PoolSnoopy Players 8 posts 5,373 battles Report post #1 Posted June 20, 2016 How shall a modus where all of the winning team are promoted ever separate the good from the bad players? Right now you have the same 50:50 chance of getting a good team regardless of rank. It's a damn lottery if you progress to the next rank or not. The first 2-3 players of both teams should get a star. Then 1-2 in the middle don't lose a star and the bottom players lose a star. What's so difficult about making a RANKED system that at least kind of works? 17 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ferry_25 Players 4,392 posts 12,107 battles Report post #2 Posted June 20, 2016 this idea actually doesn't sound so weird at all for me.... It would remove me a lot of frustration. Doing my utmost best yet still losing because of lack of teamwork. Of course I do derp out as well so losing a star that way would feel correct. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[NWP] Gojuadorai Players 2,832 posts 21,712 battles Report post #3 Posted June 20, 2016 How shall a modus where all of the winning team are promoted ever separate the good from the bad players? Right now you have the same 50:50 chance of getting a good team regardless of rank. It's a damn lottery if you progress to the next rank or not. The first 2-3 players of both teams should get a star. Then 1-2 in the middle don't lose a star and the bottom players lose a star. What's so difficult about making a RANKED system that at least kind of works? i really like this idea its pretty good !! (it would still suffer from the current DD problem but tht is cause dd get too much points for caping and decaping) only thing i would ad is to keep the incentive to win up: like the wining team first 3 gain a star and on the loosing only the 1st or 1st and 2nd gain a star and then so on as you described. there would be the incentive to play well and the incentive to win Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mtm78 Alpha Tester 19,378 posts 6,105 battles Report post #4 Posted June 20, 2016 like the wining team first 3 gain a star and on the loosing only the 1st or 1st and 2nd gain a star and then so on as you described. there would be the incentive to play well and the incentive to win These two sentences don't match the same situation, if I can lose knowing I still gain stars being first in the team I will first play for being first in the team. This is especially going to affect DD's which during the start of a game take the most risks trying to secure cap points ( let's just not, let's keep stealth firing those cruisers and BB's and rack up some damage that way instead... ). Basically, as you hinted to (which I didn't quote ) the XP distribution alters gameplay. I know it sucks having crap teams, and I know people want to be 'rewarded' even if they lose. But you can't have contests in contests, it would ruin teamplay ( if possible ). 4 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[JFTB] _Necropoliz_ Beta Tester 122 posts Report post #5 Posted June 20, 2016 To be honest "Ranked Battles" cannot be seen as skill dependent or even as ranked. They are basically a form of random battles. A more proper name would be "Random Ranked Battles".An average player can reach the same rank as a very good player by simply playing more battles than the very good player -> Therefore the rank of a player is not a real indication of skill or similar. Since there are Teambattles around I'm fine with ranked as it is at the moment. Instead of randoms I'm playing ranked and get some goodies on top. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kamuka Beta Tester 337 posts 3,261 battles Report post #6 Posted June 20, 2016 Bad idea for the reasons mtm has laid out. If you don't like it, don't play it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[BOATY] Shaka_D Alpha Tester, Players, In AlfaTesters, Weekend Tester 3,691 posts 15,960 battles Report post #7 Posted June 20, 2016 How shall a modus where all of the winning team are promoted ever separate the good from the bad players? Right now you have the same 50:50 chance of getting a good team regardless of rank. It's a damn lottery if you progress to the next rank or not. The first 2-3 players of both teams should get a star. Then 1-2 in the middle don't lose a star and the bottom players lose a star. What's so difficult about making a RANKED system that at least kind of works? I like the idea but you're talking about WG here. They couldn't tie their shoelaces at the best of times and now you're expecting them to change something to make it work better? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ferry_25 Players 4,392 posts 12,107 battles Report post #8 Posted June 20, 2016 mtm has a valid point as well in Cap Battles (it has nothing else to do besides capping IMO). I found out I have most succes in my Mutsuki (best stealth and speed). But I need the cruiser backup and they the BB backup. I rush to a cap and find myself alone against the gunships while the rest of the team is hiding behind an island or start camping like in Random.... in 50% of the cases I manage to take the gunships out but in the rest I get wrecked. Or my collegue DD start rushing after the carrier. It's all about capping and nothing more. Forget the strategies, good firing skills. Capping. nothing more nothing less. She shooting part is only to get the caps asap. My point is: if the team doesn't work together the match is lost. In the situations where I cap, manage to deal with the other boats but still get wrecked while the rest of the team is camping in queue to be shot to pieces and I lose a star because I had 10 Xp less then the lucky camper who managed a citadel here and there it's getting extremely frustrating. But in mtm's point: it should be about teamwork... So I tempt to stay neutral in this matter. Having said this, off topic: if you know you have a slow connection, please stop Ranked! The team who gets 1 second behind in the cap usually loses as well. If you get active in the 5th minute the game is already decided. