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

Ranked Battles and the Team Parasites

111 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[BGNAV]
Beta Tester
452 posts
8,129 battles

Ranked Battles and the Team Parasites or ... Ranked Lottery.

 

Ranked Battles is not about skills, at least not at most, actually it is just a lucky lottery who gets less team parasites into the team, easy as that.

 

Team Parasites? Yesss, exactly that, team parasites. Clowns that can not even choose a proper ship at < rank 10. 

Stock Pensacolas, Colorados, Yorcks, not to mention Atlantas sailed by 45% clowns where you wonder how they made it up to rank 10, 7 or even 5. Damn, had a rank 7 batlte where the next best player had some 47% and me the only tier 8 against a nearly full team of tier 8s. 

 

You can kill 2 ships at start and still lose it, not because the enemy is better, but because you got more team parasites into the team. Damn, even had a bit ago an Atago that sailed to A1 and sailed 10 minutes circles there. Not even talking about the AFKs, no idea if these are intentionally or by accidents parasites. 

Damn, these parasites, not enough they are in some total useless stock pensacola can not even paint their ship, what's left for premium consumables?!?!

Seriously, this ranked damn battles are 90% about luck, just luck you get less clowns, parasites and noobs into team, nothing else.

 

I have seen today soooo many really bad players in rank 5 - 7 that die immediatly without hesitating that i bet these clowns go into battle, die immediatly and hope that team will make it, while they get back to harbour and take the next ship. I absolutly bet that these start suiciders make exactly that. To get ranks up without actually doing anything, just team parasiting.

 

This ranked battles is pure masochism, lol. Let's see how much more i can take until my blood pressure gets 200+, lol. 

 

Now i feel a bit better, greating to all useless team parasites that fit into any category i have posted so far.

 

P.S.: Spare me that Colorados, Nagatos, Pensacolas, New Orleans, Yorcks, Atlantas are good enough. So far i have seen 3 times a really good player on such ship, 2x Nagato, 1x Colorado, the other 8746 ranked battles they are at the bottom of the XP List ......

  • Cool 17

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
Beta Tester
814 posts
17,175 battles

I know the feeling.

 

Feast your eyes on this creature:

disgrace.jpg

He played Atago, Benson, Tashkent and Fubuki. All very capable of much higher average damage than that.

 

Apparently that guy got to rank 1 in season 1 too, the same way, by leeching off his team.

 

 

I wish there was a way to punish people like that. At very least, they shouldn't get a star if they didn't do some minimum.

disgrace.jpg

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BGNAV]
Beta Tester
452 posts
8,129 battles

Gets even worse since i got a chat ban too now as bonus, lol.

Now the pensacolas and colorados just sit and shoot, sit broadside to the enemy, not 1 meter forward neither backward, just sit broadside and .... do nothing at all. Last battle a pensacola, colorado and new orleans sailed together at most 2km, TOGETHER, not each of them.

I should stop, but now i want to see it all until i'am back to rank 10 from 7, lol.

I have a feeling that with the chat ban you get some other bonus by the MM too, not 1 battle so far in which i had more than 2x tier 8 in team (one is me!) while the enemy has each time the way better ship setup. Damn, last 4 battles lost even with 1 kill for our team, always by me and thats it. Paranoia? Bad Luck? Working as intended? No idea, but it gets suspect now.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
569 posts
5,948 battles

Why not call them Luggage instead of Parasites? Sounds friendlier and just as appropriate since they expect to be carried.

 

All in all I think it is not surprising there are players who play this way if the system is set up in such a manner that it can yield results. The only way I think that this can be avoided to some degree is to limit divisions to single tiers and only allow entry with ships for which players have unlocked all upgrades, if such a thing can be implemented. If you so desire you could even argue all upgrade slots should be filled as well.

 

What do you think there could be done realistically to prevent things like this happening as much as possible?

 

Cheers, M

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
467 posts
13,407 battles

The small teams in ranked make it hard to compensate if there are one or two very bad players on the team. They really should have some sort of a win-/killrate minimum to participate in them. If someone have i.e. 45% winrate, and 0,6 kills per death, they are not able to climb to the top without ruining many games for other players.

 

What I mean is, in theory 45% wins and 0,6 killrate players should not be able to get to the top at all, so why let them even join?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BGNAV]
Beta Tester
452 posts
8,129 battles

View PostMeneleus, on 08 December 2015 - 10:58 PM, said:

Why not call them Luggage instead of Parasites? Sounds friendlier and just as appropriate since they expect to be carried.

