don't even want to mention suiciding (I would like to believe not deliberate) in the first minutes (this includes DDs, CAs/CLs and even BBs)... :Smile_amazed:

 

As for me... I simply didn't have enough time to play (due to COVID-19 and my work) and I only reached rank #3... first time ever for me... :Smile_hiding:

 

No amount of tanking  and helping team (including polite education during the game) made my teams play better - but I did get plenty of Karma... :Smile_honoring:

 

 

So... on average... 2.5M "Potential Damage", 1 kill per game and around 120K inflicted damage... it was not enough...

 

 

jlPaAsM.jpg

 

 

Leo "Apollo11"

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PISH]
Players
369 posts
3,065 battles

Overall it was a pleasant experience I wish there was more of it. Also I learned a lot about the ships I choose to bring there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CR33D]
[CR33D]
Players
2,749 posts
26,520 battles

IMO by far the least fun Ranked Sprint ever.

  • Cool 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[KITEN]
Players
128 posts
10,716 battles

I'm not new to the ranked, and actually found the idea behind this one very interesting: more players, lower tiers--> encouraging more players to participate, it's a very good idea; except lacking steel rewards. That should encouraging more players to participate, which is exactly what WG is expecting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
3,159 posts
3,608 battles

I played this ranked season, but I had less time than I would have liked to put aside for the purpose. So I only got to play nine ranked battles in all, and it got me as far as rank 6. Not as far down as I'd hoped, but farther than I expected, to be honest. During the 10th ranked season I had one loss after the other, some due at least in part to me and some where I played rather well but not enough to carry. So I got absolutely nowhere, and it put me off the whole thing. This 11th season was better; I had some annoying losses but a few satisfying wins as well.

 

I think it was a good idea to allow ships from two tiers in the same battle. Having tier 9 and 10 play together works well overall, and gave some spread as to what ship one could expect to play against.

 

Twelve players are four or five too many for arms race, I think. I prefer a smaller number of players, say seven or eight to a team. This kind of format, with a race for buff drops and the drive to quickly get to grips with the enemy, benefits from having smaller sized teams. You can make more of a difference as an individual, and you don't end up facing too many enemies at once if you get spotted, which encourages active and daring gameplay.

 

A possible problem with having smaller teams, is that any carriers present will have an even more disproportional influence on the battle than would otherwise be the case. I suspect that this is one reason why Wargaming went for 12-player teams this ranked season, when they also allowed carriers. Personally, I think it would be a better idea to keep to smaller teams and to maintain a ban on carriers in ranked battles. So I have a suggestion, namely that you add the question of whether or not to have carriers in ranked, to the poll?

 

While I am generally in favour of educational efforts, I'm not sure whether those players who haven't already picked up enough clues on how to play arms race, would benefit from further instruction. That said, I just tried to change my "No" on question 5 above to a "Yes", but I failed.

 

I did not experience too much of camping, and no actual suicides, so I guess I was lucky in that regard. Then again, I played all my ranked battles in either my Daring or my Smolensk, which promoted an active and eyes to the front-sort of play style, so I can't say I kept much track of what my allies were doing at my back. I got fairly good fire support in most of my games, I'll say that much. Arms race, and ranked in general, does seem to attract the more active and engaged kind of players, which is a big part of why I generally enjoy these game modes.

 

Nice poll!

:Smile_honoring:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
496 posts

3 games.

2 wins.

All Benham.

Killed more red guys than green guys.

 

Arms race is atrocious, at least the heal upgrade needs to go. 12 vs 12 sucks in ranked and Sprint should be low tier. Only saving grace were the lackluster rewards, so I didn't feel compelled to slog thru.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CR33D]
[CR33D]
Players
2,749 posts
26,520 battles
24 minutes ago, luokailk said:

I'm not new to the ranked, and actually found the idea behind this one very interesting: more players, lower tiers--> encouraging more players to participate, it's a very good idea; except lacking steel rewards. That should encouraging more players to participate, which is exactly what WG is expecting.