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[TOXIC] eliastion Players 4,795 posts 12,260 battles Report post #9 Posted June 21, 2016 (edited) This idea is mind-boggingly stupid. This is a team game. It's about winning the match. There is no excuse to reward losing and passive non-teamplay focused on getting your XP as high as possible. The 1st XP player will USUALLY be someone who contributed if not most then at least a lot - and therefore letting the "best looser" keep his stars is ok as an anti-frustration safety net. But XP is a TERRIBLE gauge of actual contribution to victory ESPECIALLY because the most common cause of defeats I see is players being risk-averse and not playing aggressively enough. But do you know what happens when people play more aggressively? Chances of victory may be better, but there is that one thing: they risk dying. It's common sense that when a fleet pushes, the guys that take the point are likely to die first. Which means: die before they accumulate lots of XP. They literally sacrifice themselves for the team. And any game design that PUNISHES them for this should be scrapped immediately. And as for 50:50 chance of getting a good/bad team, no, this is false. Because you're a part of your team too. You are, literally 1/7 of your team. That's a lot. So if you get 50:50 chances of being in a good and bad team, that means that you yourself are PERFECTLY AVERAGE. And perfectly average (at given level of play) people tend to more-or-less keep their rank and not advance, especially once you run out of free stars for gaining a rank and guaranteed ranks. Now, if you are actually an above-average player and contribute to victory, guess what - you get 6 other random 50:50 players and the opposing side gets 7 of them. On average, you have an advantage and you WILL, over time, win more than you lose - thus advancing, even without any stars salvaged from losses by being the top XP. Edited June 21, 2016 by eliastion 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
anonym_yABmLAWoZ6QF Players 68 posts Report post #10 Posted June 21, 2016 (edited) *** wrong threat *** But WOWS is a teamgame. I would say if you don't like playing in a team. Play an other game. Edited June 21, 2016 by anonym_yABmLAWoZ6QF Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[PKTZS] JapLance Weekend Tester 2,567 posts 18,265 battles Report post #11 Posted June 21, 2016 It's a good idea, but... Unfortunately, with the proposed system 70-80% of the players would NEVER leave the bottom ranks, get bored and stop playing. The players that advance would soon get very poor queue times due to the lack of players, and mode would die in a few days. Doable in a game like WoT with a large number of players, but not in WoWs, in my opinion. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ph3lan WG Staff 419 posts 1,295 battles Report post #12 Posted June 21, 2016 These two sentences don't match the same situation, if I can lose knowing I still gain stars being first in the team I will first play for being first in the team. This is especially going to affect DD's which during the start of a game take the most risks trying to secure cap points ( let's just not, let's keep stealth firing those cruisers and BB's and rack up some damage that way instead... ). Basically, as you hinted to (which I didn't quote ) the XP distribution alters gameplay. I know it sucks having crap teams, and I know people want to be 'rewarded' even if they lose. But you can't have contests in contests, it would ruin teamplay ( if possible ). Basically what mtm78 said. While on the surface OPs idea seems good, this system would encourage selfish play and not teamwork. Instead of playing for the win players would only try to boost their own XP scores even if it ultimately leads to a loss. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ew_ Beta Tester 349 posts 7,834 battles Report post #13 Posted June 21, 2016 One way to greatly improve the ranked mode would be to disable the karma system in it however. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mordante Players 77 posts Report post #14 Posted June 21, 2016 Anyone that thinks that WoWs is a team game is rather misguided and naive. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[SCRUB] AgarwaenME Beta Tester 4,811 posts 13,808 battles Report post #15 Posted June 21, 2016 Basically what mtm78 said. While on the surface OPs idea seems good, this system would encourage selfish play and not teamwork. Instead of playing for the win players would only try to boost their own XP scores even if it ultimately leads to a loss. People are already doing that. Either to game the "top xp doesn't lose a star" system or just because they don't care about rank and just plays it as "random with extra rewards". Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[NWP] Gojuadorai Players 2,832 posts 21,712 battles Report post #16 Posted June 21, 2016 Basically what mtm78 said. While on the surface OPs idea seems good, this system would encourage selfish play and not teamwork. Instead of playing for the win players would only try to boost their own XP scores even if it ultimately leads to a loss. and thats why i sugested a simple alteration to the system i really like this idea its pretty good !! (it would still suffer from the current DD problem but tht is cause dd get too much points for caping and decaping) only thing i would ad is to keep the incentive to win up: like the wining team first 3 gain a star and on the loosing only the 1st or 1st and 2nd gain a star and then so on as you described. there would be the incentive to play well and the incentive to win like such : winning Loosing Rank +1 +1 1 +1 +1 2 +1 0 3 +1 -1 4 0 -1 5 0 -1 6 -1 -1 7 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[THROW] Takru Supertester, Players, Sailing Hamster, Privateer 3,851 posts 23,972 battles Report post #17 Posted June 21, 2016 Basically what mtm78 said. While on the surface OPs idea seems good, this system would encourage selfish play and not teamwork. Instead of playing for the win players would only try to boost their own XP scores even if it ultimately leads to a loss. Which can already be done now. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mtm78 Alpha Tester 19,378 posts 6,105 battles Report post #18 Posted June 21, 2016 and thats why i sugested a simple alteration to the system like such : winning Loosing Rank +1 +1 1 +1 +1 2 +1 0 3 +1 -1 4 0 -1 5 0 -1 6 -1 -1 7 And you're still giving stars for losing -> hence no incentive to play for a victory at all. Bad system is bad, and stays bad as long as it's giving a selfish out to people at the expense of team goals. It's bad enough already that some people actually are already playing to not lose one, but that is still not as profound as it would be if you could gain one only by being first ( or second ) in the losing team. Even a system where XP gain is 'more fair' eg where CA's get a bigger boost then now for killing DD's, where BB's get a big XP boost if they actually use their W key instead of snipe, you're running into issues. Because, a Zao doesn't play like a Des Moines or like an Hindenburg. So, 'fixing' XP gain amongst different variant of the same class is already hard. A Pensacola is much better suited for escorting BB's and providing AAA then a Myoko is. But the Myoko is capable of supporting the DD's from closer to them because it isn't instantly spotted. The only clear 'thing' which you can reward is capping. And that is done, and many don't like it. But, let s face it, the gamemode, if you want to win, is revolving around controlling the cap points, for which DD's play a pivotal role. Which can already be done now. The extent it influences behavior in game is imo nowhere near as big as with a system where the first ( or first two ) gain a star based on their 'playing the team' instead of playing for the victory with the team. Basically, if I play for the victory I sometimes 'take one for the team' but I would never do such a thing in the counter proposed system because I would be screwing my own chances of scraping out as much XP as I could. That is the simplest example I can give but I hope it is also one which in all it's simplicity is just impossible to dismiss? 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
anonym_yABmLAWoZ6QF Players 68 posts Report post #19 Posted June 21, 2016 (edited) Anyone that thinks that WoWs is a team game is rather misguided and naive. Personally I have won a lot of games by paying attention to my team and attacking by group. But then again there are a lot of players out there that don't recognize the team aspect of the game. I will give you that and it mostly cost you the team win. Edited June 21, 2016 by anonym_yABmLAWoZ6QF Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
havaduck ∞ Players 2,989 posts 11,824 battles Report post #20 Posted June 21, 2016 (edited) Honestly I think the most pressing issue is get rid of all the afkers and bots. I mean I only played 7 games and won 5 of them ..... but in every game there was at least one bot/afker and usually on my team. I dont try to give the impression that I have a recipe to solve all the injustice in the current system, simply because I know I dont have that recipe but getting rid of those persons is crucial. When I play I really feel like it doesnt matter what I do; I have those damn afkers and bots on my side every game anyway. It really comes down to the enemy team then also having a bot on their side, or some tremendous cowards that throw the game for them. Most simple and immediate thing: - Everyone that has not moved after 3 minutes cant earn a star. However if the team looses he still looses a star. - Do that a few times in a row or for a certain pecentage of games played (starting with like x % of minimum 20 games to not punish players that are just having bad luck with their first 3 games or so) and you get banned for a day. - Still not learning? Well, banned for the season. - Getting a second season long ban? Well no more ranked for you ever again. Edited June 21, 2016 by havaduck Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