 

All in all I think it is not surprising there are players who play this way if the system is set up in such a manner that it can yield results. The only way I think that this can be avoided to some degree is to limit divisions to single tiers and only allow entry with ships for which players have unlocked all upgrades, if such a thing can be implemented. If you so desire you could even argue all upgrade slots should be filled as well.

 

What do you think there could be done realistically to prevent things like this happening as much as possible?

 

Cheers, M

 

First of all i think a tier restriction. That is one of the first luck factors for a team. If you want, make even the ranked battles event in 20 ranks, first 5 ranks for tier 5, next 5 ranks for tier 6, next 5 for tier 7 and next for tier 8 or whatever, but no more tier mix up. That is the first thing that opens team parasites all doors either by grinding while in ranked or just by using some total useless crap-ship that is 90% useless. 

After that the best player of the losing team should not lose a star and the worst player of the winning team should not take a star. Even better if it's the best and worst 2 as this eleminates more unfairness.

 

 

View Postbug, on 08 December 2015 - 11:05 PM, said:

The small teams in ranked make it hard to compensate if there are one or two very bad players on the team. They really should have some sort of a win-/killrate minimum to participate in them. If someone have i.e. 45% winrate, and 0,6 kills per death, they are not able to climb to the top without ruining many games for other players.

 

What I mean is, in theory 45% wins and 0,6 killrate players should not be able to get to the top at all, so why let them even join?

 

how about that one i just had in a rank 8 battle in my team?

Battles Fought
Victories / Battles
AVERAGE EXPERIENCE PER BATTLE
Average Damage Caused per Battle
Kill / Death Ratio
511
44.42%
369
9,520
0.36

 
 

View PostMeneleus, on 08 December 2015 - 10:58 PM, said:

Why not call them Luggage instead of Parasites? Sounds friendlier and just as appropriate since they expect to be carried.

 

Because parasites perfectly fits.

 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/parasite

2.

a person who receives support, advantage, or the like, from another orothers without giving any useful or proper return, as one who lives onthe hospitality of others.

 

Synonyms
2. sycophant, toady, leech, sponge, hanger-on.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
569 posts
5,948 battles

First of all i think a tier restriction. That is one of the first luck factors for a team. If you want, make even the ranked battles event in 20 ranks, first 5 ranks for tier 5, next 5 ranks for tier 6, next 5 for tier 7 and next for tier 8 or whatever, but no more tier mix up. That is the first thing that opens team parasites all doors either by grinding while in ranked or just by using some total useless crap-ship that is 90% useless. 

After that the best player of the losing team should not lose a star and the worst player of the winning team should not take a star. Even better if it's the best and worst 2 as this eleminates more unfairness.

 

I think tier restrictions are the very minimum, only allowing people to enter with all upgrades unlocked would ensure it is not possible to use ranked play for grinding purposes. I don't know if rewarding the best player of the losing team and not rewarding the worst player of the winning team is such a good idea.

 

Then again, you have played more ranked then I have, and the examples in this thread do make a point...

 

Cheers

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TTTX]
Players
1,952 posts
6,550 battles

The amount of Hatsuharus in ranked battles is amazing. It is the worst DD you could bring to ranked, it doesn't have the torpedoes or the guns. I have had a Hatsuharu in nearly every match and it has been pretty common to have 1-2 per team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
357 posts
13,142 battles

Not giving the worst player on the wining team a star would ruin the game mode as it is all about teamwork, but a ban system for being AFK in games should be implemented.

 

I disagree the Hatsuharu is blessed by RNG, the few guns it has i have found to be nearly more lethal than what my Benson is dishing out at nearly 3 times the firing rate, plus those damn Japanese destroyers are so hard to spot with their concealment advantage, so it is valid choice for ranked in my eyes.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
16 posts
1,880 battles

Regarding the players that have been linked here......

HOW CAN SOMEONE BE SOOOO BAD? i mean, i think myself as above average, and i got
Battles    616
Win rate   58.77%
Damage   31 793  (i dont know why this is so low, i have done up to 169k with my Fuso, and i usually do above 100k with it :/  maybe my first low tier games i guess)
Kills / deaths    1.46

and i am just doing what i think as the right thing to do... i aim the best way i can for citadels, i angle myself to other ships, help on the objectives, switch to the right ammo type, not suiciding etc etc... like any gamer worth its salt should do. am i right?

if you are playing a game, then play the freaking game like its supposed to... how can someone joke around in a game like this?
i mean, afks and disconnects are ok, it happens. but trolling and doing circles and being a coward the whole game, avoiding all contact, what is this? LoL? how old are you, 13?
and that last part about cowardness.... OH MY GOD they are suuuuch cowards! you are a big fat badass battleship, just get in there and kick some [edited]!

