Ranked mechanics need an overhaul

[Flosen8000]

1 minute ago, Seraphice said:

I have a hard time believing that ranked is 90% luck.
If anything, in ranked your share of contribution to the team is a lot higher because of the smaller format, meaning that you have more influence on the outcome of a match.
Hardly a lottery.

 

Fair seas captain!
~Sera

True. As long as the teams are somewhat balanced you can take an even bigger influence in smaller teams. The only issue with that is said balance. That's the lottery part. Have one team with 3 or 4 good players, one team with 1 good player. If you're the 1, decision is made for you before the match starts in 9 out of 10 matches at least. In such a case bigger teams even improve the balance again since the overall average across the teams are closer.

[SurfaceFish]

3 minutes ago, Flosen8000 said:

If you're the 1, decision is made for you before the match starts in 9 out of 10 matches at least.

I was like that with the last T10 Ranked season, had really good run, then just unwinnable games after games, towards the end I was just throwing the games based on MM monitor. Take a break from Ranked for couple of weeks, or try out some ships you don't normally play. No point carry on if you think like that, it will just reinforce the negative outlook every time you lose.

[Puffin_]

The loosing team should get steel as participation trophies.

The winning team gets the joy of winning and leveling up.

That is the new coddling way of doing things.

[KhorneFlake]

4 hours ago, Seraphice said:

Basing ranked exclusively on the battle performance regardless of win or loss is not the way to go with this, especially if a full ranked revamp is what you are looking at.

the win condition should be the only thing that matters in the end. I don't know of any other team based games where you win but end up losing points/rank.

Another part to this is that in some matches, the actions necessary to win are not always the same as those necessary to get the highest XP on your team.

Right now there are no major revamps for ranked planned either way.

 

Fair seas captain!
~Sera

This!

Ranked is fine as it is.

 

It's the people trying to play ranked not knowing the least bit about game mechanics or teamplay.

Same goes for any other competative team mode, be it LoL, dota or whatever

[DFens_666]

20 hours ago, Flosen8000 said:

Most matches can be won while doing nothing or lost while carrying hard.

 

Statistically thats like 6 games out of 10. Thats why we have people with <40% WR and >70% WR. I think because the majority is so bad, we dont see 30% WR in ranked, because they just cancel each other out over time. If really bad players would be as rare as super unicums, im sure we would see people with 30% WR.

 

About subs in ranked:

Im pretty sure WG has given subs inflated XP gain for some tasks (atleast spotting), so thats why i think they didnt put them in ranked. They want people to play subs since "oh look, sub did 3k base XP" and so increase the amount of Sub players. When they lower XP gain for subs, they will be put in ranked. Thats the day ill be left playing OPs (which im already doing most of the time anyway). Not having to deal with the crap (CVs, Subs, T11) WG is putting in to this game has made it much more enjoyable

[Hirohito]

21 hours ago, Flosen8000 said:

And that is because it is all centered around win rate while the teams are made up completely randomly.

Be good enough to carry then.

Ranked is already easy enough as is.

 

If you struggle in ranked, drop down a league

And if you're too bad even for bronze, play randoms.