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

Ranked Battles - Season 7 Rules [Suggestion]

43 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Alpha Tester
298 posts
3,200 battles

Number of Players: 7 vs 7

Allowed Maps: Only those with 2 caps, no Epicenter

Ship Tier: VIII (8) - it's the most balanced and popular tier and also used in tournaments

Ship Limit #1: 2x DD, 3x CA, 3x BB, 1x CV

Ship Limit #2: Max. 3 ships with smoke, 1 with radar

 

Ranked Mode Season 7 Differences compared to Season 6:

-------------------​-------------------​-------------------​-------------------​---------

1) Number of stars required for each rank is increased roughly twice (with some exceptions):

- Ranks above 10: 5 stars

- Ranks 6-10: 8 stars

- Ranks 2-5: 10 stars

This change is made to compensate for higher star rewards and to allow creation of more accurate rewarding system.

 

2) Star rewards:

A) Winning Team

- rank 1 xp player will gain 3 stars (usually someone who did work for another 1-2 players)

- rank 2,3 xp players will gain 2 stars (usually someone who played very well too)

- rank 4,5,6,7 xp players will gain 1 star (usually someone who died early or had bad luck or got totally carried by others)

 

B) Losing Team

- rank 1 xp player will gain 1 star

- rank 2,3 xp players will NOT lose any star

- rank 4,5,6,7 xp players will lose 1 star

 

What will this system mean for us?

- it will positively motivate players to not THROW away games once 1 or 2 allies die early because if you continue playing, you will be rewarded by increasing your chance to not lose a star

- it will motivate players to play and perform well even in case of inevitable loss because they can still rank 1 and get a star

- it will motivate players to play even if they are going to win, because if they are just going to get carried by others, they will get less stars than those who actually did something for victory

- right now, good players are constantly being frustrated by getting 2nd by small difference in xp and losing star even in very well played games against all the odds -> this new system will be less frustrating as it will be finally skill based ranked battles

- good players will get to rank 1 faster because system will reward them by getting (or at least not losing star) even if they were unlucky and got team full of potatoes; estimated number of battles for the TOP players to reach rank 1 would be around 100-120 (which is true if you check the leaderboards for season 6), while estimated number of battles for poor players would be around 400-500. But the point is everyone would be less frustrated. Imagine this suggestion similar to current system, where you could get half (0.5) of stars as partial reward for your performance. It's just all doubled (even the rank requirements) for easier counting.

 

3) All-Star League:

- there is a lot of good players and many of them are giving up ranked battles because the frustration level is disasterous; with these changes we would see increase to quality of gameplay and more players at rank 1 (which is not bad thing; everyone will need to fight for it the same and prove their quality)

- after reaching rank 1, you will be playing with other rank 1 players (in case that matchmaking takes more than 3 minutes, it will match you with ranks 1-5 instead... this is temporary solution for first days of league before players reach it)

- this league will have own leaderboard and it will be the ultimate and most prestigeous competition for solo players with unique prizes at it's end

- to make the league fair and remove serious advantages of players who simply have time to play hundreds of battles in short period, the system will record your top 50 battles played while in league; if you perform better in battle 51 (or higher) than you did for example in battle 23, then results of battle 23 are replaced with 51 in your seasonal record; and based on your performance/stars/damage done and other stats in your top 50 battles the leaderboard and ranking is made

 

4) All-Stars League Rewards:

- exclusive ships (tier 8-9) for high ranked players

- exclusive flags (with economic bonuses)

- camos, signals, credits, doubloons, premium, etc.

- exclusive ships (tier 6-7) for lower ranked players

- unique equipment for getting over specific milestones (so even if you get not into the top ranks, if you get over some statistic value, you get reward)

- the rewards by rank should be that higher ranks always get all that below ranks have + something more

 

5) Flag improvement:

There is only few (2-3?) flags with economic bonuses and if someone made the efforts to get one, he shouldn't be forced to use only that one for all the time, because no-one likes to play with self-inflicted penalty. Instead, let player to pick any of the hard-earned flags and apply all flag economic bonuses to all of them. There is not many of those and they are usually very small (like 5%) or in case of more powerful ones they are very limited (like 10 players on server, only temporarily as tournament reward). So it should be no problem at all (especially when these players are usually the most active ones who pay a lot for in-game stuff, make videos, posts about the game and put it simply... make WG famous and rich). 