anyway, regarding the ranked battles, i dont have much experience because i enjoy this game while playing with my two friends, and i cannot do that in ranked games (this should change.... really now.... just give us duo at least....),

but my two cents on this, is that the problem is the Match Making, and how it can be exploited to get carried while doing nothing, not the players themselves (u cant make a bad player better, only avoid him)... it really should work differently, and award rank progression based on ingame performance, rather than simple win/lose conditions. that way, only if you are good enough, you can advance higher....
also, you should get placed with players very close to your rank AND tier.... and really now, nobody cares about wait times, if it guarantees a balanced game... at least i dont! id rather wait 5 minutes to find a good game, than waste 15-20 minutes of my life for a ridiculous game with bad MM.

----- shout out to the devs here.... consider the above, its not a bad thing to change a bad thing.... nobody will cry about a good change that brings balance and less frustration. ----

ALSO! please change how divisions work....people should not be able to bring their Hermelin friend in a T5 game.... for real.... and also, for the same reasons, i shouldnt as a t6 player, drag my t5 friends in a t8 game....  the highest tier in a division SHOULD NEVER be the lowest tier in a game. do some changes in this game, it desperately needs them.

Cheers

 

 


 

Edited by Sticky_Icky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BGNAV]
Beta Tester
452 posts
8,129 battles

I disagree the Hatsuharu is blessed by RNG, the few guns it has i have found to be nearly more lethal than what my Benson is dishing out at nearly 3 times the firing rate, plus those damn Japanese destroyers are so hard to spot with their concealment advantage, so it is valid choice for ranked in my eyes.  

 

Look, while here and there you see a good hatsuharu, all over this ship if put against tier 8, even other tier 7 DDs is not good for much, again easy as that. With the concealment advantage the Benson is down to 5.8km detetection range, nearly as good as most japanese, when both are spotted the hatsuharu has nearly zero % chance. Nothing that is here to discuss all over i would say. Easy as that, every tier 7 in the game is worse than the next level 8 ship, no rocket science here. Everytime you have a tier 7 in team, but the other side a tier 8 against it, it is just a handicap. Not even talking about such stock ships......

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
Beta Tester
814 posts
17,175 battles

Hatsuharu has 6.7 stock detection range, if I remember right. It can't mount the concealment module.

Fubuki with concealment module has 6.2, and Benson has 6.4. That alone makes them superior to Hatsuharu.

Not to mention fubuki has one more turret and torp launcher.

Same goes for Mahan, it's detection range is simply too big to be useful when faced against Bensons and Fubukis.

 

If you take a Hatsuharu or a Mahan, you're screwing over your team. They have nearly no advantage over their followups (Hatsu turns and goes a bit faster, but not enough). For USN and IJN DDs, detection range is the god of stats.

 

As for soviets - Kiev turns a bit faster and is a bit smaller, and Tashkent has a bit more health, lower detection range (not so important on soviets) and a bit more usable torpedos. It is down to preference and both ships can be equally successful. Hatsu and Mahan simply can't compare to Fubuki and Benson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
357 posts
13,142 battles

True every tier 8 is / should be better than the tiers before it, like it should be.

 

Btw. most Benson players will only have a concealment of 6,4 km with the camo. so in most cases the Fubuki will have a slight edge, as not everyone have grinded their way to the concealment captains perk yet, though that would come in handy.

 

And you're right about the handicap with having tier 7 vs 8 but i guess that is all part of the challenge, and the player lottery to get to rank 1, i'm at rank 7 and i can only but share your frustration with the parasites...

__

edit.

The Hatsu is down to 6,5 km with the camo so about the same as the Benson, so might be even even-though the tier 7-8 difference.

 

And the Kiev is just a 'shoot me' target for everyone, with its 9 km concealment  xD

 

But back to the topic of the annoying parasites in Ranked

Edited by Bloody_Bear

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TTT]
Sailing Hamster, Players, Privateer
3,791 posts
16,349 battles

Been doing ranked a lot with Blyskawica, a ship which can not mount the -10% detection module. It's a decend gunboat but not meant for stealth operations. My excuse for the low damage is that I often sat / sit in cap zones, either capping or denying cap to the enemy. Sadly, base cap / def cap points are not recorded for ranked. :-(

 

The only T8 ship I use in ranked is the Fubuki, which does have the -10% module and the first hull upgrade. I still do think that each ship has it's own role to play. However, a Hatsuharu is usually the worst choice for DD in ranked. I do understand that since people can use what they have that they'll join in with what they do have, which often enough might be T7-whatever-ship. What I do not understand is when they are being asked not to yolo and still yolo. It's really a lot more about the people than the ships IMHO.

