suggestion: non-team players in ranked battles

[ClaBah]

I believe there is a number of players who tried ranked battles and are frustrated with players who don´t want to play as part of team but rather hide around behind islands or at the edge of map. Most of the time those players, even though they actually manage to do some damage, are the main reason for losing a battle.

 

So, the idea is simple: there is already report/compliment system in the game so why not use it in next ranked battles? If a player collects, let´s say 10 "plays poorly" reports he gets banned from ranked battles for a day. Or maybe lose a rank after 20 reports?

 

Comments anybody?

[Userext]

There is no need for that. If you are good you will improve eventually. 

[Mucker]

I think this would be prone to abuse. Yesterday I blew all of my 5 plays poorly reports on an Atlanta, that did not have the cohones to engage the last destroyer of the enemy that was outcapping us, albeit being in striking distance. However, the more I think about it,.. yes I'm all for it.  

[Reyte]

The idea isnt bad. We need something like a report/vote System. Reasons " played bad"; "failed to communicate" or somewha alike. Often enough rankeds are already lost in the first 5min because of bad teamplay (bb go alone, camp in back, DD go yolo in the frist minute). The guy who get voted should receive a ban for some time or receive a starloss. Of course we would also need to talk about how to prevent abusing the system.

#

ATM i see even really bad player reaching the highranks. ALso BB seem to be the best choice for playing rankeds.

[Userext]

ATM i see even really bad player reaching the highranks. 

 

Bad players cant reach that high. I am not sure but i guess the star protection is up to 20 or 15 they cant progress from that if they are bad. And they possibly came to that rank by his team acrrying his [edited]soooo yeah

[Reyte]

 

Bad players cant reach that high. I am not sure but i guess the star protection is up to 20 or 15 they cant progress from that if they are bad. And they possibly came to that rank by his team acrrying his [edited]soooo yeah

 

They can reach at least around 10-8. MAybe you should play ranked yourself before making an opinion. They reach it because they got carried.

[Userext]

 

They can reach at least around 10-8. MAybe you should play ranked yourself before making an opinion. They reach it because they got carried.

 

No, not to rank 10 or 8 there is a block until 15 or 20 which they dont lose any star and after that block gets lifted you have to win 3 times in a row which is impossible if you are a bad player

[Reyte]

 

No, not to rank 10 or 8 there is a block until 15 or 20 which they dont lose any star and after that block gets lifted you have to win 3 times in a row which is impossible if you are a bad player

 

Of course bad players are able to win 3 battles in a row. Like the ranked is even if u win 50% of all ur battles u will be able to reach higher ranks over a long amount of battles

[Userext]

 

Of course bad players are able to win 3 battles in a row. Like the ranked is even if u win 50% of all ur battles u will be able to reach higher ranks over a long amount of battles

 

its not possible for bad players to win 3 times in a row per rank. They suck and at that rank people arent that bad. So a bad player is a big burden. If you know a guy that you saw in ranked battles with 10- rank PM me his name and i will look into his normal stats. 

[Reyte]

 

its not possible for bad players to win 3 times in a row per rank. They suck and at that rank people arent that bad. So a bad player is a big burden. If you know a guy that you saw in ranked battles with 10- rank PM me his name and i will look into his normal stats. 

 

u ve got mail

[Liviu_Von_Prundar]

Guys, the ranked battles are full of i..ots, some of the worst players I saw in ranked battles.

I'm not a pro, but in ranked in full of r..ards, and in a week I managed to go back at from 14 at ranked 19 .

Whatever I play, tier 6, tier 7, I'm in the top 3 players of the team, but it's a defeat.

WG should introduce a minimum average XP or DMG per battle to enter in ranked.

My two cents...

[JapLance]

I reached rank 9, and you could still have idiots in your team at those levels. After downgraded to rank10 again I gave up playing.

 

Good effort that game mode, but bad players can get pretty high and ruin the experience of the rest of players. The minimum level to get access to play these games should be much higher. Just having a tier 6-7 and reach account level 9 is not enough.

[ClaBah]

I reached rank 9, and you could still have idiots in your team at those levels. After downgraded to rank10 again I gave up playing.

 

Good effort that game mode, but bad players can get pretty high and ruin the experience of the rest of players.