 

More people doesn't automatically mean that it is improvement. In the first game, I had a Zao in my team which for 20 minutes went around our spawn and spammed "Set a smoke screen" every 10sec. It was so annoying. Luckily we won a game but that means he won a star while basically not doing anything and going on everyone nerve with his spam. So many players without camo, players who were more interested in grinding their T9 ships instead of going for objectives and be useful. As almost all ships head heal and there was usually a lot of heal buffs it took forever to kill anybody who is not straight yoloing. To me this is by far the worst ranked sprint so far. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-TAP-]
Players
269 posts
7,916 battles

@Leo_Apollo11 hi bud, just a quick note that there's no option to answer question 6 for people who haven't played this ranked sprint.  I skipped this season because I really don't enjoy arms race at all, and the pull of 10k coal isn't enough to overcome my distaste enough to make me play it.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Quality Poster
4,389 posts
15,275 battles

Hi all,

 

12 minutes ago, Pandafaust said:

@Leo_Apollo11 hi bud, just a quick note that there's no option to answer question 6 for people who haven't played this ranked sprint.  I skipped this season because I really don't enjoy arms race at all, and the pull of 10k coal isn't enough to overcome my distaste enough to make me play it.

 

Ahh... darn... yes... I forgot...  :Smile_honoring:

 

The "Question 6" can be answered by all because those who didn't play it because they dislike it as a whole can answer with "1"... :Smile_hiding:

 

 

Leo "Apollo11"

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-TAP-]
Players
269 posts
7,916 battles
1 minute ago, Leo_Apollo11 said:

Hi all,

 

 

Ahh... darn... yes... I forgot... :Smile_honoring:

 

 

Leo "Apollo11"

No problem,  just thought I'd let you know - I suspect it's why there's a suspicious cluster of 1 out of 10 ratings on that question.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
252 posts
17,380 battles

My personal experience wasn't that bad. Rushed through the first ranks with almost 100% WR, but then the 200% week started and I had better things to do. Obviously. When I came back at the weekend, the whole thing felt different. Lost almost every game, but no star. Reminded me of why I don't put too much effort into Ranked these days anymore. The rewards are just not worth it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
561 posts

+ ranked sprint

+ armsrace

+ ability to play with a friend in div.

 

- tier 9

- tier 10

- 12 vs 12

- players having no clue how to win (no capping, no taking buffs)

- players with <1000 battles can play this OR even have T10 ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[POI--]
Players
1,145 posts
9,566 battles

This ranked sprint was basically random battles T9/10 with even more camping...incredible enjoyable and fun & engaging gameplay. /s
Can't wait on T7 sprint where everyone is taking Belfast or SinOP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
185 posts
5,319 battles

My experience was quite positive, can't say I love the arms race mode but quite enjoyed it all the same and made it to rank 1 in 46 battles (mainly with the Halland or Venezia) with a 56% win rate. 

 

I mainly did it for the 10,000 coal on offer, as I am saving for a Yoshino.

 

I think the next ranked sprint should be a purely one tier affair, perhaps 7 or 8 and no Aircraft Carriers, though they didn't bother me too much this time but having a DD with excellent AA did help :Smile_Default:

 

Regards to all and stay safe out there

 

SKWK :cat_paw:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,155 posts

Ranked out in 42 games... 100% WR to rank 3 then it went a bit iffy... Finally ranked out with a 60% WR.

 

12v12 better than 7v7 in my opinion..

 

Best ever DD score: 

271,000 damage in my Gearing...

 

Love the arms race format, once you know how to best play (It's all about the heal buffs) and realise you can retreat to heal and come back... you're unstoppable...

So many games where players suicide thinking they're done for because they've lost health yet not realising that if they went dark and pulled back they could heal.

 

Funniest game:

In my Shimakaze I sat alone in a cap keeping 6 enemy ships at bay including radar.. they never pushed once. Won that game by points.