Edited by Takru

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
4,583 posts
13,720 battles

First of all, I think we need to decide if ranked battles can be a reflection of one's skill. IMHO, the way WoWs is build - they can't be. Class balance is way of mark, limited maps, limited scenarios, cross tiers, stock ships, untrained captains etc. I don't look at rankeds as a skill evaluation, I look at them as way to grind my North Carolina and play a little bit different game - focused on objectives rather then sinking. 
My biggest problem with rankeds is that they are so slow, stagnant, and just plain boring. Most part of the game nothing is happening. Many games are ending in just 1 sinking, and almost always it's just 1 DD which has been sunk. Tactics are set in stone: blob. There is no other approach, no flanking, no ambush, no rush - nothing. Just blob, keep distance, and wait till one team lose a ship or two, and then press for the second cap. That is all. 
I don't know if in this game it's even possible to implement such ranked mode, that it will be more or less accurate standing for players skill. Hell, even in LoL ranked games are somewhat funny. The first league that actually shows you're a good player is diamond (bronze, silver, gold, platinium, diamond, challenger). Rest of the leagues just say how much you play this game. 

As for the teammates. Well, I just assume that on the other side of the map is the equal number of poor, average and good players as on my side of the match. Nothing to do with it. I just try to ask if they can do this or that, if I need it for some reason, and most of the time some of my teammates respond. I had a nice game two days ago, when I spotted a enemy fubuki flanking my NC, and asked Benson who was near me to intercept him. He agreed, proceeded to sink the Fubuki ensuring my safety, and, all in all, a victory. So yes, your skill has a meaning in this mode, but it is no more relevant than it is on randoms. So if you have 55% to 60% win rate on randoms, you will need this 100+ battles to get this rank 1, unless you're lucky. 

 

I think, the real question is: would anybody play rankeds if there was a team mode enabled, not only 3 man divisions? Or even better, ranked teams. That would indeed be a proper evaluation of your skill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TTT]
Sailing Hamster, Players, Privateer
3,791 posts
16,349 battles

Dropsiq, can't agree on the tactic stuff. There's a limited number of maps and tacatics have changed somewhat after a while I think, with countertactics being more widely used. It also depends on the class of ship you are playing since it's depending on this circumstance how you perceive and experience the battle. DD ranked is a lot different from BB ranked even in the same battle.

 

You are correct that WoWs ranked (or random for that matter) do not reflect the skill or the knowledge someone has about the game.

 

For me, the ranked had a completely unexpected side effect: Chat was a lot more alive there and I ended up chatting with several of those who also play ranked, regardless whether they were on the enemy team or mine. Added some more people to friendslist and hope to go into random battles with them here and there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
4,583 posts
13,720 battles

 Dropsiq, can't agree on the tactic stuff. There's a limited number of maps and tacatics have changed somewhat after a while I think, with countertactics being more widely used. It also depends on the class of ship you are playing since it's depending on this circumstance how you perceive and experience the battle. DD ranked is a lot different from BB ranked even in the same battle.

Well, I have different experience. I played mostly CA, and recently switched to BB, as I got bored with New Orleans. For those 2 classes, battles are mostly the same. What you say about different gameplay on ranked for different classes is true. But in general, wider perspective, operating as a team - it's reduced to blob. 99% of the time. Any different behaviour is met with scepticism, if not outright insults. 

  Added some more people to friendslist and hope to go into random battles with them here and there.

That's the only true positive thing about rankeds. I've met a lot of dudes from forums playing with me or against me. It's fun and motivating, but it doesn't change the downsides of rankeds - utter boredom.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
300 posts
3,401 battles

Why not call them Luggage instead of Parasites? Sounds friendlier and just as appropriate since they expect to be carried.

 

All in all I think it is not surprising there are players who play this way if the system is set up in such a manner that it can yield results. The only way I think that this can be avoided to some degree is to limit divisions to single tiers and only allow entry with ships for which players have unlocked all upgrades, if such a thing can be implemented. If you so desire you could even argue all upgrade slots should be filled as well.

 

What do you think there could be done realistically to prevent things like this happening as much as possible?