 

Summary:

All is written above, so feel free to express what you think, how you like or hate this idea and so on.
/flame on

 

TL;DR: I recommend you read it fully to understand the PROs and CONs fully. Also some of the posters below are mentioning tiers, maps, or ship limits. Let me assure you, the purpose of this post is to lineup core of the rules. After it's changed, I don't really mind if we play with tier 4, 6, 7, 8 or 10. With these changes I could easily be happy even with the epicenter, lol:) Keep that in mind.

  • Cool 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[KOKOS]
Beta Tester, Players
3,368 posts
8,807 battles

Ship limits will cause long(er) queues. :honoring:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
298 posts
3,200 battles

Ship limits will cause long(er) queues. :honoring:

 

Better rules will bring more players which result in shorter queues.

Better rules will allow playing different ships than Shiratsuyu and Belfasts which will make queues also faster.

:hmm:

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
108 posts
4,344 battles

I actually like that. There are 2 problems tho:

- Rank 1 players taking stars from the ones trying to rank up by scoring best

- and your average camper tends to score quiet good base xp on the losing team

 

Problem is that I don't have any actual solutions for these...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
[TOXIC]
Players
3,760 posts
10,656 battles

I actually like that. There are 2 problems tho:

- Rank 1 players taking stars from the ones trying to rank up by scoring best

- and your average camper tends to score quiet good base xp on the losing team

 

Problem is that I don't have any actual solutions for these...

 

 

The solution is easy - get rid of ANY sort of reward that's not victory-based. Yes, it's frustrating to get a great game, lose narrowly while carrying the whole team and still lose a star. That's why I liked this anti-frustration mechanic when it first appeared. But it soon became apparent that this hurts the game a lot. People are conscious of their XP, they don't take the risks they should, they're unwilling to spot when it means not being able to score hits... we don't need that. Sure, it's sad to have a good match and end up screwed out of victory by really bad teammates. But the overal atmosphere and teamwork was actually much better before this feature got implemented.

And the LAST thing we need is - as OP suggests - to let people advance by outplaying not their enemy but their allies. Stars gained on defeat are a big no-no. Want to be rewarded for defeats and for using your teammates as meat shields? Go play Randoms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
298 posts
3,200 battles

I actually like that. There are 2 problems tho:

- Rank 1 players taking stars from the ones trying to rank up by scoring best

- and your average camper tends to score quiet good base xp on the losing team

 

Problem is that I don't have any actual solutions for these...

 

 

Thanks.

 

Issue #1: Playing with rank 1 and ranks 2,3,4 or 5 is nearly the same. Especially in first days of season, whoever is there has dedication to get rank 1. Many times, those "good" rank 1 players will actually help you to get a star by playing well. In any case, it shouldn't be big issue as it works both ways (rank 1 player can have bad game in his stats) and it will be this way only at beginning of season when there is not enough players at rank 1 (and ranks 2-5 are ALL adepts for rank 1). It's purpose is to make better waiting times for these players, but if it doesn't work, it could be removed.

 

Issue #2: There is no cure for that, but there is room with these rules to let others outplay him by own teamwork and gameplay instead of contest for the biggest camper of all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
298 posts
3,200 battles

No because you ant a reward for being on the losing team.

 

It's easy to miss the fact that rank requirements are now double. So the rewards must be accordingly increased to allow better precision in rewards for performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TTT]
Players
1,952 posts
6,062 battles

 

B) Losing Team

 

- rank 1 xp player will gain 1 star

 

- rank 2,3 xp players will NOT lose any star

 

Is there a point in playing with the team to win? Playing well does not equal high xp. A DD gets nothing for providing smoke for their teammates. You might be better off damage farming.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
298 posts
3,200 battles

 

 

Is there a point in playing with the team to win? Playing well does not equal high xp. A DD gets nothing for providing smoke for their teammates. You might be better off damage farming.