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
453 posts
1,465 battles

It was enjoyable for me because my goal was NOT rank 1, but rank 9 for the credits and a decent win rate.

2 games, 50%WR and rank 9 credits:cap_cool:

 

I know Rank 1 is not a reasonable goal for me at this point so I don't stress about not getting there....:cap_like:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MIMI]
Beta Tester
768 posts
3,605 battles

The Poll is lacking the option "Did you like the ship tiers involved"...

Also I had to pick that I did play when in fact I didn't play, to be able to show why I didn't play... Which was mainly 12vs12 (same BS as randoms so why bother) and tiers9/10 (boring meta) as well as the arms race mode (most players don't even understand standard battle...)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PN4VY]
Players
358 posts
6,877 battles

This ranked sprint, like every other ranked season is crap.
Unless irrevocable ranks, superb xp/fexp and rewards are removed(or moved to r1) from this game mode, it will remain crap.

 

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BYOB]
[BYOB]
Players
4,465 posts
19,590 battles

It was randoms with extra steps. Played 2 games and then decided to do more fun things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[JRM]
Players
6,241 posts
24,081 battles

I give the "Arms Race test for Randoms Sprint Rank seson" a clear unsatisfactory, I hate AR and dont want it in the game, however if seems it will be a regular thing in Randoms soon...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-HUN-]
[-HUN-]
Players
1,083 posts
10,040 battles

I like ranked sprints more than actual ranked.

I don't like Arms Race.

I ranked to R1.

This season had basically none good stuff to get. Where is mah steel?????

Why always T10?

 

Worst Ranked Sprint ever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[I-J-N]
Players
4,101 posts

The worst problem (apart from my own abysmal performance which I can after all always rely upon) was that I found it difficult to fit the ranked into the ongoing campaign and other requirements.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BATES]
Players
658 posts
10,029 battles

Worst ranked sprint ever, due to:

Too many players

T9-T10 again  ---> probably the tier question had to be added to the POLL @Leo_Apollo11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WGP2L]
Players
158 posts
11,873 battles

In general, I LOVE ranked sprint game mode. I believe there should be one held every month when a normal ranked season is not ongoing.

 

I did not like this season at all:

1. arms race game mode is CRAP. I don't know who the very powerful individual in Wargaming is who pushes this game mode but Ivan please STOP.

2. 12 vs 12 is not good for Ranked mode, in fact, it is overly frustrating. The good thing in ranked modes is that you need to carry "only" 6 other potatoes, not 11.

3. T10. Ranked sprint should remain lower tier for better variety. It was still by far the lesser evil of the three, and this along would have not hindered my experience that much.

 

Overall WG is doing their best to ruin the last remaining fun modes: Ranked Sprint with Arms race and 12 vs 12, Clan Battles with CV.  And their whole game with subs.

Well done Komrades, well done. NOT.

  • Cool 3
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[I-J-N]
Players
4,101 posts
1 hour ago, BlackFish__ said:

In general, I LOVE ranked sprint game mode. I believe there should be one held every month when a normal ranked season is not ongoing.

 

I did not like this season at all:

1. arms race game mode is CRAP. I don't know who the very powerful individual in Wargaming is who pushes this game mode but Ivan please STOP.

2. 12 vs 12 is not good for Ranked mode, in fact, it is overly frustrating. The good thing in ranked modes is that you need to carry "only" 6 other potatoes, not 11.

3. T10. Ranked sprint should remain lower tier for better variety. It was still by far the lesser evil of the three, and this along would have not hindered my experience that much.

 

Overall WG is doing their best to ruin the last remaining fun modes: Ranked Sprint with Arms race and 12 vs 12, Clan Battles with CV.  And their whole game with subs.

Well done Komrades, well done. NOT.

 

Well, this is not going to be a popular suggestion, but perhaps with 12 vs 12 the option to save the star on the defeated team should cover the top three to make it fairer.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×