 

Cheers, M

 

Much like how I like to refer to people as chronically inverted stairwalkers instead of mentally challenged (or the edited word that I cannot post) since the recieving end is very unlikely to guess that connection and not report me for it:trollface:
Edited by Noobsplatter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ODB]
Alpha Tester
2,621 posts
10,390 battles

Have to agree with the OP in terms if ranked battles being a lottery. I never have luck with such things. I've had a few games where I've made bad choices but certainly not consistently enough to drop from rank 2 to rank 7 in 3 days, no matter what ship I play. I've seen players do some pretty horrendous things. All we have in ranked battles is just another random mode with less players and tier restrictions on ships, it's nothing more than this sadly. Those lucky enough to make it to rank 1 will reap the rewards but I must say I'm getting more pissed by the day the longer it goes on.

 

You cannot have any form of ranked system without considering player skill, and when putting 7 players in a team together so randomly you're going to get some major differences in skill between teams. We can't always carry games in WoWs, the dynamic is different to WoT and the rng makes sure the frustrations are always there.

 

Not sure I feel like carrying on in ranked anymore, it's just too wishy washy in terms of team setups. I can easily get a game in a cruiser, but in a DD or BB i have to wait ages because this is what everyone is playing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester, In AlfaTesters
4,583 posts
13,720 battles

The second good thing about rankeds is that I really appreciated the faster paced games on randoms. I just want to get this rank 1 fast enough, so I can get my 10 000 000 credits for Benson :D

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OP-B]
Beta Tester
449 posts
12,650 battles

....

Not sure I feel like carrying on in ranked anymore, it's just too wishy washy in terms of team setups. I can easily get a game in a cruiser, but in a DD or BB i have to wait ages because this is what everyone is playing.

Just look at it differently jinx, see it as a different mode you can play. Ppl already stated that they are not happy, that after reaching rank1 you cant play it anymore. You know, that glass is half full/empty thingy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ODB]
Alpha Tester
2,621 posts
10,390 battles

Just look at it differently jinx, see it as a different mode you can play. Ppl already stated that they are not happy, that after reaching rank1 you cant play it anymore. You know, that glass is half full/empty thingy.

 

Don't get me wrong mate, I do like many things about ranked battles, i.e. the smaller teams, the general tendancy toward players who are more focused in terms of team play, the reward system. I prefer it over randoms by miles, but just a pity it comes across at times as more of a miniature random mode instead of a reasonable setup in support of player skill.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BGNAV]
Beta Tester
452 posts
8,129 battles

First of all, I think we need to decide if ranked battles can be a reflection of one's skill. IMHO, the way WoWs is build - they can't be. Class balance is way of mark, limited maps, limited scenarios, cross tiers, stock ships, untrained captains etc. I don't look at rankeds as a skill evaluation, I look at them as way to grind my North Carolina and play a little bit different game - focused on objectives rather then sinking. 

 

When we have "ranked" battles i for sure await that a good portion of skill in included. I would agree with you if it was named "lottery battles" or "lucky ranks" or something like that. Under ranked battles i personally await that a good portion of skill is involved, at least more skill than luck. That luck and bad luck are always a factor, sure, hence the reason i do not complain about random battles but ranked battles. 

 

Ok, so you look on it like a way to grind? At least it is allready a tier 8 you have and a north carolina and that you are a good player. But i wish you really in your team 6 others with these thoughts, some pensacolas that just bought the ship, compared with a colorado that is stock and maybe some Atlanta noob that just farms credits and does not care much about the outcome. I really would like to see how you get battle after battle exactly such grinding and farming team mates instead of mates that give their best for the win with the clear willingness to help the team, no just parasite from it...

 

I personally would NEVER enter a ranked battles without fully upgraded ship, best tier 8 choices of ships, best possible captain, paintings, all moduls, premium consumables and even some flags, just to be as usefull as possible for the TEAM. Seems we have a different view on the word TEAM, some just seem to use the team, others try to help the team.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,091 posts
2,423 battles

[...]

I personally would NEVER enter a ranked battles without fully upgraded ship, best tier 8 choices of ships, best possible captain, paintings, all moduls, premium consumables and even some flags, just to be as usefull as possible for the TEAM. [...] some just seem to use the team, others try to help the team.....

About the first part, Same here. And I expect the same from everyone else.

About the second part. This is why I want to see division implementation into ranked. Even if the division is only limited to 2 people. At least it would give you someone to work as a team with.

 

(And I'd like to see a block function in the game. To mute people I don't want to see, and maybe even a way to prevent you from being with 'that one guy' in a team even if it prolongs your queue time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,286 posts
9,985 battles

The second good thing about rankeds is that I really appreciated the faster paced games on randoms. I just want to get this rank 1 fast enough, so I can get my 10 000 000 credits for Benson :D

 

True that. I personally don't even care about those rank flags, like the pirate one, or the skins, I just want those 10 mil credits, but it is damn hard...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×