 

Just compare it with current system. Everyone knows it's frustrating and needs change, but noone posts acceptable ideas. So just compare it and tell me, what prevents DD from doing that now? This system will extend the farming from 1 player to 3 and that's already "division". Good players will start team-playing because group of 3 cooperating players can win the game and if they are unlucky in their efforts, they will at least have safety net for top 3 players. And as the meta of this game changes, others will follow. Just give the people fair rules and be sure they will get followed.

 

After all, everyone without severe brain injury will play with win (1-3 stars) rather than hoping for doing enough of damage to get (0-1) stars in losing team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
748 posts
11,447 battles

Number of Players: 7 vs 7

Allowed Maps: Only those with 2 caps, no Epicenter

Ship Tier: VIII (8) - it's the most balanced and popular tier and also used in tournaments

Ship Limit #1: 2x DD, 3x CA, 3x BB, 1x CV Nope, accepting more BBs than DDs, historically accurate :D

Ship Limit #2: Max. 3 ships with smoke, 1 with radar Nope, imagine you have a MK and a RN CL, only 1 dd

 

Ranked Mode Season 7 Differences compared to Season 6:

-------------------​-------------------​-------------------​-------------------​---------

1) Number of stars required for each rank is increased roughly twice (with some exceptions):

- Ranks above 10: 5 stars

- Ranks 6-10: 8 stars

- Ranks 2-5: 10 stars

This change is made to compensate for higher star rewards and to allow creation of more accurate rewarding system.

 

2) Star rewards:

A) Winning Team

- rank 1 xp player will gain 3 stars (usually someone who did work for another 1-2 players)

- rank 2,3 xp players will gain 2 stars (usually someone who played very well too)

- rank 4,5,6,7 xp players will gain 1 star (usually someone who died early or had bad luck or got totally carried by others) So 4/7 of the players get carried, nice.

Win 11 stars

B) Losing Team

- rank 1 xp player will gain 1 star

- rank 2,3 xp players will NOT lose any star

- rank 4,5,6,7 xp players will lose 1 star

Win 1 star, lose 4

Total +12-4      8 stars generated per game, so 8 times more than now, you should multiply by 8 not by 2

What will this system mean for us?

- it will positively motivate players to not THROW away games once 1 or 2 allies die early because if you continue playing, you will be rewarded by increasing your chance to not lose a star

- it will motivate players to play and perform well even in case of inevitable loss because they can still rank 1 and get a star

- it will motivate players to play even if they are going to win, because if they are just going to get carried by others, they will get less stars than those who actually did something for victory

- right now, good players are constantly being frustrated by getting 2nd by small difference in xp and losing star even in very well played games against all the odds -> this new system will be less frustrating as it will be finally skill based ranked battles

- good players will get to rank 1 faster because system will reward them by getting (or at least not losing star) even if they were unlucky and got team full of potatoes; estimated number of battles for the TOP players to reach rank 1 would be around 100-120 (which is true if you check the leaderboards for season 6), while estimated number of battles for poor players would be around 400-500. But the point is everyone would be less frustrated. Imagine this suggestion similar to current system, where you could get half (0.5) of stars as partial reward for your performance. It's just all doubled (even the rank requirements) for easier counting. 

 

3) All-Star League: Nice idea, need some adjustment

- there is a lot of good players and many of them are giving up ranked battles because the frustration level is disasterous; with these changes we would see increase to quality of gameplay and more players at rank 1 (which is not bad thing; everyone will need to fight for it the same and prove their quality) So ranked is just a grind?

- after reaching rank 1, you will be playing with other rank 1 players (in case that matchmaking takes more than 3 minutes, it will match you with ranks 1-5 instead... this is temporary solution for first days of league before players reach it) Not same tier.