 

  Exactly why I posted this idea... people are getting too frustrated and sick of ranked battles idiots. I fell from rank 6 to rank 10 in two days only because of morons I had to play with. I had battles where I had done more damage and kills with Cleve than the whole team together. And I am talking about t7 BBs and DDs. I am no pro player and I know my stats are average, but that is because I play for fun and fight, not for camping behind all and paddling stats while my teammates are getting killed in front of me, but in team battles I do my job. And I am aware I can not expect much in random battles, but I would certainly like to see some team work in "team" battles. Or must I wait until clans are introduced to WOWS...

[Liviu_Von_Prundar]

The trend continues...

What should I say more?!

Full of retar.s ranked battles...

[Admiral_noodle]

The trend continues...

What should I say more?!

Full of retar.s ranked battles...

 

Not sure how this is a useful post at all. 

 

Well done to WG on ranked battles - but it's "not for me" generally. I'm looking for clans as well. Where everyone on your team is playing for the TEAM. 

[Liviu_Von_Prundar]

You're right - TEAM = clan.

You're not right = "Well done to WG ", they should implement a minimum average XP or DMG per battle to enter ranked battles.

[Admiral_noodle]

You're right - TEAM = clan.

You're not right = "Well done to WG ", they should implement a minimum average XP or DMG per battle to enter ranked battles.

 

I really dislike that as elitism to enter ranked. 

 

if anything they should have reduced the number of irrevocable ranks and split the match maker into 4 pools (but yes that would screw up the wait times...)

 

perhaps to leave irrevocable ranks you should then have to prove yourself (get certain performance) *in ranked*

 

like achieve X damage in five games in a row...

[Liviu_Von_Prundar]

Man, I don't want to argue with you, you are certain a better player than me, but it's not elitism, it's just something to not let all clueless retar.s monkeys to ranked battles.

What's the point being ranked, after all?

BTW, down to 20 because or retard.s...

My last 3 games in a row...

 

[Userext]

1-This is the test run for ranked battles as this is the first season

2-You are elitist and you dont even live up to your standarts. Since you arent a good player you deserve to be among the "noobs" dont you?

 

Being at 19th rank sounds to me more like its your fault. People should really need to learn to look for mistake on their part first. Check your side if you are clean then you can defend your words bravely. %80 of average players blame "noobs" seriously guys. This is wows. Even the dumbest way can lead to victory if you work as a team.

[Liviu_Von_Prundar]

that's bull...t, man...

I can't carry the hole team.

I do my part and if they would do the same, would be good...

I'm on 20 rank down from 14, so?

It's my fault?

Since I'm on top 3 every match?

LOL

 

[Admiral_noodle]

Who is deciding who is better than who already? What's a "good" player anyway?

 

I can understand the frustration in ranked and disagree with the "elitism" idea... But I'm not throwing insults around.

[Userext]

that's bull...t, man...

I can't carry the hole team.

I do my part and if they would do the same, would be good...

I'm on 20 rank down from 14, so?

It's my fault?

Since I'm on top 3 every match?

LOL

 

 

See thats the problem. Everyone thinks they are doing their part and others should do their in their own way . As i said before even the dumbest way can lead to victory if you do it together. Your problem is that you arent doing it with others. This isnt a school project. You dont do your own part because there is no "your" part

 

Edit: I can hardly believe you are top 3 every match since your average says the otherwise

Edit2: Also you dont need to do teamwork to be at top 3. 

[Liviu_Von_Prundar]

Edit: I can hardly believe you are top 3 every match since your average says the otherwise

Edit2: Also you dont need to do teamwork to be at top 3. 

 

Yeap, guys, you're right..

Your arguments are better, I give up saying my point...

A victory, I can't believe it.

 

[yXOLAXy]

rather I would opt to bring small prizes in consumables gold if you win, at least would come more players and the waiting time would be reduced

[Userext]

 

Yeap, guys, you're right..

Your arguments are better, I give up...

 

 

oh look one battle proves everything! (not at earth but maybe in mars?)

 

Your average stats on each ship mean more to me than this one battle. 

Your stats tell me that you arent good at any other class but CAs. So maybe instead of blaming others try to play the ships your are better at?

Oh btw since you pointed hatsuharu out your winrate between random battles and ranked battles isnt diffrent. There is more teamplay at ranked battles but somehow that winrate stayed the same(%45) So yeah there is a pretty big sign that says you are the problem.

No hate towards you