Sicknote1

Surely MM should take Rank into Account?!

  • You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.

20 posts in this topic

So I've been having another weekend losing streak and I'm kind of pissed off which might be channeling this a bit.

 

But, I've just lost yet another horrible match (our team mustered three kills, two of which were mine) where I noticed, the enemy team only had two players who didn't have a ranking of lower than 15. Whereas, only two players on my team had a rank higher than 15 (only three in total had ranks!).

 

Surely this could/should be something taken into account when teams are being matched? There is now a decent yard stick to use when assessing people's capabilities and it would help against these horribly one sided matches.

 

(Sorry, I've been trying to get a screen shot but for some reason my PC just keeps capturing a black screen)


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a ranking of 19...

 

Do not judge players by their ranking in ranked battles.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have seen rank 8 bb's shooting nothing but HE.

Rank means nothing mate, trust me.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Best way to carry on weekends is to play DDs. Kill all the red DDs and all the red BBs run to the border, then spot and let the friendly BBs blap the frew cruisers that get spottetd. EZ win.

 

PS. rank dont mean anything. Alot of rank 1 potatoes. 


1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I play ranked for the flags you get there, I never bothered getting rank one.

 

I've seen rank 1 players with far over 500 matches in ranked. If you're patient enough, you'll get carried op to rank one some day.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Sicknote1 said:

There is now a decent yard stick to use when assessing people's capabilities and it would help against these horribly one sided matches.

Unfortunately, no. Take a look at these two players here:

4b69a8ad56.png

They reached rank one with over 1k battles and a winrate below 50%.

Rank-based MM would mean players like these are equal to players like this:

88590a1f6d.png

 

The same goes for the other way of course. There are many great players that for some reason didn't play (enough) Ranked and don't have a rank fitting to their skills.

 

44 minutes ago, Sicknote1 said:

Surely this could/should be something taken into account when teams are being matched?

Another downpoint: Every kind of skillbased MM will increase waiting times for matches. (especially for the higher skilled players)


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Commander_Cornflakes said:

The same goes for the other way of course. There are many great players that for some reason didn't play (enough) Ranked and don't have a rank fitting to their skills.

 

That would ofc encourage ppl who dont want to play ranked (like me last season), to dont play it at all to have a low as possible rank so that u get matched with someone who actually would be a lowrank and maybe is a low skilled player to have an even bigger advantage.

Sure, ive had matches where ive seen R1 ppl in the enemy team who deserved it and also ppl who are [edited] so to say and are also R1...


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few days back I had a similar discussion on reddit. Let me quote myself on this one:

 

Quote

For better comparison: I took season 6 (EU).

Now first off how to determine if a player performed well in ranked. I'd use WR paired with battle count. Someone like Reyte (on EU) with 75% WR and 70 battles played to ge R1 is clearly an extremely good player.

If you sort the players WR down you'll see that after the Top 200 (roughly) players the 'average' good player comes up. Those with somewhat between 55% and 65% WR and 150 to 250 battles. The number to be expected if you're good in randoms, know quite a bit about Warships and have a (small) selection of ships you can choose from. This bracket goes up to player #656, so 450 players in this bracket. If I had the dedication I'd probably land somewhere in this bracket, but I can't stand Ranked for extented periods of time so I usually tap out around R10.

Now the 55% is arbitrarily choosen, you'll still find players with less than 250 battles below 55%, but it's clear that for the majority of R1 players the battle count goes up. The bracket of 50% to 55% WR now averages between 250 and 450 battles. And the closer you get to 50% WR the more often you find the statistical counterpart to Reyte. Players with 52%, 51% WR and way north of 500 battles. This bracket goes up to player #1120, so again roughly 450 players in this bracket.

And then we have roughly 100 players left that made it to R1 with a WR below 50% and a battle count that can have 4 digits....

Yields in total 1210 players of Ranked 6 on EU to reach R1. Of those are 16% (according to my definition) top of the class. Very good Ranked players and it's safe to assume that these players also rock randoms. 37% are above average players. Players like me that can make stuff work in Ranked and Randoms. They either were unlucky or lacked in the skill department a bit to follow up the top ones, but still churned out a formidable achievement. Another 37% is the average Joe that's determined to get to R1. What this player lacks in skills he makes up in dedication. I mean, 400 battles in a tense (and more often than not toxic) environment, that's actually a feat of its own. Which leaves us with 10% of players that want R1 but are somewhat below average that it takes them 'ages' to get there. At best they don't get noticed by their teammates when they're carried, at worst they throw the game for their team. And for me it's safe to assume that this player doesn't perform average in randomes either.

This correlates quite well with how often I see R1 in the random teamlist (no matter on which team) and wonder how this player made it to R1 if he played that bad in randoms. On the other hand I rarely see R1 players that are worth their money. At least not compared to players of other ranks (or without any rank at all) that played equally good (or better if we take the 48%/900 battle R1 player).

 

Greetings


1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

some of us either don't play ranked or play infrequently

for example I only played a few games in the last day or two of the last season (after not playing ranked since season 1) and ended up at R14

I know of potatoes who played 50+ ranked battles to achieve ranks <5 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Commander_Cornflakes said:

Another downpoint: Every kind of skillbased MM will increase waiting times for matches. (especially for the higher skilled players)

The skill based MM should not be too strict, because this is what everyone automatically thinks of when skill-based is brought up. It would already be very welcome if WG put players internal (not visible for the players) into categories. The amount of played battles and their win ratio as well as for example kill/death ratio should be used to determine in which category a player fits best.