- this league will have own leaderboard and it will be the ultimate and most prestigeous competition for solo players with unique prizes at it's end

- to make the league fair and remove serious advantages of players who simply have time to play hundreds of battles in short period, the system will record your top 50 battles played while in league; if you perform better in battle 51 (or higher) than you did for example in battle 23, then results of battle 23 are replaced with 51 in your seasonal record; and based on your performance/stars/damage done and other stats in your top 50 battles the leaderboard and ranking is made

 

4) All-Stars League Rewards: GL telling this to WG

- exclusive ships (tier 8-9) for high ranked players

- exclusive flags (with economic bonuses)

- camos, signals, credits, doubloons, premium, etc.

- exclusive ships (tier 6-7) for lower ranked players

- unique equipment for getting over specific milestones (so even if you get not into the top ranks, if you get over some statistic value, you get reward) No, all the equipment should be available to every player, no need to give better players better equipment

- the rewards by rank should be that higher ranks always get all that below ranks have + something more

 

5) Flag improvement:

There is only few (2-3?) flags with economic bonuses and if someone made the efforts to get one, he shouldn't be forced to use only that one for all the time, because no-one likes to play with self-inflicted penalty. Instead, let player to pick any of the hard-earned flags and apply all flag economic bonuses to all of them. There is not many of those and they are usually very small (like 5%) or in case of more powerful ones they are very limited (like 10 players on server, only temporarily as tournament reward). So it should be no problem at all (especially when these players are usually the most active ones who pay a lot for in-game stuff, make videos, posts about the game and put it simply... make WG famous and rich). 

 

Summary:

All is written above, so feel free to express what you think, how you like or hate this idea and so on.

/flame on

Red font is reserved for WG/Moderator use only - RogDodgeUK

Edited by RogDodgeUK
his post has been edited by a member of the Moderation Team, due to forum rules violation. RogDodgeUK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Quality Poster
4,343 posts
14,943 battles

Number of Players: 7 vs 7

Allowed Maps: Only those with 2 caps, no Epicenter

Not a fan of epicenter matches but they dont happan often and again gives veriance

Ship Tier: VIII (8) - it's the most balanced and popular tier and also used in tournaments

Evidance for this? Indeed if you look at tier 7/8 ships brought to battle the last week in Jan tier tier 8 make up 57%. But Most balanced realy. I would be interested to see that stat from season 5 if anyone has them but from what I remeber  CA was almost exclusive Atago/Mikhail Kutuzov. BB was all Tier 8s and DD was Prety much Benson. At tier 7 we have way more Ships to choose from and most are viable. For me I like teh way they change the tiers from time to time in ranked.. It stops it always being the same each season. Just look at DDs at tier 8 top DD is a Gun boat at tier 7 its a Torpedo Boat. at tier 8 there is only 1 CV to bring at tier 7 we have Siapan and  Hiryu

Ship Limit #1: 2x DD, 3x CA, 3x BB, 1x CV

Ship Limit #2: Max. 3 ships with smoke, 1 with radar  Way way way over complicating the Que algaritham.

Will lengthen ques and Stifle variety. I have no issue with ship distribution in game. Do these restrictions and you make all matches the same. At the moment it is great, DD heavy matches play different to BB heavy ones

Ranked Mode Season 7 Differences compared to Season 6:

-------------------​-------------------​-------------------​-------------------​---------

1) Number of stars required for each rank is increased roughly twice (with some exceptions):

See 2) below

 

2) Star rewards:  You are over complicating the rewards as it is at moment is fine.. I understand why people get pissed with top loser keeps a star. and it douse happen that players play for that rather than winning but I am finding it is not happening all the time,  And it often douse not work if they do. An OK player that playes aggressive can still often end top of tree

A) Winning Team

B) Losing Team

g.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
298 posts
3,200 battles

 

@Migulaitor:

1) If you compare it with current system, rank 4,5,6,7 of winning team are getting 1 star now (which is equal to 2 stars in system suggested by me). It means that right now you are rewarded twice as much for being carried.

