Jump to content
You need to play a total of 1 battles to post in this section.
The_EURL_Guy

Updates to Ranked Battles

108 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[SHAFT]
[SHAFT]
Players
1,288 posts
26,181 battles

Reached rank 7 then back to 9 because of typical horrid "team-play".  Our Shimakaze sailed straight into enemy Petropavlosk as soon as the match started, I asked him to come back using the short commands, his reply was "F-U"....  He survived that first radar only to die a bit further down the match, his stats, 10k battles 45%... So, this person reached gold league just because someone kept carrying him..

 

On another match, our Halland asked what's Petropavlosk's radar range... I mean, they reach tier x and have no clue on radar ranges? Yet they play ranked which is competitive and also never equip detonation flags...

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
105 posts
11,001 battles

So, I'm in gold and I have to get 1st every week to stay in gold despite not having any "safe" level in it you can't go back from?

 

Ahahhahaha forget it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[T-N-T]
Players
3,799 posts
18,550 battles
2 hours ago, Supersubway said:

So, I'm in gold and I have to get 1st every week to stay in gold despite not having any "safe" level in it you can't go back from?

 

Ahahhahaha forget it.

No, you stay in gold if you got there.

But each week you'll start at the lowest rank in it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THROW]
Players
189 posts
9,852 battles

Trash rewards, trash system.

 

Not only did you strip steel amount from ranked in general, but you took away all the signals and other stuff that ranked gave. As an extra awesome feature, you made it the grindiest crap I have ever seen.

 

God-awful.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[T-F-K]
Players
30 posts
14,838 battles

WG here is my suggestion:

 

- Leave the " lose a star " system. Players in the loser team should not lose a star

- Make leveling up harder. Instead of 2-3 starts, rise it to 5-6 stars. 

- In this case the grinding stays, but with less frustration.

 

Think about it!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quality Poster, In AlfaTesters
1,866 posts
14,648 battles
2 hours ago, Rolesz81 said:

WG here is my suggestion:

 

- Leave the " lose a star " system. Players in the loser team should not lose a star

- Make leveling up harder. Instead of 2-3 starts, rise it to 5-6 stars. 

- In this case the grinding stays, but with less frustration.

 

Think about it!

 

This would just turn ranked into a straight grind. If they did ranked correctly then players would have a rank that actually represented their skill, and not just a gold symbol that proves they spent sufficient time farming ranked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[B-F-L]
Players
57 posts

Its wired when finish 5-4 rank and clearing Rank 3...so after loosing some battles loose all stars back to 5...isn´t it wired?

Sounds like be punished for bad playing team players. After get ride of Rank 5  and 4 you  shou´ld not get back to Rank 5. Each Rank is a unit for it self...and stars should not be lossed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
114 posts
17,482 battles

image.thumb.png.d5e54f93c5eb7eea27a93e1aa196ecd9.png

 

What kind of metric does WG matchmaker use?  

Some quick math:

PR total: 6002 vs 9093 

PR avg: 857 vs 1299

DMG total: 329,942 vs 432,442

DMG avg: 47,134 vs 61,777

All the stats were heavily stacked against one team and swapping just 1-2 ships from one team to the other would make it more even.

 

WG usually claims that "PR is not our metric" - well, adopt it. It's not patented.

 

Biggest laugh I get is from "How it works" video - and I've said it before - IT DOESN'T

 

 

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×