Let's say 4 categories like clan battles use it right now. For players this could be 'category A' with very good players, 'category B' good players, 'category C' with average players and 'category D' with bad players. So now the MM can build teams based on these categories, either use an equal amount of category A + B or B + C or C + D. Or simply mix teams like 2A + 3B + 4C + 3D ... whatever fit to fill the game with a 12 vs 12 but an equal amount of equally skilled (good or bad) players for both teams.

Right now we can have matches, and the displayed Rank plus Clan Rank shows this very clear, with 5 or 6 unicums on one side and the othrr side has only 12 potatoes. Of course will this be a lopsided match and even more important, it is no fun for anybody. The unicums waste time clubbing potatoes (means low xp, low credits, low everything and wasting camos, flags, daily win bonus for a 7 minute game) and the potatoes once again only get their asses kicked without any chance to win the game. No potato can tell me he enjoys it to only get slapped around game after game after game. 

 

Whatever solution WG could use, anything is better than what we have right now. And fixing the damn MM should have highest priority to make ALL player equally happy and set for more enjoyable games, but for whatever foolish reason WG just gives as damn about the MM and tries to convince anyone that it's fine as it is right now, when it really is not.


2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Sicknote1 said:

Surely this could/should be something taken into account when teams are being matched?

no.

3 hours ago, ThePurpleSmurf said:

And fixing the damn MM should have highest priority

nothing to fix

3 hours ago, ThePurpleSmurf said:

but for whatever foolish reason WG just gives as damn about the MM and tries to convince anyone that it's fine as it is right now, when it really is not.

everything is fine with the MM


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The display of ranks from the last season should have been disabled long ago. Ranked is over and the ranks mean nothing.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Klopirat said:

no.

nothing to fix

everything is fine with the MM

Hardly. 

 

As has been pointed out by others, MM distribution of radar ships and DD types between teams is not optimal.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Sicknote1 said:

Whereas, only two players on my team had a rank higher than 15 (only three in total had ranks!).

 

Surely this could/should be something taken into account when teams are being matched? There is now a decent yard stick to use when assessing people's capabilities and it would help against these horribly one sided matches.

I don't believe your 'rank' is a good indicator of overall skill.  I could be wrong.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ranking can deceive you badly as you just would not believe how many potatoes had been carried to rank 1, and how many unicatz stopped half way.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Sicknote1 said:

So I've been having another weekend losing streak and I'm kind of pissed off which might be channeling this a bit.

 

But, I've just lost yet another horrible match (our team mustered three kills, two of which were mine) where I noticed, the enemy team only had two players who didn't have a ranking of lower than 15. Whereas, only two players on my team had a rank higher than 15 (only three in total had ranks!).

 

Surely this could/should be something taken into account when teams are being matched? There is now a decent yard stick to use when assessing people's capabilities and it would help against these horribly one sided matches.

 

(Sorry, I've been trying to get a screen shot but for some reason my PC just keeps capturing a black screen)

for some reason print screen captures two images when in WoWS, the black screen one goes in your regular images folder, and the good version goes into the screenshot folder in your WoWS directory, try looking there...


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, MortenTardo said:

Best way to carry on weekends is to play DDs. Kill all the red DDs and all the red BBs run to the border, then spot and let the friendly BBs blap the frew cruisers that get spottetd. EZ win.

 

PS. rank dont mean anything. Alot of rank 1 potatoes. 

Sounds familiar, I do believe I had the misfortune to be on one of those red teams yesterday when we lost 4 dd's almost instantly, I had to follow along with the herd of tier 8 BB's as they were shepherded off the map, not much fun that one.

 

As for ranks sometimes it can be deceptive, I played approx 50 games in the first season of ranked but I don't like the smaller team sizes, I gave up on that so I got no rank (I think), if I had continued a bit more then given up because of lack of interest in the mode then I would probably have a mid level rank by my name.  The Problem is that having a mid level rank next to my name or no rank at all next to my name doesn't change the fact that I do reasonably well at this game in full random madness mode. 

 

Sometimes, as in the case of the screenshot I posted, ranks really do matter and MM could probably make it slightly more even....but then that's the ''fun'' of randoms isn't it?

 

Seriously though, I've played far too much of this game and mostly solo and it's the challenge of trying to win with all the crazy crap going on that makes it a challenge, I get days when I win 10 out of 12 games and I get pissed at the two teams that I couldn't drag over the line, I have days when I just can't win at all and get pissed at the teams.... and then I stop and think to myself how fecking boring would it be to just win constantly?!

shot-17.03.23_21.06.42-0281.jpg


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for this - ranks reset between seasons so I could keep my low rank without destroying my stats to get better MM.


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, please make this a thing....

510385471.png

 

Remember: rank equals skill level guys.

 

Spoiler

/s :Smile_hiding:

 


1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

top kek of the week

heres the price for u

Spoiler

flat,800x800,075,t.u3.jpg

 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.