 

2) Any attempts to compare it like this are attempts to compare it with broken system. But if you want, right now you have +7-6 = 1 star generated per game. In suggested system it's +12-4 = 8 stars, but in comparison to current system it works with double amounts, so the real difference is only half, which is 1 star generated now vs 4 stars generated after. It means that the new system will reward 4 times more stars, but if you tell it this way it sounds really like huge difference. In real it's only 3 star difference of stars generated per battle. And those 3 stars are used as additional reward for well performing players in form of extra star or defended star. Of course, we are still comparing to current system (in new one it would be the same, just doubled for letting us work with something we would right now call "half stars") and those stars are used for more accurate rewards for battle performance. This mode needs some difference badly.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
298 posts
3,200 battles

You are over complicating the rewards as it is at moment is fine.. I understand why people get pissed with top loser keeps a star. and it douse happen that players play for that rather than winning but I am finding it is not happening all the time

 

I'm respecting your opinion, but can't accept it as valid argument due to your low number of ranked battles played. Believe me, this season I personally skyrocketed to rank 10 without single loss. The hell starts below rank 10. Personally I am not pissed about top loser keeping star, I'm rather annoyed by system not reflecting other players. For example, in 150 battles this season I ended up second top xp loser in about half of lost games. Some times it was even by 3, 7 or 10 xp. After you try so hard to turn the battle, you are not getting anything out of it. Only frustration and hesitation to play this mode anymore. And this is pretty toxis as players who see 1-2 allies die are already throwing the games, getting themselves destroyed with no resistance and jumping quickly into another game.

 

Wouldn't it be better if the skill and teamplay (even if just of 2-3 ppl) was rewarded and not only luck for team with more cooperating players?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
143 posts
8,219 battles

I'm quite fond of this really, as atm it's just way too much of a gamble & grind; it's not ranked battles, it's ranked who-has-literally-hundreds-of-hours-to-invest instead of who is actually competent.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BONUS]
[BONUS]
Beta Tester
2,683 posts
7,227 battles

 

It's easy to miss the fact that rank requirements are now double. So the rewards must be accordingly increased to allow better precision in rewards for performance.

 

Rewards that should come from winning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BONUS]
[BONUS]
Beta Tester
2,683 posts
7,227 battles

 

You still gain more for winning tho.

 

Which is the way it must be.  The point of any battle in a game is to win.  Rewarding a player on the losing team would be plain wrong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
263 posts
4,293 battles

 

No Epicenter, Tier 8 ships

 

There should be a research dome among players. I would personally agree, players I am in contact with have mostly same preferences, though I would not be sure it goes for majority of players.  

 

As for tier, I find it important to make a stable tier for ranked battles (whether it should be T7 or T8, or even some transition aka T7 for battles bellow rank10 and T8 for above rank10). Having each season with tier being switched (and not even knowing long in advance - like at the end of season having set tier for next season) - is rather frustrating.

 

Rewards for win/loss based on exp

 

First of all I am no big friend of the rule that prevent me from losing a star if I score top exp (though it is the only reason I am rank 4 currently, with WR bellow 50%). On the other hand - if there will be some end-game content for season, where ranks could be seen as some sort of qualifier, then I would agree in making progress to rank1 easier. In my mind having rewards exp-based promotes playing for personal gains (exp-leeching) over teamplay. And suggested changes make these differences even bigger (despite making it easier to get to rank1 in general). Also some other system to measure one's contribution need to be used for this, or the exp-gain algorithm has to be revised not to benefit certain game styles over others but to reflect actual impact on team victory.

 

Losing team rewards/losses .. Here I would oppose the idea of actually gaining a star for a defeat. Not losing a star is more than a good reward for player's performance. Even in case there should be more than one player who will not lose a star, there is no need for giving the top one something more (just make it that all three will save their stars). After all you should not be able to progress to top rank with 0% WR, what this suggestion could make possible.