xXilence Players 4 posts 7,159 battles Report post #21 Posted June 21, 2016 Basically what mtm78 said. While on the surface OPs idea seems good, this system would encourage selfish play and not teamwork. Instead of playing for the win players would only try to boost their own XP scores even if it ultimately leads to a loss. Two things here: 1) First and foremost, I always thought ranked battles were introduced to reward players individual skill - making good players climb constantly and seperate from the rest by their individual skills was the whole purpose of this gamemode. The current system does not reward your individual gameplay which is why ranked is an overall frustrating game experience for many players. As of now ranked battles should rather be called "random team battles", because that's literally what they are. People pointed out that playing ranked is more like a lottery and they have a fair point. I understand, that only rewarding individual performance poses a risk to teamwork and a victory should always be the main goal of the team, which is why a victory should always be more rewarding than a loss. Maybe the whole stars system should be changed into some kind of Elo system: getting Elo by victories, losing Elo by being defeated whereas gains and losses are dependent on performance. 2) If you want to encourage teamwork, then you should actually start rewarding teamwork: spotting dmg, tanking dmg, etc. That's one of the biggest problem of this game to begin with and not only in ranked battles but in random battles as well. I think Wg has to make up their minds on what they want to achieve with ranked battles. Do you want individual skills to be main factor of climbing ranks? Fine. Start rewarding it properly then. Do you want teamwork (as a skill) to be the main factor of climbing ranks? Fine. Start rewarding it properly then. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
daki Weekend Tester 1,677 posts 20,280 battles Report post #22 Posted June 21, 2016 How shall a modus where all of the winning team are promoted ever separate the good from the bad players? Right now you have the same 50:50 chance of getting a good team regardless of rank. It's a damn lottery if you progress to the next rank or not. The first 2-3 players of both teams should get a star. Then 1-2 in the middle don't lose a star and the bottom players lose a star. What's so difficult about making a RANKED system that at least kind of works? There is a clear improvement in player quality in my experience, after reaching better brackets. For me, going from 18 to 15 was a painful and often frustrating experience due to too many players basically just testing ranked battles without even trying to win or support teamwork. That is why it seems so much as the lottery. After rank 15 the situation improved notably. And after rank 10 even more. Try to advance and then reassess.your opinion. While setting proper rules & mechanics seems simple, as you can see from several responses it is very far from that. It is very hard to set rules that on one side work universally, promote skill, and cannot be "exploited" by some players. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mordante Players 77 posts Report post #23 Posted June 21, 2016 Honestly I think the most pressing issue is get rid of all the afkers and bots. I mean I only played 7 games and won 5 of them ..... but in every game there was at least one bot/afker and usually on my team. I dont try to give the impression that I have a recipe to solve all the injustice in the current system, simply because I know I dont have that recipe but getting rid of those persons is crucial. When I play I really feel like it doesnt matter what I do; I have those damn afkers and bots on my side every game anyway. It really comes down to the enemy team then also having a bot on their side, or some tremendous cowards that throw the game for them. Most simple and immediate thing: - Everyone that has not moved after 3 minutes cant earn a star. However if the team looses he still looses a star. - Do that a few times in a row or for a certain pecentage of games played (starting with like x % of minimum 20 games to not punish players that are just having bad luck with their first 3 games or so) and you get banned for a day. - Still not learning? Well, banned for the season. - Getting a second season long ban? Well no more ranked for you ever again. Stop taking ranked battles so serious. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[MBSSX] OldschoolGaming_YouTube Beta Tester 3,274 posts 16,879 battles Report post #24 Posted June 21, 2016 How shall a modus where all of the winning team are promoted ever separate the good from the bad players? Right now you have the same 50:50 chance of getting a good team regardless of rank. It's a damn lottery if you progress to the next rank or not. The first 2-3 players of both teams should get a star. Then 1-2 in the middle don't lose a star and the bottom players lose a star. What's so difficult about making a RANKED system that at least kind of works? Im not trying promoting my video here dont need to watch the video, just pause it if you like and read the comments) but i think we had some really good discussion on this subject in the comments of that video that has bearing on this subject. I think we are really on to something that can change ranked from the cancer it is today to something that can be a real gamechanger for us players, WG and this wonderful game.I think with some easy changes from WG ranked cant be that great fun competitive gamemode that will attract new players to the game and give skilled motivated captains a chans to battle each other in a good wholesome competitive environment. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
[NWP] Gojuadorai Players 2,832 posts 21,712 battles Report post #25 Posted June 21, 2016 Honestly I think the most pressing issue is get rid of all the afkers and bots. which rank are you on? i havnt yet seen 1 afk or bot in 170 games Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