 

Victorious team rewards .. 3 stars for top exp player is way too much (unless you really want to make it just a swift run through ranks towards end-game). Again I can imagine giving 2 stars to three best players. This would actually lower the stress on leeching as much exp as possible since being in top3 is much easier than fighting for top place, and no extra reward for top place would give more space for fighting for victory.

 

Overall star count for progress should be adjusted towards how fast we want players to progress to end-game content. Suggested setting would be way too fast I guess.

 

All-star league (end-game)

 

First to stress out, the best rewards should be given based on player's "progression" in end-game. E.g. the flag and doublons will not be given to player for reaching rank1 (since now it would be much easier under these changes (easier on purpose to allow more players participate in end-game) but for reaching certain criteria in end-game.

 

50 best battles .. kinda troublesome in my opinion. I value WR as the ultimate measure of player's success. This way I may be "grinding" entire month having 50 epic battles among thousand battles played with poor WR and score above a dude who has 100% WR though he never scored a result to match my top50. Moreover it would lead towards playing for individual gains, all those yolo runs screaming "glory or death", instead towards "professional" organised gameplay putting teamplay and victory above anything.

 

As for the exclusive rewards - keep historical ladders accessible. I guess for most of top players the records of their successes are more valuable in long-run than some premium ship they don't really need (unless it's something OP useful to gain advantage in upcoming battles).

 

ELO-like system suggestion

 

For measuring performance in end-game I would prefer something based on ELO system. I don't want to go deep into math formulas, but imagine a coefficient for each player starting with some set value upon reaching rank1 and entering end-game. By winning a game player's coef would increase, on the other hand losing a game would reduce it. The volume of how much it will be increased/lowered depends on difference between player's coef and average coef of entire enemy team. The higher player's coef compared to this average the higher the loss (in case of defeat) and the lower the gain (in case of victory). This way WR is crucial factor yet there is a factor of how strong were teams the player was fighting against.

 

In case there would be enough players playing end-game MM should try to match players with as close coef as possible. Anyway MM should try at least to balance overall strengths of teams (in case it would be possible, still balancing by ship types should be superior).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
[TOXIC]
Beta Tester
208 posts

top 1 spot in premium ship on wining team = + 2 stars

top 1 spot in premium ship + premium account on wining team = +3 stars

premium ship ship on loosing team = don't loose star if top 3

premium ship + premium account on loosing team = don't loose star

premium ship + premium account carried to rank 1 = 1 VIP card - get your karma restored to beggining of ranked season +25 free karma points (30% bonus)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Quality Poster
4,343 posts
14,943 battles

 

I'm respecting your opinion, but can't accept it as valid argument due to your low number of ranked battles played. Believe me, this season I personally skyrocketed to rank 10 without single loss. The hell starts below rank 10. Personally I am not pissed about top loser keeping star, I'm rather annoyed by system not reflecting other players. For example, in 150 battles this season I ended up second top xp loser in about half of lost games. Some times it was even by 3, 7 or 10 xp. After you try so hard to turn the battle, you are not getting anything out of it. Only frustration and hesitation to play this mode anymore. And this is pretty toxis as players who see 1-2 allies die are already throwing the games, getting themselves destroyed with no resistance and jumping quickly into another game.

 

Wouldn't it be better if the skill and teamplay (even if just of 2-3 ppl) was rewarded and not only luck for team with more cooperating players?

 

Thing is with your idea of top player getting a star and the next 2 not losing one.. So top 3 losers are no worse off you will encourage the type of play you are talking about.. The players playing not to lose a star is relatively few at the moment , as the chances of it working is quit slim all it takes is 1 player playing properly and doing a little better than ok he/she will be top of the team,the only way that rely works is to play to win do ok and hope you make top of team in case of a lose. If you have almost half the losing team not losing a star many many more players will try the tactic of playing to be in top half of losers and not to win match
Edited by T0byJug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
298 posts
3,200 battles

Victorious team rewards .. 3 stars for top exp player is way too much

Read carefully before posting please. All requirements are doubled, stars are just reflecting to allow more accurate performance rewards. Translated to current system, it's like if top player got 1.5 stars (= only 0.5 difference).

 

Again I can imagine giving 2 stars to three best players.

2 stars in new system is worth 1 star now. For 2nd and 3rd player there is literally no change. Difference is only for top player (+0.5) and 4th and below players (-0.5). Translated back to new system, it's simply 3 / 2 / 1 star instead of 1.5 / 1 / 0.5.

 

Overall star count for progress should be adjusted towards how fast we want players to progress to end-game content. Suggested setting would be way too fast I guess.

If you do the math and compare it with leaderboards on shipcomrade, what you find out will probably surprise you. The top players are getting to rank 1 with less than 80 battles and poor players need more than 400. This suggested system won't change these numbers much, but make it dramatically easier for good players that don't have to lose hard-earned stars in games where they can do nothing about their brain damaged allies. And overall attitude toward ranked battles will get much better.

 

All-star league (end-game)

50 best battles .. kinda troublesome in my opinion. I value WR as the ultimate measure of player's success. This way I may be "grinding" entire month having 50 epic battles among thousand battles played with poor WR and score above a dude who has 100% WR though he never scored a result to match my top50.

If you try to be so fair, look at it from other view. View of top player that got just very unlucky for row of games with equally unlucky teammates, while in opposing team there were potatoes carried by 1-2 extremely lucky players. The WR will be seriously messed up and I really believe that what I suggested has more PROs and is overall more fair system that allows to fix your mistakes. And if someone really wants to try hard in thousand battles, why not. It still counts the top 50 battles which is quite fair amount for everyone who got up to all-star league.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alpha Tester
298 posts
3,200 battles

 

Thing is with your idea of top player getting a star and the next 2 not losing one.. So top 3 losers are no worse off you will encourage the type of play you are talking about.. The players playing not to lose a star is relatively few at the moment , as the chances of it working is quit slim all it takes is 1 player playing properly and doing a little better than ok he/she will be top of the team,the only way that rely works is to play to win do ok and hope you make top of team in case of a lose. If you have almost half the losing team not losing a star many many more players will try the tactic of playing to be in top half of losers and not to win match

 

The way how ranked battles work (and will work) is nothing about team-play. You are playing with bunch of random people. Some are listening, some are not. Some are soloing, some are cooperating, some not. Sometimes you have afk allies, sometimes not. You can't do anything about it and in some battles you can't change the fact that team-work doesn't exist at all. In some battles you can't play to win. It's decided on loading screen.

 

In any case you got it wrong, but there is nothing I can tell to persuade you. You need to play ranked more and see it for yourself. This suggested system is to motivate players to do better. And when someone does good in a battle and knows that he will make it into top 3, it further motivates to play for team and instead of retreating to safety (which is good for him) do something for team, because if player dies in such effort, he will most likely not lose a star at least (or maybe even get one). But if he succeeds, he will win and get 2-3 stars instead.

 

Lesser risk of losing deserved progress will drive better players forward and also create better experience for all of us. And if you still insist that there will be more people abusing this, don't worry. They won't stand a chance. Actually, anyone who ends up in top 3 usually had big impact on the result as in nearly every battle I played (out of 500 ranked battles) those players really earned it and it was not them who lost the battle. From my experience, battles are lost usually because someone loses patience, chooses obviously bad position in smoke and eats torps or because someone rushes to early (when there is a lot of time) and gets burned down from smoke. Those are also the ones who then blame entire team for camping, no support, etc...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
748 posts
11,447 battles

If you compare it with current system, rank 4,5,6,7 of winning team are getting 1 star now (which is equal to 2 stars in system suggested by me). It means that right now you are rewarded twice as much for being carried.

 

Finished this season with Atlanta using it as a support ship, radared DDs, hydroed close to my fleet, swaped to AA fire and gave AA support when there was an enemy CV, this is not rewarded but it helps to win, same as smoking the fleet with dds. If you win you get rewarded, if you lose you dont. Different rewards will make players to stop helping each other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×